City, County & Local Affairs Committee - Senate
Video
Transcript
1 document
Bills discussed (14)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
HB1503
Act 313
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1503 Clowney TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING MUNICIPAL REGULATIONS;…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING MUNICIPAL REGULATIONS; AND TO PROHIBIT CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS ON THE REGULATION … | Clowney | Notification that HB1503 is now Act 313 |
|
HB1510
Act 314
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1510 Gonzales TO REPEAL THE AUTHORITY FOR A MUNICIPALITY TO EXER…”
|
TO REPEAL THE AUTHORITY FOR A MUNICIPALITY TO EXERCISE TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OVER AN UNINCORPORATED AREA … | Gonzales | Notification that HB1510 is now Act 314 |
|
HB1600
Act 317
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1600 Tosh TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING MUNICIPAL LAW ENFORCEMENT;…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING MUNICIPAL LAW ENFORCEMENT; AND TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING HOLIDAY … | Tosh | Notification that HB1600 is now Act 317 |
|
SB252
Act 590
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…THIRD PARTIES TO PERFORM PLAN REVIEWS AND SITE INSPECTIONS. SB252 J. Dismang TO INFORM THE PUBLIC OF HEALTH RISKS CAUSED BY V…”
|
TO INFORM THE PUBLIC OF HEALTH RISKS CAUSED BY VAPOR PRODUCTS AND E-LIQUID PRODUCTS; AND … | J. Dismang | Notification that SB252 is now Act 590 |
|
SB401
Act 448
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “SB401 J. Boyd TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS UNDERGROUND FACILITIES DAMAGE…”
|
TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS UNDERGROUND FACILITIES DAMAGE PREVENTION ACT. | J. Boyd | Notification that SB401 is now Act 448 |
|
HB1555
Act 995
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…RESTRICTIONS ON THE REGULATION OF ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS. HB1555 Painter TO ESTABLISH UNIFORM PROCEDURES FOR FILLING A VACAN…”
|
TO ESTABLISH UNIFORM PROCEDURES FOR FILLING A VACANCY IN A MUNICIPAL OFFICE. | Painter | Notification that HB1555 is now Act 995 |
|
HB1590
Act 454
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…ORM PROCEDURES FOR FILLING A VACANCY IN A MUNICIPAL OFFICE. HB1590 J. Moore TO COMBINE THE OFFICES OF TREASURER AND TAX COLLEC…”
|
TO COMBINE THE OFFICES OF TREASURER AND TAX COLLECTOR IN WOODRUFF COUNTY. | J. Moore | Notification that HB1590 is now Act 454 |
|
HB1591
Act 455
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…OFFICES OF TREASURER AND TAX COLLECTOR IN WOODRUFF COUNTY. HB1591 J. Moore TO COMBINE THE OFFICES OF TREASURER AND TAX COLLEC…”
|
TO COMBINE THE OFFICES OF TREASURER AND TAX COLLECTOR IN ARKANSAS COUNTY. | J. Moore | Notification that HB1591 is now Act 455 |
|
SB10
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…THAT CONVEYS REAL PROPERTY OR AN INTEREST IN REAL PROPERTY. SB10 B. King TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS DATA CENTERS ACT OF 2023; AND…”
|
TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS DATA CENTERS ACT OF 2023; AND TO REGULATE THE IMPACT ON … | B. King | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB271
Act 460
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…r Sen. Joshua Bryant REGULAR AGENDA Number Sponsor Subtitle SB271 Crowell TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING A COUNTY CLERK'S CERTIF…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING A COUNTY CLERK'S CERTIFICATION OF SCHOOL BOARD CANDIDATES TO THE … | Crowell | Notification that SB271 is now Act 460 |
|
SB322
Act 591
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…D CANDIDATES TO THE COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTION COMMISSIONERS. SB322 J. Bryant TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING CONSTRUCTION AND DEVE…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT; AND TO ALLOW THIRD PARTIES TO PERFORM … | J. Bryant | Notification that SB322 is now Act 591 |
|
SB399
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…ORIAL JURISDICTION OVER AN UNINCORPORATED AREA OF A COUNTY. SB399 G. TO CREATE THE ANTI-ATF COMMANDEERING ACT; AND TO PROHIBI…”
|
TO CREATE THE ANTI-ATF COMMANDEERING ACT; AND TO PROHIBIT THE PROVISION OF MATERIAL AID AND … | G. Stubblefield | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB60
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…CTRIC GRID BY BLOCKCHAIN NETWORKS AND DIGITAL ASSET MINING. SB60 Hill TO PROHIBIT A DIGITAL ASSET MINING BUSINESS FROM BEING…”
|
TO PROHIBIT A DIGITAL ASSET MINING BUSINESS FROM BEING LOCATED WITHIN A THIRTY-MILE RADIUS OF … | Hill | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB69
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…rs and Staff Only'. DEFERRED BILLS Number Sponsor Subtitle SB69 A. Clark CONCERNING THE RECORDATION AND FILING OF A DEED OR…”
|
CONCERNING THE RECORDATION AND FILING OF A DEED OR OTHER INSTRUMENT THAT CONVEYS REAL PROPERTY … | A. Clark | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
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
Senator Gary Stubblefield
Unverified
0:12
Uh, we've got several people presenting bills and other committees. I know I know it's a difficult time. We thought we would stagger the time it started at 10:30 instead of 10, so people would uh be here to testify, but apparently Uh, some of them are taking longer than, so I'm gonna call these names. I don't see a lot of them, but I'm going to go ahead and call them Senator Crow, you're not here? Central dismay.
Speaker 4
0:43
Center, uh, Representative Gonzalez. I Uh We're gonna
Speaker 5
0:51
start out with San Petty. He's gonna run Senator Gonzalez bill.
Speaker 12
1:17
Is 1510. if you recognize yourself in your district, you are recognized as present the bill 1510. Thank you, Mr.
Senator Jim Petty
Unverified
1:39
Chair. Jim Petty, Senator District 29. This bill is a bill obviously
not without a little bit of pushback from the municipalities, but it deals with the extra jurisdictional territory outside of cities uh uh actual boundaries. There's been some situations that have included basically boils down to property rights for those outside the uh the cities. I'll share one in particular that that was in my district. Uh, there was a long range road plan that
was in place, has been in place for 1015, 20 years, there were some individuals trying to a state plan or sell some of their property. They did not realize because they did not get notice and and due process and the road is on their land, some large tracts of land, and it was encumbering their land and ultimately in a negative way with the ultimate sales price
that they received on their property and so this this limits that territory to the city's actual boundaries and I'd be happy to attempt to answer any questions. This is not my bill, but I'm familiar with with some of the situations going on. All right, thank you, Senator Petty. Yeah, you've
Speaker 19
3:07
heard an explanation of the building and, uh, senator English. Yeah, I do have some questions, so I'm, I've
Senator Jane English
Unverified
3:14
heard from a lot of my my mayors.
And for some of us, um, that, that, that could be a real problem is not being able to have any control over the within a mile. Of their of their city limits in their planning and all that. Um, so yeah, I, yeah, 11 thing, but it or is there a whole mass of people out there who are complaining about the 1 mile or is it just So, so in, in my situation when
Senator Jim Petty
Unverified
3:46
I, when I began working on a bill, again, this is not my bill. Uh, I found that it was
more and more prevalent and, and this does not remove their ability to annex and to move forward. It's the, it's the the uh taking without due process, the taking without compensation that annexation actually deals with that we're trying to to get to. I guess the, the issue can be
Senator Jane English
Unverified
4:14
well we're talking about crypto mining and all that is the loss of control
around a community for something like that, if that's not what they wanted to
have. It would be easy for somebody to build a facility or any kind of facility within that 1 mile radius. So Probably maybe an important thing in Northwest Arkansas, but maybe not such an important thing down here. I OK. Any other question?
Senator Breanne Davis
Unverified
5:00
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think my question just would be, I mean, many cities have, you know, enjoy that one mile so that they can plan for fire safety issues and respond accordingly and know what's, you know, there for them to protect and provide services to, um, how Can we maybe do both, you know, ensure that they still have the ability to plan and sort of have a say in in what's coming, so they can adequately keep everyone safe and do what they need to do, but also accomplish what you're trying to accomplish.
Senator Jim Petty
Unverified
5:32
That's a that's a fair question, and I don't think it actually changes the plans, their ability to plan. They can continue to plan. They just don't have by right, the ability to encumber the the property owners and what they plan to use their property for. They can still plan and if it's, if it's fast enough growth, then they can begin the annexation process that's in statute. you have Any other questions from the committee.
