City, County & Local Affairs Committee- House
Video
Transcript
1 document
Bills discussed (19)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
HB1462
· 4 mentions in agenda, transcript, chapter
Matched: “…AND TO REQUIRE NOTICE AND COMPENSATION TO PROPERTY OWNERS. HB1462 Painter TO AUTHORIZE AN OWNER OF A PUBLIC WATERWORKS SYSTEM…”
|
TO AUTHORIZE AN OWNER OF A PUBLIC WATERWORKS SYSTEM TO EXPEND PUBLIC FUNDS AND TO … | Painter | WITHDRAWN BY AUTHOR |
|
SB181
Act 242
· 4 mentions in chapter, agenda, transcript
Matched: “D. Sullivan SB181 TO AMEND THE LIBRARY LAW; TO AMEND THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE…”
|
TO AMEND THE LIBRARY LAW; TO AMEND THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE STATE LIBRARIAN; AND TO … | D. Sullivan | Notification that SB181 is now Act 242 |
|
HB1436
· 3 mentions in agenda, transcript, chapter
Matched: “…WATER AUTHORITY ACT. REGULAR AGENDA Number Sponsor Subtitle HB1436 Steele TO PLACE LOCATION RESTRICTIONS ON CERTAIN FOOD PROCE…”
|
TO PLACE LOCATION RESTRICTIONS ON CERTAIN FOOD PROCESSING PLANTS OPERATING A SLAUGHTERHOUSE ON THE SAME … | Steele | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1564
· 3 mentions in transcript, chapter, agenda
Matched: “…h, I think there's some people that walked in late, uh, for House Bill 1564 and 1567, and those will not be running today, just to clar…”
|
TO MODIFY MOTOR VEHICLE RACING FACILITY PERMITS AND TO SET CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS ON A MOTOR … | Long | WITHDRAWN BY AUTHOR |
|
HB1212
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…PROPERTY TAXES IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ISSUANCE OF A TITLE. HB1212 Steimel TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING CIVIL OFFICE HOLDINGS;…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING CIVIL OFFICE HOLDINGS; AND TO ALLOW A JUSTICE OF THE … | Steimel | WITHDRAWN BY AUTHOR |
|
HB1272
Act 520
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…SERVICING UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF THE COUNTY TO LEVY DUES. HB1272 Warren TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PROPERTY VACATED BY A CO…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PROPERTY VACATED BY A MUNICIPALITY; AND TO REQUIRE VESTED ABANDONED … | Warren | Notification that HB1272 is now Act 520 |
|
HB1414
Act 417
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “Andrews HB1414 TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING CLAIMS FOR FIRE SERVICES; AND T…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING CLAIMS FOR FIRE SERVICES; AND TO UPDATE THE SCHEDULE OF … | Andrews | Notification that HB1414 is now Act 417 |
|
HB1503
Act 313
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…MENT OF LEAD AND CERTAIN GALVANIZED CUSTOMER SERVICE LINES. 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 |
|
HB1522
Act 620
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “Womack HB1522 TO AMEND THE LAW TO ALLOW FOR THE DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS IN…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW TO ALLOW FOR THE DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS IN THE MUNICIPAL AID … | Womack | Notification that HB1522 is now Act 620 |
|
HB1555
Act 995
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “Painter HB1555 TO ESTABLISH UNIFORM PROCEDURES FOR FILLING A VACANCY IN A…”
|
TO ESTABLISH UNIFORM PROCEDURES FOR FILLING A VACANCY IN A MUNICIPAL OFFICE. | Painter | Notification that HB1555 is now Act 995 |
|
HB1565
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “AGENDA (Revised 02/25/25 @ 8:02 AM) Added HB1564, HB1565, and HB1567 House Committee on City, County, and Local Affa…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE DUTIES OF A COUNTY PROPERTY ASSESSOR; AND TO PERMIT … | R. Burkes | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1567
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…ENDA (Revised 02/25/25 @ 8:02 AM) Added HB1564, HB1565, and HB1567 House Committee on City, County, and Local Affairs Wednesda…”
|
TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF "MOTOR VEHICLE RACING FACILITY" RELATING TO MOTOR VEHICLE RACING FACILITY … | McClure | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1130
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…TION ORDINANCE IS NOT ADOPTED; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY. HB1130 Pilkington TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PERMITTING FOR RESID…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PERMITTING FOR RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION; TO AMEND THE FAST-TRACK PERMITS ACT; … | Pilkington | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1274
Act 521
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…ANDONED PROPERTY BE CONVEYED WITH THE ABUTTING REAL ESTATE. HB1274 Warren TO ALLOW A TITLE INSURANCE AGENT, TITLE INSURER, OR…”
|
TO ALLOW A TITLE INSURANCE AGENT, TITLE INSURER, OR TITLE COMPANY TO PAY REAL PROPERTY … | Warren | Notification that HB1274 is now Act 521 |
|
HB1331
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…N CERTAIN LOCATIONS. DEFERRED BILLS Number Sponsor Subtitle HB1331 Barnes TO REQUIRE A COUNTY TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE UNDER THE…”
|
TO REQUIRE A COUNTY TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE UNDER THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE FOR THE … | Barnes | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1387
Act 239
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…Painter CONCUR IN SENATE AMENDMENT Number Sponsor Subtitle HB1387 C. Cooper TO REQUIRE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF A…”
|
TO REQUIRE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF A PUBLIC WATER AUTHORITY TO PUBLISH … | C. Cooper | Notification that HB1387 is now Act 239 |
|
HB1416
Act 673
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…HEDULE OF EQUIPMENT RATES USED IN CLAIMS FOR FIRE SERVICES. HB1416 L. Johnson TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING MUNICIPAL FIRE DEPAR…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING FIRE DEPARTMENTS; AND TO ALLOW A VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT SERVICING … | L. Johnson | Notification that HB1416 is now Act 673 |
|
HB1448
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…TERHOUSE ON THE SAME GROUNDS AS THE FOOD PROCESSING PLANTS. HB1448 Puryear TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING MUNICIPAL PLANNING AREA…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING MUNICIPAL PLANNING AREAS; AND TO REQUIRE NOTICE AND COMPENSATION TO … | Puryear | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1510
Act 314
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…RESTRICTIONS ON THE REGULATION OF ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS. 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 |
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
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
0:09
Cher sees a quorum call the meeting to order. Yeah Members and What little audience we have um view housekeeping things here. We will not be hearing House Bill 1436. I'm just saying today this this doesn't mean we're not hearing them ever, but today we're not hearing 1436. 1448. 1503.
1564, 1565 or 1567. So anything else may or may not be heard today, but those, those we're for sure not hearing today. So with that representative Painter, you are first on the list. House Bill 1462. members you have a fiscal impact attached to this bill. Hey, Mr. Chair, Stetson Painter, representative
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
1:16
District 3, Baxter and Fulton Counties. If it's OK with the chair, I'd like to have John Wilkerson from the
municipal League to join me. That's fine. You do have an amendment, um, uh, after talking to some members, we want to clarify the language. So this is all the amendment does. It's clarifying Uh, that, uh,
lead pipes that it connects the water meter, water main, and other things to individual customers. Let's take a minute, get
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
1:45
that, let that get passed out and give
Our membership, if you all had a chance to look at that, your representative Painter, you want to take just a second to
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
2:27
explain your amendment. Sure, we're doing in this amendment after uh uh talking to some members which just clarifying to lead
pipes from meter to house and we did not have that meter to house language in the bill. Um, it was, you know, intent was there, but we didn't have
that. So to help some members, uh, we went ahead and put that in there. Be glad to take any questions. Any questions from the committee? Seeing none.
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
2:53
Anyone to speak for or against this amendment, seeing none, what's the will of the committee got a motion to adopt the amendment. All in favor say aye. All opposed. Congratulations, you've adopted your amendment. You may
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
3:07
now present your bill as amended. Thank you, committee, uh, HB 1462, um, comes off kind of an EPA mandate, uh, in October 2024 EPA mandated that all uh rural utilities and so forth must get rid of uh lead pipes by October
30th, 2037. So what this bill does and, and water utilities and cities that have water are doing that, but they come to find out, especially in rural Arkansas, that there are still lead pipes. From the meter to the house, which we all know the uh the horrible effects of lead. So all this bill is doing is giving those water you uh utilities and a uh city authorities to issue bonds if they want to and if they pass, they have the option
to do that from meter to house. That is all they are doing. If that bond, if they put it out to the people and it fails when of course the bond doesn't work. All
Chair
Unverified
4:08
that's all it's doing. Be glad to take any questions. Any
Speaker 20
4:12
questions? Yes. Uh, Representative Scott Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
4:14
Uh, so just to be clear, normally under. circumstances as I understand it, meter to house is generally the responsibility of the homeowner, um, so we're using public funds.
