Insurance & Commerce - Senate
Video
Transcript
1 document
Bills discussed (15)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
SB83
Act 424
· 8 mentions in transcript, chapter, agenda
Matched: “So next is a Senate Bill 83, and it has a handout. Has an amendment as well.”
|
TO MANDATE COVERAGE FOR BREAST RECONSTRUCTION SURGERIES; TO REQUIRE PRIOR AUTHORIZATION FOR BREAST RECONSTRUCTION SURGERIES; … | J. Bryant | Notification that SB83 is now Act 424 |
|
HB1316
Act 390
· 4 mentions in agenda, transcript, chapter
Matched: “…VE PAYMENTS TO A PROVIDER UPON CREDENTIALING OF A PROVIDER. HB1316 F. Allen TO MANDATE COVERAGE FOR LUNG CANCER SCREENINGS. HB…”
|
TO MANDATE COVERAGE FOR LUNG CANCER SCREENINGS. | F. Allen | Notification that HB1316 is now Act 390 |
|
HB1271
Act 479
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1271 Warren TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING MECHANICS' AND MATERIALM…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING MECHANICS' AND MATERIALMEN'S LIENS; AND TO CLARIFY THE PRIORITY OF … | Warren | Notification that HB1271 is now Act 479 |
|
HB1288
Act 423
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…ARIFY THE PRIORITY OF LIENS IN MORTGAGE CONSTRUCTION LOANS. HB1288 L. Johnson TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS HEALTH CARE CONSUMER ACT;…”
|
TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS HEALTH CARE CONSUMER ACT; AND TO REQUIRE A HEALTHCARE INSURER TO … | L. Johnson | Notification that HB1288 is now Act 423 |
|
HB1652
Act 393
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1652 Tosh T0 AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING SELF-SERVICE STORAGE FACIL…”
|
T0 AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING SELF-SERVICE STORAGE FACILITIES; TO ENFORCE AN UNSIGNED SELF-SERVICE FACILITY STORAGE … | Tosh | Notification that HB1652 is now Act 393 |
|
HB1700
Act 638
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…DURE FOR A SELF- SERVICE FACILITY STORAGE RENTAL AGREEMENT. HB1700 Achor TO AMEND THE PRIOR AUTHORIZATION TRANSPARENCY ACT; AN…”
|
TO AMEND THE PRIOR AUTHORIZATION TRANSPARENCY ACT; AND TO CLARIFY THE PROCESS OF AN ADVERSE … | Achor | Notification that HB1700 is now Act 638 |
|
SB103
Act 425
· 2 mentions in transcript, agenda
Matched: “Members, uh, Senator Penzo has amended Senate Bill 103 and somehow didn't get back on the agenda. I would like to…”
|
TO CREATE THE PHARMACY NONDISCRIMINATION ACT; TO REQUIRE PHARMACY BENEFITS MANAGERS TO ACCEPT ANY PHARMACY … | C. Penzo | Notification that SB103 is now Act 425 |
|
SB140
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…Staff Only'. PENDING FISCAL IMPACT Number Sponsor Subtitle SB140 J. Boyd TO MANDATE THE USE OF BIOSIMILAR MEDICINES UNDER HE…”
|
TO MANDATE THE USE OF BIOSIMILAR MEDICINES UNDER HEALTH BENEFIT PLANS; TO REQUIRE A HEALTHCARE … | J. Boyd | Sine Die adjournment |
|
SB331
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…IOSIMILAR MEDICINES. DEFERRED BILLS Number Sponsor Subtitle SB331 G. Leding CONCERNING COVERAGE FOR GENETIC TESTING FOR INHER…”
|
CONCERNING COVERAGE FOR GENETIC TESTING FOR INHERITED CANCER MUTATIONS; AND TO CREATE THE GENETIC TESTING … | G. Leding | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB420
Act 736
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “SB420 Hester TO EXPAND ELIGIBILITY FOR WATER DEVELOPMENT STATE PR…”
|
TO EXPAND ELIGIBILITY FOR WATER DEVELOPMENT STATE PROGRAMS; TO AMEND THE WATER AUTHORITY ACT; AND … | Hester | Notification that SB420 is now Act 736 |
|
SB437
Act 945
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…HE USES OF THE CONSTRUCTION ASSISTANCE REVOLVING LOAN FUND. SB437 Hester TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS WIND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ACT.…”
|
TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS WIND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ACT. | Hester | Notification that SB437 is now Act 945 |
|
HB1275
Act 389
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1275 Cavenaugh TO PROHIBIT PRIOR AUTHORIZATIONS FOR HEALTHCARE S…”
|
TO PROHIBIT PRIOR AUTHORIZATIONS FOR HEALTHCARE SERVICES PROVIDED FOR TREATMENT OF A MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS. | Cavenaugh | Notification that HB1275 is now Act 389 |
|
HB1424
Act 628
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…16 F. Allen TO MANDATE COVERAGE FOR LUNG CANCER SCREENINGS. HB1424 L. Johnson TO MANDATE COVERAGE FOR SEVERE OBESITY TREATMENT…”
|
TO MANDATE COVERAGE FOR SEVERE OBESITY TREATMENTS. | L. Johnson | Notification that HB1424 is now Act 628 |
|
HB1721
Act 394
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1721 M. Brown TO AMEND SECTIONS OF THE ARKANSAS CODE TO PROHIBIT…”
|
TO AMEND SECTIONS OF THE ARKANSAS CODE TO PROHIBIT GREYHOUND RACING AND SIMULCASTING OF GREYHOUND … | M. Brown | Notification that HB1721 is now Act 394 |
|
SB123
Act 553
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…vin Sen. Clint Penzo REGULAR AGENDA Number Sponsor Subtitle SB123 G. Leding TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING COVERAGE FOR MAMMOGRA…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING COVERAGE FOR MAMMOGRAMS AND BREAST ULTRASOUNDS. | G. Leding | Notification that SB123 is now Act 553 |
Machine transcript
May contain errors. Verify important quotations against the official video.
About transcript accuracy
- Source
- SliQ live captions
- Model
- SliQ live ASR
- Processing date
- October 2, 2026
Speaker 1
0:08
Send it to commerce will come to order, uh, we're gonna start with uh with House Bill 1316. Wow Well, we wait on a couple of members to get here. No, I don't go all the way down there. Hey, that's too far. Come on this is how we do it I feel like the clamp it whenever we're all
Senator Dave Wallace
Unverified
0:39
the way down at the other end. Just introduce yourselves and you're welcome again. Thank you,
Speaker 9
0:54
Mr. Chair. State Senator Dave Wallace, District 19, and my friend, state representative Fred Allen District 77. Go ahead. Whoever wants to talk
Senator Dave Wallace
Unverified
1:05
to members. I run a lot of bills down here,
but this is one that I'm really proud of. It's a good bill. This bill is going to
Speaker 1
1:15
save lives. Hang on just one second. We got a handout that goes with this, I think, and let them, let them get that out for a second.
Senator Dave Wallace
Unverified
1:37
OK It The. One. there No. Go ahead, Senator Wallace. Sorry about that. And before I start,
I'm going to tell you that to the best of my knowledge, there's no known opposition to this bill. As you know, lung cancer is a leading cause of death in Arkansas. It claims nearly 2000 lives annually. More than brisk, more than colon cancer, more than prostate, all combined. Arkansas not only has one of the highest lung cancer date rates, death rates, but also one of the lowest survival rates nationwide and one of the big reasons for
this is that too many of our cases just are not detected. It's just we find out too late. Early detection is crucial. However, many Arkansans, especially our folks that live in rural areas. Just like access to necessary screenings. You know, it's important to note that this bill has a zero fiscal impact on the state. The employee benefits division, EBD already covers these screens, and they are neutral on this bill. As a draw or even for.
There they are. You're OK, you just gave me up, so thank you for that. I appreciate it. Furthermore, under the Affordable Care Act, private insurance company plans are required to cover preventive services, including lung cancer screenings without imposing cost sharing on the patients, so there should be no increase in the premiums. This bill simply ensures that uniform coverage following guidelines set by the American Cancer Society is in place. Last week this bill passed
judicially. Now the House committee and off the floor showing you that on the House side they think it's a real good bill. And with that, I'm going to
Representative Fred Allen
Unverified
3:27
turn over to my good friend. Uh, thank you, Senator Wallace. Indeed it's only in a high privilege for me to stand here or sit here today and introduce this bill. Many of you may not know this, but it's been an 18 year journey for me with cancer and cancer is something that's passionate that I'm very passionate about and this bill,
HB 1316 is going to save lives, and I believe that the sooner a person is detected with cancer, the sooner that person can be treated and early detection means that a person's survival rate goes up when you detect the cancer at an early age. The longer it takes to detect cancer, the more complicated it is for a person to recover if a person to heal. I have walked the halls of Saint Jude
Hospital, uh, Lavanna Hospital in Memphis and also I spent a great deal of time at MD Anderson Hospital down there in Houston, Texas. The doctors all around the country and also I had spent a lot of time at Sloan Kettering Hospital in New York talking to some of the best cos experts in the world, and we come to the conclusion that if we can detect cancer at an early stages, the survival rate goes up, and this is essentially what this bill will do.
Speaker 19
4:51
There any questions from the committee. There's no one signed up to testify for or against the bill, uh, you want to close your bill? I am closer. All right, motion by Senator Flowers, seconded by Senator Penzo, all in favor say aye. All opposed like san. Thank you, Senator Wallace. Thank you, Representative members. Thank you. We saved lives today. Thank you all.
Senator Dave Wallace
Unverified
5:13
Thank you all so much. Thank you for your. Thank you all for your vote.
Speaker 19
5:29
Members, uh, Senator Penzo has amended Senate Bill 103 and somehow didn't get back on the agenda. I would like to suspend the rules to place Senate Bill 103 that we've already heard and the senator has amended as as necessary rights, Senator Pinzo. You have made the amendments that was requested. All right. uh, what's the will of the committee on suspending the rules to place it on the agenda that motion by Senator Boyd,
second by Senator McKee, all in favor. Say aye. All pose like sign. Thank you, senators. We will go to Senate bill. 103. It's, it's already been amended and engrossed. Friends here for some.
Speaker 20
6:40
Thank you committee. Um might just tell us about the amendments we've already heard a
Senator Clint Penzo
Unverified
6:47
lot of the testimony the original version of the bill had one sentence that the hospital association had concerns with. After a review, it was determined the sentence was unnecessary and imposing a standard that exists elsewhere in the law. So after agreement from all parties, it was removed, so the hospital association is OK with it. We just struck some language and then we added a Senator.
Johnson and Senator Irvin as a co-sponsors. They said if we made the amendment, then they'd be happy to join as co-sponsors. Well, just
Speaker 39
7:21
appreciate a good. Is there any questions, Senator
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
7:25
Flowers? Remind me what the sentence was that they wanted out. Is that, I mean, it's hard to see what was engrossed and what wasn't, I guess you're
talking about page 5. Relevant and reasonable. What, what are you talking
Senator Clint Penzo
Unverified
7:43
about? Simon's here with me and he made the uh uh worked, worked with them on the amendment, the hospital association, so
Speaker 46
7:55
I'll let him kind of go over. The request and what was done. Good morning, senators and committee members, Simon De Brits of Highlands Oncology Group, the sentence in question was subsection 5B on page 5 line 15 through 19. It read relevant and reasonable terms of participation does not
include if the pharmacy benefits manager performs a prohibited practice of requiring accreditation standards. You're
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
8:20
going too fast. You said 15 on page. Ah, that's, that's, you're talking a line 8. It's already been amended. I know, I'm just trying to see what, what. What was, what language are you talking about? I see
relevant and reasonable, but that's online 8 on page 5. Is that what you're talking about? This is the new.