Senator Gary Stubblefield
Unverified
6:06
So no, we have one in the audience speak for the bill, Mr. Walden,
Speaker 19
6:12
James Wallen. Mr. Longfield, state your name and who you're with,
James Weldon
Unverified
6:18
uh, you'll be recognized. Uh, my name is James
Speaker 41
6:22
Weldon. I'm, I'm here with the uh Arkansas chapter of the American Planning Association. I didn't want to clarify I'm speaking against the development. You're speaking against speaking against, I apologize. Um In terms of looking at this,
this is a relatively complicated issue. The exercise of A planning area boundary or extraterritorial jurisdiction outside of outside of city limits, uh, as planners, we recognize that this part of the statute has been in there for a very, very long time. And it's had a few amendments over time, but it's, it's somewhat unclear, so we recognize that there is need for reform with this particular issue. We recognize that it's
also very complicated and a bill that is coming through this fast probably isn't looking at all the intricacies of all of the issues that that can be raised that we have downstream effects unintended consequences as a result. Uh, it really does deserve detailed study. The bill itself, when it when it takes away that extra territorial jurisdiction or the planning area boundary, that territorial jurisdiction. It in fact does take away planning. It
takes away also any ordinances that are designed to carry that out, so it takes away all of it, all authority that exists related to it. It's a total repeal, uh, in that respect. When we're looking at planning in these areas, we're thinking about where cities are going to grow, where they're going to extend infrastructure, how they're going to be providing services to these areas ostensibly in the future. When we're looking at regulation, it boils down to two things principally it boils down to zoning. Zoning is not something that I'm, I'm a big
fan of being exercised outside of city limits simply because cities don't have authorities, authority to require building permits and one of the principal ways that zoning is enforced is through building permits. So if you don't have that enforced mechanism, you're really just putting people through a lot of pain when you're, when you're applying zoning outside the city limits. The exercise that I do think that is is very valid is subdivision control. Subdivision control deals with when you're dividing property, so you're
taking a 40 acre tract and dividing it into 10 tracks, uh, and you're deciding the requirements for streets. You're deciding the requirements for utilities. And so ultimately what this is stripping away are those standards that exist that where a city may have higher standards than a county that exists for areas where they might be serving utilities, uh, so if we're thinking about the developer wants to put in a 2-inch water line, whereas the city may have a requirement for an 8-inch water line that has implications for the ability to
provide future fire service, uh, and thinking about things like street standards, uh, if there are no street standards that exist because there are that don't necessarily have street standards that could allow a developer to go in and put in a very large subdivision and simply put gravel roads in. Uh, right at the edge of a city in terms of that. And so this will result in harm. It's not a hypothetical issue. I, I, there are plenty of examples out there.
where developments have gone in where standards didn't exist. One I can tell you about is in a community, the developer put in a street. It was 300 to $400,000 homes. They decided that a tree was a good thing to have in part of the subbase for a row. Now that's about the worst thing you can put in the subbase of a road because it's organic material, organic material rots, creates cavities, so the street caved in within 2 to 3 years. The problem is, oftentimes.
Inadequate development and standards that relate to inadequate development. They don't, they don't become apparent until 2 to 3 years after. And so it, it's usually the taxpayer that ends up getting Left to hold the bag on this particular issue because the developer's long gone. The infrastructure's been turned over to the county or someone else for maintenance, and they get asked to provide updates and maintenance on that.
The ask with this and the desire is to see amendments for this particular bill. Um, this is a complicated issue. We need time to deal with sunsetting these particular regulations, and so we asked for for some additional time for sunsets on this to allow it to extend further, uh, and then additionally providing allowance for cities and counties to cooperate on regulating these areas. We recognize that it's an area of contention and it's an area of contention between cities and counties, but it's also an area
where they can have cooperation that provides for good sound infrastructure and planning in the future. Um, and also additionally addressing these questions of of notification requirements. I think those are doable. Those are doable amendments. Those are things that can be changed. We just don't need to scrap it entirely. Any other questions from the committee? I ain't done it. Thank you. Yes sir.
Senator Gary Stubblefield
Unverified
11:53
Anyone else in the audience who wish to speak for yes. Our sense of failure that
Senator Jim Petty
Unverified
12:01
close. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am closed and I make
Speaker 9
12:04
a motion to pass. All right, we have a motion to pass and a second discussion, yeah. You recognize. Members, I think this is a, it's
Senator Bart Hester
Unverified
12:15
a problem all over our state, but it's particularly up in the Northwest Arkansas area where things are growing and cities continue to annex.
But if you imagine living on your family farm for maybe generations and now city annexes within a mile of you. Now they're gonna control your farm. They're going to control a few build for your kids. If you want your kids to build on the farm and they're going to say they didn't, but they do. And if you want to build a house for your kids or you want to do something, now you've got to go ask the city for permission, then the county for permission, and this is what happens. The city says, Well, you got to go to the county first. And the county says, well, you got to go to the city first. And they said, no back and forth, back and forth, and you could be
literally an endless amount of time because neither one really cares, but they won't give up the authority. But what I continue to hear is that this will continue to be a problem. We got to, it will continue to be a problem. For individual property owners. That we are saying what this bill is that we're going to give the, give an individual property owner their rights back and as opposed to a city saying, well, one day maybe we will. I mean, the example that Senator Petty talked about, this guy had his
farm and couldn't sell it because the city said, well, maybe one day we will. It's not in our 10-year plan, but maybe one day we will build a road through there. So you can't sell your farm, you can't do anything with your farm. It's, it is as hostile of a thing as as as our cities do. And uh And I'm telling you this is a real problem and I understand maybe it's more of a problem in areas that they're all growing together, but it doesn't make it any less of a real problem for people that, that own and and he
he gave some other examples, uh, hey, look, I, I, I get that there, there are uh there are problems either way we do this, but I'm going to ask uh this body to side with the individual property owners, and if a city wants to control that area, an exit. If they don't want to annex. Don't, don't control it. So that's
uh those are the reasons I'll be voting yes and I second the motion. Discus Senator Rice.
Speaker 58
14:27
Make some good points and I was reading.
Senator Terry Rice
Unverified
14:33
Uh A deal from Northwest Arkansas that talked about a master street plan. That you sympathize with the landowners because they had no consultation. In any insight into this plan, but it's already done. And even though they say it's something, maybe an imaginary road. It, it puts their property in question. And it valued their property.
That happens in other areas too. With 100 year old farms. So I'm sympathetic to the landowners in this case and while the gentleman, I know this causes some problems, but you know, this is what is what happens when you don't include citizenry in the planning. And, and that's what I think the reason this bill has come out. I will, I will support the bill.
Speaker 60
15:33
Yeah. So Senator Petty, and I too just uh more
Senator Jim Petty
Unverified
15:37
discussion, um, I had another example growth happens and we did a development and there was already a water line in there, but guess who got to help pay for the upsize of the development of the water line was already there that was planned for, uh, that didn't anticipate the growth, the developer, so growth happens upsizing of lines happened. Uh, and, and, and you can plan
for the best, but, but at the end of the day we're
all going to be responsible for, for, for paying for
Senator Gary Stubblefield
Unverified
16:12
that growth let me just have, you know, property rights is a very sacred thing to eat a lot
Speaker 19
16:17
of people. It really is, uh. Any of the discussion on the bill? Before we vote
Senator Gary Stubblefield
Unverified
16:27
We have a motion to pass and a 2nd. All thoseavor say a post.
Speaker 68
17:09
Senator Bryant. Senator Bryant. Senator Davis. Senator Davis, yes. Senator Wallace. Wallace? No. Senator ranks, Senator Rice, yes. Senator Hester, Senator Hester, yes. Senator English, Senator English, no. Senator Petty. Yes.
Speaker 12
17:45
Bill passes. Congratulations. years. Excuse me. OK All right, since,
Senator Gary Stubblefield
Unverified
17:54
uh, sensor dismay. You're going Take your
Speaker 19
18:01
name and your district and you're recognize us. Senator Jonathan Dima, Senate
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
18:09
District 18, um. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members last week passed out
an amendment on this bill and that
lowered the initial filing and the reoccurring filing from $500 to $250. That's not been in grossed, but it was adopted by the committee. Other than that, the bill has not changed. I know we had a pretty good deliberation on it. Uh, the last time that it was presented and so I'll just open myself for questions at this point. Right Committee heard an
Speaker 78
18:37
explanation. We've been on this once, but uh, Any questions from committee?
Senator Gary Stubblefield
Unverified
18:48
So no, we have some people here to speak for the bill. And one against the bill Scott Stubbs. Scouts, excuse me. You state your name and who you're with. recognize My name is Scout Stubbs, and I'm with Dripper Vape Shop.
Scout Stubbs
Unverified
19:20
Thank you members. Uh, you've already heard from many business owners last meeting, but this time I won't requested to speak again just to hit on some new points. Before I begin, uh, last meeting Steve Good said that he had no knowledge of any stores closing after registry bills passed in a few neighboring states, but I brought a letter that you will have. It's signed by the vice president of the American Vapor manufacturers, showing that roughly $50 to 75 businesses closed in Alabama.