Scott Richardson
Unverified
4:27
To replace what generally would be expected to be a homeowner's responsibility, correct? Correct. What we're coming
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
4:31
to find out is a lot of folks. Right now, especially in the economy that we've had, cannot afford to have that sin that pipe dug out, replaced, whatever. So all this is doing just providing the uh the option. The private owner can still say, I don't want, I don't want to be a part of that. I don't want to do that. But it's just giving the option there. follow up. Yeah, you don't just continue
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
4:59
on. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, so, uh, I'm sorry, once again, I come out of judiciary, so, uh, the, uh, so, so under this circumstance. The homeowner still has the ability to say, no, I don't want my lead pipe replaced. Correct. Or yes, I do, and you're gonna fund it because you're the city. Or the municipality you want if I may, uh, so the issue is that the,
Speaker 31
5:25
it's the EPA mandate. The EPA mandate comes down and
Chair
Unverified
5:30
says that we have to replace all all lead lines, and it talks about that if the customer, there's a whole, it gets real as she imagines the federal government, it's a lot complicated. We're trying to figure it out or we're trying to figure it out, but basically what it says is that if the customer asks to do it or gives or you notify them, they say, yes, please replace. The city is now responsible or the water utility is not responsible for a place. That line. I think there's a good faith argument, um, obviously we can't spend public money for non-public purposes. I think there is a good faith argument to say that trying to,
you know, eliminate lead in the water system is a public purpose, but to be crystal clear and to make sure that we can both comply with the EPA mandate and issue bonds to, to pay for this and spend public funds to pay for this, especially the mandate the federal government saying that we have to do. This clarifies that we can use public money and bonding authority to fix the, fix the lead line. lines, even on the customer side, but you're, you're right. Usually, and most often, the customer side is the customer's responsibility, but because the EPA mandate came down, it's
changed, it changed the game for us. And so we're now, we're, we are now responsible for replacing those lead lines. Does this
Scott Richardson
Unverified
6:38
establish precedent for ownership of that line going forward? No, we're very clear in the bill that, that anything going forward
Speaker 35
6:45
is not on, on, on the city or on the utility that we, we fix it, um, but it's
Chair
Unverified
6:50
still, it is not transfer ownership over to the city or to the, the water utility, I should say. We're very clear. We're trying to, we, we had that same concern early on, we made that change. OK.
Speaker 37
7:01
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Representative Andrews, you were recognized. Thank
Representative Wade Andrews
Unverified
7:07
Mr. is there a limitation on like how far you'll go because say you got a house that's a half mile or mile, you know, off the beaten path, off the road you can is the city gonna or the county gonna spend money to put a mile of pipe in.
Speaker 42
7:22
Unfortunately, I think because the EPA mandate, that's where we're sitting. That's the struggle we're having with this. So, you
Representative Wade Andrews
Unverified
7:28
know, we don't have the communist in charge anymore. We have much friendlier
administration. Do you think the EPA can change his mind. That's
Speaker 35
7:35
a I don't know. I, with the new administration, you know, obviously lots, lot's been, um, changed. This
Chair
Unverified
7:40
is not, from what I've heard so far, I've not heard this Ben has been talked about, but it's, it's very, it's possible, obviously. I mean, anything's possible now, and I don't know what the current administration. would do with this. And, and maybe they're, they're thinking about it and they just haven't talked about it. Maybe it's, you know, on the totem pole and they're gonna get to it later on. I know they just got started, so it's right, exactly
right every day right, so, so we're just getting prepared that if the EPA rule stands, the mandate stands, we're in a, we, we have the ability to, to, to do what we're required to do. And so that's how we're really, really doing
Representative Wade Andrews
Unverified
8:15
this mandate require from the meter to the house like on on on private land if, if the customer
Chair
Unverified
8:21
asked for or really, again, it's convoluted. The mandate is, and it's very long, but it's, it goes back and forth about is notice enough? Do they have to get formal permission or they do they just have to say no and where does it
really line up? But they can say no. And so, but it's we're being extra cautious. And just to be clear, this bill does not require c, sorry, water utilities to do anything. It just saying if you have to comply with the mandate, then you are set up to, to use public funds to do it and to issue bonds to do it.
Representative Wade Andrews
Unverified
8:56
Is, is there any possible constitutional challenges to this. Uh, I, not
Chair
Unverified
9:01
with, not if it's established that by the
legislature, we don't think so, no. And, and then we've talked to bond lawyers. about this too, um, so we, we think this is the safest way to make it. Make this the funding available. Got you. Thank you. Representative Carolyn Brown, you
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
9:22
recognize? Thank you, Mister Chair. um, I have two questions. Um, so this, these bonds could pay for from the meter to the house. What if there's lead pipes in the house. I mean, do those still exist? I mean.
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
9:36
Yeah, I don't think it does anything inside the house. It, it doesn't do anything inside the house. This is specifically this language says meter to house. That would be on the homeowner, but This
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
9:52
is just saying meter the house. OK, and then, um, what is the alternative to using public funds and bonds to doing this, would that be then on
Chair
Unverified
10:00
the homeowner? That's a really good question. I, I, I don't know, because the EPA is going to mandate it or they've mandated it so far. I think that's the problem we're
in. We don't know what to do if this isn't available to us. And that's where we're kind of stuck. But I, I would suppose that it's, well, I, yeah, I don't know. I don't know
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
10:22
what we do. Thank you. Representative Hall, you recognized. Thank you. Uh, quick question, how do you know even if you have lead pipes
going from to your house from the meter. I mean, it's underground. How does, how does somebody know that information? So
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
10:36
a lot of, some of the water utilities in cities
have, have, have done some studies and stuff like that to making sure that they have, if they have or have not, and so that would be up to the individual cities or water authorities that would determine that. John, do
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
10:53
you have anything? Representative Pilkington. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, sorry, I came in late, so you may
have already covered this, but just trying to get you up to speed. How much lead piping do we have in the state of Arkansas that's going to need to be
Speaker 23
11:07
replaced. I'm not sure we know at this point.
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
11:11
Um, I don't know. Sorry, I didn't mean to cut you off. I don't know. We could probably look at and ask, that would be up to, I'm, I'm sure the individual water
Speaker 77
11:21
authorities or the cities would have that. OK, that, that's fine. Or they will
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
11:24
soon because of this mandate Gotcha. OK. And then the other question I have is, and, and I think we had discussed this or not, but I can't remember in some private conversations, but if they default on the loans, can you kind of walk me through that process if there's a water association that defaults on this. How is that How, how does that get rectified
Speaker 63
11:41
if there's a situation like that, like any other default in a bind, um, which is my short answer saying I don't know exactly what it, what it
Chair
Unverified
11:48
would do because I'm not a bond lawyer, but I do know it would be the same as defaulting on any other bond. And of course, that would affect the credit rating and that would, um, it caused a lot of downstream problems, pardon the pun, uh, for
sure. But this, this would be treated, this would not be treated like, unlike any other, would not be treated differently than any other bond default. Got you. So my understanding would be. If
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
12:04
they, if they were to default, it would just basically go back on to the people who are
Chair
Unverified
12:12
part of the, the water association to basically I would assume that's one of the options for sure.
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
12:25
OK, seeing no further questions from committee members. Is there any, if I'm, I'm sorry, I was just
Chair
Unverified
12:30
getting, I'm we're looking at my text, make sure I'm not missing something. Somebody mentioned to me that the first EPA mandate was to do a survey on lead pipes. So that's going to be coming as well. So we'll, we will know. OK
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
12:46
OK, seeing no further questions from committee members, uh, oh, I'm sorry, we just had some pop up, uh, Representative Richardson, you're
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
12:55
recognized. Thank you, uh, Mr. Chair, so to be clear, the mandate is on. whom Water, water providers. So it's on the water providers to replace. The lead pipes that are on private property. It is to replace lead pipes,
Chair
Unverified
13:11
and then when you get down into the verbiage of it, it, it then it
sort of, it's, it is on them if the customer, I think, I think the actual language is more or less if the customer doesn't object. And so that, that became the issue. So you have to notice them, my understanding of it, again, it's convoluted, but essentially if the customer says no, you don't have a responsibility to do it. And there, there's a question about whether or not there has to be an affirmative yes, depending on how you read the language. But the, the requirement, and this is a, this is a genuine debate that we've had internally about what the mandate actually says about the private side. We know that it says that you have to replace it. Under what
triggering effect there actually is, it's, I think he, I, I agree with him on this, but it's been a matter of interpretation. But long story short, if the customer says no, we don't have the requirement. If the customer
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
14:02
says yes, we do have the requirement. And then you, I think you mentioned this already, when is that requirement to be fulfilled. It's
Representative Richard Womack
Unverified
14:14
you. Representative Womback, you're recognized. Do we, uh, well, I'd
like to make a comment first from somebody that's
literally remodeled probably over 100 houses. They're most likely is lead pipe in the house. If, if it was fed with, it's not guaranteed, but. Very high percentage likelihood, uh, so that doesn't make any sense. I know it's not your mandate, but, uh. what happens if we just don't comply? I mean, if, if the water system's just. ignore it. Do, do we know? Uh, I don't, I don't, I don't know, and I'm
Speaker 63
14:45
not sure I want to find out, honestly. I don't
know. I don't know what happens. I guess. I'm hoping somebody is gonna text me to tell me what happens, but I don't know.
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
15:00
OK. Thank you. Representative Carolyn Brown, you recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair again. um, so. If you have a community and some people say that they want their lines replaced. And some people don't. Are all the people gonna be paying for the bonds or just the ones that get their lines replaced. Or is the whole commun I mean,
Speaker 63
15:21
who else is paying for this? I mean, it's going to be a revenue bond or or a voter voter approved bonds, so yeah, it's, it's gonna be everybody's gonna
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
15:28
pay for it whether everybody benefits. Thank you. I will say the benefit
Speaker 63
15:34
is complying with a mandate. I think the way I would look at it, that that's what we're trying to do, um, so that's, that's the best I can say, but again, it's not our mandate, so we're trying the best we can. OK, any further questions? Yes, Representative Hall, you're recognized.