Speaker 46
8:46
The the language was removed, so it was Oh This is the old version. This is the new version. Um So on page 5. Lines 8 through 12 as the new version under 12 there was an additional sentence. And that was the sentence that was removed.
And I have the old version if you'd like for me
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
9:21
to read it, the sentence did the old version have our consistent with industry standards as it's written on line 8. Yes,
ma'am. So we only struck. You, you just added a definition, really, I guess.
Senator Clint Penzo
Unverified
9:38
That we, the, the amendment, the amendment cut out a a sentence. I don't remember what the sentence was,
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
9:44
but this is fine. Do you want to
Speaker 46
9:49
show it's the sentence right here. It's B. The sentence was the one that was removed. right
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
10:01
here. OK, so you, you did more in the way of defining what relevant and reasonable terms
Speaker 46
10:07
are. Yes, we removed a sentence that every all the parties believed was duplicative present in other areas of the law and had no reason to be in this bill, and so we just struck that sentence,
Speaker 19
10:19
and that made everyone happy. OK, I'm happy. Thank you. You're happy, I'm happy and I'd ask for a good vote. Is there any other questions? Seeing none whatsoever of the committee. The motion to pass as amended by Senator Boyd, second by Senator Flowers. Any discussion all in favor say aye. All opposed like signed. Thank you, Senator Penzo for for working with everyone and being a patient in the wait.
So next is a Senate Bill 83, and it has a handout. Has an amendment as well.
Speaker 28
11:36
So, uh Well, uh, I'll make a motion to adopt the amendment, seconded by Senator Boyd. All in favor say aye. All opposed
Speaker 68
11:46
like sign, uh, if you would just go ahead with, with your. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Joshua Bryant, Senate District
Senator Joshua Bryant
Unverified
11:53
32. I'll let my guests introduce themselves. I've done the button, push your button and pull it to
Speaker 1
12:01
you so we can hear you. I'm Jennifer Moore. I'm a
Speaker 72
12:07
practice manager at Taylor Plastic Surgery and
Speaker 74
12:10
Reconstruction. Dr. Robert Taylor here in uh uh for
Senator Joshua Bryant
Unverified
12:15
this uh very important bill. Committee, I just want to set some context up to where, where, where this came from and and why we're here today. Uh, March 30th, 2023 was the end of our legislative session, and I got a call from a constituent about a lapse in coverage for a very important breast surgery after
her long battle with cancer, and happens to be that the facility that was trying to navigate the insurance route happened to be Taylor Surgery Center there in Rogers. Arkansas. And what I thought was a relatively simple conversation about an S code S 2068 going away from the CMS roles, Blue Cross Blue Shield was just rolling on with the national pathway was S2038 I'm sorry 2068 was a pathway for a specific type of surgery that was the
gold standard in care. The old code, which was a C code C 19342, I believe, was the tram was an old way of. surgery which was covered underneath the insurance. While C is good for some, the C code, the flap surgery is good for some. The deep procedure was really required for several that had other comorbidities that require that type of surgery. And so initially I thought, well, if the code goes away, they just can't cover that surgery because
they were gonna lump that that specific surgery in with the traditional surgery, but there were two distinct types of surgery. One had far better outcomes for the woman's health and and was required for radiation patients and other types of treatment for the Cancer and the traditional kind is the implant-based surgery. Well, what that progressed into was that our local providers that could do this surgery for our local citizens here in
Arkansas were not in network to get. coverage for those patients and so our insurance providers were sending them out of pocket to another provider. To an in order for them to afford it, but they're getting displaced from their families, from their work, from their life, and having to have all those things happen hundreds of miles away at their expense versus something that could be offered here in Arkansas, and from what I could tell there's really no reason for it other than that was just what we had chose to do here in Arkansas for
insurance providers. So what Senate Bill 83 does is it mandates coverage for this gold standard of care that is here in Arkansas because we have several of our organizations demand or ask that we get to gold standard care and qualified surgeons to relocate here in Arkansas, but if we cannot pay them to do the work, there's no reason for them to come here. And so Senate Bill 83 again is a mandated coverage that all the abilities for reconstruction surgeries after a woman has gone through their
battle of their life for cancer, they can be made whole to the gold standard of care. One of my main concerns was what is this going to cost? looked at the studies across for NIH and several independent studies in European studies. This procedure's been out there long enough that they're able to index it in comparison with traditional surgeries. So while the upfront costs are higher, the long range costs 2 to 5 years is negligible. And so, but the quality of life
index, the QLI, is astronomically higher underneath a deep procedure which this bill intends to make sure we get our our people covered for its dramatically higher than with the traditional tram flat. So with that, I'd like to turn it over to Ms. Taylor or Dr. Taylor and Ms. Moore for their comments. Well, thank you all for giving us the
Speaker 77
16:05
time to come. This is the culmination of a 10 year battle that we've had trying to provide this service for the women of Arkansas.
15 years ago when I would do a breast reconstruction for a patient after a mastectomy. And an implant-based reconstruction wasn't Uh, a, um, option for them, we would use tissue from their stomach and bring it up to make a very beautiful breast, um, but in doing so, we would have to sacrifice the muscles of the abdomen and in doing that, that left them with visible and functional deformities of their core.
It's all we had. We didn't know any better. It was a satisfactory operation at the time, but then A smart gut doctor down in New Orleans determined that maybe we don't have to sacrifice the entire muscle of the stomach. We can just take the blood supply and then uh and tie it into little arteries and veins in the chest and make the same beautiful breasts without sacrificing abdominal function.
And as soon as I read his his groundbreaking article. I never did the tram flat reconstruction again. It was obsolete from that day forward. But the problem that we found was when we tried to do this groundbreaking surgery that we were reimbursed at a rate that was commensurate with the simple surgery and uh this groundbreaking surgery is, it's 10 to 14 hours in length. The patients are in the hospital 3 to 7 days.
It's in a very tense procedure oftentimes from necessitating bringing them back to the operating room. It it's just it became almost in impossible to do for the amount of money that we reimbursed for from insurance companies, so not only my practice but every practice in the state of Arkansas stopped doing free trap free flap breast reconstruction And in doing that, the patients were being shipped out of out of the day where the patients and the
physicians doing the surgeries were reimbursed at 3 to 5 times what the in-state physicians were reimbursed. And the patients were uh uh burdened with the cost of going out with not having the support groups of being local and it was just not fair, but it wasn't just that. Many times when I would see patients coming back to Northwest Arkansas. They would have wound healing problems or infections oftentimes necessitating going
to the hospital and it just, it was just a horrible system and needed to be changed. So, um, after uh with um Um, the help of a very great support group in Northwest Arkansas, we decided to to promote this bill, asking that the in-state physicians reimbursed at a level commensurate with the out of state physicians and so that the women of Arkansas can be treated in their local communities by
their local physicians in their local hospitals with better continuity care and overall better
Speaker 82
19:33
results. Again, my name's Jennifer Moore. I've been a practice manager now for over 20 years. Every day I sit across from women that have had radiation chemotherapy, reconstruction, and with failed surgeries coming back in and they just want to be made whole again, and that's what they're
looking to us for. 1 in 8 women will be diagnosed with cancer. So whether it's your mother, your sister, your wife, your daughter. This will touch all of us at some point. white. The Women's Healthcare and Cancer Act is there to protect women. It gives us the right to be reconstructed at our choice, but what insurance companies have done in Arkansas is they have tried to circumvent that. They have looked for the loopholes in the women's healthcare and Cancer Act. An example is a patient, she's gone
through all these surgeries. Now she's looking for somebody to do the deep flap, which is the gold standard in all the other states. And Blue Cross says, and I use Blue Cross because there are 85% of our pair mix. They say you're covered. You're going to be taken care of, only to find out there are not surgeons in Arkansas because they claim they cover it, but they keep the reimbursement so low that surgeons cannot afford to do this or we can't recruit good surgeons, so it leaves the
patient at a loss what to do. We are the only clinic in Arkansas right now that offered this procedure. The way we are doing it is we are having to go outside of the state. We are legislating it through the No Surprise Act at the federal level, and we are winning 98% of the time. We have, but the issue is we have to wait 8 to 10 months to get paid. And this is really a huge
liability in financial thing to take on for a small practice. We can only continue to do this so long, but we want women to have access to this. So, but while we're fighting and we're taking on the debt to offer this to women. Arkansas Blue Cross and these other insurances, they're enjoying the loopholes and denying women access. It's wrong. We need this bill. What this bill will do is it will allow Standardized reconstruction for all women. We have prior
authorization. That is key because Blue Cross says we are no longer going to offer prior authorization. That's our pathway to knowing that we get paid and it protects the patient. It establishes a minimum reimbursement so surgeons can offer this in Arkansas. Patients will only pay in-network rates. That's so important because if they have to go out and they have to reach to an out of network doctor. They shouldn't have to pay more. For something that by law they should have This is so key. We talk this has
minimal fiscal impact. The only reason the insurance companies are doing this. is to die so that they don't have upfront costs. We need this for the women of Arkansas. Arkansas deserves the same standard of care that women do in other states. I ask you please to stand behind this bill. Women should not have to fight cancer and insurance companies at the same time. And
Senator Joshua Bryant
Unverified
22:56
thank you. And just to wrap up the testimony, so where
we got to the bill language. I like to, uh, call
out on your desk is a is a
handout by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons when early on in 2023 when I was visiting with this
issue, I got handed this article about developments and access to the microsurgical breast reconstruction and so I reached out to this group because they handle this for all across America and they were instrumental in the language of the bill and understanding how other states do it and when they said with this bill we would be at the
forefront of the fight to make sure women's health care is covered in these issues. I visited with the hospital association with Arsenal Medical Association with our different large providers, UA system, and they were all commending the bill and it's and its progress progress forward here in Arkansas. So with that, we'll be glad to take any questions,
Speaker 19
23:54
any questions from the committee. Seeing none, uh, there are 3 to speak for the bill. Are y'all two of the three or? All right,
Speaker 1
24:05
uh. We. Where is that group? So uh just come forwards, all three of you. They're speaking for it. I have handouts, so I'm
Speaker 28
24:28
going to ask now we've had enough handouts. I'm going to ask you to keep this brief because we
Speaker 19
24:36
have a long agenda, keep it as brief as possible, but I want you guys to be heard because it's important that you be heard, but just keep it as short as you can and and don't be redundant, and
Speaker 1
24:51
each one do it separately and and introduce yourselves before you, before you give your test. Go ahead. Go ahead go ahead. OK,
Dana Brown
Unverified
24:59
good morning. My name is Dana Brown. I'm a 55 year old. Breast cancer survivor.