Over 100 closed in Louisiana and 80 to 100 closed in Oklahoma. I also know several personally that have closed and I have those messages as well. On top of that, it has created a budget shortfall in Oklahoma. Uh, the registry is costing them more than they anticipated, and they're having to correct it through additional legislation. This bill is huge. I usually do well with policy, but this bill is 19 pages and it's very complicated. I feel like I need to elaborate
why this bill is so devastating as written. Senator Dima makes it sound like everyone who submitted an FDA application is OK. But the bill only allows for approved or pending applications, not denials. All the applications submitted to the FDA in 2020 are for open system vapor products because they're the only ones on the market before the FDA market freeze in 2016. At the same time, the tobacco company's products were approved. Everyone
else in the industry was blanket denied without review. Even Jewel was denied. A few e-liquid companies got together with hundreds of thousands of dollars and sued the FDA. That's the only way they are still eligible to be on the registry. There is no no option for me to be on the registry, nor any of the other 26 million that were denied. There was no legitimate reason given for denial, uh, the FDA blanket denied my PMTAs without review because they were flavors other than tobacco, but tobacco flavoring is still flavoring.
There is no difference between my products and those of the big tobacco companies. I first saw this bill in 2023, when it ran last week of session, I came to testify and once we had defeated the bill, I was asked to go into a room to negotiate. I expected to meet with ATC, but instead came face to face with 3 Altria lobbyists who pressured me for 3 hours to accept an amendment that would allow someone with an FDA denial to be eligible for the registry. I wanted to accept, but unfortunately
Speaker 86
21:57
the other shops wouldn't go for it. I have not been offered any amendments this time and as you can
Scout Stubbs
Unverified
22:05
see ATC has been absent from this process this time. After reading this bill, it is abundantly clear that this will indeed put me out of business. I manufacture my own e-liquid, like the other 26 million applications I was denied by the FDA. I don't have an approval or a pending approval. I have a denial for the 100 different juices that I have sold for 10 years. I do not meet any of the
requirements to be in the directory. I heard at the last committee meeting that all you have to do is have an application submitted, but that's the kicker. I have submitted 2 times. The only way you can get on this registry is if you are a tobacco company with an approval, or if you've put up the hundreds of thousands of dollars and sue the FDA to stay in review. To add insult to injury, I have to sell everything I can before this bill passes with an emergency clause, and all of my products become illegal overnight.
As I said before, I talked to industry experts and my fellow store owners in Louisiana and 100 shops have closed since they passed the registry bill, 75 in Alabama and 90 in Oklahoma. It will have a far worse effect here as it affects rural communities worse. Let me just take 3 minutes to tell you how the words in this bill will affect myself, other vape shops in Arkansas adults that want to vape a quality product safely. Criminality. The bill makes it
illegal to buy an unregistered vape in another state and bring it home. It also makes it illegal to make your own juice as lots of people do. You could get in trouble if you buy a vape in Texas and it is not on the Arkansas registry. You can be fined if you are caught with it in Arkansas. I personally think that is crazy. Possibly the worst thing in the bill. It is an unfair burden for interstate commerce. This bill requires that all out of state companies to have a registered agent in the state with an Arkansas address, it doesn't
expressly say that you must hire an Arkansas lawyer, but mandates that you continually engage without interruption for service of process. If every state passed this bill, and Arkansas company would have to pay for compliance with 49 registries and hire 49 lawyers. Again, this is unaffordable for Any small business. The registry. This bill mandates that the state keeper registry of all products that have been approved by the FDA or have an application still in review. Small businesses like me that
manufacture their own juice and have been denied are not eligible to be on the registry. A company must submit money and an application between the time this bill passes in the May 1st deadline. This cuts down on the products available to customers who contacts the out of state companies to tell them the steps they need to take to be in the registry and continue selling in Arkansas. Do shop owners spend the next 3 months understanding this huge policy and walking companies through the process just so they can keep carrying their products. It will be a
nightmare for shops in the ATC. Fiscal impact for the registry to be enforced, Oklahoma budgeted for $3 million per year. This year, they're enforcing ency asked for an additional $12 million per year for enforcement. That's $15 million per year for Oklahoma to enforce this registry mess. These are real numbers. We talk about a registry like it's already a common practice. Literally no other industry has to function this way. There is no other retail industry that
has to consult a list every time they order something and charged a huge fine if they make a mistake. If every state had a registry, it would cost me $75,000 to be listed in every state, not counting that I will have to hire 49 lawyers to be registered agents. Fines. The bill creates new fines for selling products that are not on the registry. If a retailer makes an order in error, defines alone could put them out of business. It's game over just for selling products that are available in stores today.
Disposable vapes. Currently they have a huge market share in a gray area on and are allowed to be sold because of a loophole in the law, any new law in Arkansas should define disposables and bring them under the same regulations as my products are and all other vape shops are in the state. This bill is silent on disposables. Emergency clause, the bill's emergency clause makes it effective immediately upon passage, leaving no time for shops to adapt. Inventory becomes illegal overnight. How
do we function in between the time the bill passes and the registry is complete. An emergency clause does not give enough time for the few national companies to learn about the law and to file the proper paperwork to come into compliance. I would think the bill needs language to help the industry transition, not something that makes their products illegal immediately. I don't know why the veto language is in here or what it means. Governor Ron DeSantis vetoed this bill in Florida, and now they have a version of the bill that exempts open vapor like me.
Nicotine pouches. Part of this bill creates policy for flavored nicotine pouches, but is silent in other parts. This is an attempt by the tobacco companies to circumvent the law to be favorable to their own nicotine pouch products. Nicotine pouches are included in the first sections of the bill, yet omitted in the registry portion. Pouch use tripled from 2016 to 2021 and is a favorite among teens and young adults. They come in bright colorful cans and have. several flavors. I'm just
pointing out the double standard here. These are not hypothetical problems or people that have been Googled from out of state. This is me and the other shop owners. These are the words in this bill. I've been doing this for a long time and I've had to navigate the FDA's terrible policies for nearly a decade. Now we are allowing the cigarette companies with 1% of the market to use the FDA to ensure a monopoly without so much as a conversation with anybody else, business or consumer. I don't think we should allow
cigarette companies to make health policy. I think when we make good vape policy, we should seek input, discuss ideas, and look for a solution that eliminates specific threats like Chinese disposables, not destroy an entire small business industry. Thank you very much for your time. I know you've heard more about vaping than you probably ever imagined you
Speaker 81
28:30
would, but I would be happy to answer any questions, please vote no on this. All right. Any questions from Mr. Stubbs.
Speaker 101
28:40
That's since Petty. Mr. do you know what the approval process at the FDA, are
Senator Jim Petty
Unverified
28:48
they looking at those that did get approved. You said yours didn't get approved. Are they looking at ingredients content or what what's the determining factor for them to be approved versus you not being approved. The a lot of this information came out
Scout Stubbs
Unverified
29:03
in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals decision, um, a few months ago, and they ruled that it was arbitrary and
capricious, the blanket denials that they did. Because they did not review them. I did submit ingredients. I had 4 terabytes of data that I submitted, um, but they didn't even review it because they were flavors other than tobacco. The court had ruled that that was arbitrary and capricious, and so now it's in front of the Supreme Court of the United States. Bryant, you're right. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Can, can you expand
Senator Joshua Bryant
Unverified
29:37
more on what Florida did with the open, I'm not a vapor
just expanded more on that for me. Yes, I'm
Scout Stubbs
Unverified
29:45
happy to, because I know this is new terminology for a lot of people here. OK, so open systems vapor products are the ones that have been around for a long time, at least 10 years. That's as long as I've been open. Um, and it's where you take a bottle of e-liquid and you fill a tank. These products are not produced in China, they are primary I would say 99.9% made here in the United States, and they were on the market before the market freeze in 2016. So,
Rhonda Santis when he vetoed this registry bill, the same one, he exempted open vapor because he realized they were not the problem makers and he also realized that the small businesses will all close. I think they have like 1000 vape shop licenses in Florida, and so that's a lot. Now we're, we're a smaller state. Um, I think we have about 100 and most of those are rural, registry bills like this affect rural communities worse than they do urban. That makes sense. And then we've
Senator Joshua Bryant
Unverified
30:47
got, you know, 75 counties, you know, dozens that border 6 states. Do you know, like I think you said Louisiana has something like this. Do you know what other bordering states Oklahoma and Alabama
Scout Stubbs
Unverified
31:00
are our closest neighbors. Um, I have in my Benton shop, uh, which is crazy to me. I have people from Louisiana that come to my Benton store to buy products, which it seems far, and I, I double check with my manager. manager there, but she said it's true.
Speaker 19
31:19
Any other questions? From committee Say no, ma'am. Thank you
Speaker 118
31:32
for coming. Mr. Good Are you here to speak for the
Steve Good
Unverified
31:46
bill? Steve Good, I represent the Arkansas Retailers Association,
and members again, I would, uh, again, I know we've had testimony on this. I, I would like to uh Just point out that uh you know, while we don't um While we don't have a registry bill today. It causes problems throughout our industry. One of the biggest problems that it causes throughout our industry is that we will have salespeople come into our retail stores offering up different kinds of vapors and, and our, and our store managers and our owners don't know what of those products are legal or illegal. That's why we think that it's a
very good idea to have a registry that way that the store owners, the store managers, when they are presented with products that they could buy or not buy, they will know if those products have been approved, if there is a registry. Um, I, you know, I won't sit here and defend the FDA and their process, but the reality is, I can tell you in Alabama they have over 1100 items on their registry that are approved and in Louisiana, I think right at 600 items that are approved. I, I did not check Oklahoma's. I apologize to see how many were on their approved list. So there are items that are on these
lists that make those items approved and so for that bill for that as retailers, we are for this bill.