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
15:53
So rural water projects that, that covers that also, not just the cities. Is that correct? Yeah, because, as
I understand, all, all water utilities. OK, well, our, our rural water system, like they're, it's hard enough for them to find workers right now as it is. I don't, and to cover the leaks that they have. Or is this money able to be put out for contract bids, I guess, or does it have to be done by the I would, well,
Speaker 63
16:14
I, I would assume it'd be able to be done by contract. I don't, I don't know of any limitation that requires the water utility to do the work. OK.
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
16:27
I turn my mic off. Any further questions from committee members? Seeing none we have nobody signed up to speak for or against this bill. Anyone in the audience here to speak for or against this bill. Seeing none. Um Representative Painter, you want to close for
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
16:43
your bill? Yes, Mr. Chair, I, I appreciate the committee and your questions. Again, just trying to comply. I don't like the mandate, but just trying to comply and also provided uh these water utilities in cities an option if they still if they want to do that or not. At the end of the day, the private citizen still
gets to have the say so whether they wanted to be in
compliance or not. And so I would just appreciate a good vote and as a privilege of being a member of this committee, I would make
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
17:09
a motion to pass. As amended. I have a motion to pass as amended. Uh, is there any discussion on that motion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. all opposed. So the noes have it. Sorry. Um Maybe we're gonna take some of
these a little bit out of order, uh, representative. Dan Sullivan, or, um, Senator Sullivan and Representative Burks, y'all are up next, Senate Bill 181, and I want to go ahead and say again that these, uh, I think there's some people that walked in late, uh, for House Bill 1564 and 1567, and those will not be running today, just to clarify that and let y'all know. So. introduce yourself and you may begin a presentation of Senate Bill 181.
Senator Dan Sullivan
Unverified
18:05
House District 11. Senator Dan Sullivan Jonesboro
Speaker 115
18:09
District 20. Thank you, colleagues, uh, just to introduce really quickly SB 181. This amends requirements to hold a position of state librarian or a director of a regional library system simply, it says that if the library board or the body overseeing the state library or the board of trustees of a regional library system approves the candidate
would not be required to have a graduate degree from an accredited American Library Association program. Currently the Arkansas Department of Education offers similar waivers to teachers and others who do not have required degrees, but have requisite combination of experience and education. Many of our rural library systems struggle to find people who qualify under the current law and um another thing to consider is that if you go to the American Library Association's website and you
search the database of a accredited programs, Arkansas is not even on that list, so. according to their website, we don't even have a school in our state that produces somebody who meets this qualification. They do have some divisions that approve school librarian, uh, programs that we have in Arkansas, but it's a, it's a conflict in our, in our law actually is the way it reads, um, so if you have any questions, I'm happy to try to answer those. Questions from committee
Chair
Unverified
19:33
members, Representative McCulloch, you're recognized for a question. Thank you, Mr.
Representative Tippi McCullough
Unverified
19:37
Chair. Um, I just would like to ask what type of, um, professional experience.
Did you, do you imagine would meet an equivalent requisite for this master's program. No, that's an excellent question, and that's not up to me.
Speaker 115
19:48
That would be up to the board of trustees that oversees the regional library system or the board or body that oversees the state library. Those people who are on that board who have the best interests of those programs at heart would make that. choice, but there's no question
that having an expertise in management, grant writing, information organization, database management, First Amendment law, and those types of things would be required, um, and could be created through a culmination of experience and education in the field. Um, another one plays, sorry, Senator, did you have
Representative Tippi McCullough
Unverified
20:18
something? Yes, I think it's important to know, I think the Department of
Senator Dan Sullivan
Unverified
20:23
Education has something like 8000 waivers out there. 8000. We have teachers teaching. Elementary school reading who have no degree at all.
And most of the time it's because they can't find anybody in those rural areas, and we rely on those boards and the commissions to make decisions when those waivers are granted and how they do that and I think that's what this bill does, it just allow the local people to make a decision on what standards they want. And I think the question about what do I envision? I envision letting local boards make those decisions, uh, and I think they know best what suits their community.
Representative Tippi McCullough
Unverified
21:08
Yes, sir, um, if I can go ahead along this line, um, I do hear what you're saying about that and probably have voted for some of those waivers. I, I just, to say all of those maybe are the equivalent of this. I'm, I mean, I don't know. I would have to look, you know,
kind of at those separately, but have you determined how this bill would affect collaboration between Arkansas libraries and national or regional libraries, um, the networks that typically require this professional accreditation for leadership
roles. Well, there's no question that the board is going to select the
Speaker 115
21:38
most qualified candidate to fill the position. And those candidates should be seen by these national organizations is qualified as well because they'll have a combination of experience and education that that
Representative Tippi McCullough
Unverified
21:50
makes them suitable for the job. And just one more, um, so with lowering this, this qualification risk diminishing the professional standing of Arkansas libraries and, uh, potentially make it harder to secure grants and outside funding to the premise that we lowering
Speaker 115
22:04
the standards because there's nothing that says that the board of trustees or the
body or board overseeing the state library might not require a PhD instead of a master's degree. That's gonna be up to the
Senator Dan Sullivan
Unverified
22:17
board. OK. Thank you. Yes, so I'd make the comment that a lot of the grants that come through, come through the Arkansas Department of Education, legislature, uh, one of the biggest, uh, contributors to that somewhere between 5 and $7 million a year, uh, so I don't imagine changing this criteria, and I think you're exactly right, you know, the, the, the folks will set their
standard, and I would guess and imagine that a board that's considering offering a waiver would, that would be something they would consider. Are we going to Put our library at risk financially by doing that, and I, I would hope they don't make that decision.
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
23:00
Representative vary, you were recognized for a question. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Question for you ladies and men. Um, This Election of directors. Is it
going to be appointed or is it gonna be elected and will they represent all
Speaker 115
23:16
corners of the state, so we have, so we have in our law something that allows cities and counties to collaborate and create a regional library system, uh, and, and when they do that, then they appoint people to serve on the board of trustees that overstays that regional library system. So that's what we're talking about is we have across, I think we have 16 systems maybe that cover 48 states across our right now. Yeah, and I think that would be
Senator Dan Sullivan
Unverified
23:42
you, you know, you is a state representative at the board is abolished, it goes under the Department of Education and the legislature is over that. We have oversight for the Department of Education, so the idea that we're diminishing oversight, uh,
I think we're making oversight better. I think we're going straight to the legislature to allow us
oversight. Thank you. You know, I'll, I'll make a,
a real quick comment at the commission meeting last week. The president, the chair of the
commission made the statement that no one really cares about, and I'm paraphrasing, no one cares or, or is concerned about inappropriate books being in the library. That was a a motion was made to consider just to consider, not to put in place, but let's consider, uh, books that are inappropriate in our libraries. The federal court said that's appropriate, that you can move books to an appropriate. in the library. Federal court said that.
When I asked for the commission and the board where they consider developing policy that would consider that the commissioner said no, it's not a problem. I was downstairs this morning with the homeschoolers. They'll be close to 1000 of them here and I asked that question to the parents there and said, are you concerned about the appropriateness of books in the library and it's overwhelming. Yes, we're concerned, yet the board, our board voted not to consider that, and the chair
said that there's no really no interest in that and she trust um her and the board to make that decision. I think you. is a legislature are much, uh, more informed and capable of making
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
25:34
those decisions. OK, see no further questions from committee members. We do have people signed up to speak. Against this bill. Judy Calhoun.
You will come to the table and introduce yourself to the record. And just state who you're with, your name
Judy Calhoun
Unverified
26:00
and who you're with, and you may begin your testimony. Thank you, Representatives. Uh, my name is Judy Calhoun. I am a retired regional library director from the Southeast Arkansas Regional part of the state. I was a regional director for over 31 years or in the system for over 31 years. I have 5 counties and 9 libraries that I was over and um I would like to address one of the comments on uh that Senator Sullivan talked about. I
think it's up to our communities to make those decisions. about what they deem appropriate in their libraries. We have things in place to address that. So if there's a problem in the community or in the libraries, then the, the communities will definitely speak out. We will hear from them. But today I'd like to address about voting on a Senate Bill 181. In the last 15 years, Arkansas has worked hard to produce quality educated librarians. Uh, there is really no reason for this bill, um, there is, uh, all library uh
master's degree programs are available online. I entered the program myself 20 years ago, worked full time, went back to college full time for my master's degree and had children in college at the same time. Um, there's so there's no reason for us not to get education to run regional library systems. Like I said, I have a very big system. I have a 25 member board, 5 corn courts. So I think they do a good job of overseeing the communities and their libraries that they represent, um, this
Bill does not talk about any type of requirement to, and it's, it is a requirement in order to receive state aid to have a master's degree. I was also the president of the Association for Rural and Small Libraries. There is no reason that I have not seen anywhere in that regional small libraries have a problem getting a master's degree librarian. If they do, most of them are like ours. We have one degree librarian over 9 library systems. They, we
pulled together, we share our resources and we share that now. The, the young lady that took my position does not have a degree, but she is working on it. She is being, uh, overseen by a degreed librarian, and that's how we do this system until she gets her degree. Our, uh, degrees are also funded almost 100% by the Arkansas State Library, so there's no, there's very little out of pocket cost to a librarian to uh further their education.
So I see that there's, I see no reason to do a bill where we're gonna put uneducated or unqualified people that can, uh, into position to run libraries. I thank you for your consideration.
Chair
Unverified
28:45
Do we have any questions from committee members? Uh, yes, Representative Shepherd, you're recognized for questions.
Judy Calhoun
Unverified
29:00
If we pass this, yes, right now the state, uh, to receive state aid from a, a library, you have to have a master's degree, librarian to receive state aid, or you get so much money for having stayed up. Uh In follow up,
Representative Tara Shephard
Unverified
29:15
Mr. Chair, in regards to the area that you represented, could you speak to maybe approximately how much funding you were receiving as a result of this 160,000. Yeah, so we would
Speaker 152
29:26
lose 160,000 if we did not have a degree librarian.
