Said in CommitteeBeta

Exactly as spoken.

Transportation, Technology & Legislative Affairs - Senate

March 10, 2025 ·15 Minutes Upon Adjournment of Senate ·OSC ·1:09:22
Video Transcript 1 document

Bills discussed (11)
Bill Title Sponsor Status
HB1605 Act 328 · 5 mentions in transcript, agenda, chapter
Matched: “Center Brian HB 1605. proceed. Thank you,”
 TO AMEND THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER-GENERAL CONTRACTOR METHOD OF PROCUREMENT PILOT PROGRAM TO TO MAKE THE … Wing Notification that HB1605 is now Act 328
SB261 · 3 mentions in chapter, transcript, agenda
Matched: “SB261 A. Clark TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE OPERATION OF AN AL…”
 TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE OPERATION OF AN ALL-TERRAIN VEHICLE ON CERTAIN ROADS; AND … A. Clark Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment.
HB1502 Act 325 · 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…CATED ON A TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICE IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. HB1502 Maddox TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE REGISTRATION AND LIC…”
 TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE REGISTRATION AND LICENSING OF A HISTORIC OR SPECIAL INTEREST … Maddox Notification that HB1502 is now Act 325
HB1536 · 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…ES TO UNPAVED ROADS. REGULAR AGENDA Number Sponsor Subtitle HB1536 M. McElroy TO WITHHOLD STATE TRANSPORTATION FUNDING FROM A…”
 TO WITHHOLD STATE TRANSPORTATION FUNDING FROM A SCHOOL DISTRICT THAT DOES NOT REQUIRE PASSENGER RESTRAINT … M. McElroy Died in House at Sine Die adjournment.
HB1596 Act 327 · 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…AW CONCERNING ANTIQUE MOTOR VEHICLE SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES. HB1596 Steimel TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING MOVING TRAFFIC VIOLATIO…”
 TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING MOVING TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS IN A HIGHWAY WORK ZONE; TO CREATE … Steimel Notification that HB1596 is now Act 327
SB258 · 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…DRIVER'S LICENSE TEST AND THE DRIVER'S INSTRUCTION MANUAL. SB258 C. Penzo TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS DIGITAL RESPONSIBILITY, SAF…”
 TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS DIGITAL RESPONSIBILITY, SAFETY, AND TRUST ACT. C. Penzo Died on Senate Calendar at Sine Die adjournment.
SB330 · 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…RESTRAINT SYSTEMS IN SCHOOL BUSES UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS. SB330 J. Scott TO AMEND THE CONTENTS OF THE WRITTEN DRIVER'S LICE…”
 TO AMEND THE CONTENTS OF THE WRITTEN DRIVER'S LICENSE TEST AND THE DRIVER'S INSTRUCTION MANUAL; … J. Scott Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment.
SB372 · 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB372 A. Clark TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE SIGNAL LEGEND OF T…”
 TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE SIGNAL LEGEND OF TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES; AND TO ALLOW … A. Clark Died on Senate Calendar at Sine Die adjournment.
SB3722 · 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “right into SB 3722. Uh, you see it”
 Pre-2017 bill
SB397 Act 931 · 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…UREMENT PROGRAM PERMANENT FOR THE STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION. SB397 D. Wallace TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIAL PERSONAL INFORMATION OF…”
 TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIAL PERSONAL INFORMATION OF RAIL EMPLOYEES IN REPORTS INVOLVING RAILROAD FATALITIES. D. Wallace Notification that SB397 is now Act 931
SB96 · 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…rs and Staff Only'. DEFERRED BILLS Number Sponsor Subtitle SB96 C. Penzo TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING DETACHMENT BY A REGION…”
 TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING DETACHMENT BY A REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY; AND TO REPEAL REGIONAL … C. Penzo Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment.