I'm married to my best friend and soul mate Jim Brown for 35 years. We have an amazing son, James Daniel, and I would like to start out by thanking this committee for the opportunity to speak to Senate Bill 83 from a patient's perspective. For the last 31 years, I was an educator in the Mountain Home School District, starting as a business teacher working my way through administrative roles such as high school principal, then after obtaining my doctorate, I advanced to the role of assistant superintendent. Ultimately, breast cancer
impacted my educational career due to traveling to Springdale for chemo treatments, surgeries, and radiation. I exhausted all of my sick days, personal days, vacation days, and sick bank days. I retired in January of 2024 to work with my husband and our family business. Knowing that I had additional surgeries in 2024, the stress of not having days and not performing my job. to my standards. In essence,
breast cancer ended my career in education. In December 2021, I was diagnosed with breast cancer. Specifically invasive ductal carcinoma, HER2 positive, so it was hormone fed. Stage 4, level 3, which was considered the most aggressive and has spread to my lymph nodes. My treatment was as follows, 3 rounds of chemo over a 3-year period, 25 treatments of radiation and 6 surgeries, which
include two deep flap surgeries on my left breast and two pat flap surgeries on my right breast. When going through chemo, I found I could push through the physical aches, pains, fatigue, even losing my hair and nails. What I found most difficult was the mental aspect of this journey. Being goal oriented, I would mentally prepare myself to receive chemo to complete that part and be able to move to the next phase to have the cancer journey complete.
The 3 times it was canceled and rescheduled was mentally brutal. It was like two steps forwards, 3 steps back. In my mind, reconstructive surgery would complete this journey. It would make me whole again. I would be finished. When I rang the bell completing chemo, I thought the fight was over, but it was just beginning. In September of 2022, I had a bilateral mastectomy. I developed an infection from my radiation treatments in April of 2023. My handout was to show you my before and after picture to
show you the impact of this surgery. This resulted in an emergency surgery to remove my expander. This surgery left me extremely deformed and prevented me from having what I would call a normal reconstructive surgery, which would have been implants. The deep flap surgery was my only option. After several follow-up appointments with the original plastic surgeon, he stated that reconstructive surgery would not be possible, which was devastating to hear. Wanting a second opinion, I made an appointment with Dr. Kasha
Khanya, who is the sole deep flap surgeon within 150 mile radius of northwest Arkansas. However, she was facing challenges in becoming an in-network provider with Blue Cross Blue Shield, which was my insurance company and still is. Doctor Kanye gave me hope. She gave me back what cancer had taken. The deep flap surgery made me whole again. Senate Bill 83 would have provided me access to an in-network provider that is essential not only for the financial aspect, but also for
the continuity and convenience of my healthcare. I was told that if I traveled to San Antonio, St. Louis, or New Orleans, it would be in-network. Traveling out of state for this procedure would not only have added emotional stress, but also disrupt the vital support system provided by my family. During this challenging time. Our only choice was going out of network using the No Surprise Act for arbitration at the federal level. It is crucial for the patients
to receive treatment without facing excessive financial burdens or out of network fees. Doctor Kasha Khaya performed two deep flap surgeries on me. In each breast, each one was 15 hours. She took me from a cancer patient to a cancer survivor. Senate Bill 83 would have a major impact on future breast breast cancer patients in terms of access to care.
Arkansas women should have the same health care opportunities as those in San Antonio, St. Louis, and in New Orleans, Arkansas women should have access to doctors like Doctor Kanya, Doctor Taylor and their amazing support staff in their clinic to help them finish their breast cancer journey. So I would like to thank you for allowing me to share my story with you. And I would appreciate your support for Senate Bill 83. Thank you again for your time. Thank you.
Speaker 2
30:18
The, the lady in pink. So, are you a survivor also? I am. Turn
Speaker 19
30:26
that piece of paper over. That you're fixing to read
Speaker 100
30:32
and just talk to us, OK, OK, talk to us and tell us, tell us a
Shannon Ellis
Unverified
30:37
a brief version and uh and and I appreciate that. Thank you very much my name is Shannon Ellis, and I'm representing myself this morning. I had breast cancer twice in
2011 and 2018, we treated aggressively the second time with mastectomy, and Dr. Taylor knew that my irradiated tissue and peace of mind needed implant free, one and done. No replacement periodic replacements needed, deep flap, breast reconstruction. So he referred me on to New Orleans, um, a consultation with them went well and I was ready to pack my bags, but their
insurance specialist let me warned me that I would be on the hook for tens of thousands of dollars, and mine wasn't going to be in network at all. I do not have Blue Cross Blue Shield. And so I got on the phone and started searching and I found one in-network provider at UAMS here and um but inquiry with him revealed that he was not accepting deep patience because he couldn't get paid.
Um, so I just kept hunting all around mostly in Texas and South Carolina cause I have family there and you know you got to travel and have a place to stay and so forth. Um, my insurance card was run over and over again, and I just got refusal after refusal, um, and in the meantime, um, Dr. Kanya arrived in Northwest Arkansas. I made that appointment, um, their office worked tirelessly less ly to get me a single case
dispensation. My insurance company did pay, but it took, it was a 5 year search and um yeah, it's, it's amazing it it, you shouldn't again I don't want to be redundant. You, you finish up your treatment though, and you and you think you've got this and and and in Arkansas right now, it is as if the women's health care and cancer right Rights Act does not apply,
so that's why I'm here today in support of this bill. I hope you guys will think of the women in your life and your constituents
Speaker 28
33:05
and get behind it. Thank you very much for that. Yes, Senator Johnson. Go ahead. Thank
Senator Mark Johnson
Unverified
33:10
you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Ellis, thank you, and all of you, thank you for your testimony, Ms. Ellis, who is your, was your insurance company? Qual Choice. OK,
Speaker 105
33:18
thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair, we have one more
Speaker 103
33:22
to testify. Uh-huh for the bill. If you would not read something, just
Speaker 107
33:27
talk. Mine is very short and it's a different
Sandy Carpenter
Unverified
33:30
perspective than the other two. my name is Sandy Carpenter and I am in favor of SB 83 bill. I'm a 12-year breast cancer survivor. I found out I had infiltrating ductal carcinoma at the age of 46. At that time in my life, I was a single mother with two children, 10 and 14. I would spend the next year having 3 surgeries, one at which would be at MD Anderson in Houston, Texas. I would travel to MD Anderson for consultations, testing, surgery, follow-up
appointments with the help of my parents who were 74 and 78 at the time. That would also leave um my friends and family um to help me with, and they would have to leave their jobs to help me on this journey. When I returned home, I started a treatment plan of 24 weeks of chemotherapy, 20 radiation treatments and then had a waiting period of 6 months with tissue expanders in place, all while trying to continue working to provide for my family. After 6 months waiting period, I would then have permanent implants
placed. I was so relieved and thought I could put all of this behind me to only wake up one morning wondering why my breast was wet, my incision had opened up and I had to have my implant removed due to not having good blood flow to my breasts from the radiation since I was not a candidate for a deep flap surgery due to not having enough tissue, I would need to have a latissimus flap to restore blood flow back to my breasts so I could hold an implant. Over the next year, I would have 6 surgeries to my left breast. I am grateful to have had my implants for the last 10 years,
but the latissimus flap does restrict some daily movements, activities in my left arm and will need to have another surgery in the future to remove scar tissue that is forming around my implant. The reason I am sharing this today is Because the latissimus flap surgery has been the only option for breast cancer patients that have had radiation in Arkansas for the last 11 plus years. Not all plastic surgeons offer this procedure. Many women are left with no reconstruction at all, failed procedures, or being forced to travel to another state for all the surgery needs.
All scenarios adding more strain to what's already an incredible stressful journey for patients and families. These are stories I witnessed far too often in my job as a patient coordinator. The women Arkansas should not have to settle for alasimus flat nor reconstruction when they can have a gold standard procedure like the deep flap surgery using their own tissue, tissue and offering better quality of life. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to share my journey, the road to recovery is different for every patient, but I hope this will encourage you to support SB 83 bill to give women in Arkansas the gold
standard of care they deserve. Thank
Speaker 14
36:05
you ladies for that testimony and uh And uh Is there
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
36:14
For the. Go ahead, Senator Flowers.
Well, I thank you, ladies for your testimony, I'm a breast cancer survivor myself, didn't have to have
a Breasts removed, but lymph nodes removed on my left arm. I
appreciate you, Senator Bryant, for, um, bringing the bill. I'll support the bill
and You know, hopefully, uh, insurance companies in Arkansas. will be More prone to help people, uh. have a quality of life that they deserve, but I appreciate all your service to educator and. Uh, what you did, uh, as a
patient rep and the doctors in your clinic. I do appreciate it. I just wanted to say that and at the proper time I make
Speaker 28
37:13
a motion to pass. So, ladies, if you would shut your microphones off.
Speaker 116
37:20
And you're dismissed. Senator Bryant, you want to
Senator Joshua Bryant
Unverified
37:23
close your bill? I'll keep it brief. I appreciate the committee listening to testimony. It's obviously emotional for lots of families is 50% of our population has
this impact. I will say that several positions that do traditional surgeries have reached out saying that they would love to offer this when they could, so I
see this as an expanding care to, if not most, if not all of our metropolitan areas can we start to
Speaker 28
37:46
offer this. So with that, I appreciate a good vote. Thank you, Senator Bryant. What's the will
Speaker 19
37:52
of the committee, Senator Fla? motion seconded by Senator Penzo as amended discussion by Senator Ervin. Thank you, and I apologize
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
37:58
for not being here, but I just wanted to thank Senator Bryant. He reached out
to me last year and we worked together a little bit and I just really grateful that you reached out to me and that we talked through this, and I hope it was helpful and I just really, I'm glad that you got to this point and just happy to see this bill pass and thank you for reaching out to me and and letting me.
Speaker 19
38:24
be a part of helping you with it. All in favor say aye. All oppose like sign. Thank you, Senator. Senator Hester has
Speaker 117
38:35
The Senate Bill 420. Senator Hester. Senator Hester. Come up
Senator Bart Hester
Unverified
38:53
here. Oh, that's too far. No. All right. Thank you,
Speaker 126
38:58
Mr. Chairman. This is Senate Bill 420. just introduce yourselves and and your state senator Bart Hester, District 33.
Senator Bart Hester
Unverified
39:06
Westward, Arkansas Department of Agriculture. So this is, this is a bill brought to me by the agency members. I think it's really important every single one of us have water and sewer concerns in our area. We've got a package of bills. This will be the 2nd 1 we just ran one in a different committee, but what this bill ultimately allows is if you have a water authority or sewer authority that is not government owned. They are still eligible. This will make them eligible for
our natural resource loans, low interest loans. They would not be eligible for principal forgiveness. So for instance, just thinking of a few committee members here liberty authority that that handles the water from Pine Bluff, they would be eligible for loans now, even though they're not a government owned. This would make them eligible for these low interest loans that they're not currently eligible for, or Hot Springs Village, not currently eligible. This will make them eligible. Look, I don't think the people
of our districts care if it's public or private. it, they just need good, clean water at a at a good rate and ultimately that that's, that's all this bill does. It expands who is eligible for these low-interest loans, and if I miss something, I'll hand it off
to that's, that's it. It's not, it's not really complicated. Senator Flowers. Well you know
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
40:30
I'm interested now that you mentioned liberty. Uh
And OK, so with this bill, they become qualified for low interest loan, you know, you said agency when you uh
Started talking. What agency is this? That you're talking about. What agency? Just that's a couple of words, I think. Yes, ma'am.
Speaker 132
40:54
So the Arkansas Department of Agriculture within the department, we have the Natural Resources Commission, which is the border commission that that overviews water financing for the state and do you, does your agency make the loans?