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
29:35
Thank you. Thank you. So, well, sorry, Representative Kavanaugh, you're recognized for questions. Thank
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
29:39
you, Mr. Chair. I just want to make sure that I understand you're concerned about losing the funding, but if I read the bill right, it says that
if you go this route, you would not lose any state funding. Are you aware that that's in there? I
Judy Calhoun
Unverified
29:53
think that would have to change the policy on the state aid, uh, which it does say in there. But I do believe in
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
30:00
this bill it addresses that. Have you, have you read that? That's what I'm
asking because it does say that they're going this route doesn't disqualify you from any state aid, right? Um, I
Judy Calhoun
Unverified
30:11
did read that, but I'm, I'm still say what would be, what is the purpose of putting uneducated, OK, but
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
30:18
I'm asking about you, you made the statement that you would lose $160,000 in funding, but in the bill, it says that you would, that's what I'm asking is did you understand or not?
Speaker 159
30:28
Well, this bill oversee the, the policy of state aid.
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
30:35
But once we make it, if it becomes law, yes, yes, ma'am, it will automatically
have to be changed. Yes, ma'am. OK. All right. Thank you.
Chair
Unverified
30:46
You're welcome. Sorry. Seeing no further questions, thank you for your testimony. Next on the list have Missy Hawks. You She
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
30:58
Come to the table, introduce yourself, um. We're getting your hand out passed out now, so you
give him a minute to get that done.
Speaker 166
31:24
Introduce yourself for the record and then. Yes, sir. You're recognized. I am Misty Hawkins and I'm the regional library director for the Arkansas River Valley Regional Library System? And we serve Franklin Johnson,
Logan, and Yale Counties. So I'm happy to have um represent representative Pilkington, and I actually have one of my county judges here that I didn't know he was going to be here today, so that's amazing, so, um, I'm gonna read my statement. Um As regional director, I serve Franklin Johnson, Logan, and Yale Counties. I'm here today not only as a library director, professional community and economic developer, but also as a concerned citizen.
Before earning my graduate degree, I worked in a public library for approximately 10 years. In the 4 years since graduating, I have never once regretted my decision to further my education. That's why it's deeply concerning and frankly a bit disrespectful. To see my profession and the value of my degree undermined. SB 181 states on two different occasions that instead of education, work experience may be substituted for both regional
directors and even the state librarian with no clear definition or explanation for what that requirement should be. With 23% of Arkansans reading at or below the lowest literacy level, I cannot understand why we would discourage education rather than promote it. Beyond that, Well Um Beyond that, my understanding is that the general assembly.
Addressed the issues SB 181 claims to solve with with Act 566 of 2023. The state library took immediate action to improve how state aid is distributed and accessed across Arkansas and part of those improvements are directly tied to the education qualifications of library directors. That was also, so you would know that was House Bill 1093 before
it became Act 566, in case you need to look it up. At this point, it remains unclear what specific problems this legislation seeks to fix or whether actual professionals in the field were even consulted in the process. I urge you to carefully consider the full impact both the immediate and long term before moving forward with this legislation. Consider the existing approval requirements in place by the Department of Higher Ed. Considered the emphasis on
regional library directors and the state librarian rather than county or city. Lastly, standards exist currently and have recently been updated. Over 380 master's level library professionals are employed in Arkansas. Public libraries, some of which relocated upon obtaining their degrees.
This is a non-issue. And unnecessary legislation. Please support continued education and professional standards. Vote no on SB 181 and thank you for your time and your consideration. Um, I also, it's not in your packet, but inside of your packet I did include, um, Some information from the University of Oklahoma in which I
Guy against my better judgment, I went to OU and I loved every bit of it, and I hate to say that out loud, but it was amazing and they they actually supplied some documentation and gave um some clear parameters for what are degree program entailed. And what the requirements were for our degree, and I also brought my certification from the division of
Ed to show that all of this was approved through the Arkansas State like the Arkansas Department of Higher Ed in 2020, and I looked this morning before I left and the requirements for common market are still available. So there is no issue in conflict within the Arkansas Department of Education with what is in place. We've done our due diligence, and we would like to continue to do this.
Chair
Unverified
36:19
Representative Pilkington, you're recognized. Hey, thanks for, thanks
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
36:22
for coming. Uh, always good to see a constituent down at the table, um. During your testimony, one of things you, you said that there, there wasn't. There wasn't problems they were trying to address, but the Senator Sullivan said with rural librarians, uh, this would help be able to get more rural librarians in there as someone who represents rural counties, can you address that? Are we having shortages with getting librarians into these areas, I
Speaker 166
36:46
have 3 in my, in my county right
now. I have 3 masters. I have 3 librarians within my counties that have master's degrees. And I serve a 3000 square, um, like approximately 3000 square miles of rural river valley, um, And 3 of my My staff members have master's degrees. Thank you, appreciate that. So. Representative Richardson, you recognize. Thank you,
Chair
Unverified
37:16
Mr. Chair. Thank you so much for your testimony and being here, uh, early in your
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
37:23
testimony, you, you stipulated that, um, that you were concerned around, um, work experience in a library versus a degree. Do you feel like that individuals that come straight out of college, have all of the skills necessary to perform the duties that, uh, you have to do on a daily basis and that they need no further, um,
Scott Richardson
Unverified
37:45
Support, help, coaching, training. No, no, absolutely not. For
Speaker 166
37:49
the same reason that I
like, I, um, my mom is a nurse and she always believes that nurses need to be CNA's first, um, because you need to be, you need to have the bedside manner just the same as, um, I, I feel like you need to have that work experience. I, I would never take away work experience and supplement that and say that that is, um, that is not valuable. They're not mutually exclusive, you know, you can't have one without the other. Um, a person who has never stepped foot in a library
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
38:27
but has a degree is of no use to me. So on the on the con side of that, would you agree that a person who has, let's say, 30 years of experience in library would be of
Speaker 166
38:45
who's straight out of college. In some regards, they probably would because um I have on my on my staff, I have branch managers that have their, um, they are retired teachers and they are fantastic in what
they do, um, there are reading. Readiness programs are impeccable and we teach children to learn, like we teach children to read every summer. Um, we cannot discredit that. Would they ever want to be a regional library director? No. But if they wanted to, I feel like they need to be able to move up, but they're not the same. Each library just the same that a children's librarian is
not necessarily going to be a regional like, like a regional director. It, they're not the same job duties. I'm a regional director and I'm here today. And I'm here representing my constituents where I'm not necessarily on the floor doing
Speaker 177
39:48
The story time every single day anymore. OK, thank you for clarifying
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
39:53
that. I hope that makes sense that makes perfect sense and this the the statement that you
made early in the, in your, in your testimony, um, just kind of confused me so I appreciate you clarifying that uh that
Speaker 166
40:08
work experience is extremely valuable, there's not a job yet, please, please know and my staff members know, there is not a job that they do that I would not do. Um, I am. Cleaning toilets. It does not, because you have to be when you are working in the rural libraries, it is other duties as
assigned every day. So just because you have and frankly. My dad calls me an educated idiot is what he calls me, um, because he thinks that I got a degree for no reason because I could just, you know, do this without a degree, and that's, that's not true. I learned things in school that I need for my degree, or for I need for my job, and I need for other people to understand the value in that as well. Representative Brown, you're recognized.
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
41:03
Thank you, Mr. Chair. And ma'am, this is, I, I don't mean for this to sound as any kind of a slight to you or the previous librarian. Um, but one of my very first jobs. I was an assistant to the librarian at the Arkansas School for the. Death. I learned so much from her, and I learned what librarians look for when they examine a new book that comes into the library to determine whether she's gonna.
And she looked for appropriateness for the students, their education level, their reading level, and whether she was familiar with the graphic designer and, and just all kinds of things that she looked for. I simply did the card catalog. And did other labor kinds of things, but. It really impressed me with what a librarian can do. And, and I don't. I don't see in this legislation anything talking about.
Appropriateness. It's, it's just sim it's simply addressing maybe a shortage of of master's degree librarians in the state, which. I don't have a problem with this legislation. However, I can tell you that the uh local central Arkansas library. That I took my 9 year old granddaughter too in the last few months. I was appalled, not necessarily at the books because I was so preoccupied trying to get my work done. I let her look for books.
Maybe I should, but when we got ready to check out with the book she chose, there were some Materials there on the counter that children could pick up and color. And one of the paces lying there was so inappropriate I was shocked. I snatched it up and I. I guess I should have said something to the librarian at the time. But I was appalled and so I thought of all the qualifications that a librarian has. Why in the world would they have allowed that kind of
material to be there publicly available for a child to pick up and take, take home to color. So. That being said, I know librarians have great training. But some of them may not be using that to the best advantage of
Speaker 166
43:33
their customers. So well, to, to touch on that, I, I do believe, um. Judy kind of mentioned it, um,
previously about reflecting the communities. I will definitely attest to the fact that we reflect our community in our libraries and. I can attest that in our libraries in, and I don't necessarily have that issue, so I don't see what y'all what, what is being spoken about loudly and, and I, I said the exact same thing at the state library board meeting last
Friday. I don't see what people, I don't see this, and so some of our smaller and more rural libraries are screaming from the rooftops.
Speaker 177
44:26
We You need to speak to us and we're. Coming to you saying, please quit comparing us. And almost um.