Official video page ↗

Transcript

Transcript available SliQ live captions ✓ Whisper: not yet available Download .txt
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 Ricky Hill Unverified 0:14
vote for which Bill SB 261 passed from committee you referred it, so we need to expunge that vote and then start over. Motion for Senator Johnson, seconded by Senator Love, to expunge the vote. All those in favor say aye. Those oppose same sign, vote is expunged. Senator Clark, if you'd like to present your bill as amended. Yes, thank you, Chair. Thank you, members of the
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Alan Clark Unverified 0:34
committee. Uh, Central Hill had asked me to send this bill back in here. And uh, as things are going in BLR that you're aware it's taking 2 weeks to get this simple amendment, but it does 3 things. One, we pull a little closer to you. Mike, I'm sorry, and Senator Alan Clark, District 7, The uh association of County Sin language that they thought made it clear that it is only on paved roads, so. We've got that we've been asked about insurance and we have insurance in here. Uh, page 2. Beginning with the law in 19, maintains liability insurance on the all train vehicle that provides at a minimum the following coverages. Uh, we may have overdone it, but not less than $25,000 for bodily injury or death of one person in any one accident, the accident results in damage to or destruction of property, not less than $25,000 for the damage to or destruction of property of others in any one accident. And then we also at the very end, uh, Page 3 lines 11, the Cormor of a county may adopt an ordinance prohibit the operation of an all-terrain vehicle under subdivision A1B of this section on unpaved roads located in the county by 2/3 vote of the total membership of the court. Uh, they have to take any questions. OK, I got a quick question for you on this one, Senator
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 1:59
Clark. It just popped my mind. Uh, when they were looking at 25,000 as far as the insurance goes that we all discussed, does that now back up and say that the farmers who are using it going crossroad and stuff must have the $25,000 as well. I do not believe so. I believe it's just this section only. I'm
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Alan Clark Unverified 2:18
almost positive, Central Hill, you see where I'm going with, it's it's specific
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Mark Johnson Unverified 2:28
to this section. specific to this section, OK, Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator Clark, the, the, the last uh thing you amended on page 3, this is, this is not makes the the bill not permissive, but it, it gives an opt out. Is that essentially what it does because local control and
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Alan Clark Unverified 2:44
it has 2/3 vote for those of us who have served on theorum Court so that the city JPs can't outlaw it. It would take you know I like that but I
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Mark Johnson Unverified 2:55
but my, I guess to get more to the point. and clarify, uh, If The quorum Court in any county does nothing on this, then it's law for them. OK, thank you, thank you, and I don't particularly like that amendment, and I think don't even
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Alan Clark Unverified 3:09
think it helps it pass, but Uh I was trying to work with everyone, so it's there. Thank you, Senator Johnson. Any other questions for Senator
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 3:20
Clark? Seeing no. Is there anyone in the audience here to speak for or against the bill? Seeing no one. Motion to approve by Senator Johnson, saying by Senator Bryant in discussion. Seeing none All those in favor say aye, oppose the same sign. Eyes have it centered. You passed your bill. Thank you. Thank you, Chair.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Alan Clark Unverified 3:51
Thank you, members of the committee. And let's jump
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 24 3:54
right into SB 3722. Uh, you see it
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Alan Clark Unverified 3:57
there in front of you. It's For all intents and purposes, a one-page bill. It says that if you come to a stoplight, Uh, and there is no one there. This is my words, not the actual language, uh, you've treated it, you can treat it as a stop sign. Uh, you can, you must stop. And then if there's no one there, you can proceed. This is common sense bill. It's a green bill. Uh, it's what people are already doing, uh, you know, anybody you visit with, if you uh, if we put ourdo and others under oath if they don't admit on their own that they already do this, and we should make people outlaws, uh, for doing really the right thing, doing the safe thing is there's no reason to sit there for 5 minutes. and run gas at a stoplight in the middle of the night when I was coming back from the Fine Arts Center the other night. I don't know which street it was that was coming up. I think not, but I could be wrong. What street it was, there were 5 lots. Uh, and all with absolutely no traffic. And the cumin, uh, amount of fuel that we're using. Uh, and putting CO2 into the atmosphere makes no sense. Plus it makes no sense to just sit there, uh, you know, those against it we'll talk about accidents in Uh intersections, but you have accidents and intersections because there's traffic where there is traffic where somebody's running a red light, and this isn't running a red light. This is stopping. and making sure that there's absolutely nobody there, nobody beside you, nobody across from you, nobody, uh. And and then going, it's as simple as that. I'll be happy to take any questions. Are there any other states doing this currently? Somebody is. I did. I was calling to Montana stoplight Bill somebody out west, and I couldn't find where Montana because I that's, you know, as much as I'd like to take credit, If I had not read that one of the Western states was doing this, uh, I would not have come up with it on my own, but I can't tell you which one. So you did not get mad enough the other night when
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 6:16
he left the pro tem ball with the stoplights catching that made you do this when you got home. To what you didn't like this because you got mad when you left the protein ball and you got caught all the stoplights
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Alan Clark Unverified 6:27
and Senator Hill, it's not about me. Everybody I talked to says, and I shouldn't say everybody, 95% of the people I've talked to says I already do that. Uh, and we shouldn't make people outlaws. We shouldn't have the speed limit at 60 if it's really 70 we, we ought to have, we ought to have truth in advertising. We ought to have truth and laws and the fact is this is what people do because people have good sense and a lot of times. Here at the Capitol for some reason we don't think people have good sense, but they do have good sense, uh, and So Uh, it's just that, just there's nobody here. Why am I sitting here? Senator Bryant. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 34 7:15
kind of reading the overview of the bill. You
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Joshua Bryant Unverified 7:17
know, if I, if I'm, I'm I'm supportive of the bill overall. I've been in several situations where you just sit and wait and wonder. You're gonna risk the ticket even though 3 minutes have passed and there's obviously nobody coming, but in this situation, if I see a green light and it's 1 mile away and I'm going 65 miles an hour. Um, I've got no Preconceived notions that I'm worried about the gentleman pulling out in front of me. Obviously, I'm going to be Noticing of it, but I'm not going to consider them running that red light in the current state running that red light to pursue pointing out in front of me. But in the event he did that, Obviously there's a conflict. That might may occur a T-bone or even a rear ending. At what point of this fault? Uh, transfer. Because I wasn't at the intersection 1 mile away. I'm going at a higher rate of speed, maybe even higher than the speed limit that driver pulls out. Not judging my speed. He has. Uh Granted the authority to do that because Nobody was at the intersection and an accident occurs, um, the law would say Who's at fault? Can you answer that just for my own clarity.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Alan Clark Unverified 8:38
It's always your duty to avoid an accident if you, you know, I can't tell you how many times I've said at a stoplight, and I know that people will be coming through, especially if they're making a left turn that people will be coming through not only through the yellow but after it turns red. I sit there. Uh, because I know that's going to happen. Uh, although legally they're running a red light. But also I can see. That they're coming. This car doesn't, you can't see it in any direction. Well, I mean, so you could,
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Joshua Bryant Unverified 9:15
you could, you could look and you could see they are coming from a long ways off. This bill does not
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Alan Clark Unverified 9:20
allow that. This bill says there can't be anybody, yeah, no, that's the whole this whole thing is there cannot be anybody. They can't be a long ways off. They can't be sitting beside you. They can't be sitting across from you. There can't be anybody. So, with approaching not
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Joshua Bryant Unverified 9:37
being defined even if they were As far as the eye could see coming down the roadway. You can't make that
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Alan Clark Unverified 9:48
start to your point, you know, going home late at night. On 70 from I-30 to Hot Springs. A lot of you have traveled that direction. We have a stoplight out there instead of instead of a tunnel underneath or bridge. Uh, we have a stoplight, uh, and Late at night, that light will turn red as it did last night. I was actually coming in this direction for absolutely no reason. I mean, and so More likely to run the lot and not just me. People in general are more likely to run the lot looking on both sides and seeing there's no traffic there. We're not seeing any traffic, but you're going 60 miles an hour. You don't see any traffic and more likely to run that red light as it's turning red, uh, because they know they're going to be sitting there for some time. In the middle of the country for nothing. Uh, I don't know why I have no idea why it turned red, uh, other than for the purpose of this meeting, uh, but I should have been able. After having stopped, Uh For a red lock that turned red for no reason and looked over here and looked over here. And because we're talking about a whole highway being cleared. There's nobody coming up ahead of me. There's nobody coming in any direction, uh, just being able to proceed forward and We could probably this bill right here may solve climate change.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 47 11:21