Senator Terry Rice
Unverified
33:11
Sent Rice. Uh, since your name was mentioned and I thought I remembered that. Would you address your testimony. That there were not any businesses closed, yes, sir,
Steve Good
Unverified
33:23
Senators. I reached out to uh my compatriot in Alabama and ask her because again we had had that bill had passed in Alabama back in 2023. I talked to her via text on, hang on one second, and I'll tell you. In preparation for this.
Back in February and just asked the question, have the, have you had any stores closed because of your registry bill, and she said to
Speaker 124
34:03
her knowledge there had been 0, so that was why I testified that. Yes, sir. Have you seen the copy that was passed out? No, sir, I have not seen that. It
Senator Terry Rice
Unverified
34:15
says in Alabama that they were By mid 202024, 50 to 75 of the roughly 300 bait shops closed, Louisiana, I saw 100 and 400
plus shop closed in Oklahoma led to 80 to 100 closures among the 350, yes sir that is
Speaker 124
34:31
possible, that's correct. Very possible it could be, yes sir. I'm just going off of what I was told by my peer in Alabama. I, I, I can appreciate that. We all get information we have to give it like we get it sometime. Thank you.
Speaker 79
34:46
Yes, sir. I, Senator Petty, you're that.
Senator Jim Petty
Unverified
34:48
Thank you, Mr. Chair. So you heard Ms. Stubbs talk about an exemption similar to Florida
would you, would you or your organization be opposed to having that exemption that Florida has in this bill. Again, I think that we
Steve Good
Unverified
35:04
would be happy to sit down and look at what we seek is a registry bill that has items that that there has been somewhere somehow there has been some data and some scientific research. Jenna. And so if those items, you know, if, if they have at least applied for that list. Again, I understand that the denial process from the FDA to be a little different than what she explained it, uh, you know,
I, I do think that there are items on some of these lists that have been denied, yet they are still being able to be sold on the registries because they're in a a uh a denial process and so I understand that process, I think a little different than she does, uh, but I would have to talk to my membership and say, yes, sir. OK. Well, so, so
Senator Jim Petty
Unverified
35:49
clearly there's a problem if it's been taken to court and I don't know, I can't remember if she said the Supreme Court has agreed to hear it, or
that's the next level of appeal. They have agreed to hear it, right. There's clearly a problem with the federal process. And so I'm trying to make it uh helpful, uh, I don't, I'm like Senator Bryant, I don't vape. I'm not a fan, but I am a fan of small business, and I'm trying to make it to where our businesses in Arkansas are reliant upon the feds to approve or disapprove something and so an exemption or I would like to even see testing at some point. I'm not introducing this at this
point, but, but clearly there's a problem and I keep hearing you go back to the federal approval of the Federal registry, and that's been the problem. Now you may have a different opinion as to Ms. Stubbs' process or applications and why they were denied or what, it doesn't matter, but clearly there's a problem if it's tied up in litigation. And so uh that's why I asked the question if a an exemption, whether it be temporarily until we could get something else or or otherwise
because I would like to see a lot of things change in this and starting with the Chinese disposables, but I don't want to at the cost of small businesses, you know, whether it's 400 or 100 or 600. I mean, those are pretty sizable numbers that are going to affect small. businesses in surrounding states. I can't imagine it having a different impact in Arkansas, so thank you for your input. Steve, how many, how many new,
Senator Gary Stubblefield
Unverified
37:32
would there be any new people that has to be uh trained in this new process. getting a brand of And tobacco control,
Speaker 124
37:42
um, they have an excellent team over there, Senator Stubblefield, and, you know, I think that I
Steve Good
Unverified
37:46
think that I think the last physical I saw that they would bring on one new auditor and one new agent, but they would have to be trained, the administrator
Speaker 124
37:53
would have to be trained. Yes sir, yes sir, they would have the staff to do that. Yes, sir. All right, any other questions from the committee?
Speaker 132
38:05
Thank you, Mr. Chair, I appreciate it. Yes, sir. Uh,
Speaker 133
38:10
we have one more to speak for. Uh, David Hendrick. Container if
Speaker 19
38:19
you feel, take a seat, tell us who you're with. You, you recognize? Yes,
Speaker 135
38:25
sir. Thank you. My name is David Hendricks. I'm with Family Market Stores, and I'm a member of the Arkansas Tobacco Control Board. And I, I'm here today to speak
for this bill, um, and, uh, I've got some notes just to cover my viewpoint. Like I said, I, um, I'm a retailer with 4 locations in Arkansas, some grocery stores and a convenience store and I'm, uh, been a member of the Arkansas Tobacco Control Board since 2021 and I just wanted to come today and give, I think, perspective from both angles, um, on this bill. And I think there's uh obviously a lot of challenges navigating
vapor. I don't think anybody here for the most part would say they were an expert and I won't do the same, uh, but I do think what the challenges we need some clear and enforceable legislation. We need, we need some clear guidance, and I was hoping that the state can come through for us on this. Uh, we need state level action because the FDA is moving so slow. We need to, we need the state of Arkansas to Fill this gap and and uh come to rise to the challenge because
the FDA is not moving fast enough. I support this bill because I do think it would establish a directory and, and strengthen our enforcement measures against this growing problem of illicit vapors. Um, this targets or what we're going after is unregulated and illegal vapors. I think that's what we're the main goal here, vapors that come from China, um, I don't have to tell anybody here about the epidemic we have with Teenagers and young people, um, in the vape business, um, I'm
sympathetic to retailers that sell vapors. We sell vapors at our forest stores. And we have not, uh, we, we submit all four stores and we have not carried any vapors that are not approved currently and we sell quite a few vapors, um, so I, I do think this bill could pass and there's still a market to sell vapors. I don't think they're completely out of the vape business. Um, as a board member at Wood Tobacco Control, I think this would be very powerful, um, every, we have a
meeting every month at tobacco control, and the board is tasked to approve wholesale. applications and retail applications. Last month we had 3 wholesale applications to approve, so that's about 20 to 30 a year and almost all of them want a vapor application approved. They want to be able to sell vapor products to retailers in Arkansas. We had 24 retail applications last month, so that's about 200 to 300 applications a year. As a
board, we approved these and we really don't know what these wholesalers are selling or what these retailers are selling in their stores are public. We just know right now they can sell it. They can sell vapor products. What's in that vapor product? We don't know. No one's testing it. There's not a clear list telling retailers what they can carry, what wholesalers can carry. I think there's a lot of good actors out there, but the bad actors right now, if they can pay their permit and fill out the form. We approve them because we don't have anything
else to go off of, and our enforcement agents don't have anything else to go off of. Like I mentioned before, I think this will help protect the public, our youth who are out there trying to buy these, um, and I think one interesting thing to me is the state of Arkansas today, if you want to sell cigarettes in your store, not vapor, cigarette products. There's an approved list that the Attorney General maintains you can look at this list online and it'll tell you all the cigarettes that you can sell in
your store by brand, family, by manufacture, all these are approved. So my question why do we think cigarettes need to be, have to have a list of vapor products shouldn't have a registry. We have a registry right now for cigarettes. Are we seeing vapor or safer or easier to maintain for the public. I, I, I think, I think it vapor product should be held to the same standard as cigarette products are, um, as a retailer. I think Mr. Good pointed out it would be nice to have a list,
you know, right now, a salesperson or a warehouse or a warehouse can say, hey, here's a new product, we'd like you to sell it. I don't know if it's a good product. Is it approved? Will the state approve it? I would love to have a list that I could check off for my 4 stores uh to say, hey, look, here's, I can't sell this or I can't sell this. I think I've already pointed out there's still a lot of options, you know, we sell products every day in our stores, but we have not gone into the juices or the mixing products, I think, you
know, you heard testimony today, I think there's some really good retail operators out there, but there's also some people that are just mixing up juice in their back room. We don't know what's in that juice or where they're getting it from? Is it from China? Is it something they're making on their own? We don't know. And but as a tobacco control board, We just have to approve it because there's not a list to hold them accountable, um, one way or the other. Also as a retailer, selfishly, I think this would level the playing field.
I, you know, I, we feel like we've tried to sell vapor products that have been approved. We, we don't want anything that could potentially make someone sick or hurt, um, and that we're liable for it because we sell it in our stores. While other retailers can sell products that maybe aren't approved or they got from somewhere else for cheaper or by other means. We want the retailer down the street to have the same, you know, list that they're held accountable to that
we are, so those are my, those are my perspectives. I like I said, by no means feel like I'm an expert, but I feel like this list is just somewhat common sense and maybe there's some tweaks that need to be made, but I do feel like registry would be good for our agents and our administrators and tobacco control and for retailers by and large in the state. All right, Senator Bryant, do you have a question? Yeah. Thank you, Mr.