Speaker 166
44:35
We are not all the same. We're not all the same. So for the same, for the same way that
If someone were to say, well, you are in this category because that's how you identify yourself. If there were a bad actor. You would not want to be associated with that either, um, we do everything within our power, within at my system to make sure that we are. Family friendly and providing services and we have the homeschool families. We have homeschool families at every
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
45:18
single branch. I have no, no problem with this. I don't know like I said, I'm not disparaging you. I
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
45:29
any of my libraries at any given time, like librarians, um, I'm
Speaker 166
45:33
not lumping, but y'all are making legislation for all libraries. All this legislation pertains to every library in the state. So it's not just one library that we're like, so this is
legislation that impacts every Every Library in the state, not just the one. Thank you. OK, seeing no further questions, thank you
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
46:02
for your testimony. Next on the list, John McGraw. You'll come introduce yourself for the, for the record, you may begin your testimony. State your name and who you're with, please.
Speaker 195
46:22
Good morning, everyone, uh, I'm John McGraw. I'm the regional director of the Faulkner, Van Buren Regional Library System. Uh, I have been in libraries for 32 years now, and half of that as a degreed librarian. Uh, in 2005, I had the opportunity to take over vacancy at the Sid McMath Library on John Barrow Road, and my employer, uh, said, well, if you're gonna be running a tiny library uh on in South Little Rock you need to get. a library degree.
At that point, I've been in libraries for 16 years and I was like, yeah, that's actually probably true. This is my, this is my vocation, this is my, this is my career. I should get the professional degree that reflects uh my interest in in this field. Uh, there was no internet in rural Faulkner County in 2005 to speak of, uh, I, I went to coffee shops. I went wherever we could. I was in the first cohort for University of Alabama's online library program and in
2005, that was a fairly novel thing in this day and age, it's fairly common. I just had a staff member who's working in the Mayflower library. She just completed her degree from LSU in December, and she applied for Judy's job. Actually, I don't, uh, she didn't get it, but, uh, but yeah, there's, I don't think there's a, there's a, a shortage of degreed librarians for rural and small libraries. I have, I have degreed librarians working in Faulkner County in rural branches. There is also the, uh,
the state library has an amazing program that lets you get your master's degree, uh, they do a waiver for directors, so you don't even have to hit a a prerequisite number of 12 hours or anything like that. Uh, so there is programmed basically pipeline people into degree library programs, uh, in addition to that, there is also the fact that Arkansas libraries really help each other out. We step up and we take care of each other. When Lone Oak lost their degreed librarian, uh, last, I guess
actually 2 years ago now, uh, the board asked if I would be the um MLS of record for Lone Oak County while their director gets her degree, and I happily agreed to that. Uh, how many times has she needed my help? 0. She's needed my help 0 times, uh, because she has a wealth of experience which this bill highlights is, is important, but there's no actual crisis here, there's no problem that you're actually going to solve with this bill. We already have a robust scholarship program
through the state library. My predecessor's predecessor was in this program in 1991 getting her degree from an accredited school back in the old when you had to do all this correspondence stuff where you had to travel out of state for these things. Now you're just hopping online and take care of all the stuff online, just like you take care of anything else online. I don't find that you have any, any, any problem that this bill is going to solve. We do not have a shortage of librarians. We, we in fact have a moral panic that librarians
aren't doing enough. So I find it odd that you would want to To, uh, create waivers. I mean, 3000, somebody mentioned 3000 waivers for teachers. That sounds an amazing number to me. I bet you would like that number to be lower, and I don't think that you would want librarians to be less qualified than they are today. And right now they're, they're
Speaker 196
49:44
pretty good, pretty well qualified, and I would like them to be better
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
49:51
qualified. Thank you. of hall, you're recognized. Hey, thank you for testimony. Uh, you just mentioned the staff member earlier that, uh, you
said that she was well qualified to, for the job, but she had to go off to get a master's so she could be hired there. Uh, wouldn't that kind of, this bill kind of take care
Speaker 195
50:09
of that? What, what, I mean, but she feels she still feels that that the degree is important, that she will learn valuable things about doing her job through the degree program, and I agree. It gives you valuable tools. It tells you a lot of the theory behind why we're doing what we're doing. It gives you skills like cataloging that I don't think you're going to as easily get just doing the
job on the fly. But she feels like I felt in 2005, like this is my, this is my passion, this is my vocation, this is where I'm wanting to be spending the rest of my life. So wouldn't I want to get the degree that reflects the professionalism that I
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
50:44
want to bring to that job day by day. So what you're saying is if somebody worked there, uh, for like 10 or 15 years, uh, they wouldn't have the knowledge to become a librarian, they'd have to still go and get a higher education? No, I'm
Speaker 195
50:56
not saying that. I'm, I'm also not saying that the degree is useless. I'm saying that the degree and
experience are an amazing combination. Maybe you can get by with just one or the other, but if you can have both, why would you not want
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
51:09
to have both? But you said you had to fill in for
Speaker 195
51:12
her while she was gone. No, no, no, I, I, I'm simply the on record as MLS so that she can receive state aid, so she can continue to get funding to keep the doors open in Lone Oak County. Loan Oak County is doing an amazing job. They're not, they're not suffering for a lack of a degreed librarian at the moment, but she is pursuing that degree and she is still getting funding, having me as the MLS of record, there's, there's,
Speaker 199
51:34
there's already creation, there was already workarounds for any of the problems that you're
Speaker 205
51:38
talking about. Representative Richardson, you'll recognize. Thank you,
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
51:47
Mr. Chair. Uh, thank you so much for your testimony. I appreciate you being here. Um, how much time are
Scott Richardson
Unverified
51:52
you spending right now, uh, working for Lone Oak County. Oh, I, I,
Speaker 195
51:56
I've actually asked her more questions than she has asked me questions actually. I've had questions about custodial contracts. I've had questions about service
contracts for Lone Oak. I've, uh, now that we've established a relationship, I'm, I'm asking her questions about, uh, problems that while I've, I, I've been doing things, you know, It's one of those situations where we've always done it this way, but maybe I should step out and talk to other people who have are similar size and see if they're dealing with problems in in a different way that I can learn from and by her you're referring to the
Scott Richardson
Unverified
52:26
individual who's now pursuing her degree. Barker. OK, thank you very much for that. Sure.
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
52:36
OK, see no further questions. Thank you for your testimony. We have no one else signed up to speak for or against this bill. Anyone in the audience want to speak for or against this bill, seeing none, Senator Sullivan. For Senator Burke, you want to close for your bill. Mhm Thank
Speaker 115
52:57
you, Mr. Chair. um, just really quickly in closing, I, I know that members of the committee have studied the bill in detail, but there seems to be some confusion in the public. This bill does not relate to all
librarians across the state of Arkansas. It talks about the regional library director, so the system director. This requirement that we're changing in the law relates to the system director and it relates to the state librarian, but it certainly does not relate to all librarians across the state, um, another point that I would mention again I'll reiterate that the oversight board, whether it's the regional board of trustees or the body that oversees the state library has the uh the best interest of the system that
they oversee at heart, and they're not going to make decisions that are contrary, whether it's giving up federal funding or national or state or any other kind of funding, uh, and, and again we do, we do emphasize that in this bill it says state funding will not be, will not be relinquished because of this law. Um, the only other point that I would, I would point out is. that Like many of the people here today, they're very qualified individuals who have a combination of experience and education and our boards are going to be looking for those kinds of things, whether it's
more education or more experience than what we currently are requiring and then I would just yield to Senator Sullivan. Thank
Senator Dan Sullivan
Unverified
54:16
you. Remember that we, we, the legislature placed Johnny Key over the Department of Education and Johnny Key did not have a degree
in education and I would argue did a good job. You know, our attorney general does not have to
be an attorney. Then it be an attorney. But
the people get to choose just as this bill says the people can choose but folks, one of the
biggest issues out here is, is the uh the American Library Association. You know, you can only get a master's degree through a program that's approved by the American Library Association. So if you want to go get a degree in education in just about any field you can go to the college of your choice. They can be very liberal they can be very conservative. They can be anywhere in between, but you get a degree in education, you can go teach. Not so with the librarians.
You have to go through a program approved by the American Library Association. The past president of the American Library Association. It said I'm a Marxist and I'm gonna run the libraries as a collective. Now that's the person approving the curriculum that our folks are going to. So when you go to a library program, Oklahoma, California, I think even Canada. The American Library Association is approving that program. If
you go on their website, they are steeped in DEI. Steeped in DEI. Yet in Arkansas we're passing laws that say you can't do that. Uh, in education of multiple fields. When you look at what they have what the American Library Association advocates for gender affirming care. Boys and girls sports. All of those things that are, I'll call them woke are promoted by the American Library Association and we're gonna send
our folks to a program that they're advocating for. I think folks need a choice. And if you wanna go be a professional in another field or in that field and work and get your job, you should have a choice and right now folks have no choice. So not only is this about choice for your local library. This is choice for professionals and at some point the American Library Association is gonna have to back off of this and other programs are going to start allowing for
licenger for those people. Folks, I appreciate your time. This is a good bill. I love our. libraries. Our libraries are fantastic institutions for decades, our professionals that run those are good, hardworking folks in your communities. This has nothing to do, uh, to denigrate those programs of those institutions, but we can do better. We can have professionals in our library who have a choice to go to programs that are allowed them to pursue what they think is important.