What well taken, Senator Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator Clark, I
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Mark Johnson Unverified 11:26
remember when we instituted in Arkansas the uh Right turn on red law. And it had gone back and forth. Is this kind of analogous to right turn on red where you have to come to a complete stop and look both ways before you can turn right on except now if there's absolutely no one around, you can
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Alan Clark Unverified 11:49
go straight and we did pass it and I say we. I was a teenager, but during the oil. Uh, was
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Mark Johnson Unverified 11:57
considered an energy saving thing. Obviously it does because you're sitting there idling. But uh plus the time it says,
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Alan Clark Unverified 12:07
uh, and obviously before that time we didn't think people. had the good sense to do that, but they seem to have now, so maybe we're getting smarter. Senator Clark, I never
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 12:15
knew that you'd be an environmentalist for the state. always been an environmentalists, not
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Alan Clark Unverified 12:19
just crazy. Any other questions? Senator Love, I know you've got to have one. I'm
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 12:24
OK. OK, see, seeing no other questions from the committee. Is there anyone here to speak for or against the bill? Seeing no one wants the will of the committee. Most new path 2nd century stone. Any
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Fredrick J. Love Unverified 12:59
discussion? Go, go ahead, center. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and, and thank you, Senator Clark for this bill. you know. I, I really do have mixed emotions about this bill because on, on one hand, I've been at a, a light at night and just sitting there and thinking. Man, I wish I could go through this like. However, I've also been. And a light at night. I've been hit by a drunk driver. And, you know, just the different scenarios go through your mind because now you're taking it out of Aim. You know, a, a. Something that that just goes traffic light does not discriminate. Hey, it's green, it's red, it's, it's there. Right now we're saying, hey, with this bill. We'll leave it in the hands of a human. As
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 66 14:02
Senator Bryant said that. My interpretation of if that vehicle
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Fredrick J. Love Unverified 14:08
is close to me or not. It's different than if Senator Stone might see it and I just think it, it that it's just too arbitrary for us to say. You know Should I go? Should I not go? It just leaves it. It leaves it kind of at a whim. And that's, that is kind of my. My thought about this bill, even though I have, I mean, literally I have said it it it it light and I'm like, oh my gosh, I wish this like would turn green so I can go and I've just been sitting there and nobody's there. At least I know that number one. If somebody does approach. They're not counting on me to. To go, I mean, it's just I don't, I mean, I can't get the, I can't get it out right now. But it's just to me this just leaves it too much, it's too arbitrary for for me to say, hey, you know what, no, there was no traffic. Come in. Versus somebody that says, hey, you know what? I was coming and he just didn't see me. Because they're expecting that this light is green and they're going. And so that's that's why I um I, I kind of like the intent of the bill because it has impacted me. Um But at the same time, I think it's, it's a little bit too arbitrary because now we're getting into. We're getting into what I perceive maybe oncoming track versus what Senator Brown or what you may perceive as oncoming traffic, so uh with that, I asked for a no vote. Just
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 15:57
to answer your question on that if you read line 32 and 33. Says no vehicles. No no vehicular traffic around. So this is for clarification on that. like that. Thank you. Any other comments? Fair discussion I won't down. Just to make sure I understand
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Matt Stone Unverified 16:32
if a vehicle sitting at a red light on this discussion, not, not questions. OK, well
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 69 16:37
then I don't guess I have anything
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 75 16:39
to say to someone else can answer it for you. OK, well, I guess, and
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Matt Stone Unverified 16:44
it just in the discussion then, if, if I'm sitting at the red light waiting to enter into maybe like to the highway traffic and I'm coming off a secondary road if there's no vehicles there. I can turn right or turn. left are going across to the intersection, but by the same token, when I leave my house and drive the Little Rock, I'm almost 4 lane the whole way, and there's probably at least 100 county roads coming through that. through my journey up here that I have to come up and stop at an actual stop sign where they have to make a judgment call if they can pull out safely and get to speed without being rear ended or hit in the side. I think this is the same thing if you're sitting at a stop sign, it can make that judgment and even have other vehicles pulled up behind you or turning in, surely if you're sitting at a red light and there's no other vehicles in the intersection. You ought to be able to judge if you have time to enter. The the intersection safely and and travel on would be my
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Mark Johnson Unverified 17:53
comment. very good comment. In Senator Johnson, thank you, Mr. Chairman, in response to Senator Stone's comment. Sent Bill 372 would not allow, if you can see another car, then it won't kick in. It's not even as it's even more strict than it would be if there was a stop sign there, so stop sign is is pretty well you can say, well, those people coming the other way. I know they've got the right of way, but in this case, you've got the bar is even a little higher, and I hope I'm interpreting that correctly, but that that if you see a car, you don't have to say. I'm judging that it's going to take them 90 seconds to get here or whatever. You don't get that, that leeway if there is a car approaching at all that you can see, so that's why I feel comfortable supporting Bill. Thank you Senator
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 18:47
John. Any other? Discussion Go ahead, Senator Love.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Fredrick J. Love Unverified 18:56
But here's what I would ask the committee, not the sponsor. What is approaching? When approaching this to you may be different for me. So what is approaching? Yes, sir. Senator
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Mark Johnson Unverified 19:14
Love, I, I think it's pretty well spelled out in the bill. Approaching means you can see a car coming. It doesn't matter if it's a quarter mile down the road or way even further if they're approaching that intersection, then you've got to obey the stoplight until it changes. Now we're hoping that it's turns red on your the other guy's side, you could you could worry about, but the burden of proof is on you. This, I think it's good billion. In insofar as it puts that limit on the driver that has the red light doesn't get the option to say, well, I thought he was going real slow and I could go ahead and pull on that. Now, if there is another vehicle approaching, then you must, you must stay there and wait until the light changes or that car has cleared and there's nobody approaching anymore. That's at least how I would interpret the language, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Senator Johnson. Any other discussion saying 9th century free to close for your
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 20:16
bill. Yes, OK. So we got a motion to approve. All those in favor say aye, oppose the same sign. Si your bill passed. Senator Clark, would you please send Senator Des down here as fast as you can OK, thank you, sir. Right. Center Brian HB 1605. proceed. Thank you,
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Joshua Bryant Unverified 21:25
Mr. Chair. Thank you, committee. House Bill 1605, a little history on this. This is one of the methods of alternate project delivery. Just introduce yourself to the Joshua Bryant, Senate District 32. So House Bill 1605 is a alternate project delivery process that was actually adopted in 2017 as a pilot project and what the construction manager general contractor did is add another. Add another ability for the department of Transportation to do these complex projects where you bring along a potential general contractor um to work through the design of the project, work through scheduling of the project, work through the costing of the project. And in 2017 we enabled a pilot project. In 2019 it got amended, so we started real low the first project could not exceed $70 million. They had a program expiration date and the General Assembly really had a lot of controls over the program and then in 2019 they saw some successes. They they asked the General Assembly to raise some of those thresholds so a single project could not exceed 100 million. And then in 2023, I jumped on because I understand that the CMGC program fairly well and we just started, really started to lift those caps up a little bit and do allow more and more projects that are very complex to be adopted through this delivery. Process by the Department of Transportation. What this bill seeks to do is no longer call it a pilot program. They have promulgated the appropriate rules and guidelines and controls and and partners and put them in place and have had multiple successes, um. In In using not only design build which they've had since the early 2000s, but also this project such as the Cantor Roadhiting Highway 4962 interchange up where I'm at, um, Pulaski County line, I-40 improvements. They just have a long list of successes and so what they've asked is, let's no longer call this a pilot program. Just let us have control of it. They did put their own self-imposed controls on there that no one project could $300 million to get those really large complex projects. So if you see a lot of projects that are riddled with a lot of delays. That was probably a hard bid or potentially a design build, which is still an alternate method but design built gives a little more control to the contractor versus the CMCG lets the owner, lets the department have more control, so the programs that have used CMCG have not only been the complex projects that are prone to delays, prone to having Potential conflicts with owner acquisition of land, potential conflict with time delays and costing, and what that does is allow all those questions to get answered prior to going to a bid, so what it would look like is once all those programs are married up if, if the the general contractor that has the relationship that has worked through all the design complications and been a partner with the department can meet that or within 10% of what the cost is, they could potentially get the award of that contract if they cannot negotiate that contract, it'll go into the next, it'll go into a hard bid phase to where they'll try to get those uh partners in to build that but use the CMGC as kind of a partner to Wei who who best Fits that project, so that's really this is just a larger appeal of the controls, the monetary controls that were in the pilot program, and it gives the department the authority to take this, this program on as a whole. Now this for state only projects whether they include federal as well