Senator Joshua Bryant
Unverified
44:37
Chair. Just curious that the cigarette list. Do you know what generates or what, how do you get off or on that list
Speaker 135
44:44
just for talking about just our cigarettes, sir, I would not go out of my way to profess that I'm not, I know that the Attorney General maintains it, just reading here it says made periodically update this directory either by adding or removing brands, uh, that would be a good question to ask. I know it's been in place for a long time, so I think
Speaker 138
45:01
a lot of these brands. Uh, there's some you're familiar with, but this list itself is 5 pages long, so it's, uh, you know, there are quite a few options on the list. We don't know if that's a federal list that we've just adopted or we
Senator Gary Stubblefield
Unverified
45:16
have the ability to add or take. Mr. Frederick, do you have any idea how
Speaker 2
45:30
many new regulations. This bill would create. Do I forgive me,
Speaker 147
45:35
I regulations would be created? No, I, I, I've just focused mainly on the directory aspect of the bill. I do know there's
Speaker 135
45:41
some fines and some things included if that's kind of what you're asking what all else is in place, um, uh, I
think someone else could maybe speak more to that part, but I think the directory aspect is the aspect that I've focused on mainly for uh You know, creating this directory and then we have something to go off of.
Senator Jim Petty
Unverified
46:02
OK, Sanri Petty, you have a question. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for your testimony. It's been, it's been helpful, um, I think we're on the same page, it sounds like you, you feel the same way as far as frustration with the federal approval process, but yet this
particular bill relies on the federal approval process. And so that's kind of where, where I'm hung up, um, and, and so. Uh, my question, two questions. One, based on what you, and I'm not asking you to take an official position, obviously from the from the board, but based on what Ms. Stubbs says she thinks that her product would become immediately illegal because it's not been approved on the list. Do you agree with that? I think
Speaker 135
46:50
some products probably in her store would be that way. I would, you know, not being an expert on her inventory or her operations, I think I know today my understanding is the products we sell in our retail stores would all be approved. There are bait products. There are vape products today that meet these requirements in the bill that can continue to be sold, um, the vape category would not be eliminated by any means. I do think that they're not approved, they would be, you know, any of those that fall into that bucket
would be considered illegal. I do have sympathy for the FDA process, and I do understand the frustration that that's something we're relying on. I think unfortunately they are the standard when it comes to testing. Now you can say that that standard should be sped up and she'd operate a lot smoother, and I don't disagree with that, but you know, we need something to tell us what's what's in these products that's good and what's in these products is bad and unfortunately the list is small right now. I hope it continues
to grow as a retailer and uh we have more products in the future to sell, but We just need something to go off of, and I think that's why the FDA list is was approved because the state does not have the ability to, you know, go out and test individual products at everybody's store to make sure they're safe or, you know, meet the right requirements for health standards. Thank you follow up. So, uh,
Senator Jim Petty
Unverified
48:13
speaking of lists, and I want to back up and ask the
question because you touched on testing and I mentioned it as well, but could you work off of, I know
there was another bill that that was uh it didn't make it out of committee yet dealing with banning of Chinese products. I mean, you could still work, you could work off of a banned list as much as you could and approved list, correct? I think so. I think that's a good,
Speaker 134
48:39
that would be an approach to handling it, um, you
Speaker 135
48:41
know, and There's, there's certainly some items that are already on the list like that, that the tobacco control operates off of. They know when they go into a retail and they see some items that right away that they're illegal or or shouldn't be, you know, in
the store. So a band list is an approach. I think there are some measures like that. I think an approved list would be easier to manage for the tobacco girl agents um because it would just give them a, you know, they wouldn't have to check down a list of hundreds if not thousands of banned items. Bro, they would be able to look at the items that are eligible and have been
Senator Jim Petty
Unverified
49:18
approved. OK. And then as far as testing goes, I'm I'm, I believe I'm an advocate for testing the products both to
get approved on the list and and I'm in favor of an Arkansas list as opposed to a federal list, but, uh, uh, also, you know, random testing off the shelf, but testing is relatively inexpensive from what I understand from from the folks that I've to, I know they test in other situations, the THC levels and things like that which add to costs, but from what I understand, the testing is is relatively inexpensive and, and
maybe that's something that that the uh shop owners could do in a relatively inexpensive and then just compare that what's in the what's what the ingredients are in that, the, the nicotine level or whatever it is, I don't know anything about that. It's above my pay grade, but, but compare that to what is a approved on the federal registry and if they're within that other than it's flavored orange instead of tobacco, but the nicotine content's the same. That seems to me would be a reasonable approach to developing our own list. Do you have a thought on that? You
Speaker 147
50:28
know, again, I, I think someone from tobacco control enforcement can answer that question a
Speaker 135
50:33
lot better than I can. I don't know what the ins and outs of testing would be, I think they would, that would be some more burden on our agents, I would think, and you know, another standard and there'd be some time lags on. I think one concern I would have in the vape category is standardization, because I do think there's quite a bit of customization when it comes to these products, uh, you probably have some operators that are better about making the same standard product each time,
but I think a lot of these are really customized products, so today is a product need approval tomorrow. It's a different mix. um, I think that would be a hard thing to uh hard standard for some of our agents to maintain and keep an eye on. But I will not profess to be a um, an expert on that by any means. All
Speaker 152
51:18
right, Senator Ra, you have a question. Thank you. And you,
Senator Terry Rice
Unverified
51:30
board. That's correct, yes, sir. Did you hear the testimony that said Arkansas was running a deficit from their policing that does
that cause you any concern or what? But finds you, you, you agency would need I
Speaker 135
51:45
think yeah, I think it's always a concern, but I think the report like Mr. Good just said, I think they're anticipating having to add another auditor and another agent, which I don't think is, you know, a crazy, you know, Something they would have to
match to meet that standard. I, uh, you know, I've been on the board since 2021 and I've been very impressed with the, with our agents and our administrators. They've been throwing a lot of curveballs over the years, whether it's hemp or vape, medical marijuana, they're responsible for a lot of things,
Speaker 156
52:17
and I, I think they rise to the challenge each time something's thrown at them, and you have 4 stores? Yes
Senator Terry Rice
Unverified
52:25
sir. And the testimony we have in our hand from the American manufacturing Association.