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
41:11
We do, yes, ma'am. OK, and I wanted to know. Because I understand liberty wants to build out or upgrade infrastructure and stuff at some point and that's as far as I know, the only water company in the state that's subject to the public service commission. And so I want to know. I would think a low interest loan that they would receive, if any, from your agency.
Would, uh, help us. Uh Not Get
big rate increases. Would you agree with that? Yes, yes,
Speaker 132
41:54
ma'am. That's, that is the overall goal. Senator Hester has talked about just, you know, the overall water and wastewater needs across the state, you know, we estimate those to be about 13 billion statewide. So the senator Hester's point of billion 13 billion, yes ma'am. So to the point of trying to help these entities qualify for
low interest loans, help them to be able to implement those without you rate increases for for their constituents at those water and wastewater facilities, but
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
42:25
Say entities and we're talking about water. And if liberty is the only Entity in the state that has not
Speaker 44
42:35
qualified. In the past we think there's a few
Speaker 132
42:40
others that have just not submitted applications because
they would not qualify, and this just brought
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
42:47
that not talking about $30 billion. Of infrastructure. What, what kind
of interest rate, low interest loan are you talking about? I, I would have to pull
Speaker 132
42:59
the specific numbers so it varies based off the market on what the financing rates are, but it's, it's usually a little bit below what they could get out on otherwise through a commercial lending entity, so it helps them
be able to finance their loan at a lower cost
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
43:18
to their customers. Do they have to submit the plan to
Speaker 132
43:25
your agency. They do. So they would submit an application. It would, it would, there's a number of things that are included in that and then the commission would would review, review that with other entities that are applying
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
43:38
for funding. And, and does your Department coordinate with public service commission.
Speaker 137
43:46
We, we have conversations, but our authorities are
Speaker 132
43:49
not overlapping on that, so we don't As far as the Public Service commission specifically, we don't work with them on other aspects, so this, this would just be financing itself for a water project. So, and, and
Senator Bart Hester
Unverified
44:04
I'll, I'll jump back in here like, so what we're talking about
is the Natural Resource Commission right now they have about $300 million of bonding authority over the past 4 years, and you see there's
stars all over the state in every county that they've issued these, these, these loans for and these loans are leveraged to get federal dollars. So when they go in they've got to have, you know, an engineering plan and put up so much of their own money. That's what these bonds are for, uh, and, and the whole state's using them and But we did not allow until hopefully now, um, a non-governmental owned water authority, which would be liberty to be able to access these, these, these, these low interest loans. I think this is
a huge opportunity for Liberty Water and Pine Bluff and Hot Springs Village and probably village wastewater and the the Bella Vista Water Authority up in northwest Arkansas, um, and now they may choose not to use it, right? They don't have to. It just makes them as somebody that can actually make. Application and if it goes through the process and they're selected, they then they they're just eligible whereas currently they're not. Well, it makes sense
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
45:11
that they would use it and I would think that the PSC would consider that when they go over
there asking for increased rates. Can I have
one of those maps you can have this one, OK, and you said you used the term bond and then
seemed to equate that to loans. Can you explain what, what, what you're talking about.
Speaker 132
45:39
little complex, so there, there are multiple avenues of funding, but Senator Hester was talking about right now there's a separate bill that would continue general obligation bond
authority, and we use that general obligation bond authority to leverage other programs to maximize the water financing capability for the state of Arkansas, so there there's a few different pots of funding. The general obligation bond Authority is what helps leverage those dollars to to get. what Senator Hester referred to as all these projects on the on the map. We use that to make sure that that money comes in and those projects are possible, but the money that you agency
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
46:19
has for loans that would be pursuant to this bill is what, $10 million and you're talking about billions of dollars. So
Speaker 132
46:27
it's, it's a certain percentage, so the general obligation bond is primarily used for loans and for matching. the federal programs, so the federal programs comes with a certain, a certain portion. It varies by year of how much of that can be used for for principal forgiveness, but it's a I'd be happy to follow up with additional I'd like to know if you expect something from the
Speaker 28
46:50
federal government for this year. Thank you. Thank you, Senator. Any other questions? Go ahead, Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mr.
Senator Mark Johnson
Unverified
47:00
Chairman. Uh, Mr. Secretary, uh, With the loans be to the for-profit entities at the same rate that a nonprofit entity would be getting
and equivalent situation. Yes, yes, sir. So it would, it would be similar rights, but they would compete
Speaker 132
47:21
for that, so it would be as Senator Hestro mentioned, I would have to apply. They don't have to apply. We would receive those applications. We would rank those applications. The commission will look at that and say we've got x amount of dollars that we can loan out and so it would, it would be a competitive process on trying to trying to get those loan dollars out as far as possible, but it would be, it would be very similar rates for regardless of
Senator Mark Johnson
Unverified
47:47
entity. This this is turning into quite a great session for
for-profit utilities. I've just, you said. 13 billion is the estimated need across the state. I knew it was a high number, but so we've got $13 billion worth of need and now we're going to pardon the pun and gosh, I hate puns, dilute the Ability to use this fund by bringing in the for-profits that have access to capital markets and pay, pay a dividend, I guess, to their stockholders, which is certainly a legitimate
thing, but I'm just, I'm a little leery of that. I have a, a nonprofit water authority in my district that, you know, they struggle along and they need to meet their needs and this is like, well, if you're going to have let these Other entities and this is no offense to the folks in Senator Flowers' district who have they, they need their water too, not, not saying that's wrong, but
it's a question is a subsidy. It seemed that if you had a higher rate, maybe less than market rate, but a higher rate than the the nonprofits were were using. It might seem to be a little bit more equitable,
Senator Bart Hester
Unverified
49:05
but Senator, please, Senator Hester, please there's some good good news to that like we haven't ran out of this money yet. So it's not like we're picking someone or deluding. In fact, that's one of the debates we have is like there we have funds that we are not accessing um
that that there are funds available is what I'm saying, but not $13 billion. Well, no, they are not $13 billion available, right, but we, we, we all have needs in our district. In fact, I've got a handout that I was going to provide to all members before I presented these bills that they that they have given me that shows all the available options that That we're not using for for for funding. Uh, the problem would be even if this is a privately owned water system, the cost for upgrades are simply more than a privately owned this
system, and I'm not sure if liberty is a is a non for profit or a profit, but it is privately owned. There's simply no ability to go get the loans or if they got the loans, what the local community could afford. They can't afford for their water bills to go 2 or 3 times. I can tell you, uh, Springdale, Bentonville, they're doubling water bills right now, and it is brutal. I'm the community, doubling water bills and But you know, and that's that's what this is just trying to help prevent in some other places. I
Senator Mark Johnson
Unverified
50:25
appreciate that explanation, but Senator, as you know,
all of us that have been around paying attention. A lot of these, these massive increases have been because many of these entities have not done the periodic maintenance, and so now they're having to, I hate to say pay the piper, but to come back and and and and raise rates because they didn't take care of the needs along the way, and I I'm not, it's not easy to raise rates along the way and then
when you finally have to, like we saw in Helena West,
Helena, it's quite a major hit. So anyway, but,
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
51:08
but thank you for your answers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Any other questions? See OK, go ahead. I'd just like to
say thank you to Senator Hester for bringing the bill and point out that liberty actually was owned by United Water and then before
that by some other company for profit, so it's not all black and white like you think it is, and bottom line is the rate the people that consume the water. We're paying for this, and we need help. You got to look at the demographics of the district, the income level just like he said up there in Springdale, I think y'all had a lot of
money up there where you're building out, but we don't have all that money down there in Southeast Arkansas, not
the average consumer, so I appreciate the bill and at the proper time move do pass.
Speaker 11
52:02
Thank you, ma'am. You want to close your bill?
Senator Bart Hester
Unverified
52:06
Um, I don't think anybody's here to speak for or against it, but no, that's it, members. I think there will be
asked of us what are we doing for water and sewer rates? What are we doing for the people? We've got a package of these bills. This is part of that. It's helpful. And look, there are certainly other water, there may be some in each of your districts. I don't know that are owned by non nonprofit,
but certainly not government owned that this would affect. I didn't bring a whole list of that today, but this
Speaker 28
52:36
is something that's needed. I would appreciate a good vote. Motion by Senator Flowers, second by Senator McGee.
Speaker 19
52:45
Any discussion. Seeing no what's all in favor. Say aye. All opposed likean. Thank you, Senator. Passed your bill. All right, next, we're going to go to uh Representative Kavanaugh on 1275.
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
53:09
introduce yourself and you're welcome to begin. Thank you, members. Representative Frank Cavanaugh, District 30. Uh, this is a bill that just simply says that we're no longer require pre-authorization for a mental health crisis. Um, there is no impact to the EBD when we did the physical impact, so it doesn't affect because our EBD currently doesn't require pre-authorization, but there are insurance companies that in the state that do require preauthorization, and we discovered this through our work with the
CSU's crisis stabilization units, we found out a lot of them were getting, um, denials on their claims because they said they needed to have a pre-authorization. And for me, it's really a parity issue because it doesn't matter if it's a mental health crisis or a physical health crisis. It's a crisis, and if it's not addressed properly and quickly, then it's going to have the same outcome. It could result in the death of the patient. And so that's why I ran this bill is so that we can have the same parity on a mental health crisis as we
do on a physical health crisis, and I'm glad
Speaker 19
54:14
to take any questions members, get your questions out of the way before they get this gets to the floor because I've got run
Speaker 41
54:26
it there. So any questions? Go ahead, Senator Flowers. I like the
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
54:29
bill Representative Kavanaugh, something I can support, I'm wondering on the last page you have uh Uh Mentioning the state board of
Finance to promulgate may promulgate rules to implement this subchapter that may apply to state and public school life and health insurance programs,
any other Agency Required to promulgate rules. Not my understanding. That was
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
54:58
put in there for ABD as my understanding, and when we got the physical impact back, we discovered EBD already doesn't require a preauthorization for a mental health crisis, so they're, they won't really have to promulgate any rules. It's
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
55:14
already in there, OK, you put it in there and just in the event. Yes, ma'am. That's the
Senator Mark Johnson
Unverified
55:22
only question that I have, Mr. Chair. Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Representative Kavanaugh, do we have prior
authorization for people to visit an emergency room and it was just analogous to that, yes, so that, that was really my
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
55:35
catalyst is we need to be the same parody. Doesn't matter where they're being seen when they're in a mental health crisis, they need to be able to
Speaker 20
55:45
be treated just like if they're in the ER. Exactly. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you, Mr. Senator Johnson, if you're not offended,
Speaker 19
55:57
I may use that on the floor testimony. Thank you. Is there any other questions? Saying no, no one's here to speak for or against the bill. What's the will of the committee, Senator Flowers and seconded by Senator Johnson, any discussion all in favor say aye. All opposed like sign. Thank you,
Speaker 166
56:15
Representative Kavanaugh. Thank you, members. Appreciate it. All right. Senator Scott. Are you doing uh 1721. 1721.