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 25:25
I think federal has different requirements for CMCG. You've got the
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Joshua Bryant Unverified 25:28
department here that can't answer that, but I believe it's whatever money comes in that the department wants to use the program on. They have the authority to as long as it does not. 300 million. We'll get someone from the department down here.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 26:03
Please do Jared Wiley, director of RA. Thank you, sir. I, I guess my question to start with on this is going back to the conversation we had a couple of weeks ago with this going to include the DBE projects or the
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 109 26:16
all or nothing projects, so most of our projects of any size such as these, they would have federal funding in them. Yes sir. So DB requirements would apply. The DBE
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 26:24
requirements which will increase the cost to the state. Generally, yes sir, that that's how that works. Would you like to explain to the committee how that works so they'll be familiar with what we're talking about about DBE. So that's a that's a federal statute that requires that
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 109 26:40
we set aside a certain percentage of work to disadvantage business enterprises as defined by the federal law. And so currently I think our percentage is around 8.5% of our work per year and so we, we make sure that we set aside that amount of work throughout the course of the year as we take bids on projects, so we're looking to see how much work is available under a project that a qualified EBE might be able to undertake, and we set a goal on that project with the overall goal as required by the federal government to meet our goal at the end of the federal fiscal. Thank you, Mr.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 112 27:21
Wiley. Central Love. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So I think I, I may have missed some.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Fredrick J. Love Unverified 27:29
So, so is the general contractor method is, are you taking that part out of it? Are you taking the, the disadvantaged business out of, out of No, no, sir. OK. And then, so, so what, what is, what is the main difference between the the general contractor method in design build and some of the other methods that you may use. So
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 109 27:51
our predominant method is design bid build, so we we had a set of plans and contractors bid on that. They bid each quantity of each item with the price, and we award that to the lowest bidder. First design bid bill that's all of our projects in the history of Ardo have been done that way except for 5 or 7 now 7 construction manager general contractor as a Senator Bryant said it allows us to work with that contractor early on. The infuse some innovation to reduce risks so that we pass on time and cost savings to the public as we deliver a transportation project, so We get the contractor in early as we're working on design and work on utilities maybe ahead of time, where we could have to wait for design being able to attack those utilities, so we save time in the front end, and we eliminate risk on that contractor which results in cost savings for the
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Fredrick J. Love Unverified 28:53
public. So, so let me ask, so you said we're working with the contractor, so do you, you go out and select the contractor without the bid, I mean, are you doing this this uh through an RFQ so that you can then select the contractor without going out for bid, is that, is that what we're doing? I mean, I just want to be clear on
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 109 29:15
what I'm voting on. Yes, sir. So, so this and I'll answer you certainly this has complete support from our associated general contractors group. Asphalt paving association, so they're all on board with this, but we have a list of 19 prequalified contractors that we've worked through, so we would select off that list if we selected to see him. Yes, sir. OK, so then how, how, how
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Fredrick J. Love Unverified 29:35
do we ensure as a state that we're that everybody's kind of getting the, the our diet is, is not just picking this one or 2 contractors that out of the 19 We can get a good mix of of of contractors. How, how do we assure that? So we
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 109 29:55
have a list again of 19. We've had 5 of these projects and so all 5 have been awarded to different contractors today, and you know, when a project is put out for an RFP goes out for say a new project, any of these contractors can submit for that. And but you,
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Fredrick J. Love Unverified 30:14
you're saying that you're using an RFQ. This is the RFQ process mainly? Yes sir. They have to be a
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 116 30:20
prequalified contractor if they're not, they can't bid on that project.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 109 30:23
So out of this 19, we may have 5 that come say, hey, I want that that work. And so they put a proposal together. They show us how they would attack that work, how they would infuse innovation into the process, and so we make our selection based on what they
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Joshua Bryant Unverified 30:44
tell us in that second RFP and Senator Lowe, I think a question maybe our doc can answer is how often do they update the
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Fredrick J. Love Unverified 30:52
RFQ. So if you got 19, no, no, I'm familiar with all this because we, we. did it, I mean, I'm familiar with the process, what I'm, what, what I'm asking though is how do we ensure that of the 19, say for instance, out of the 19, you could choose to just use one contract on that list every single project. You could. I'm not saying that you will do that. What I was asking was how do you ensure that you have a a um out of the 19 that work goes around instead of harddo saying, hey, we're going to go with just say Redstone. Redstone might be on your list. We're going to go with Redstone and we're going to keep going with Redstone because Redstone is familiar with uh doing work on I-30. Just say, just say for instance. You know, for the sake of argument. And so how do, how do, how do we not do that? So we, we look at the key
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 109 31:45
personnel, their experience with the type of work, their equipment burden, how much of contract they can handle, so we look at that each time on each project. OK. Alright. Thank you. Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Mark Johnson Unverified 32:05
Mr. Wiley, uh, I appreciate Senator Love's question, but as a kind of a follow up to that as a practical matter, you know, I would be concerned if one or two contractors are going to get all the work and the rest of them are going to be left off, but as a practical matter, is it not true that Each individual company regardless of their size, they're the number of projects that they can bond at any given time is going to be limited by, I would just call it their bondability, and I know there's, there's your credit rating, their assets, their other things, so practically wouldn't mean that the work would get spread around to where the the qualified contractors would still have a practical limit in that. They couldn't bond 16 projects of that size at the same time. Is that, am I kind of on the same uh on a correct line of, of, of understanding that. Yes,
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 116 33:04
Senator, we have, in addition to the
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 109 33:07
bonding requirements that we have. We also have a prequalification process for all of our contractors, and we look at again the same things the personnel, their their equipment. What projects they're engaged in, and we assigned each contractor a rating each year and so we make sure that we don't allow a contractor to get overextended based on last year's ratings. So yes, we're looking at that as well,
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Mark Johnson Unverified 33:30
a quick follow up, Mr. Chairman, uh, the project at Highway 10 and 430, uh, that was done under this pilot, was it not? And y'all were very pleased with it, as I understand and I hate to scratch the scab off, but I drove through here last night. The uh the project in Saline County on the interstate. It was not done under that process, was it? And I'm not saying one was took a long time because of that, but I just had to note that last night, by the way, we came through, it was, it was beautiful to drive through there and not, you know, fear for my life because an 18 wheeler was 4 inches away from my fingers anyway, thank you, Mr. Wiley. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Going along with what you just said, I
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 34:15
drove through it uh Saturday and Sunday and I had allowed an extra hour to get to where I was going, so I was actually early when I got there. Make it through there. Any other