The testimony was, and I gave the numbers a while ago to Mr. Good, but up to 25% of the shops. closed after this type of legislation. Does that cause you any concern? You know,
Speaker 156
52:42
I, I, I always support small business. We're a small business. We're a
Speaker 135
52:47
family owned business. I, I think there's a lot of good operators. I think you've heard from one today. They do a great job. I have concern on the tobacco control board that we have some operators in our state that are not good operators. I don't want anybody to go out
of business, but I do want us to have stores out there that are responsible, you know, are they selling products out there today that we don't know where they come from. Um, can someone go in the back room and mix up some baked juice, uh, product and sell it today. I think they can. We don't know what's in that product, um, so I, I, I don't want anyone to go to business, but I do think this category is not going away. Um, you know, part of me thinks, um,
You know, we need some speed limits to make sure everybody's not speeding, you know, we need to, we need to slow down some of this business because we just don't know what's going on out there, and we need a clear list, um, no one's saying a vape shop has to close tomorrow and if everybody's on the same playing field, they should all be playing by the same rules, and I do think, you know, like always, you're going to have some criminal elements of people in the black market sell products, but that happens today with cigarettes, happens today with alcohol. I don't think you're ever going to totally eliminate those
things. I don't think we should let threats like um, you know, the idea of maybe criminal activity or the idea that some bad operators might have to move to another state, hold us back from a good list, good policy that could keep our public safe and keep our retailers on a level playing field. You lastly you would agree that
Senator Terry Rice
Unverified
54:27
with the volume the previous testimony. Uh, I think one shot, I think it was one of the chain shops at 30% of their business was a
Chinese vapes, but it was very small amount of profit that would do everybody good to I agree. I think that's
Speaker 135
54:45
a great start. I think, I think those are, uh, something that right away can be taken out. Thank you. Thank you,
Speaker 113
54:53
Mr. Chair. Thank you. Any other questions
Senator Joshua Bryant
Unverified
54:56
from the committee, Senator Bryant. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, there was, there was testimony last time we heard, heard the bill. growth from industry and from control that there was really no known complaints outside of the closed Chinese things that's
just proliferating and and having issues which the other bills to be addressed, but when there's no No known complaints through the control border industry outside of just this doesn't taste right and find something different. Um Why can't retailers that, that want this, I guess it's two part. You want a level playing field, but you want everybody to play your game instead of the retailers play their game. And if their game is not really creating any issue. It hasn't
for 10 years. Um, I would surmise that it's, it's more like while the intention is good, you're, you're after a problem that just puts everybody in, in the retailer's box instead of opening up and letting small business chase the consumer, which they still have no problem, so I just wonder if you can, how, how do you address that as a as a board member that doesn't really get, I mean, have you seen any big complaints come across the boards? that you
have to address. That's a fair concern, and like I said, I'm wearing two hats. I'm a
Speaker 134
56:14
small retail business and I really don't like the government telling us
Speaker 135
56:17
what we can't can't sell, so I understand that. I think we're early on in this vapor industry, you know, I, I don't know if we'll see the health issues and health concerns that we might down the road, I think, um. You know, the things that come before our board are more of the fine nature to retailers, to operators, to wholesalers. I think the issues you might see would be more in the health industry, you know, and those
are the things I don't know. I can't speak on it. I think, you know, more local health experts could speak on that. I wonder how much of that will you would ever hear about. I'm not, I don't want to speculate and act like it's an epidemic. I do know that teenagers, they, I don't think, I don't think you'll find a high school teacher that won't tell you that vapor is an issue in our high schools and our junior highs, I don't think that that's necessarily a retailer's issue. I think they need to be good operators, um, and follow the
rules, but I think that's where as a, I'll say it this way, as a board member, when we sit in our monthly meeting. meetings and a wholesale application comes across. We looked through it. It's about this thick of paperwork that they have to fill out, financial records, they have to agree they're going to follow the rules, but I approve them and our board approves them, and we really don't know what they're selling, you know, so a little bit of it is just kind of some personal concern in my approving somebody that has really Not a lot of standards that
they're held to and in terms of the product that they sell in their stores where And someone says, I'm just selling cigarettes. I know that there's an approved list that they have to go off of, you know, cigarettes have a list. Is it just because they've been around longer? That's my guess. Cigarettes have been around longer. We've got more regulation. We've got our hands and arms around it, vapes of relatively new, so that's what we're trying to do here. We're trying to put our arms around,
Senator Joshua Bryant
Unverified
58:11
but as a retailer, if you were concerned, because you said you get people a lot and want to sell different juices and things
like that. Well you could self-impose your own rule. that says, I'm only using these, which is probably the list you have because you're buying it from the big companies that are also sell on your tobacco
Speaker 135
58:27
brand. Yes sir. That's, that's the list we've tried to follow just because we just don't wanna sell anything that we're not sure
Senator Joshua Bryant
Unverified
58:34
about. So since you're approving wholesale permits that you, you yourself would say I, I just don't know we've got regulations, we've had regulations for a decade, industry out there for a decade and growing, got no real issues that come on, you would know if
there's an issue because you start to receive consumer. complaints of that nature, correct? You know, I think in theory that
Speaker 135
58:53
could work, but like I said, I think these are things that might show up more in a health health field, you know, I'm not sure they would get reported back to the tobacco control it's a health issue, it's carte
Senator Joshua Bryant
Unverified
59:04
blanc vapor health issue, and you'd want to either ban vapes all together, um, keep it in a box
that you can control or let the market decide. I think at least with the list we know that these have been held
Speaker 134
59:18
to some. testing. And and and those lists, I don't think anybody's gonna say
Speaker 135
59:22
anything's healthy, but they're going to say that at least these have gone through some measure of testing at a chemical level or whatever means to be approved, whereas the items that wouldn't be on a registry or a directory are not approved and could potentially cause issues. We don't
Speaker 138
59:38
know. That's my point on it. Any other questions from the
Speaker 113
59:48
committee? Anyone else in the artist wants to speak for or against the
Speaker 12
59:55
bill. But your, your Yes, ma'am. to speak against, if you want to come, come on up
Senator Gary Stubblefield
Unverified
1:00:10
front, we'll let you. Go ahead and state your name and who you're with.
Speaker 167
1:00:25
Rachel still, um, I'm actually just a A citizen Oh, I'm sorry. Hi, my name's Rachel Steele. I'm just
Speaker 168
1:00:33
a citizen of Arkansas. I worked for Abbey Road for a short period
Speaker 170
1:00:38
of time I've been in the vaping industry for a total of 10 years since 2015. I started at 13 years old, smoking cigarettes. My parents would go buy them for me. My grandparents would purchase them for me.
After I turned 18, my brother was introduced to vapes. We He slowly transitioned me into vapes. I started at a 12 mg nicotine juice. Which is significantly high in my opinion, but not nearly as high as what's indisposables right now. What's in disposables right now is 50 mg of nicotine juice. None of the disposables that are typically sold on shelves. Have less than 25 mg of nicotine juice per puff.
I have done the math. I'm not sure that y'all would like to see it particularly, but I was asked this by a customer when I worked at Abbey Road. I was asked how much nicotine he was intaking and what the health risks were of him smoking cigarettes versus him vaping. As someone who very much loves statistics. I love statistics to the point where I've actually called over 100 vape shops over the past weekend. Um, only Abby Road vape stores and dripper
stores were the ones that were aware of the spill that's about to be passed. There was one other person that worked at a Vapor Maven.
Speaker 175
1:02:11
He was the only person. Um, I started vaping at a 12 mg juice, which is
Speaker 170
1:02:16
like I said, lower than any disposable that's on. Any of the shelves. Right now. Um, I quit within 2 years at a 0 mg juice. My mother has done the same thing. My stepfather has done the same thing. My brother has done the same thing.
Their whole argument right now, the entire argument on this is we don't know what's in the juice, but I would beg to differ that the views products that are on a counter right now. If you go open a box of views, a 4-pack box of views. I've also worked at gas stations as well, and have seen this happen. They are going to be more inconsistent, that 4 pack box of views is going to be more inconsistent than Miss Stubbs vapor products. If y'all were to go grab any of her vapor products off of her shelf at any
of her stores and test them, those 4 views plots that are prefilled and on the FDA approved registry, and on these registries, which are wanted to be allowed. Like they want to allow views and Jewel to be sold. Those are gonna have different nicotine contents. In each individual vial. You can open them, you can look at them, you can see the difference in each individual vial. They Currently, like I said, I had a
Speaker 175
1:03:36
customer, I'm sorry. I get public anxiety. I had a customer who asked me one time, he was an older man. I was slow, but like I was
Speaker 170
1:03:44
a slow day. He asked me, he said, how much nicotine am I intaking compared to cigarettes. We did the math on that. For the 50 mg of saltick. 50 mg of saltni. I know a lot of people, we don't know what saltni is, and I'm saying a lot of words that don't make too much sense. Um, 50 mg of saltni is a tiny little pod.
Like we use tiny little pod and they fill
Speaker 167
1:04:14
it up. And oh One of those pods is equivalent to 2 cigarettes. And on average, My, my customers would purchase and use one pot a day. Do you
Speaker 175
1:04:25
see how that compares to smoking a pack of cigarettes when I was 13. 2 cigarettes, tobacco free. A pack of cigarettes a day.
Speaker 170
1:04:41
For that reason, I ask you vote no against the bill. We've had, I personally have had multiple people. Quit smoking, quit vaping. I know Abbey Road when I worked there, they were forced into selling geek bars. We, I actually had just started working there when we started selling bars. Do y'all know what geek Bars is or they're the most popular disposable brand. In Arkansas actually across the US. They come from China.
Sore back here, refused to sell them for quite some time. He came into our store one day. He was doing a store inspection, him and Caitlin both. And they said, what is something that people have walked in and walked out of, walked out of the store because we do not carry it. And I said geek bars. Geek bars are sold typically. At gas stations. We were losing our business, all of our business, to gas stations. We were, they were forced into selling those products when we
had a safer option available. And that is the goal with vape stores is we try to get them weaned off of the cigarettes and down to a 0 mg of nicotine. It's not to cause harm. If you were, like I said, if you were to take any singular box of juice, of, of views and um pods and compare it to Miss Stubbs. It would be more inconsistent views as would. Joel, they have better control.
Speaker 175
1:06:16
Um, that's me working at a gas station, they would bring in multiple people, would open a
Speaker 170
1:06:22
pack in front of me and show me the differences. I learned the differences. Throughout my 10 years of vaping history, my brother used to do vape Cos back when they were a big thing. Um, during those vape pumps, we would learn that juice color doesn't exactly tell us everything about juice, but it does tell us about the consistency of the juice.
And when you open a pack of used pods, you're not going to see two of used pods in that pack that are the same color. So what this bill would do is it would eliminate all process for vape stores only unless they add in. Similar knickknack items like Spencer's or food. It would keep vapes in the big chain box retailers because they already approved those. They only carry those, they don't carry something that's not approved.
Even though it's more inconsistent. Um, someone mentioned earlier that the testing was quite cheap. I actually had submitted to bottles of juices to test. It
Speaker 175
1:07:30
cost me $3000. I did that Friday. This bill was drafted not very long
Speaker 170
1:07:37
ago, not a lot of people know about it. Um It's really, I had a speech written now and I, I didn't feel
that reading off of the paper was going to speak to y'all as much as me telling y'all about my personal experiences and about what I've experienced with customers. I'm
Speaker 175
1:08:00
sorry for being scatterbrained. I felt like it was more effective for you to hear from me
Speaker 170
1:08:06
as a as a citizen, than it is for you to hear from anybody as a. Box retail. For example, the person that owns Family Market, they would still sell views and jewel.