Speaker 19
56:40
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Introduce yourself and OK. You're Senator Jamie Scott,
Senator Jamie Scott
Unverified
56:45
District 12. I'm presenting House Bill 1721. And so this bill is a large part of a cleanup bill, and it does two things. It repeals the greyhound racing
statues from Arkansas code, the Racing Commission has already repealed the rules on greyhound racing, so this is a cleanup of a regulatory change that has already taken place. Southland closed his greyhound tracks several years ago, so there's no longer any greyhound racing that is occurring in the state of Arkansas. This bill also
prohibits simulcasting of greyhound racing in the state over the past decade or so. The sport of greyhound racing has greatly declined in popularity with Greyhound racing, now illegal in 43 states. There are only 2 operating greyhound tracks in the country, both located in West Virginia, and there is active legislation currently being pursued in West Virginia to phase out those two remaining tracks. You will see that we have set an effective
day on this bill for January 1, 2028, which is in line with the proposed phase out that's being pursued in West Virginia for the last two tracks that we currently have, um, the racing commission has reviewed this bill, and they have no objection. Oak Lawn and Saland have also reviewed the bill, and they're neutral and Saracen does not offer greyhound, um, simulcasting anymore, so in closing this bill just kind of represents clean up language and it's an important step forward to align our policies with what is already being done.
Speaker 19
58:19
Is there any questions? Say no, no one. Go ahead, Senator
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
58:28
Flowers. I'm not sure what what this
is. Necessary, we don't have a dog track anymore, um. And why wait till 2028. I mean, so
Senator Jamie Scott
Unverified
58:41
since um thank you for the question. um we're really just trying to put in statute what has already been done to align the policies, but
since 2022 Greyhound has been repealed in 5 other states, Massachusetts, Kansas, Colorado, New Hampshire, and Arizona, so everybody's moving forward trying to put some policy in place in some of the states. There are similar bills being ran right now in Oregon and and. North Dakota. So if all of those bills pass, those 5 states and the two states that are currently doing it. Greyhound will only remain operational in 11 states, so a lot of states are moving forward to just put some policies in place for what
they're already what is already doing without the policy.
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
59:28
Well, we don't have greyhound anymore, right, as I said, I mean, why would be Uh, uh I, I,
Speaker 162
59:36
I'm just not understanding. The point of this. Are you fostering these dogs until 2028, Senator.
Speaker 193
59:45
A I. No, sir. OK. Why would we be waiting on West Virginia to do
Senator Jamie Scott
Unverified
59:52
something. I, I don't understand this. We are not
waiting on West Virginia. What I said was West Virginia has the last two remaining tracks, and they have legislation now that they're working through and the expiration date that they have on there is 2028, and that's the date that's in
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:00:11
all the other states as well. But we've outlawed. Greyhound rac in Arkansas. So if
Senator Jamie Scott
Unverified
1:00:18
we don't 2 years ago, but if legislation is not put in
Senator Mark Johnson
Unverified
1:00:23
place, somebody could come back and put Something in place wouldn't they have to get
a license? To do that. Yes, ma'am. Senator Johnson, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator Flowers are going down the line. I was going to go. This I assume would repeal any authority the racing commission might have to if someone wanted to come in and create a new greyhound racing track, not Southland, but you know
something I don't know, maybe, uh, in Western Arkansas or something it conceivably could allow that. So this is really a an animal. Rights Bill, isn't it just to kind of totally take
out of the Arkansas code any reference to allowing greyhound racing. Am I reading it correctly? It
Senator Jamie Scott
Unverified
1:01:15
could be seen as an animal rights bill, but that's not how that's not that's
Senator Mark Johnson
Unverified
1:01:20
why all these states are banning greyhound
race. Absolutely. I mean, I'm, I see both sides of it. I've been to the dog track and I tell you, the dogs seem to love it, but again, some people think that's abuse, and I, you know, I'm not going to take an opinion one way or the other, and I just want to say that what we're really doing is saying racing commission, you no longer have the legal authority to have to sanction and approve a dog
track. It's that. What this does, OK, I'm just trying to get it clear because you know sometimes we have unintended consequences on legislation. Thank you, Senator. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Speaker 28
1:01:58
Any other questions? Seeing no, no one's signed up to speak for or against the bill. You want to close your bill You want close for your bill? I'm close, and I asked for a
Speaker 19
1:02:15
due pass. All right, Senator Irvin. Well, motion to pass, seconded by Senator Boyd, and your discussion all in favor say aye. All pose like sign. Thank you, Senators. We'll go to House Bill 1271, Senator Penzo, tell me which one is yours.
Senator Clint Penzo
Unverified
1:02:36
Thank you, Mr. Chair, committee, House Bill 1271 received a motion due pass by this committee and was presented on the Senate floor. Senators Caldwell, Hickey, uh, and Hickey requested amendments, and I pulled the bill to amend it. The amendment allows for an employee of the lender or title company to perform the inspection and and file an affidavit for residential properties it also added architects to the list of
professionals that may perform an inspection and file
an affidavit, and if you, if you remember this bill allowed oh, sorry. Well, I mean, I don't know if
you want me to go over what the bill did again or if everybody remembers voting on it, but just when it got to the floor, had some amendments that were requested. We
happily made them and arguably have a better bill now, so.
Speaker 166
1:03:38
I think we have one to speak. The For the
Speaker 2
1:03:47
bill. All right. Thank you, sir. Go ahead, Senator Irvin. I just thought I was just
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:03:53
saying that I like that you added an architect to that list. I didn't know if that was part of it or just something that y'all missed or That, that was one of the requests made. I'm not sure
Speaker 19
1:04:08
which senator requested it, but I think that was a good catch. Is there any other questions, uh, seeing none, you want to close your bill? I'm close and ask for a good vote. Motion by motion by Senator Penzo second by Senator Irvin. Any discussion? All in favor say aye. All opposed like sign. Thank you. All right, we will go to House Bill. 1652.
Senator Justin Boyd
Unverified
1:04:49
Thank you, Mr. Chair, with your permission, I'm going to get started. Just go ahead and Justin Boyd, state senator Fort Smith, and I, I think I can get through this without any help, so I'm gonna try, but I do have people in the room who can give me some backup if, if need be. So this is uh updates the regulations on self storage, uh, the, the, this bill seeks to strengthen legal clarity, modernize notifications, and standardized termination policies within the self storage industry and the changes below bring Arkansas.
Up to date with other states. So in Section 1, what Section 1 does is this section updates language to add that a last known address of an occ occupant could also be found on the occupant's rental application if there's not one on the rental agreement. Section 2 ads that a written agreement could be in written or electronic form. Section 3 requires the occupant discloses any lien holders of the stored property in a unit. Section 4 adds that a facility owner could use commercially reasonable method
to search for existing leads on properties stored in their facility before a cell or removal. Section 5, does two things as more facilities are moving towards electronic gates and record keeping that are now facilities that allow you to do an online application and if approved you can fill out the agreement and get a code for the gate. Uh, so this section just adds that a person does not sign an agreement. Use of the unit for 30 days constitutes acceptance of the rental agreement, and then the second part of the
second change in Section 5 is it creates a uniform policy for disposing of property when an existing agreement terminate terminates. That said, I'm happy to try
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:06:36
to answer any questions. Is there any questions, Senator Flowers? So Senator
Boyd, uh, this, uh, In Section 1, you're saying last known address provided.
Means the address or electronic mail address. Provided by the occupant and be a written or electronic application to rent a
lease space at a self-service storage facility if assigned agreement does not exist. What about, I'm concerned about these electronic mail addresses being a last known address. What if they're hacked? I mean.
We supposed to really trust. The computer. And these email addresses to serve somebody with notice. I think I've got a
Senator Justin Boyd
Unverified
1:07:36
good answer, but let's bring somebody up who is a little more knowledgeable than Justin Boyd on the subject. Just,
Speaker 19
1:07:46
uh, whenever you get here, introduce yourselves. And helped Senator Boyd. Yeah, OK. My name is Michael
Michael Hall
Unverified
1:07:57
Hall. I'm with the Arkansasal Storage Association. Michael Hall with the Arkansas Self Storage Association, um. With regards to notice, the law already allows for electronic email as a form of notice. So we're not in that sense we're not asking for anything new.
Speaker 219
1:08:29
So what are you asking for? So the three things that we're trying to accomplish with this is a let me just.
Michael Hall
Unverified
1:08:43
Refer to my notes. So with regards, we're trying to pass it such that an unsigned lease after 30 days if they've made their payment is considered a binding lease, so we would have some situations where he mentioned where somebody would come in to the unit, put their lock on the unit, and
technically move in, drop a check in the door, and leave. currently under that without a contract they don't have the protection of the contract. And so what we're asking in that situation is if they've made the payment in 30 days have gone by, then the the understanding is that we have an agreement and we're asking if we by agreeing there's an agreement, then we have to follow that agreement and follow the law as a tenant of the facility. So the goal of that is to get the tenant protection that he
may not currently have if he doesn't have
Speaker 19
1:09:36
a lease. So, so if you have a squatter. Then you're putting him under the agreement if he's in that situation and locked to your facility and is squatting in your facility, you're you're treating him as a tenant. Am I correct? I believe so, yes,
Speaker 221
1:09:51
sir. So in that situation, as long as he's made a payment, if he's a, if he's a squatter, he's a
Michael Hall
Unverified
1:09:57
squatter, but if he comes in and he makes a payment, uh, then the
agreement is we've accepted the payment, hence we have, we have the agreement. So in that case, if he didn't make a payment the next month, we would go through the
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:10:13
lien process. I couldn't just dispose of. Go ahead, Senator Flowers. And, and
then in section 3, you're adding Uh The requirement to disclose lien
Michael Hall
Unverified
1:10:26
holders. So, so currently somebody stores personal property. They're not required to tell us if there's a
lien holder. The current statute says that during the lien process we have to contact the county clerk circuit clerk of the county where the property's stored. Um, we've, we think that's very restrictive. We don't think that's fair to the lienholder because you have a gentleman who lives in Little Rock. He buys a boat. He pays taxes. on the boat and he stores it up at Washita in Hot Springs, let's say, and he doesn't pay his
bill. Well, that storage operator only has to check the hot springs circuit court circuit clerk for a lien, but that boat is all registered in Little Rock, so by allowing us a more commercially viable way to notify we can use any kind of lien search, something more along the lines that a bank would use that would check statewide.
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:11:27
And storage facilities are not able to check. Statewide
Michael Hall
Unverified
1:11:35
Currently the statute just requires us to check with the the clerk in the county where this property is stored. So we're we're trying to mandate that we that we
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:11:49
can go outside of that. And so when you
say in Section 4 Line 24 or use a commercially reasonable method that'll capture. All over the state. Well, it
Michael Hall
Unverified
1:12:05
will allow us to use third party lien searches the statute uses the same language in regards to legal notification so you can notify in a newspaper of general circulation or what they say is a commercially reasonable way, which allows The use of online auctions and stuff, so then
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:12:23
with that language, using that commercially and it's an or in there, so
you don't have to correct. We're not trying to
Speaker 226
1:12:36
change it. We're just trying to enhance enhance
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:12:44
The storage facility. Manager or owner. will have in a lease agreement if it's in writing. A space on there or a question on there about lien holders. If this, if this is approved,
Michael Hall
Unverified
1:13:03
yes, ma'am, we would allow a line on that.