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Fredrick J. Love Unverified 34:32
questions? Central You know, cheer, you said ratings. What what goes into those writings?
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 109 34:37
So the prequalification ratings is going to be again the amount of equipment they have, the amount of assets they have, um, we look at all those and we look at projects they've completed in the past to make sure they can handle that scope and size of work. It's a CPA required submittal and actually I believe someone on this committee asked that for that previously and
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 108 34:59
we sent that out. I can share that with you for sure. OK. Could
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Fredrick J. Love Unverified 35:04
it be possible? That a smaller contractor because I'm I'm going to keep asking you this. But could it be possible that a smaller contractor that has not done Just say for instance, just just just take the. No 30 expansion. Right? Is it possible? That There are some contractors that could do that work that once they get into your rating system would not be. That that actually They could do the work, but based on the rating, they just could not. Do that, I mean, could not be awarded that project I don't believe
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 108 35:57
so, no, sir. No sir. No. So if they can handle that work,
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 109 36:01
we want them to take on that work because it is best for us as a state if we have a competition out there and we're building projects, so we want the most competition we can have out there. Yes, sir. And no, no, go ahead in the smaller contractors they work on these projects as subcontractors too, so there's a lot of work, you know, just because somebody's not a prime, there's still a lot of subs that work on that job as well. OK. Any other
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 36:30
questions? Seeing none, is anyone here to speak for or against the bill? Senator, would you like to close for your
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 106 36:43
bill, Mr. Chair, I'll close for the bill and a motion to pass. So we have a motion, we have a second Senator Johnson do pass. Any discussion Senator Love
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Fredrick J. Love Unverified 36:56
Thank you, Mr. Chair. In, in, and Jared, I'm going to tell you, I'm going to continue to, I'm going to continue to discuss this issue because what I don't want to see the state do is award a few contractors. And make them larger and the smaller contractors can't get to the, you know, they can't get the step up and so. So while I think I am supportive of of this method. I just, I just want us to be very careful and cognizant of the fact that, you know. Or or be When you, when you're doing this, just really be mindful that we're not giving 1 or 2 or 3 contractors. The opportunity to get these larger projects so that they can grow their capacity and there there are some contractors that could possibly do the work and we're not giving them that opportunity. I'm just, and so that's, that's really my main thing. That's why I continue to ask the same questions that I do because I want us to really be thoughtful and making sure that we're not what I consider. Uh Picking winners and losers because I mean when you get when you get a contract of $300 million I mean, that's. You know You can build your capacity rather quickly. So I just want us to be mindful that with that, Mr. Chair, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Waley. I kind of want to go
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 38:24
ride along with that. You know there's nothing we can do about the DBE that that's part of a federal deal, but I think as we've discussed in the past, the all or nothing bidding, I think we need to look at some of that. Is your main contractors are passing out. To to get their subs. Like when you look at some of our smaller businesses, and I think that would make Senator Love happy as well to get the smaller contracts in there where they can do, might be able to do one. One or two parts of the job, but they can't do the whole thing. I think we're pushing them out when we don't. I would really like to see y'all. Dive in on that because I really think that would save the state some money.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 109 39:00
So we're looking into that and we're also looking to see what's legal federally and at the state level, and we'll be back with you on that for
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 39:08
sure. Thank you, Mr. Watley. I know you will appreciate you sir. So we have a motion to pass in a second, all those in favor say aye. Same, same sign for nose, eyes have it center your bill passed. Seeing no one else here.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 146 39:33
Sandramatics or represented Maddox And I really didn't see you over
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 39:48
there, Senator Hammer. Representing Maddox, would you please introduce yourself and your free to present your bill. Yes
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Representative John Maddox Unverified 39:52
sir, John Maddox, District 86. Appreciate being down here today. Uh, don't do this very often, so thank you. Senator Justin Boyd, I'm mainly here for moral support. Please present your bill, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is actually this really is a very simple bill. So this bill rolls back the requirement for an antique car tag from 45 years to 30 years. Um, so to give some context in this, um, it had been 25 years since 1957 when the assembly passed Act 466 of 1957. So that was the law for a long time. A lot of you guys remember Representative Jack Fortner, he became very involved in this issue, um, and changed it to 25, so my bill's kind of a compromise. It, um, excuse me, he moved up to 45. My bill's kind of a compromise. It takes it back to 30. Um, so that's what it does. It does leave and effect all of the safeguards when you get the tag, you must have proof of ownership of another vehicle that's not an antique to show it's not your primary source of transportation, um. It's also supposed to show that it is essentially unaltered from its original manufacturers manufacturer specifications, and it's not your primary form of transportation. Um, so to be completely frank, members, um, I'm not an antique car enthusiast, but I have a lot of them in my district, and they were not happy with that change we made with Representative Forner and I did talk to Representative Fortner at length about this, and he is, he is OK, so I did do that. I actually, I did do that because um and he's OK with it. He's OK, but did he agree with you? Well, I mean, you know, he, he's OK with it. So his concerns were that I would roll back some of the safeguards like having to prove you have another vehicle, and that's not this. This is just the year. So he thought there was abuse that people were, that was their only vehicle and they were using it only having it as an antique tag, so that's it. That's it. And I know as
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 42:02
well as you do that representative Fortner was really passionate about that because he is an antique business, and so he was really passionate about that. Questions, Senator Johnson.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Mark Johnson Unverified 42:12
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Representative Maddox, thank you for bringing this bill because that means I don't have to. I've been looking at doing this and because of my, my love for former Representative Fortner, I just couldn't bring myself to take him on head on and of course now he's working for the governor, so you know we this might hurt you on some other things like that, but be that as it may, I think that this is a reasonable compromise. I thought 25 was maybe could you could argue that when they first passed this a 25 year old car would hardly run unless it had been restored, and now, you know, at one point. I was driving a car that was over almost 20 years old and it was running fine but uh I think this is a reasonable compromise and I appreciate you bringing it. Would you agree? Yes, sir. Thank you, Senator, I agree. Thank you very much. Thank
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 43:01
you. I was wondering what the question was in there. Any other questions? OK, we'll get, get with you at the proper time then. Anyone here to speak for or against the bill? Representative, would you like
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Representative John Maddox Unverified 43:25
to close for your bill? Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and committee members, I'm closed for my bill. Appreciate a good vote. Thank you. We have a motion
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Mark Johnson Unverified 43:36
by Senator Scott discussion like you. Mr. Chairman, in the spirit of transparency that we love in the Senate. I want to disclose that I own a 1995 vehicle. Which under this law I would be able to get a antique tag, but I do also own a 2021, which I will also be driving most of the time, so I just want to make that full disclosure before I vote. Thank, thank you for disclosing that, and I know
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 43:57
Senator Boyd will be proud to hear that. We have a motion by Senator Scott. 2nd of Senator Stone. Any more discussion, seeing none. All those in favor say aye Pole same sign. Representative, your bill passed. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank committee. Thank you. Do we have any Senator Hammer, you're back there. Thank you, Representative Please introduce yourself for the record. Staner plays for the record. Like a chairman members committee, uh, Kim Hammer state senator, District 16, and I have a sample that I'd like to ask if the staff could hand out, please. We'll get that in just a second. OK. You would introduce yourself for the record again, Jared Wiley, our director. The We're good to go, Mr. Chairman. Good to go. OK, thank you.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Kim Hammer Unverified 45:32
Actually, this deals with the mobile work zone and increasing the fines and those mobile work zones. I'm sure we're all aware, have memory that recently, unfortunately our went through the tragic experience of losing one of their workers in a mobile work zone this was kind of in the works before that. However, I think this just emphasizes the necessity of the bill and for expediency, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to do is yield to the director of our. I think he could probably get to the point quicker if that's OK. There's no doubt, yes sir, please yield.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 109 46:06