The only thing left on most vape stores' shelves would be 3 different brands of vape juice, um, I believe Halo is one of them. I believe naked is one of them, and I believe. That, uh, Victasia is the other one. They would be able to sell those 3 brands of vape juice along with Jewel and Buses. That's it. The open watch systems. We didn't see increased children use usage in
Nicotine or in nicotine devices until we started offering nicotine disposables. In 2015, Jewel and Views both came out. They both became big on the American market, and they were easily accessible to children. Children can walk in just like I did with my parent. Children can say, hey, I want this. And a lot of people, a lot of cashiers are too scared to tell the parent no. But when I worked for ABC for a year.
That was my first job ever, um, they actually didn't know about that when I worked at, um, Abbey Road. My first job was at ABC. I
Speaker 175
1:09:32
went into vape stores. I went into tobacco marts. I went into alcohol stores and I went into gas stations. I went into restaurants. The only people that sold to me. With the gas stations, restaurants, and tobacco stores. The vape stores never sold to
Speaker 170
1:09:52
me. I went in every time supervised with someone in a car sitting right outside watching Fape stores wouldn't sell to me, and that's because they care about their customers and they care about their consumers. You would be destroying that market. Right. Yes, sir. Any questions for Ms. Steele? Saying no, we appreciate you coming, your testimony.
Senator Gary Stubblefield
Unverified
1:10:24
All right. Nobody else to testify and we have to speak on the bill. Senator Dimay, you want to close for your bill?
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:10:35
Thank you Mr. Chairman. There's one thing that I'd I'd like to say, and I think it's a valid concern, and that's the emergency clause, what what I will do if this bill is successful in this committee is asked for a separate vote on the bill and the emergency clause on the floor with the intention of not passing the emergency clause that would
provide some more time to those that are trying to figure things out and also allow the federal government to, you know, get a handle on what's happening with the uh FDA list. But, but again, so that would Push things out and eliminate the emergency clause from the bill. Thank you,
Speaker 48
1:11:10
Senator Desma. I, I. Uh, we've heard the
Senator Gary Stubblefield
Unverified
1:11:14
bill uh. You entertain emotion. We do. We have a motion to pass and we have a 2nd in discussion.
Senator Joshua Bryant
Unverified
1:11:28
I, I will, I'm going to maintain my no vote on this just because this type of activity, even though I'm not a vaper, I can apply this to so many other industries and I, I've got family that creates her own plants. But they're governed to get a different governing structures, um, got large industries that control different markets, and if they came in and did what big tobacco's doing on this, we would just run every mom and pop out, um, so that's, that's the goal of this bill. I would like
to say that it's a little disingenuous for some of the um groups that came and spoke because whenever they recognized that the problem was a Chinese issue. They went to our friends on the house side and and spent time lobbying against the bill that would Also fix this issue, so I'm a little um. Disenheartened by
that, but with that, I, I appreciate it. I'm going to remain a note. All right. am
Senator Gary Stubblefield
Unverified
1:12:29
We do, we've got a motion to pass as amended. All those in
Speaker 68
1:12:46
favor. Say ah. All opposed. Roco Senator Bryant. Senator Bryant, Senator Bryant, no. Senator Davis, Say Davis, yes. Get my stuff.
Uh, Senator Wallace, Senator Wallace, yes, Senator Rice. Senator Rice? No. Senator Hester Senator Hester, yes, Senator English Senator English, yes. Senator Petty. No Senator Patty, no.
Speaker 205
1:13:53
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair, uh, house bills,
Senator Breanne Davis
Unverified
1:14:07
um, 1600 Bree and Davis State Senate District 25. Uh, this is essentially
just a cleanup bill for the cities, um, currently the law says that any
police officer, um, can earn leave, sick leave, and annual leave, and this just clarifies that it's full-time, full-time police officers, full-time employees. This is not restrict cities from having the ability to create a policy so that part-time officers or employees can accrue, leave, but um it just clarifies that the ones that do accrue. sick leave and annual leave or full-time officers and employees happy to take any questions.
You finished, yeah, sorry, I said I'm happy to take any questions. Any questions
Senator Gary Stubblefield
Unverified
1:15:12
for Senator Davis? done. Anyone in the audience that wished to speak for our guests. Say none of you will recognize clothes for your bills, Davis. Thank you.
Senator Breanne Davis
Unverified
1:15:22
I'm close for my bill and make a motion to pass.
Senator Gary Stubblefield
Unverified
1:15:25
We have a motion to pass a 2nd. In discussion All those in favor say ah all opposed.
The bill passes. Senator do you will? 1503. Hospital 1503. Ready to proceed you recognize in Chester.
Senator Bart Hester
Unverified
1:16:02
OK thank you members. This bill is about accessory dwelling units, as we've seen, uh, this is becoming more popular, particularly in, in growing cities. Um, but, but it becomes very critical when we are dealing with the need for affordable housing. So an accessory dwelling unit is, for instance, finishing out an apartment in inside a garage, finishing out your basement, adding a small unit, um, in your backyard or next to your garage.
They can be attached or not attached. But these units they can be used for a wide variety, but what we are seeing um in Northwest Arkansas, they are used for um somebody just getting out of college because it's a little bit more affordable because it doesn't have quite all the amenities. Maybe it's a mother-in-law unit, maybe it's a retired person, um, they don't forgot all the amenities of your of your home, but they certainly forgo a more affordable unit. What we also know, um, and, and
you can see it in different parts of Arkansas that are growing, the cost of land is so expensive, not only the cost of land, the cost of the utilities and servicing those utilities. So when we have when we have opportunities to help um What I would consider working people. Or retired people with an affordable place to live. This is something that we, that we should do, and I felt like we were compelled to do it.
Uh, it, it allows for the same type of uh regulations that you would not put on uh on a home. So if you have some typical standards like on height or some setbacks that would still allow for those for those same consistent uh regulations from a city, they can still charge a fee and whatever the normal fees are for permitting and inspections. They just can't forbid you from um from adding an additional dwelling unit. I think this is something we
hear all the time, uh, about the need for affordable housing. This is a direct effect. This will directly affect affordable housing and and certainly each of our, of our communities, um, and I think it will be something that even, you know, like I will say that I'm not putting Senator Ross, but he's about to experience with the, with the growth in biking in and around Mina. This is going to be something that becomes a real, uh, a real needed amenity for those communities and I'm happy to answer any questions. start. Remember you've heard the
Speaker 79
1:18:37
explanation of the building. Any questions, Senator English? Well, I,
Senator Jane English
Unverified
1:18:42
I guess I'm wondering, is this not something that that a local city ordinance could the city council could pass
for county. How come we we're looking at it for a statewide thing. Well, that is
Senator Bart Hester
Unverified
1:18:57
a great question. Yes, they could, but uh Senator, as we know, there is no uh no
one more offended by affordable housing that our local cities. They fought
against it every day, they, they, they oppose any anything that would be helpful to affordable housing. If you, it'd be hard pressed to find a city of any significance that hasn't added inspections, fees, time, requirements, uh, regulation on on in every single one of those they do is is an absolute. front to affordable housing. In every city of any size Northwest Arkansas. Central Arkansas, Northeast
Arkansas, uh, everywhere where they're building, uh, they are adding these regulations year after year after year and becoming more and more hostile to affordable housing. I think it's incumbent on us we continue to get asked what we're doing about workforce housing for teachers. What are we doing about workforce housing? Well, asking cities to handle it is a proven failed position. They will not, in fact, they are hostile towards workforce housing. Now they will sit down here. and say the opposite, but
virtually every action that our city takes are the opposite of what comes out of their mouth. So I think it is imperative this is held a handle on a state level. But
Senator Gary Stubblefield
Unverified
1:20:21
cent party. Just, oh, you got it, she's still got a question, sorry. I guess one of the things I'm, I'm looking
Senator Jane English
Unverified
1:20:29
at here in Central Arkansas or even Lone Oak or some of these other communities around the state. That's not a huge deal for us
here. I mean we've we've got plenty of housing in Sherwood being built all the time. More and more housing, I guess it's an issue in Northwest Arkansas, but I'm not so sure it's an issue across the rest of the state. So I'm, I guess that's why I'm wondering why it it isn't possible for local. Folks produce those ordinances. Set that up because obviously you do have a problem up Northwest Arkansas, huge problem. We do in the house here it just keeps growing and growing and growing,
and we just keep adding more housing all the time. So I don't see it as a big issue here, yeah,
Senator Bart Hester
Unverified
1:21:15
and that may be true. I can tell you the uh someone spoke for spoke for this in the House committee, and he was a builder that one of the one of the local communities here in central Arkansas did pass this ordinance, and he's used it 4 times in the past year or so and then talked about what a benefit it was and if and if it could be used in other surrounding communities in central Arkansas, you can continue to provide this type of more affordable, uh, more affordable housing, so it's,
it's certainly not just in Northwest Arkansas. you So, you
Speaker 22
1:21:46
don't, said Jane, Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think
Senator Jim Petty
Unverified
1:21:49
you know where I stand on this. I think it's a great idea. um, one of the things that that I know is going to affect growth in a negative way is our infrastructure and and I know there's a lot of, a lot of thoughts on this in terms of the
it's a less taxing way of growing housing on the existing infrastructure. Do you have any thoughts on that? I would, I would absolutely agree, you
Senator Bart Hester
Unverified
1:22:18
know, when you're, you know, when you're doing what's considered urban sprawl, which is also it's very costly because you're expanding main lines, you're expanding services for fire and uh trash and all those things that's further out when you can add, when you can add more of it into an area that's already serviced, it would, it would have to make reason that it would it would it would be a cost savings for the taxpayer.