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:13:09
They could always lie to us, ma'am. I believe that I'm wondering is it going to be up to
the person who is wanting to store. Property or is it going to be on the owner of the storage unit to say to that person, you need to tell me whether
Michael Hall
Unverified
1:13:28
you got a lien holder, so yes, we will, we will ask, we currently ask if they have a lien holder. We're just trying to strengthen that up under the current lien process
we're required to do a lien search regardless of what the tenant tells us. Oh, really? Yes, ma'am. And that's why we're asking for a commercially reasonable because we want to expand outside of the county where the
Speaker 19
1:13:53
property's stored, so if they default on payment. Uh, you have to be able to to get that title perfected or get your, get you in place of the person who has defaulted since you had to take possession of the property, correct, correct,
Speaker 28
1:14:11
we we view them as first lien holder, yes. All right. Thank you. Uh, any other questions? Seeing none, there's only these two are signed up to speak for the bill, so
Speaker 68
1:14:24
you want to close your bill? Thank you,
Senator Justin Boyd
Unverified
1:14:30
Mr. Chair. I think those were some good questions. I would appreciate and I'm closed for the bill. I'd appreciate a good vote, make a motion
Speaker 19
1:14:37
to pass. The motion by Senator Boyd, seconded by Senator Johnson. Any discussion
all in favor say aye. All oppose like sign. Thank you, Senator. You passed your bill. You have one other bill,
Senator Justin Boyd
Unverified
1:14:53
it is. House Bill 1,700,700, yes, so this, this bill is House Bill 1700. It's just, uh, what should be a fairly simple update to the law. It's a provider privacy protection bill to maintain the integrity of a prior authorization ruling that still allows for all identifying information available, be available to the ordering
provider. So what it does is it simply prevents the prior authorization review provider's name from being auto printed. and sent to the patient, uh, whoever did that prior authorization review had no relationship with the patient. They have no medical record on the patient. They only have whatever they reviewed right in front of them, and it is creating some some challenges in the market. So the prior authorization review physician does not have an established history with the patient, nor can they assess the patient's mental status when making their
ruling. So this requires that the relationship to be maintain maintained between the patient and their physician. There's no known opposition and it's supported by the hospital association. Any questions? Seeing none,
Speaker 19
1:16:05
uh, Don't see anyone to speak for or against the bill. You know close your bill. Yes, this is just
Senator Justin Boyd
Unverified
1:16:12
a common sense update, and I'd appreciate a
Speaker 19
1:16:16
good vote and make a motion to pass, motion by Senator Boyd. Seconded by Senator Johnson, any discussion? All in favor say aye. I opposed like signed, thank you. We're going to go to uh House Bill 1288 Senator Irvin is going to run that, and I would ask to suspend the rules and do a voice amendment to add. One of these days, Representative Johnson is going to learn to put somebody on the
bills, and that spin to rolls and put Senator Irvin motion to suspend the rules, seconded by Senator Boyd. All in favor. Say aye. All right, uh we uh I move adoption the voice amendment to put Senator Irvin's name on it, motion by Senator McKee, seconded by Senator Penzo, all in
Speaker 1
1:17:11
favor. Thank you. Uh, would you present your bill at 1288 as amended.
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:17:19
Yes, thank you remember Senate Bill 1288 is just very straightforward. It's requiring a
healthcare insurer to make certain retroactive payments to a provider upon the credentialing of that provider. Sometimes the credentialing process can take a long time. We need these people to be out there working and, and, and taking care of patients and so this all this does is just uh clar. ify that they can make those retroactive payments to that provider for the work already
done, um, upon the credentialing approval of
Speaker 39
1:17:53
the provider. Is there any questions?
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:17:59
Senator Flower. So why is it that this section does not apply to Medicaid program.
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:18:05
The reason I think I'm correct. I'm not sure if somebody's in here
from Medicaid, but I think what what why is because retroactivity is something that we would have to define in our
with CMS and we actually do already do that retroactively for beneficiaries, uh, but we, we, I think the credentialing process is, is already, you're either signed up to be a Medicaid provider. or you're not, and so that should never be an issue with the Medicaid program. This shouldn't be an issue with that. So
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:18:41
they have to be. Already credentialed to participate in
Medicaid. Yeah, yes, if they're participating in
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:18:51
Medicaid, they've already done what they need to do to participate
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:18:55
in Medicaid would a clinic have credentials or is it individual providers, individual providers, so anybody in a clinic, whether
it's a nurse or doctor lab tech if they're billing,
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:19:12
it would, it would be for those that are billing. Under their provider.
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:19:22
Status each each person, it has to be a person.
It can't be a a doctor's office corporation or, I mean,
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:19:36
it's under the provider's name. Well, my question is a provider or a corporation could, I mean they will, they create corporations, but as far as credentialing your credentialing is of a provider that's based on your certification and licensing, education, all that kind of stuff is part of your
credentialing so that you meet the certificate, you meet the requirements of being able to be paid as a health care provider. So it's sometimes that credentialing takes some process and some time to get they're already working inside of a clinic, but they're credentialing as being a Insurance companies, when you come into network, they credential you. As as an individual. Thank you. So you know, the questions.
Speaker 68
1:20:33
if there's anybody. I don't see anybody to speak for against
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:20:40
the bill. You know close she be closed. I'll
Speaker 19
1:20:43
make a motion to pass as amended. All right, motion by Senator Ervin second by Senator Flowers as amended all in favor say aye. All opposed like sign. Thank you, Senator Irvin, for
taking care of that. All right, we will go to uh We will go to Senate Bill 437. Senator Hester will be here in just a couple of minutes. Senators, thank you so much. We have cleared off pretty much everything except for Senator Lennings, and he wanted to run
those bills Thursday, yeah, yeah, he, he came up and asked me to do
Speaker 1
1:21:32
those Thursday. Senator Hester has a handout.
Speaker 19
1:22:04
Senator Ester just introduce yourself and and have your uh guest introduce herself and your, your red and proceeding. State Senator Bart Hester, District 33 with
Speaker 250
1:22:12
me. I'm Julie Morton. I live in Crawford County. I'm an Arkansas
Julie Morton
Unverified
1:22:20
native born in Hope and raised all over the state. It, uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members, what we've we've got here is, you know, the new
Senator Bart Hester
Unverified
1:22:35
industries are up and coming all the time, and we have a an unregulated industry in the state of Arkansas at almost any terms and there might be some, sometimes I'd be OK with that. We have this particular industry which I find particularly offensive and hostile to entire communities. Um, it's an industry that does not work financially without almost 100% uh um subsidies from the, from the government, from
our taxpayers. Um, I feel like it's an industry that is when they are erected is a visual um basically middle finger to all your neighbors in the entire community around. Um, I think it's something that I would be personally OK with providing an absolute moratorium on, but instead of doing that, we have provided regulations to the wind industry. Uh, as far as I'm concerned, it doesn't get a lot more complicated than that. It's an industry that simply just
doesn't work. It's not sustainable. It's and which is why it only works when the government is funding it. We wouldn't have these projects destroying the state of Arkansas as they've done in other states. If it wasn't for federal government funding. Uh, and I hope that you could see after some probably lengthy testimony today. This is not something you want in your backyard or your community either. And if it does, it comes with some what I would consider
very basic um regulations to defend our property owners, and with that I'm going to hand it over for to Miss Julie Morton, who can do a
Julie Morton
Unverified
1:24:17
much better job of presenting than me. First of all, I am not a lobbyist. I paid my own room and board last night. Uh, I just retired from 43 years in the in the energy industry from oil and gas to electric utility to late in my career
wind and solar. I've worked on a lot of big projects in my career and I've seen the devastation that they can cause, and it is that devastation that prompted me to write the Arkansas wind. energy Development Act. Uh, this is not a ban, and this is not a moratorium. This is just common sense regulation like every other industry in the state of Arkansas is subject to right now, according to the FAA, there
are 5011 turbines planned for the state of Arkansas, all of which are permitted between 600 and 81 ft. And 698 ft tall, that is approximately 150 ft taller than the Simmons Bank Building that y'all look at every day, and none of the companies that are developing this are based in America. Scout's parent company is based in the Bahamas. Cordelia is the Canadian Social
Security system, SPA that shown up in Carroll County recently is from Italy and Triple Oak's sole investor Bridgepoint is from London right now these foreign companies can come into Arkansas and put one of these turbines right next to your house, your church, your school, your mother's nursing home and there's not one thing anybody can do about it. There's no oversight of the construction, the operation, the maintenance, the decommissioning
which is vital, there's no emergency plan. There's no fire plan. There is no regulation. virtually at all on these tremendously intrusive towers. Now some people have said, That this should be based on a county by county basis. Well, our counties have asked for help because they are not prepared to deal with this brand new industry. The bill is based on
48 other states regulations. There's only 2 of us that don't have them. That would be Arkansas and Louisiana. All of these regulations are very well known to the wind industry, they may be new to us, but they are not new to the wind industry. They deal with them
every place else they go. Some of the standards that we used are also
based on wind industry safety regulations and
wind industry recommendations. The wind industry. Also, the
bill is a Integrated Regulatory system whereby the state sets a minimum standard. The localities can then tweak it to whatever they need to enhance the protection of their community and also the wind industry can get waivers on
certain requirements if the neighboring landowners have no objection. Uh, the wind industry will send their salesmen into the counties. And tell these counties how rich everybody's going to get. The schools in particular, Uh, apparently none of
these foreign companies bothered to check and see how our schools are funded in Arkansas after Lakeview. And as to the other big tax money that they promised.
That is a very questionable thing as to whether the tax money will ever even be paid. Uh In Oklahoma right now, there
are 15 counties embroiled in lawsuits with the wind industry, because the wind industry is trying to get out of the big taxes that they have
promised our counties. Some of the money
has been tied up for 5 years in escrow and the counties have not seen one penny of it yet.
So I would say if the big tax money that the wind industry is promising happens for Arkansas. That will be a wonderful thing.
Am I gonna bet on it, about like I'd a bet on Vanderbilt to beat Alabama in football.
We've also heard and I'm right, aren't I? I'm right, yeah. We've also
heard an awful lot about private property rights in this debate. Understand that is the wind industry standard shtick. They use that everywhere they go. They go into the landowners that they want to work with, and they say, Nobody can tell you what you can do with your property. Well, Maybe these foreign companies
don't understand how property rights in America work. In America, if you own property, you have property rights, and yours are no greater or lesser than your neighbors and they are not inviolate, just try not paying your taxes for a few years and see exactly how autonomous your control over your property is. We have all
kinds of rules and regulations about what people can and cannot do with their property
regardless of what the wind industry tries. to say, but this bill is not telling anybody what they can and cannot do with their property. This bill is telling the wind industry, if you are coming into Arkansas, you are going to build these facilities in a safe and responsible manner that protects everybody. Now I'd also briefly like to mention our
$9.9 billion tourism industry. Right
now, In Carroll County, scout, clean energy has under lease 90,500 acres of trees that they can clear from our Ozarks for one project. Thousands of people
a year flock to the Buffalo River, the White River, the Little red, our gorgeous unmarred Ozark hiking
trails and in the Washitas we've got the Cassatot, Lake Washita, Hot Springs, are we really
going to see our second largest economic sector to foreign companies who are going to take the money out of America while devastating our own economy. I just don't think that's a viable business plan. And if these things are so
innocuous, why did Cordelia's home country of Canada in 2023 enact a 21.748 mile setback from their quote pristine viewscapes. Our pristine viewscapes are equally as important to us as theirs,
particularly to those of us who cherish them. The oil and gas business in the state of
Arkansas has paid millions of dollars in severance taxes, conservation taxes and other kinds of taxes to the state of Arkansas since the 1920s. Real money put right in the coffers. As far as I know, the wind industry hadn't paid one penny and based
on their behavior, they may never. In 2023, you all enacted Act 4 on 11, which mandated to the state agencies that they could
not invest in companies that discriminated against the fossil fuel business. If we're gonna regulate the fossil fuel business as highly as we do, and
I know about that because I've jumped through the oil and gas commission hoops many times in my career. If we're going to regulate them, but we're going to give the wind industry a pass. Then you yourselves will be doing exactly what you told the state agencies they couldn't do. You will be discriminating against the fossil fuel
business. I mean, what are we? Gavin Newsom's California. Where they went so green, so fast that their utility bills doubled and they pay 50 cents more a gallon for gas than any place else in the nation. No, we are logical, salt of the earth or Kansans. We've been blessed with wonderful abundant natural resources, and we've had the good sense. To take care of them. Oh, I'm
asking y'all to do is continue that good stewardship so that your children and your grandchildren can wade in the same cool, clear creeks that you waded in, and they can swim in our pristine
lakes and fish, and they can sit at your knee and learn how to be good, responsible
outdoorsmen. All I am asking you to do. this bill is do your duty.