So we, you know, this, this bill seeks to provide the same protections to our maintenance workers in a work zone as it does presently for our construction workers in a static work zone, so when construction work zones fines double for moving traffic violations, but presently in a mobile work zone they do not and um oftentimes, you know, these mobile work zones yield more serious and fatal injuries than our our static construction workers. And so we're trying to do what we can to improve safety for our workers, for our contract workers, and for the traveling public. Mr. Chairman, we'll
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 159 46:46
be ready to take questions ready for questions. Senator Scott, we'll start with you. Thank you, Mr.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Jamie Scott Unverified 46:51
Chairman. I'm very supportive of this bill. I do want to know, do you know off the top of your head, what our fatalities are compared to other states because I've been concerned about that for a while, um, the number of staff that we lose. I don't have that comparison
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 175 47:07
with me, but I know that in Arkansas in the last 20 years we've
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 109 47:12
lost 23 workers in our work zones, and That's just, you know, entirely too many, and you know we've lost 8 of those being and our workers in 15 contract workers, but since October we've had 3 catastrophic incidents on our highways that involved our workers, uh, two fatalities and one that's still seriously injured and in the hospital. And so, you know, we, our people deserve, we believe to go home every night to their families, and we're just trying to make sure we do all we
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Fredrick J. Love Unverified 47:48
can to see that happen. Central of. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and and And, you know, we, we, we've talked a lot about this, um, I actually have a classmate who lost her son a couple of years ago or so, um, and so just for clarification, when we're talking about the mobile work zones, we're talking about the trucks that kind of move out either cleaning up debris or I mean, yeah,
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 48:16
if you would go in and explain my kind of go into detail whether it's gonna be someone mowing the ditches or whatever it
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 109 48:23
is, so we are that we have about 2000, a little over 2000 maintenance workers that are out there on the roads each day, so they're out there patching potholes, paving, removing debris from the roadway, those kinds of operations when they're in the road, we would seek to protect them, and we would, according to the bill, there will be a sign. posted on the on the shadow vehicle that says mobile work zones, fines double, so if if a worker is in the road. Working on the road, the signs posted, then fines will double in that situation. So again, the majority of our workforce is out there doing that on a day to day basis, trying to keep things safe for the traveling public. Now this only posted on the vehicle or is it going to
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 49:04
be signed before you get to where they are or what? Great
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 109 49:10
question, Senator. So, so by the nature of this work, it would generally be on the vehicle itself, but this sign Mr. Vines is telling me that this time will be about the size of the truck's tailgate, so it's going to be big, they'll be flashing green lights, so there won't be a chance that somebody doesn't see that sign as they approach it, OK? On the interstates we have bigger operations with, you know, with the crash attenuators, flashing arrows, those are also mobile work zones, but again, When we're out there on these two-lane roads, visibility sometimes is a challenge, and that's where our latest fatality came in. A gentleman was patching a pothole, elderly driver just ran into the back of the back of our truck cost him his life. Yes sir, wasn't it? Wasn't that in Long County? Yes sir, it's down south of. Yes, sir.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 49:56
And correct me if I'm wrong, but this would be on what's referred to as the shadow
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Kim Hammer Unverified 50:02
truck that's the very back truck that people would see first before they got to the vehicles in front, is that correct? Exactly, yes, sir.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 109 50:11
And to put out static signs, you know, these guys may go and and patch a pothole they may pick up and go a half mile down the road, 1 mile down the road. It's just not, uh, efficient for them to put out a sign and go back and move that sign. We would just be chasing signs, so we want to be able to put this on the back of the truck. Because I wanna make sure I'm following this in.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 50:27
So it's going to be a Another vehicle behind the work vehicle. Yes, sir. So it's gonna be 2 vehicles there, one of them will be flashing before you ever get to the workers. So you would actually have to hit.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 109 50:43
The back vehicle first, you know, or, or you, well, or you go around that vehicle and contact our worker. Now there are a few applications where we only have one vehicle, so we're putting traffic counts out or surveying in a row. We may only have one vehicle, but this sign will be on that vehicle and they'll be away from the truck doing their work. So yeah,
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Fredrick J. Love Unverified 51:04
that's what I kind of want to flesh out because I, I've seen it both ways. I've seen it where there's a like a pickup truck. That's kind of telling. And then I've also seen like one of the bigger trucks with the flashing arrow saying move over. So we're talking about in both instances, though these signs will be on the, on the trucks. Absolutely, yes, sir. OK.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 116 51:28
All right, Mr. Chairman, just because
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Kim Hammer Unverified 51:32
I'd like him to clarify publicly if it's a mowing operation that doesn't qualify under this. It doesn't, you know, the
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 175 51:40
mowing generally takes place off of the pavement, um, although one of
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 109 51:45
those three incidents I mentioned to you was a mower that was struck as he, you know, got on the highway to go around an obstacle, somebody's bed and passed another vehicle where they weren't supposed to, and they hit him and he's the one that's now in the hospital still, but no, that would not be protected under this. We're taking this, you know, this incremental step to try to improve safety. Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, Mr.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Mark Johnson Unverified 52:16
Wiley, you may recall, uh, uh, Representative McAlinden and I sponsored Senate Bill 78, which is now Act 117 about adding to the uh uh the driver's license examination and manual uh to, to basically train our young people to be to understand that there are special safety needs in in construction work zones, uh. Would that act as it's already in the law. Would it Include the mobile work zone as part of a, I'm gonna call it curriculum, there might be a better word, but I'm confident that Colonel Hager would work with our to to make sure that language covers everything without us having to pass something else, but would you either see that it could be or am I hope, am I being too hopeful to think that we don't have to amend that law? No, my, my assumption is they will work
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 109 53:11
with us on that. They've been a great partner to us, and I don't see any issues if we run. run into anything though I'll
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 19 53:19
certainly let you know. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Any other
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 53:23
questions? See noncentral like close for your bill. I'd like to close my bill. I think
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Kim Hammer Unverified 53:30
this would be great for the families and for the workers and just for the morale of our dot, but above all we want to we want to keep them safe out there, and I'd appreciate a good vote, members of the committee. I jumped ahead of myself. I was supposed to ask first. Is anyone here to speak for or against the bill.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 53:51
Seeing no center is closed, the wheel. Motion do pass by Senator Scott, seconded by Senator Love. Any discussion Yes sir. Um, first of all, I just want
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Fredrick J. Love Unverified 54:02
to say, you know, thank you. Um Um, I just want to say thank you. Um, I know that I've had this discussion with you several times and uh I know that um Miss Miss Pope. She, she calls me, she reminds me. And uh I just appreciate you taking an additional step to make sure that our workers are, are safe. I mean, I know there's a high priority to you and you and your administration, but I just want to say publicly thank you for for what you're doing. Thank you, Senator Hammer for bringing this bill. OK, we have
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 54:46
a motion. In a second to do pass all those in favor say aye. pose the same sign. Si your bill passed. Thank you Mister Chairman members committee. Thank you, Mr. Wiley, and we'll do all we can to keep your workers safe. And Senator Wallace and Representative McIlroy.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Dave Wallace Unverified 55:37
If you would please introduce yourself for the record. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Sir, State Senator Dave Wallace, District 19. Representative Mark McIlroy District 62. Thank you, Representative. It's good to
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 55:48
see you here today again. Good to have you back and to see that you finally finished your bill up correctly. I apologize. I
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Dave Wallace Unverified 55:54
was down running two other bills and uh another committee. OK, well, we, we have
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 56:00