And then your local boards can choose whether that's important for your. Community. Thank you very
Speaker 138
57:22
much. Mr. Chair, with that, we are closed for the bill and I
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
57:26
would ask for a motion to pass. We have a motion do pass, is there any discussion on that motion? Yes, Representative McAullo, you're recognized for
Representative Tippi McCullough
Unverified
57:36
discussion on the motion. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair. You know, it's a kind of a time-honored tradition that work experience, plus getting the highest degree to, for the level
that you want to rise to in leadership, that's kind of what we've Call it work ethic, call it ambition, call it whatever you want to. Call it just being qualified, that should be important. It always has been, I feel like it still should be important. Um, we had testimony today that it, you know, used to, you had to go out of state. You would have to drive somewhere, you would have to, it would be not just to pay for the degree, but you would have to actually get in your car and travel somewhere, maybe live there, go there in the summer
with maybe extreme financial hardship to yourself. Now there's ways. to do that online. There are scholarships to do that. Um, I, I think I'm going to have to agree that I don't really see the problem here to solve, although I was really looking at this bill and really thinking about these rural communities and what they need. But then it seems that I started hearing that this is maybe just another bill that's connected to a lot of other bills for libraries that, um,
Trying to. I don't know, put, put, put a certain agenda or something. But, um, I tried to look at this just on its merits, and I still believe it's really important to get the education, the qualifications that you need to learn the skills that you need, along with the work experience to
do the job. So I'll be voting for this, uh, against this. Representative
Chair
Unverified
59:13
Richardson, you're recognized for discussion on the motion. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think it
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
59:20
is interesting that uh all of our highly qualified librarians that spoke, spoke very highly of individuals that had been promoted within the system and all of them were very clear that those individuals were fully capable of doing the job. Even one testimony that was saying that uh they had to call them to ask questions about, uh, about the job. Um, I, I'm, I'm a firm believer. I have 2 degrees from Arkansas Tech. I make, uh, I, I make a lot of comments about that. I love my degrees from
tech and I, I really appreciate the value that I got out of them. I also understand in my field, which is in technology, that experience is way more important, way more important than a college degree. And I, I, I feel like that this is one of those kinds of circumstances where experience in the field can and does in a lot of circumstances as evident by our testimony outweigh that college degree and an individual at the first point. So I'll be voting, uh, to, to, uh, Affirm this bill. I think it's a great bill, gives us more
opportunity out there for individuals to move up and not necessarily be overburdened by a, a college degree that may or may not in the end, provide them significant value and return that investment that they had to make, um, to them from a salary perspective. So I, I'm, I'm definitely for this bill and I'd appreciate a yes vote on it.
Chair
Unverified
1:00:40
Representative Pilkington recognized for discussion on the motion. Thank you.
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
1:00:45
um, and I hope Representative Burks will make comments and in the
discussion as well, because I find myself just a little confused. I mean, I, I, I've served on public health. I'm always for reducing licensure, making it easy for people to practice more to a higher scope of their practice, uh, you know, get, get more people out to these rural areas and, and same with, with really any industry. I mean, I've always been so an advocate of licensure reform to make it easier for people in rural areas to work. But I'm just not seeing a need in the rural areas for this, and then, uh, you know, we have this discussion about the leader of
the library board being um our national board being a Marxist and all this other stuff, which to me I just I I I'm, I'm, I'm losing the thread, I guess is the point I'm making where how does that have anything to do with the master's in science for a for uh the director of my local library board in Johnson County. I mean, I, I guess that's where I'm, I'm having a little bit where I'm not tracking and maybe this is just my inability to understand how these library committees and associations work, but, uh, you know, once
again, it's like it'd be different if I had people coming to me saying we can't fill these positions at the libraries and Pope and Johnson and, and Yale County, um, but all of a sudden, I'm, but I'm not hearing that. And then, so it makes me think this isn't a need and then I hear all this discussion about all these other things going on, which granted, I, you know, I don't like Marxism either. Um, I don't like a lot of the things that, uh, the senator mentioned, but to me, I'm not seeing how we're addressing those problems in this bill, and maybe I'm just, I'm confused on this, so I, I hope maybe someone else can pipe on the discussion and maybe uh.
Uh, educate me and in this a little bit because I'm honestly, it's, it's like we're talking about licensure reform and the next thing I know I'm talking about a Marxist for a national committee and I'm, I'm, I'm losing the thread here, guys. So,
Chair
Unverified
1:02:43
uh, appreciate uh any more comments on this. Representative
Speaker 115
1:02:46
Birch, you recognized for discussion on the motion. And thank you, Representative Pilkington, for bringing up that point because regardless of your personal opinions about the American Library Association, regardless of your personal opinions about DEI or anything
else, all this bill does is is give to the board of trustees or the board that oversees the state library, the ability to decide who the best candidate is, whether that's a person with a PhD in library science with it, it's a combination of a master's degree in library science and literature or something else. Uh, it gives to that board the ability to make the decision, and they are in the best place to decide and this bill actually came about because of a situation in Helena, West Helena where candidates were, uh,
difficult to find. And then when it was discovered that we don't have any um any programs in Arkansas that are in the database of accredited programs, so we under the current law, have to go outside the state to fill, we're talking about just the director of the regional library system role and the librarian role. We're not talking about all librarians across the state. This is a very specific bill, and it gives to those boards the ability to decide what's best for their system. OK, committee, thank you for
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
1:04:00
that discussion on this motion. It's more than what we normally get in here, but very interesting. All right, we have a motion on the floor of, of DuPass all in favor say aye. All opposed. I have it, congratulations, you've passed your bill. Committee, we're gonna take up Representative Walmbach, are you ready to run your bill? We're gonna take that up and I'm gonna, uh, look, Representative Schultz, take over here for a minute.
Representative Richard Womack
Unverified
1:04:35
Representative, you're recognized to present your bill. Thank you, Mr. Chair, members, this is a very simple bill that, uh, will allow for the distribution of funds in municipal aid fund, turn back funds, and county sales and use tax revenues to newly incorporated municipalities. Uh, the reason I bring you this is I have a new Municipality in my district and uh the way the law is currently written, they would have to wait possibly up to, up to a decade until data from a federal decennial census was made available to the municipality.
The, uh, this bill just changes. Just changes that and and simply allows for. Oh The Population and municipality to be based on the most recent federal, uh, The sennial census is calculated by the Arkansas Geographic Information Systems Office, which all that talk just says they have. They can access those funds without having to wait 10 years. So it's a very simple bill it's agreed to by everybody. There's
no known opposition, uh, and I would appreciate a good vote. Saying no questions from the committee. Is there
Speaker 222
1:05:51
anyone in the audience who would like to speak for or against this bill. Uh, saying none. Would you like to close for your bill? Uh, yes, sir, I'm closed and I would like to make a motion to pass. Alright, we have a motion to do pass all in favor. Opposed.
OK, congratulations, you pass your thank you, thank you. OK, moving on, let's see here. Representative Painter, are you
At this time we're going to hear House Bill 1510 by Representative Gonzalez.
Chair
Unverified
1:07:16
Representative Gonzalez, you recognized to present your bill.
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
1:07:21
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, committee. Committee House Bill 1510 is a
One of the bills that I get kind of excited about running. It's a complete repeal bill. It's there's no new language in this, in this at all. We're just striking language from, from the law. Uh, so it's, it's pretty easy read, um. What this does is takes away the extra-territorial jurisdiction of municipalities, um, what that means is, That they can currently reach outside of city limits with their regulations and and
ordinances and apply their regulations and ordinances, uh, to people that live in the county. They're not in city limits, uh, but they, they do have control over what they do. Um, with, with their own property as far as, you know, building codes in some cases in very few cases, but some cases zoning requirements, um, and I just think that cities should operate within city limits. So that's why I'm running this bill to strike all that language that
gives them authority to reach outside of their city limits. So with that, I'll take
any questions. We have any questions, uh, Representative Scott Richardson, you are recognized.
Speaker 20
1:08:42
So, uh, thank you very much, uh, Mr. Chair, and, uh, Mr. Chair, um, so I appreciate you bringing the
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
1:08:49
bill. I, you know, I, I got a lot of calls from my mayors, um, around this of course I'm in Northwest Arkansas. We deal with growth.
Regularly, uh, and challenges associated with the differences in the zoning that's happening outside the city limits versus the zoning that happens inside the city limits, uh, and also the challenges with building codes and all of those kinds of things that uh that are obviously significantly different, um, and my mayors are concerned that this is potentially going to impact them as they move forward if I were to vote for this bill, how would I respond to that challenge.
Uh, uh, regulating or I should say ensuring safety uh for those uh buildings that are being erected, making sure that they're, uh, to the same code as the rest of the city, all of those kinds
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
1:09:46
of things. So, um, currently we don't see buildings out in the county just falling down because they're not built to city code, right? So I don't think that's a problem with, you know, buildings just crumbling down because they're not not built to some cities specific code. Um, what we will do and what
I've committed to the municipal league to do is to work on an annexation agreement codifying an annexation agreement between cities and and anyone outside of the city limits that wants to be annexed at some point that says that that they can work with somebody and they could do it without, without legislation, to be quite honest with you. They don't need that if they could, they could work with a developer or community and say, you know, if you want to be annexed at some point, you're Sewer lines need to be up to our specs. Your water lines need to
be up to our specs so, so that we can easily tie you into the into our system and we can service you. I don't have a problem with that, with that kind of agreement. What, what I do have an issue with is just the city being able to come outside of city limits and dictate that current. Did that answer your question or
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
1:10:57
maybe not. Dramatic pause, uh, yes, uh, for the most part that did answer my question. I, I do have a follow
up, um, how often is, uh, how often? On average in the state do we see these areas outside municipalities being overtaken by the city in does it happen that 5 years of these agreements for, uh, because I really don't know how long are these agreements for and how long can they hang on to that piece of property before they have to decide not to use it. So
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
1:11:29
there is no time limit that they can hold the property the uh the extraterritorial jurisdiction inside of their
planning zone, um, that's, that's an unlimited time period. Uh, there is some language in this bill that we're striking that says if they had a plan to annex this area, and they didn't do it within, within 5 years. They can't annex again, they can't plan to annex again within the next. 5 years, but that doesn't release them from the, from the extraterritorial jurisdiction. They're still under that, they're still under those codes and regulations of the city, but
just the city can't can't attempt to annex them. Again, um, some of these planning, uh, Districts have have put out these plans as, as early as I can see from like 2006, 2007 that they've held areas in this, in this ETJ. District, um, and, and not release them and a lot of cases they haven't annexed any of those areas they're just holding them in. Hold them forever, so there, there are no limits
Chair
Unverified
1:12:35
on laws to how long they can do that.