Senator Joshua Bryant
Unverified
1:22:48
Central. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Senator Hester, what, what would you say there's a couple little things going around saying this is a new excessive regulation to tiny homes. I see it as you are opening the, your deregulating local people from over regulating or pushing them out, what would you, how would you respond to that? I would say this, yeah, it's the opposite of regulation
Senator Bart Hester
Unverified
1:23:10
we're pushing back on regulation. We're saying they can't regulate it more than than another house, but they also cannot stop. you from from building these
accessory dwelling units. And look, there are many cities that, that, that do allow this, um, anyway, look, I would say that this is the type of bill that might be very difficult for just a Republican to pass or might be very different virtually impossible for just a Democrat to pass, but Nicole Clowney and I are working well on this issue together, and I think that's why it's received so much support. Any more.
Speaker 222
1:23:52
You. We have a gentleman you're speaking for recognize yourself. I'm James
Speaker 41
1:24:05
Walden. I'm the uh president of the American Arkansas chapter of the American Planning Association. A recent study by the national group called Up for Growth said that we have a rough, roughly 4500 unit under supply of housing units in the state of
Arkansas. This is a critical issue. It's a nationwide issue and a critical issue that's this large deserves a large response. Uh, and, and, and while I don't generally say that I, I love preemption bills. I would say this is probably a good example of a preemption bill. Uh, accessory dwelling units really are a form of invisible density, uh, you'd be hard pressed to drive down the street
and say that house has an ADU behind it. That house doesn't. And they make use of every single better use of every single inch of water line, sewer line, street that exists within the city. And so when you're thinking about that, that the service delivery for communities becomes more efficient. We've had so much concern about rising water rates, rising sewer rates, and this is one of the ways that we can address that and dealing with it. Additionally, this, these are,
while this concept, I think in this this particular arena as an abate debate seems like it's new. Cities have been doing this for a long time. This is a form of development that occurred back in the 1920s and so many of the neighborhoods that we cherish that have a lot of character, allow these. But additionally, cities in recent years, examples Bryant, Conway, Fayetteville, numerous cities have permitted these. They've legalized these and and I don't necessarily
agree with everything that's in the bill, but I think it's still a good bill, but these cities have legalized these, and the sky has not fallen. Things have not drastically gotten worse, and for that reason I think it is a good bill, and I think you all should uh consider passing it. We We should speak for against the
Speaker 79
1:26:28
bill. See no sentence as you recognized clothes free will? Well, I, you know,
Senator Bart Hester
Unverified
1:26:36
I will say I, I appreciate a lot of the, the concerns considering English your concern really goes back to local control, and I, I, I understand that, uh, but look, this, this is uh
as we know, this is, this is something that I believe is imperative and important to help us when you get asked, what are you doing for affordable housing? This is a direct response and a and a
and something that you can add into your answer. People are looking to us on the, on the state to, to to provide a solution to a statewide problem. We have affordable housing crisis in every area of the state of Arkansas, regardless of how rural it is, regardless if it's growing, it's just a different crisis. This is something we can answer back to our communities and say this was a response that that we had, we helped with that issue. So with that I I am closed. I make a motion to pass.
Speaker 19
1:27:30
All right, we have a motion to pass and a second, Senator Walsh. A
Senator Gary Stubblefield
Unverified
1:27:35
discussion on the motion. Saying none, all those in favor, say ah. the post Congratulations to the test. Your bill passed. Uh Is there anyone else here Center Brian, I'm sorry. So Roger recognized. This is the House bill? It is Senate Bill 401. It's 401.
Speaker 104
1:28:10
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Joshua Bryant, Senate District 32. Uh this is just a bill to uh have a little
Senator Joshua Bryant
Unverified
1:28:16
clarification amendment to our underground facilities damage Prevention Act. Really just adds the ability for the local people to to dig in and around their equipment, but with that all handed off to. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank
Speaker 232
1:28:32
you, Mr. Chair and committee. I'm Lisa Lake and I'm with AT&T.
So, uh, Senate Bill 401 just makes a small change as uh Senator Bryant mentioned the current underground facilities damage prevention Act has some exceptions in there for some times when uh an operator does not have to call uh 811 before they dig. However, right now, uh, the way it's worded, it says you can use specialized equipment or tools that are only manipulated by human power. She's just taking a shovel and
digging or or we refer to it as hand digging exclusively for system maintenance and leak detection. So what we're trying to do is to clarify that. It can be, you can use uh a shovel and hand dig even if it's not for system maintenance or leak detection as long as you are no further away than 12 inches from your own facilities and you don't dig more than 12 inches deep, so an example of
this is like if AT&T or another provider goes out to install fiber for a customer and they lay out the cyber line from the customer's house to the pedestal. What we want to be able to do. is to take a shovel at our own pedestal and dig just enough so that we can connect that fiber line now before a contractor comes back to bury the line that's laid out across the yard 811 will be called and other underground facilities located.
So we've socialized this, discussed it with the 811 office um they don't have any issue with it, in fact, they thought it's, it's actually a common practice, but they saw the need based on the current language to get this clarification in the law, and we've also spoken with several facilities, uh, other utilities like uh Entergy, the Electric co-ops, uh, the gas companies, other telecom providers and uh.
Most of those, they don't have any issue with this either, so like I said, it's, it's kind of a clarification, it's probably something that's been a common practice for a long time, but it's just not reflected in the law that way. I'll be happy to take questions from the
Speaker 195
1:31:01
committee? Anyone in the audience wish to speak for or against the bill? See none Senator Bryant.
Senator Joshua Bryant
Unverified
1:31:10
I think it's really self-explanatory, and with that, Mr. Chair, I'd make a motion to pass. Senator
Speaker 228
1:31:17
Branch closed for the bill, we have a motion to
Senator Gary Stubblefield
Unverified
1:31:20
pass. In a second. All those in favor, say ah. I opposed. You built pastor such right. Uh, I think we have a We have a Cox mean yeah, uh, we will meet again Thursday. 30, try to get caught up on some of these bills. Thank you for being here.
Agenda
CALL TO ORDER
SB252 J. Dismang TO INFORM THE PUBLIC OF HEALTH RISKS CAUSED BY VAPOR PRODUCTS AND E-LIQUID PRODUCTS; TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF ARKANSAS YOUTH; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.
HB1510 Gonzales TO REPEAL THE AUTHORITY FOR A MUNICIPALITY TO EXERCISE TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OVER AN UNINCORPORATED AREA OF A COUNTY.
SB401 J. Boyd TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS UNDERGROUND FACILITIES DAMAGE PREVENTION ACT.
HB1503 Clowney TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING MUNICIPAL REGULATIONS; AND TO PROHIBIT CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS ON THE REGULATION OF ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS.
HB1600 Tosh TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING MUNICIPAL LAW ENFORCEMENT; AND TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING HOLIDAY COMPENSATION, ANNUAL VACATION LEAVE, AND SICK LEAVE FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS.
ADJOURNED
Documents
| Title | Type | Pages | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agenda — CITY, COUNTY & LOCAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE - SENATE AND HOUSE, Mar 11, 2025 | Agenda | 2 | Official source ↗ |
Speakers
Senator Gary Stubblefield
Unverified
Speaker 4
Speaker 5
Speaker 12
Senator Jim Petty
Unverified
Speaker 19
Senator Jane English
Unverified
Senator Breanne Davis
Unverified
James Weldon
Unverified
Speaker 41
Speaker 9
Senator Bart Hester
Unverified
Speaker 58
Senator Terry Rice
Unverified
Speaker 60
Speaker 68
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
Speaker 78
Scout Stubbs
Unverified
Speaker 86
Speaker 81
Speaker 101
Senator Joshua Bryant
Unverified
Speaker 118
Steve Good
Unverified
Speaker 79
Speaker 124
Speaker 132
Speaker 133
Speaker 135
Speaker 138
Speaker 2
Speaker 147
Speaker 134
Speaker 152
Speaker 156
Speaker 113
Speaker 167
Speaker 168
Speaker 170
Speaker 175
Speaker 48
Speaker 205
Speaker 22
Speaker 222
Speaker 104
Speaker 232
Speaker 195
Speaker 228