actually already heard the build as a committee member of the bill that we heard. Represented McIlroy presented everything about what 2 weeks ago? Yes, sir, and he's got an amendment and the amendment is to add Senator Wallace to the bills. We need to adopt the amendment first. Motion to adopt Senator Johnson. We have a second? We had a 2nd for myself. Uh, to add Senator Wallace to the bill 1536. Any discussion on that? We have a motion to For that in a second, all those in favor say
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 192 56:53
aye, I. Same time. Pole same time. Presentative You can present your bill again. The bill just adds some
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Representative Mark D. McElroy Unverified 56:59
teeth to a school bus bill. I don't know if y'all recall last time, but it's a local control school bus bill that lets seatbelts be placed on school bus if 10% of the people, the registered voters in that district signed a petition asking That be placed on the next ballot, uh, the That people can uh actually, uh, about whether they want seat belts on the bus and the the added cost of the seatbelts would be placed on the ballot at the same time, and that then they would could vote on it and decide whether they wanted seat belts and if they wanted to pay for it, and all I ask is all this bill does is put some teeth in the bill. that says if you don't place it on the ballot or you don't want to put the seat belts on, uh, the next bus that you get, then you'll hold your transportation, withhold your transportation money until one or the other or met one of the other conditions are met. Thank you.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Mark Johnson Unverified 58:27
Any questions? Secretary Johnson Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, I, I, I've always liked your bill, Representative McIlroy, the only question I have is that. The I'll call it a referendum if it's there's a petition, then they were there, it's an initiative and then there's a referendous election that would happen at the school election, correct? Yes sir, it would be. To add not just to we The people want seat belts on buses, but it would also add a specific dedicated village that would pay for that.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Representative Mark D. McElroy Unverified 59:00
Is that the added cost of the seat belts back in 2017 when I passed the bill was about 12,000. Today it's about 20,000 and what the superintendent and the school board can decide is how much milage increase it would take to cover that extra $20,000. Uh, to pay for the added costs of the seat belts. So both of them, the question whether you want a seat belts on a school bus, and the cost to cover that because there's no free lunch and the people would have to decide whether they wanted to go ahead and add the extra mileage on for the seatbelts and the seatbelts on the school bus at the same time, or they could the regional. said They could forego that election if they decided rather than to waste that millage vote on $20,000. A lot of the superintendents would rather go than, OK, I want to save that village for a bigger increase like a cafeteria or a football field or uh you know, the library, something like that. And what happened in my case, I carried the, I carried the uh the petition myself in a local school board, and I gathered 300 signatures. I brought it to the school, the superintendent and the superintendent decided to take the ladder where he would just forego the election and he would purchase seatbelts on as they purchased new buses, they would go ahead and just buy one equipped with a seatbelts already on it. And, uh, the average age was diesel school buses 12 to 20 years. Well, I waited patiently for from 2018 to 2024. And they purchased a bus without the seatbelts on it and I asked my local, uh, My local school board member, I said, Hey, I've got concerns about this because the agreement was that you're going to buy, purchase seatbelts on the next school bus. But uh and that was back in November and I hadn't heard anything either way, but you know we complied with the law. It's not just about the safety of the children, but it's about uh them kind of thumbing their, their nose at the legislature and you know, there were 300 people that asked that they wanted to vote on it, at least they can vote it up or down, but anyway, this law just simply Say if they don't do either one, we withhold their transportation money until they do one or the other. Then
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Mark Johnson Unverified 1:02:00
follow up Mr. Chairman. OK, this, and I agree with you, it looks like you're thumbing your nose at the legislature, but also uh it appears that Uh They, they broke their word, you got the petitions and they agreed to do this, and then they didn't do was this unilaterally by the superintendent? I
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Representative Mark D. McElroy Unverified 1:02:24
don't know if it was intentional or, you know, if it was a there's been a change in the superintendent since then, you know, and I don't know, but I'm sure that they knew about, you know, because when you talk about seatbelts in school buses, it's pretty controversial and you know, I know they that At the time they knew that I had brought forth a petition. But uh you know, so far they haven't even contacted me yet, and it's, it just happened to be in the, the air conditioners, they got buses, a new bus with air conditioning, power steering, automatic transmission, the air conditioning was a lot more than a seatbelts or it would cost on the bus, but it just happened to be my faith in my grandson rides that very school bus, and that's the only reason I. they didn't have a seat belts on it.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Mark Johnson Unverified 1:03:23
OK. Thank you, Representative Mc. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 1:03:26
Any other questions? Saying none. Have anyone here to speak for or against the bill. Saying no one Center, you're free to close you're closed. Do we have a motion or what's the will of the committee, have a motion do pass. As amended.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Fredrick J. Love Unverified 1:03:53
We have the 2nd Centrico. In discussion Central. Uh, thank you and um Representative McIlroy, thank you for For bringing this bill, the only concern I have and, you know, and I should I guess ask you this question only the concern that I do have is actually forfeiting their entire amount of transportation. Um, and I was, uh, I've been on. On it for a long time. I don't even know if we have a penalty like this where a school district or a county or a town will forfeit. They they entire. Transportation budget. And so, I mean, you know, I understand why you, you're putting it in there so that they will take action, uh, but I just, I feel like the penalty is, is too steep. Uh, for, for a For a school district and and that that's my only concern. The rest of the bill is fine with me. But enacting a penalty that is just to me I feel is so extreme, uh, is, is where I'm like, I don't know if, if we should have them forfeit their. I mean, because you might get to a spot where it might not even be practical that they can hold that election before the transportation funding is, you know, can get back around to them, so that's the only thing I mean if we had a penalty of 25% or whatever, I mean, I think you could get somebody's attention by saying, hey, let me withhold 25% of their or let me call 50%, but to say that they forfeit their entire. Well, they won't forfeit it
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Representative Mark D. McElroy Unverified 1:05:48
just withhold it until they till they do one or the other.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 1:05:56
OK, representative, this is more discussion than it is question answer now. We've already, we've already passed this question and answer.
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Mark Johnson Unverified 1:06:08
OK, thank you. I appreciate my friend Senator Love bringing that up, and I would have had that same concern if it were a kind of an all or nothing thing and I'm, I'm confident it's, it's Representative McIlroy has alluded to that it's, it's until you come into compliance and Senator Love, we've served on audit together. You and I have sat there when local officials came in and tried to find a nice word that when they were naughty. How about that? They were naughty. They didn't do what they were supposed to do following the counting laws and everything and we had sanctions on them and we've had, we had some pretty strong sanctions on some of them, uh, uh, all port comes to mind. Uh, Mr. Chairman, but the point is that all they have to do to restore their funding is to follow the existing law which requires them to do one of two things if they get that petition. Put it on the ballot, let the voters decide at the next election. Or just go ahead and put the seatbelts in. on their own without having to have that measure on the ballot, and so I, if it were, as you say as, as kind of rock solid punitive as you feared, and I, but I, I couldn't support this either, but the fact that it's, it's simply a you must comply or we're going to hold it up until you do. It's not that it goes away. It's just upheld for a time until we get compliance. I wish we had simpler solutions in some of our other audit findings that you and I've had to deal with in committee. This one seems to be about as simple incentive and disincentive to make people follow the law without, you know, being a, I mean, I don't believe in everlasting punishment if they didn't do it. They just simply can come forth and then uh Do what they're supposed to do under the law. 10%'s a pretty high threshold to get people to sign a petition to ask their school board to do that and of course that's a, that's a First Amendment right to petition the government for redress of grievances, and if the government, you know, You know, they, they and we as legislators should uh consider that, you know, very carefully before we would fail to comply, so again, I support the bill. I think it's a good bill and I appreciate kind of an innovative solution that Repre representative McIlroy is come forward and I would encourage my colleagues to vote aye on the bill. Thank
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Speaker 203 1:08:36
you. Thank you. Any other discussion? Say no, what's
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error
Senator Ricky Hill Unverified 1:08:45
the will of the committee, we got a motion to pass. As amended and a 2nd, all those in favor say aye pose the same time. Representative, you didn't get 5 votes Bill failed. Thank you for. We are adjourned. Alex you can bring it back. all expensive. I Yeah Mo
▶ Play Suggest a correction Report an error