Interesting, thank you very much. Representative Walmach, you're recognized for the question. Thank
Representative Richard Womack
Unverified
1:12:50
you, Mr. Chair. Representative Gonzalez, isn't it true that all state building codes would still apply if this bill becomes law outside the city limits. Yes, this does
Chair
Unverified
1:12:57
not affect state building codes. OK. Thank you, sir.
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
1:13:05
Representative Carolyn Brown, you're recognized for a question. Thank you. One of Alec. Two concerns have been expressed
by one of my mayors, um, does not support this bill, um. What would prevent, um, so, so if in this extraterritorial jurisdiction is that the same. is that it does every city have the same amount or or how is that determined? So
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
1:13:36
that's determined by population, um, if you will look on page 3 of the bill starting
on line 14, it, it outlines all of that. Um, so cities of 8000 to 60,000 population have an area of 1 mile beyond corporate limits, cities 60,000 to 150,000 have 2 miles beyond corporate limits and cities, 150,000 and above have 3. miles outside of the city, the corporation limits.
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
1:14:09
OK, so if, um, in that extraterritorial
jurisdiction, uh, say somebody wanted to put in some sort of an agricultural uh operation that might, um, Generate some Foul odors. I mean That was one of the concerns expressed to me is so. In this extraterritorial jurisdiction, the city could disallow that to happen, but without that jurisdiction, it could, that operation could go in. So I believe that that would fall under under the zoning
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
1:14:46
ordinances and there are very few cities that can exercise actual zoning ordinances outside of the municipal limits, um, and, and get into that ETJ area, um, if you'll look at the bottom of Page 3 Let me find it real quick. may be on the wrong page.
You know what, it talks about um, Cities that that are next to a navigable stream that have had the zoning ability, so it's, it's very few cities that are going to fall into this that are next to a navigable stream that will fall under that ability to, to actually zone that could zone that agriculture or commercial or residential or things like that and restrict those, those areas. So currently
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
1:15:45
they do not have the jurisdiction to control that. So this legislation wouldn't remove.
Their ability to To to have
zoning. I'm not quite sure what extraterritorial jurisdiction gives him the power
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
1:16:01
to do. It, it gives them the, the power to enforce all city ordinances and regulations on areas outside of city limits and, and some of those cases they can also enforce the zoning so they could, they could say that this is a residential area. This is a commercial area. This is agricultural area, whatever
other zoning that that they have that they could apply inside of city limits, they can apply, also apply outside like I said that only applies to to very few cities that fall under this. This size limitation and next to a navigable stream. So I don't know where that came from. It, it was obviously the target, uh, a couple areas in the state. So One other question, could
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
1:16:45
um. in this extraterritorial jurisdiction if somebody wanted to put in a crypto mine. and
Within the 1 to 3 mile. Range of a city. Currently, could a city prevent that from happening? Yes Representative Hall, you're recognized for
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
1:17:17
a question. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, I got a couple of questions here
for you. Uh, what services do the municipalities provide for outside the city limits as far as fire and, uh, police
protection or sewer or any of that for the folks that
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
1:17:34
they are, uh, So there are occasions that they provide water and sewer outside of, of city limits, um, I, I don't believe they currently have to do that and I'm willing to codify that they don't have to do that outside of of their city limits, um, they in some cases, I believe they do provide fire protection, um, that's on page 4, but it says that, that
they can deny fire protection if it's waived by a majority vote of the governing body of the municipality, so they don't have to provide. They don't have to provide police, so what we're really looking at and, and, and also these people that are in this extraterritorial jurisdiction, they can't vote on, on their in any other city government stuff, so they have no representation, so they get all the regulation with no representation is, is what we're really looking at here. Thank you. That was my second question. I was
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
1:18:25
gonna ask what representation they have on the
city council, so that's they have none,
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:18:36
thank you. Representative Kevinaugh, you're recognized for a question. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Representative Gonzalez. That was my concern is that we're regulating people who have no say in the regulations, um. Most people in this body know that I'm very pro um local choice because I think the government closest to the people is the best, but also at some point if you don't have any say in that government, for me,
that's overreach. And that's kind of what this sets in and With that, my question to you really is, there's nothing now that stops a city from working with a county that if in their planning that they think they may annex this certain area and there's a subdivision going in or something. There's nothing that prohibits a city from working with a county to make sure that they have the same sort of regulations they might need for that. Is that correct? They can
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
1:19:32
currently do that now. Yes, they can currently do that and that's, that's one of the things that I was saying earlier, I'm, I'm willing to work on codifying that to make it very clear that they have that ability for to, to enter into annexation agreements, uh, that's one thing that I have already agreed the municipal league to work with them on is codifying that language that says, you know, if at some point you want to annex this, you all want to work together. Uh, you, you can come together and agree on what the ordinances are going to be in this annex, you know, future. annexation area, but you need to
have a clear, clear plan going forward on, on what that's gonna be and when that might happen, it doesn't need to just be, you know, hey, one day we, we might, so we're gonna put it in our plan and I mean, in 2040, 2050, we may annex that area or we may not, you know, there needs to be a clear plan of, of what's gonna happen there, how that's all gonna work out. So as
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:20:25
an individual, I could have went out and bought property 10 miles out of town, miles
out of town because I wanted to live, not within the
town, and as the area grew, they kept extending this area that they had control over, so before it's said and done, they could actually have control over me. And I did not buy with that control because I bought outside the city limits because I didn't want to have to be inside the city with some of their rules and regulations, but now they currently can extend their jurisdiction, which is actually extending their actual, um, lines of the city
to take in property that is not theirs are
not part of the city. And again, has no voice in the elections
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
1:21:12
of that city. That's, that's correct. Take it even farther, they don't even have to notify you that your land was in that extraterritorial jurisdiction area and that they have, had planned a future road or something through your property that may affect the value of your property. It may affect your, your ability to sell your property later, um, and, and there's no notification process. I don't even have to tell you that that they, that they put you in, in their plan, but yet
it directs directly affects you and and those those these things aren't made up these things are actually happening, um, there. There have been cases where people have gone to sell their land and found out that, you know, when, when they had a new survey done. They found out that they're. Their land is in this extraterritorial jurisdiction area and there's a future road plan through the, through their road that has affected their ability to to sell. It's devalued their property in some cases. Without any notification.
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
1:22:12
Representative Rye, you're recognized for a question. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Heard a lot of testimony on this, but I hadn't heard anything from the counties or cities, which we could. You will information. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Representative Milligan, you're recognized for
Representative Jon Milligan
Unverified
1:22:31
a question. Thank you, Mr. Chair. uh, me, me and the representative Gonzales, we've, we've talked about this. 3 or 4 times and municipal league and everybody in here knows I was the mayor for 10 years and
Cities under 8000, which is most of what I, uh, represent, uh, they can only plan out 1 mile out of the city they can't do any zoning. Uh, but we've had conversation and, and, you know, and I'm. Um Annexation, I had a couple of them come into town, which is pretty simple, the way we've done them, but, uh, I was mayor for 10 years and I don't think I realized till I heard the situation he's talking about, you know, this is actual to me, this is actual private property issue here. We shouldn't be telling people
outside your city limits. You can plan. But now we've agreed, we talked to, uh, Mr. Wilkerson. And Fran kind of hit on some of my thoughts about and, and Representative Gonzalez, same way, he said, hey y'all, come meet y'all, sit down, we'll talk, get with the counties and because, you know, in Craighead County, our county judges stepped up, some of them subdivisions he's made them finish paving their streets. He's passed ordinances for, you know, to make them do things where when the city takes it over one day, maybe they don't have to take them by ordinance and pave the street because the people never did and I think we need to get everybody together
to work, because I, I mean, I, like I said, I was mayor and I, I'm all about. cities, but I, I agree 100%. If it's outside your city limits, we shouldn't be telling people what to do with their private property. Yeah, I mean, that, that is is an issue and, and like I said, I, I think you bring them to the table and get everybody talking and work this out and, and make it palatable for everybody and the cities can still plan and if you've got property and something happens you need to sell or move it, you know, they, they can't stop you from that, so. Uh, I appreciate this. We've talked about to, to a pretty
good while and, and, um, wouldn't you agree with what I said that's, that's my question. I agree.
Saying no other questions from the committee, we do have a few people signed up to speak against the bill. First is Susan Norton. Thank you for being
Speaker 257
1:24:32
here today, ma'am. Uh, please identify yourself for the record and you may begin. Thank you so much. My name is Susan Norton, and I'm
Susan Norton
Unverified
1:24:49
on staff as senior advisor for the city of Fayetteville, uh, representing Mayor Molly Ron today. I want to share a few comments from our planning and public work areas regarding the ETJ or what we in Fayetteville call the one mile planning area around our city limits and so Representative Brown, even though state law allows us to have a two-mile planning area. We have our ordinances have a 1 mile planning area because of our capacity to do that level of planning.