To protect the health and safety of your constituents and their environment. Thank you, and I'll ask you to answer any questions. I'm
not going to ask y'all questions, but I will answer some, Senator McKee. Thank you, Mr.
Senator Matt McKee
Unverified
1:34:44
Chairman, and thank you for bringing this bill. You mentioned the setbacks. Could you talk a little bit about Why you picked the specific subject. They seem pretty aggressive, yes,
Julie Morton
Unverified
1:34:54
we have a setback in here that is it's kind of technical the way the
wind industry does if they take the blade hot and they multiply it by a number, and that's how they get the setback. So we looked at ordinances from counties and various states. We looked at the safety manuals, particularly
of the wind industry itself. Nordex, which is a great big blade manufacturer, as you all know. They tell their employees that If it's inclement weather like
the horrible weather we had in eastern Arkansas a day before yesterday, their employees should say 3280 ft. From the turbine in the case of fire, this is based on a 602 ft turbine, OK? In the case of fire, they should stay about a half a mile away. What the wind industry usually recommends is a 1.1 setback, which is about 1/8
of a mile. So they will tell their employees. To stay 3/4 to 0.5 mile away during these inclement uh occurrences, but it's OK for the landowners to only be 1/8 of a mile away, and I really cannot figure out how that works. Now, we also have in there a 4 mile zone in which we want landowners to be notified that this is a
project has been proposed. The reason for That is in your mountainous areas, uh, their source of water for their well, which is what a lot of them solely depend upon. According to the USGS, that can be 4 to 5 miles away, so we want those people who might lose their well from blasting or just the construction of these massive turbines to be able to have some comment. It's the same thing as you do in the oil and
gas industry. If you're going to drill a well, and you're close enough to the boundary line of your reservoir that you're gonna drain the adjacent reservoir, you have to notify those people that they're reservoir might be drained, so they have a chance to comment and give you their concerns, frankly, uh, anybody within 50 miles of one of these things can see it.
And they also should have the right to comment, but we have limited it to the 4 miles primarily because of the hydrology, but the physical setback. is 3.5 times the blade height
or 2500 ft. It's 2500 ft. Thank you. All right, is there any other questions, Senator Ervin, and
Speaker 28
1:37:54
then Senator Boyd. Thank you. Thank you so much for
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:38:07
your testimony. Um, just when you go through the regulatory what you wrote here and um did you model it after what we've been doing so it's consistent with the policy that we have in other spaces as far as energy. Consistent with, I'm sorry other types of other types of regulations that we do already for other types of of energy industry, yes ma'am. Actually we based it more on what we saw
Julie Morton
Unverified
1:38:39
from other places because we have no, we have no basis here to go on frankly, we did not compare it to regulations that you have in other industries, except I do know that You just did a 2000 ft setback for crypto mining, uh-huh, and I know that this year you all are considering a 30 mile setback for crypto if it's close to an important national security
type. So in that respect we did, but we had so little to go on here that we really had to draw more from other states and we found states, Iowa recently, they had, they already had a 5 miles setback from the Mississippi River. Now they're wanting
to increase it to 10 miles because they have discovered that they're migratory birds are being affected, so
we have tried to be moderate. We have tried to give
y'all something palatable that you have dealt with before so that we're not appearing to be um extreme, and we are not trying to stop any projects here, OK? There are projects. Underway. In fact, we had a meeting with Senator Hester and Senator King, and the wind industry yesterday in which we told them we were not trying to stop the scout project. We suggested that because they have already progressed to a certain
point that we would be willing to waive the setback. We can't ask them to go back and rearrange their entire array, and we would also Uh I mean, we can't make them go back and put the trees back they cleared, and we can't make them go back and undo the roads that they've cleared, but we said to them, What we would like in your case is going forward, if you would comply with the
Decommissioning bond, which is huge, y'all. These things, these companies walk away from these things all the time, whether they've got an easement or not. Well, that,
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:40:53
if you don't mind, can I, um, that was one of my questions. I mean, I, so when I look at the pictures that you submitted in your packet, so this huge hunk of concrete that's being poured into the ground, which clearly you have to have in order to handle that size of a structure and the weight of it and everything. When these windmills are
decommissioned, who comes back and removes this concrete. It's supposed
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:41:21
but is there anything that it's supposed to be, but is there any, does the state have any authority to say come back and do this. If not, not that
Julie Morton
Unverified
1:41:30
we're aware of. No, this is, this is one thing we're trying to one of the
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:41:35
things that you're trying to do this
Julie Morton
Unverified
1:41:37
is, this, this is really important to me. It's very important to everyone, yes, because those, if allowed to,
you can see all over the nation where
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:41:48
they just fall apart, yeah, I, I support your bill. They
My problem is I'm not a co-sponsor. um. I'm also looking at the Federal Aviation Administration and this, this handout that you also included. Um,
I live in the Ozarks, um, I very much share your concern and your passion for the tourism industry in the state of
Arkansas. We are the natural state and it is our 2nd most important industry in the state of Arkansas second to farming, and I, I would argue that both the wind energy is uh It is problematic for both the number one and #2 industry. It's problematic for farming, as it is for tourism, but the aviation heights of these that really, really concerns me when they're going into the Ozarks and
placing these on top of an already very, very high elevation of a mountain because we have so many private planes that fly this area, and it's incredibly incredibly dangerous. already and I can speak to very personal uh issue with a family member who, uh, passed in a in a plane crash, um, Because of it. So I I guess, you know, I would hope,
and I'm not sure if that's in the bill, but I think you probably it is because you've included these in your packet. Do you mind just speaking of this big, big concern. This is a huge concern. It's when you're placing on a flat land like Oklahoma, I can understand, but when you're starting to place these on top of mountains. That is, that is incredibly, incredibly, incredibly dangerous, so I just, I don't know why you would even do that. but why we would allow that to
happen, uh, is beyond my comprehension, and I don't know why we can't stop the project in Carroll County, to be quite frank with you, because that area has see so much air traffic to our private airports in Cercy County and coming into the Buffalo River, people fly in to the Buffalo River area to float the river and and be a part of that. And that air traffic. is going straight over that area
if you're coming anywhere in from Springfield, St. Louis, Kansas City, coming down into the Buffalo River area in the Ozarks, and we have a ton of private, private aviation in that area. So could you speak to that? Yes, this is the new Vogue
Julie Morton
Unverified
1:44:35
thing with the wind industry ridge tops. They're ripping out ridge tops all over the country. If you
will look at that, you will see not only all the
turbines permitted to an extreme height. The total height It is a half mile in the air. You're gonna have these meat grinders sticking up a half mile in the air on I saw maps that want to wipe out countless ridges in the Ozarks and the Washitas. Now the FAA, we discovered Can't actually stop. Anything. All they can do is make a recommendation of the
maximum safe height. Every turbine that scout is planning exceeds the maximum recommended high. The reason that the turbines are so big and the wind industry is really proud of this. Is that they can't catch the wind if they're any shorter when it's an iffy wind situation. So these massive turbines that they're so proud of.
are going to affect Air traffic, whether the FAA can do anything about it or not. Now we all, we can frankly do because that is the purview of the federal government is say that you are going to get everything approved through the FAA. We have included in this bill that they have to use aircraft detection lighting. In other words, those lights will
only come on when there is an aircraft. raft in the area and we found Incredibly that the FAA's own regulations say they have to notify all the airports in the area, so one of the members of the opposition in Carroll County called all the airports. None of them even knew about it, So their process is not exactly highly protective of of anybody,
but we, we can only do so much about that because that is the FAA's purview, but I'm with you. If you're going to stick something on top of a ridge that's going to extend a half mile in the air and you're flying a private plane on instruments only, uh, that would be a big concern to me. I, I'm very concerned about the crop dusters. That's one of the most dangerous professions in the United States and if we don't have crop dusting, we
ain't going to have an agricultural industry. So power lines take these guys down sometimes, so there's all kinds of air traffic concerns that I wish we could address, but we are rather hogtied because we can only do so much. Thank you, Senator Senator
Senator Justin Boyd
Unverified
1:47:47
Morton, you're clearly both passionate and knowledgeable
on this important issue. I did want
to ask you about page 17, lines 9 through 11, um, that identifies a retroactive start date of September 1st, 2024 and so, first of all, I'd like some clarity on how you have that date, and then I'll have a follow-up question. It was the date we finished the bill and
Julie Morton
Unverified
1:48:12
gave it to Senator Hester to give to the BLR. It was really We probably should have had more forethought. I'll just say that.
Senator Justin Boyd
Unverified
1:48:26
OK, but it's in there and so if this bill passes, it's got a retroactive start date before the
bill was even heard in committee, uh, so I guess my question would, is that even constitutional from your standpoint? I mean, doesn't that get in the way of the state and federal constitution to have
Julie Morton
Unverified
1:48:45
a retroactive start date. Uh, well, quite I'm look, I've never done anything like
this, and I, I was unaware. That it would cause such an
issue. We're certainly open to altering it. I mean, we're not trying to be intransigent in anything here. So if the date needs to be changed to a later date, that's fine because two projects are already underway. Cordelia's already underway in the Delta. Scout is underway in Carroll County, so anything else is going to be subsequent to that. Now there are companies that are acquiring easements, but that's
a risk that they take any time you start a project, you're taking a risk during the acquisition phase, so
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:49:37
we're open to discussing A change if that needs to occur.
Senator Bart Hester
Unverified
1:49:41
Senator Ward, I would say you know we pass every session I've been here we pass laws
with retroactivity. I just did one in City County Local 15 minutes ago but I do take, take your concern on the retro retroactivity of this after the debate from this
committee, I'm very open to talking about a date. OK, thank you. Do you any
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:50:14
other questions? Senator Flowers. And then Senator Johnson, so you say FAA has some
regulations that apply to These when mills. And They're not sufficient.