Agenda

CALL TO ORDER - Senator Ricky Hill

0:13
▶ Play chapter

SB261 A. Clark TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE OPERATION OF AN ALL-TERRAIN VEHICLE ON CERTAIN ROADS; AND TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE ACCESS OF ALL-TERRAIN VEHICLES TO UNPAVED ROADS.

0:21
▶ Play chapter

HB1536 M. McElroy TO WITHHOLD STATE TRANSPORTATION FUNDING FROM A SCHOOL DISTRICT THAT DOES NOT REQUIRE PASSENGER RESTRAINT SYSTEMS IN SCHOOL BUSES UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS.

56:16
▶ Play chapter

SB372 A. Clark TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE SIGNAL LEGEND OF TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES; AND TO ALLOW A VEHICLE DRIVER TO ENTER AN INTERSECTION WHILE A RED LIGHT IS INDICATED ON A TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICE IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES.

3:56
▶ Play chapter

HB1502 Maddox TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE REGISTRATION AND LICENSING OF A HISTORIC OR SPECIAL INTEREST VEHICLE; AND TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ANTIQUE MOTOR VEHICLE SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES.

39:41
▶ Play chapter

HB1596 Steimel TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING MOVING TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS IN A HIGHWAY WORK ZONE; TO CREATE MOBILE WORK ZONES; AND ASSESS A FINE FOR A MOVING TRAFFIC VIOLATION IN A MOBILE WORK ZONE.

44:49
▶ Play chapter

HB1605 Wing TO AMEND THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER-GENERAL CONTRACTOR METHOD OF PROCUREMENT PILOT PROGRAM TO TO MAKE THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER-GENERAL CONTRACTOR METHOD OF PROCUREMENT PROGRAM PERMANENT FOR THE STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION.

21:08
▶ Play chapter

ADJOURNMENT

1:09:20
▶ Play chapter

Speakers

Senator Ricky Hill Unverified
61 segments
Senator Alan Clark Unverified
32 segments
Senator Mark Johnson Unverified
42 segments
Speaker 24
1 segment
Speaker 34
1 segment
Senator Joshua Bryant Unverified
17 segments
Speaker 47
1 segment
Senator Fredrick J. Love Unverified
54 segments
Speaker 66
1 segment
Senator Matt Stone Unverified
4 segments
Speaker 69
1 segment
Speaker 75
1 segment
Speaker 109
30 segments
Speaker 112
1 segment
Speaker 116
3 segments
Speaker 108
2 segments
Speaker 106
1 segment
Speaker 146
1 segment
Representative John Maddox Unverified
9 segments
Senator Kim Hammer Unverified
4 segments
Speaker 159
1 segment
Senator Jamie Scott Unverified
1 segment
Speaker 175
2 segments
Speaker 19
1 segment
Senator Dave Wallace Unverified
2 segments
Speaker 192
1 segment
Representative Mark D. McElroy Unverified
15 segments
Speaker 203
1 segment