Is that what you're saying? Well, I guess it depends upon your point
of view. To me they're not in your point of view they're not. To my point of view, they are not, OK, and what about local communities? Do
they not have zoning laws that would regulate where Some of these windmills are placed, not
Julie Morton
Unverified
1:50:56
to our knowledge, ma'am, to our knowledge, Madison County is the only county that
has taken any action. Now the people in Carroll County had presented. Ordinances After ordinances to their quorum court and they have steadfastly refused to do anything. To protect anyone except the people that have signed easements, but as far as actually having done anything as far as I know, Madison County is the only one, and they have put
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:51:39
they can figure out how this is going to affect them. So that's Madison County, so, uh, and you mentioned East Arkansas and I see on your list, I don't understand what is a Federal Aviation Administration list of proposed cases
Speaker 212
1:51:51
for Arkansas. What is that proposed cases
Julie Morton
Unverified
1:51:55
they have to go through the process of Well, there are various aspects of it. Do they have to make
applications through FA application they have to
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:52:07
have everything reviewed and before they can construct or erect some of these. Yes,
ma'am. OK. And, and, and how long has, have the FAA. Had regulation. Oh, I,
I don't know. I would assume a
long time, yeah, and some of them uh case number goes back to 2022. I don't see necessarily any that go beyond
Julie Morton
Unverified
1:52:37
2022 that list, uh, they go, they have various stages, so that is a list of only the proposed cases. There are other lists of ones under construction, ones that are
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:52:51
interim cases, so. Right, there are some
that are, you have a page circular circularcularized case notification. And under that it says uh determined.
I'm not sure what all this means, but it appears to be in Park in Arkansas, that's over there near you, Senator Murdoch, do they have windmills over there? So, um, You know Obviously you have to have uh you you mentioned property owners' rights. And Certainly Even the ones that you're objecting to. Uh
would have to get Some kind of lease or you have to buy. Yes ma'am. You have to buy and they
might even buy the property. In fee simple. Uh, some of
Julie Morton
Unverified
1:53:53
them do. We have seen that Scout has after they acquired easements, they were having trouble getting all the road access that they needed, and they went in and just bought fee simple property. Yes, ma'am.
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:54:05
So. So you're trying to deny these
uh people that own the property, the right to do what they
Julie Morton
Unverified
1:54:15
what they want to do, ma'am, we're nothing in our bill says that you can't sign an easement. No, ma'am. All our bill says is to the wind industry. You can come in here, you can buy your easements. But you're going to have some rules to follow that protect not only those people who have granted you easements, but they're neighbors. Well,
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:54:41
Are you, do you have a Some property that's affected by these windmills. No, ma'am, but the maps
that I saw. It would affect my property. Is there something being constructed near your property now that
Julie Morton
Unverified
1:55:00
in fact the only actual turbine construction that I know of is the crossover. Uh Project out in win uh I believe
they may have constructed. Turbines already at this point, those are the only two that are actually under construction. Now there are others being that the easements are being bought on, but the only ones I know of that are actually under construction are the ones in Carroll County and the ones in Wynn. So in
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:55:34
when they were Permitted through zoning or
what? Pardon? How did they come to erect these Wind turbines. What
did they have to go through zoning? No, ma'am, not that I'm aware of. I don't think,
uh, you know, and I don't know when's county
ordinance, well, if you don't know, you can't answer, so that's fine. I appreciate it. Thank you.
Speaker 126
1:56:03
Bye. Thank you, Senator Johnson. Thank you,
Senator Mark Johnson
Unverified
1:56:07
Mr. Chairman. Ms. Morton, thank you for your testimony. Uh, just a few
questions I have and before I ask it, let me just
say that. I am on Windmills about like I am about hog farms. I like bacon. Matter of fact, I think we have some bacon waiting on us later, but uh I didn't like having one on the Buffalo River, but I'm OK with having one on Langa River and some of the other farm areas in East Arkansas, and it's kind of how I feel about this and I know that you mentioned uh when
Cross County and and of course they are struggling. They came. back are trying to come back from a devastating tornado in that area and these things are under construction there, uh, your, your retroactive date really gives me pause and first I appreciate this tremendous amount of data, but just like on the uh That wonderful bill, Senate bill 207, I would like to have had more time to digest something
that is this long and is as complicated and all the data that went along with it, and I'm, I'm the co-chair of Joint Energy, but we've changed the rules, so I don't get to hear bills like this in joint energy anymore, but the simple fact is that this is a whole lot of regulation and we're Kind of having it dumped on our head and having to make a decision. That gives me a problem. I'm not saying that
once I've totally digest everything and again I appreciate the fact you've given us a lot of data. I like that, but I haven't had time to go through that and to do that. So please understand my questions are about not just going forward, but as Senator Boyd. Pointed out you're going backwards and I, I'm hoping that there could be some, I'd almost rather see a delayed date, a
time when, you know, things that people have, and I don't just mean broken ground and made orders for equipment made significant investments, bought land and done these things, you know, we, we have a strong ex post facto, uh, tradition in this country. We don't make Things and on people retroactively, and that's constitutional, so I'm, I'm just, I'm, I'm grateful for the amount of information you've brought, and it's been
enlightening, uh, there are some, I know some people have have we had a hearing in joining energy before the rules changed and it had to do with the bill about the uh the waterfowl. And uh we did not pass that bill because there were some significant discrepancies into what witnesses said about it and even some evidence that the the fears that were brought by some by the proponents of that
legislation might not be accurate based on some studies in other states, so this is something that, you know, I, I'm not ready to support until we slow down and digest it, I could very well support it in the future, but at this point I'm just, I'm, I'm concerned, and if you have something that I've said that maybe I'm off base on. I'm certainly you're very articulate and I know you could, could help me work through that, so
Julie Morton
Unverified
1:59:48
please do. Well, um, I understand your
concern. I mean, there's a lot of language in here. I know that you all deal with regulations all the time, so you have knowledge as to how to parse them out as whether it's a Acceptable or not, um. The date, just forgive me on the date, OK? I don't know what I'm doing about that, but we like I said, we are willing certainly to change the date. The problem that you get into
It is because you've got various aspects of this early on you're acquiring easements. In every project I've been involved in. The risk management. Aspect of that project takes into consideration. When we're acquiring easements, there is or or or and oil and gas leaks. There's never a guarantee. That our project is going to be finished. So
When you're just acquiring easements, you have not commenced your actual construction, uh, you may not have even started buying your components yet because you're not sure that you're going to ever finish your project.
Yes ma'am. If I could interrupt you, Ms. Morton. I think
Senator Mark Johnson
Unverified
2:01:14
you're right in the case of oil and gas exploration and certainly there have been a lot of wells that have been drilled that turned up dry, and I'm not
going to get into fracking and all that, but in traditionally you you do your geology, you think it's here, you drill it. You've spent that money and it didn't work out. In this case, you know that if you build this tower and put this turbine on
top of it and the wind blows, it's going to generate electricity. So to me, I'm not sure that's an log ous thing to that, yes, things can go wrong and even your meteorological studies might be wrong, but that's nothing. I don't think it's
anywhere near the same as the oil and gas, and I'm sorry I interrupted you on that,
Julie Morton
Unverified
2:02:04
but, but I don't think it was quite, but please proceed. Well, I also, I've been monitoring all the bills that you all have been reviewing, and
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
2:02:14
there are a number of bills that are Changing the rules midstream on various businesses. Thank you, ma'am.
Speaker 1
2:02:19
uh. We're going to, we're gonna adjourn until after 20 minutes
Agenda
REGULAR AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER
SB83 J. Bryant TO MANDATE COVERAGE FOR BREAST RECONSTRUCTION SURGERIES; TO REQUIRE PRIOR AUTHORIZATION FOR BREAST RECONSTRUCTION SURGERIES; AND TO ESTABLISH A MINIMUM REIMBURSEMENT RATE FOR BREAST RECONSTRUCTION SURGERIES.
SB420 Hester TO EXPAND ELIGIBILITY FOR WATER DEVELOPMENT STATE PROGRAMS; TO AMEND THE WATER AUTHORITY ACT; AND TO AMEND THE USES OF THE CONSTRUCTION ASSISTANCE REVOLVING LOAN FUND.
SB437 Hester TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS WIND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ACT.
HB1275 Cavenaugh TO PROHIBIT PRIOR AUTHORIZATIONS FOR HEALTHCARE SERVICES PROVIDED FOR TREATMENT OF A MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS.
HB1271 Warren TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING MECHANICS' AND MATERIALMEN'S LIENS; AND TO CLARIFY THE PRIORITY OF LIENS IN MORTGAGE CONSTRUCTION LOANS.
HB1288 L. Johnson TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS HEALTH CARE CONSUMER ACT; AND TO REQUIRE A HEALTHCARE INSURER TO MAKE CERTAIN RETROACTIVE PAYMENTS TO A PROVIDER UPON CREDENTIALING OF A PROVIDER.
HB1316 F. Allen TO MANDATE COVERAGE FOR LUNG CANCER SCREENINGS.
HB1652 Tosh T0 AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING SELF-SERVICE STORAGE FACILITIES; TO ENFORCE AN UNSIGNED SELF-SERVICE FACILITY STORAGE RENTAL AGREEMENT; AND TO CREATE A TERMINATION PROCEDURE FOR A SELF-SERVICE FACILITY STORAGE RENTAL AGREEMENT.
HB1700 Achor TO AMEND THE PRIOR AUTHORIZATION TRANSPARENCY ACT; AND TO EXCLUDE THE NAME OF A REVIEWING PHYSICIAN FROM DISCLOSURE IN AN ADVERSE DETERMINATION NOTICE UNDER THE PRIOR AUTHORIZATION TRANSPARENCY ACT.
HB1721 M. Brown TO AMEND SECTIONS OF THE ARKANSAS CODE TO PROHIBIT GREYHOUND RACING AND SIMULCASTING OF GREYHOUND RACING.
PENDING FISCAL IMPACT
SB140 J. Boyd TO MANDATE THE USE OF BIOSIMILAR MEDICINES UNDER HEALTH BENEFIT
PLANS; TO REQUIRE A HEALTHCARE PROVIDER TO PRESCRIBE BIOSIMILAR MEDICINES; AND TO IMPROVE ACCESS TO BIOSIMILAR MEDICINES.
DEFERRED BILLS
SB331 G. Leding CONCERNING COVERAGE FOR GENETIC TESTING FOR INHERITED CANCER
MUTATIONS; AND TO CREATE THE GENETIC TESTING ACT.
ADJOURN
Documents
| Title | Type | Pages | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agenda — INSURANCE & COMMERCE - SENATE, Mar 18, 2025 | Agenda | 2 | Official source ↗ |
Speakers
Speaker 1
Senator Dave Wallace
Unverified
Speaker 9
Representative Fred Allen
Unverified
Speaker 19
Speaker 20
Senator Clint Penzo
Unverified
Speaker 39
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
Speaker 46
Speaker 28
Speaker 68
Senator Joshua Bryant
Unverified
Speaker 72
Speaker 74
Speaker 77
Speaker 82
Dana Brown
Unverified
Speaker 2
Speaker 99
Speaker 100
Shannon Ellis
Unverified
Senator Mark Johnson
Unverified
Speaker 105
Speaker 103
Speaker 107
Sandy Carpenter
Unverified
Speaker 14
Speaker 116
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
Speaker 117
Senator Bart Hester
Unverified
Speaker 126
Speaker 132
Speaker 44
Speaker 137
Speaker 134
Speaker 11
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
Speaker 41
Speaker 166
Senator Jamie Scott
Unverified
Speaker 162
Speaker 193
Senator Justin Boyd
Unverified
Michael Hall
Unverified
Speaker 219
Speaker 221
Speaker 226
Speaker 225
Speaker 250
Julie Morton
Unverified
Senator Matt McKee
Unverified
Speaker 278
Speaker 282
Speaker 290
Speaker 212