Thank you, Chair Gonzalez. Where did you go? There you are, and vice chair Schultz, members of the committee for hearing our comments today, and I, I say our comments because I'm representing our public works director and our planning staff and our mayor and these comments, uh, are combined comments. Um, last week, I listened last week during discussion of Senate Bill 87 as Senator Johnson described concerns about planning in an incorporated,
unincorporated areas in this way. He mentioned that there's a concern that cities could absorb the rural nature. Of the county in urbanize it. And coming from Fayetteville once a sleepy relatively small town where I went to college in the 70s. And I grew up in Little Rock, so Fayetteville felt like a very small place. Then in the 70s. I have to agree that we are no longer managing a sleepy college town.
And we're building a city now. Our area is exploding with growth and Representative Richardson, you and I are in the same boat and we have housing and infrastructure issues to manage, as do many of our neighbors in Northwest Arkansas. So there are some basic planning tenants and objectives that we focus on and we share with communities that are experiencing pinch points on their edges, and that's just. The, the area that we've identified that comes up repeatedly.
Without planning area oversight enactment of municipal master plans, whether for water and sewer, streets, or land use can be effectively lost, or at least compromised. Current planning in the one mile buffer does the following. It allows for and promotes coordinated land use and infrastructure planning. It grants municipalities some street design and connectivity standards for developments that ultimately create traffic
flowing into the jurisdiction, and we're happy to have the traffic flowing into our jurisdiction and helping us with sales tax and uh you know, our labor force. Planning areas can maximize connectivity inside and outside a municipality that can help reduce traffic congestion for those people who need to flow. And I'll bet there's one thing that we can agree on in this committee, and that is that everybody hates being stuck in traffic.
Development and planning areas may have water quality impacts on downstream municipalities that could negative negatively affect not only our residents in Fayetteville, but also others in the entire Beaver Lake drinking water service area. We have situations arise where wells and septic systems might fail, and we've been asked to expand infrastructure to cover those issues. In some cases very
costly infrastructure, our topography, we have because of our hills we have so much in our water sewer infrastructure that requires lift stations and things like that. Gravity is not, sometimes it's our friend with water and sewer, but not always. Um, Property values can be affected. If people invest on the periphery of a community without actually knowing the infrastructure quality of the areas being built in some neighborhoods might assume they could gain access to city
services when they're simply not available in those areas, and that's part of the pinch points we feel in the cities. Thank you very much. I hope I can answer any questions you might have, and if I cannot, I will be able to find an answer quickly. We would respectfully ask you to vote no on HB 1510 and its current form today. We're more than happy to work with the bill's sponsors on amendments that will balance the planning needs of cities with the protection of the rural nature of outlying areas of
Speaker 262
1:29:28
Arkansas cities. If I can answer any questions, I'm happy
Chair
Unverified
1:29:34
to. Thank you for your time. Representative Wommach, you
Representative Richard Womack
Unverified
1:29:37
are recognized for a question. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Ma'am, I'm curious if, uh, if you're sincere in your belief that water quality
and septic failures, etc. you know, will affect people. We are stream. Why would you choose to limit your jurisdiction to 1 mile.
Susan Norton
Unverified
1:29:51
Uh, because of resources and staff, um, we did that a long time ago in city ordinance, uh, and you know, I think maybe
Fayetteville is a little different than some other areas because we have the surrounding cities, they're pretty much they're coming in and we're going, you know, so we just don't have much room that extends more than 1 mile because Goshen's right there, Elkins is right there. I mean, we just, I'm not, I wasn't there when we did that, so I can't tell you why city ordinance was passed, but in fact we limited ourselves to 1 mile.
Representative Richard Womack
Unverified
1:30:25
OK, even though these issues. You believe exist and are
Susan Norton
Unverified
1:30:31
legitimate, right? I mean, I'm not saying that we would always have, it could be, it could happen one day that, um. We have to revisit that, but currently 1 mile. OK.
Chair
Unverified
1:30:43
Thank you. Representative Hall, you're recognized for a
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
1:30:46
question. Thank you for coming all the way down here, uh, today, uh. When these plans diminish, uh, the property value, does
the city have any obligation to compensate the property owners.
Susan Norton
Unverified
1:31:01
We have not had a situation in which that has occurred yet that we've been. Had a had I see Representative Prair a little anxious there. There has not been, it has not been resolved that whether diminishing the property value or even enhancing the property value of a specific area could be I mean you could look at it both ways. OK. So like if, if, uh, somebody goes to sell a piece
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
1:31:24
of property, and there's a road, a future road plan that goes
through there, uh, and, and the buyer backs out, uh, The cities have
no recourse at this time. No, sir. OK. All right. Well, thank
Speaker 115
1:31:48
you, ma'am. Representative Rebecca Burks, you are recognized for a question. Thank you. Can you tell me if anybody has come to city council asking to be
Susan Norton
Unverified
1:31:54
removed. Yes, ma'am. In fact, um, yes, ma'am, uh, the, uh, folks that uh are in representative Prue's area, um,
did, and we at that time, did not remove them, although I'm sure that we can continue to discuss how they would like to move forward. Um, the city council, it was. Last April, um. Through a, it was a it was a split boat, but, you know, so as to whether we would revisit that, I'm going to leave that up to our mayor and Representative Peer. Thank you. Saying no other questions from
committee, ma'am, you are excused. Thank you.
Next on the list we have John Wilkerson from the municipal League to speak against. Mr. Wilkerson, what you're seated, if you would identify yourself for the record,
you may proceed. Yeah, John Wilkerson, general counsel of the Arkansas Municipal League,
Chair
Unverified
1:32:53
I'm trying to work from a few different notes here. First of all, I want to say thank you to Representative Gonzalez, Representative Perry or Senator Petty. Um, we had a lot of great discussions about this bill and, and another bill, and we, I, I did the best I
could to listen. Well, I've listened very intently. I, I, I would be lying to you if I didn't say that this is shocking that we would be here talking about the ETJ. Um, we've, we've heard issues with the ETJ for a long time. Uh, I was not around and I think it was 1957, uh, when was passed, but at one point, it was a 5-mile jurisdiction and it's been now limited to 1 mile for most cities, up to 3 miles, well, 3 miles for the largest city, Little Rock, and then, uh, 2 miles from between, uh, 600 and 150,000. Only those that are like Representative Gonzalez
mentioned over those with over 8000 people and navigable stream have the zoning power, and I make that point to say that this is not, I want to be clear, this is not as if the city can lay down every single ordinance that they've passed on to the ETJ. This is largely aside from the zoning, which like Representative Gonzalez mentioned, um, most, this is usually a planning issue about how to make sure that the planning is done appropriately out in the ETJ. Now I've, I've heard stories about this, uh, of course. uh, from Representative Perry or from, from others. I, I think I would venture to say, now
granted, I'm reps in the cities that this has worked fairly well. Are there issues with this? I'd be lying to you if I said that there weren't. There's been excellent points raised by Representative Gonzalez and Representative Perrier and others that have talked to me about this, and I certainly understand those concerns. I think from, from our perspective, The infrastructure is the key, and a story I heard just this morning, and it's, it's indicative of the exact example that we're trying to deal with is a development goes out into the area right outside the city, or, you know, maybe even a
little bit further, and the city starts to grow, and then the people in that neighborhood or that area say we want to be part of the city. And the cities are left with the question of, well, do we'd like to accept you, but your water lines aren't up to snuff or your roads aren't up to snuff or whatever it may be, and then we have to, we as a city would have the option to have to go in there and then invest a lot into redoing all that with with city dollars that we don't, that just aren't falling off of trees. And so I've, I've heard stories about that even in central Arkansas, that there's these
areas that we just can't, I I say we cities can't just go in and easily. you know, annex, even if the people wanted it because there's so much infrastructure that would have to go into it. So it's really about orderly planning, but I understand the concern about the zoning. I, I get it. I get the I get the issue about representation. And I, I had a few ideas that I talked through with Representative Gonzalez about maybe we can, you know, I talked briefly to the counties about this too. Maybe before a land use plan is put into place. We, we have to go to the, the quorum
Court, 45 days before the planning commission votes on it to present that plan. Maybe, and there's already a play, a way in the law to allow, um, non-city residents to be on a planning commission. So I think there's ways that we can address some of the, many of these issues without overhauling the entire system, because what I, what I really worry about is that there's, I'm not a planner. But there's a lot of downstream consequences to this that I, I worry about that we, by just wholesale slashing it, then we're just sort of left with,
well, we had some real issues that we're trying to address our were have been addressing that can no longer address. Now with that said, Representative Gonzalez and Representative Perrier have been made extremely clear that they are willing to help navigate these waters after, if this passes. And so I, I would, again, I'd be lying if I didn't acknowledge that and want to be respectful to what they said, and I appreciate that very much. And I think that's really our difference of opinion on this. I think they're, they're your view uh speaking for you Representative Gonzalez, but the view is, let's take it all down and then start to rebuild it. I
think it's a less, I think just trying to address the issues that we can identify and making this process or making this system better, is, is the better, is, is the better way. I, there are certain things that cities have to do before they exercise this planning jurisdiction. It's called the Nolan and Dolan standard. There has to be an essential nexus to the need of the city. There has to be a rational or rough proportionality to the decisions made to that, to what the city is trying to accomplish. I think that could be better, that could be codified to make it clear that cities have to check these boxes
before they even go out and you know, even explore exercising in this kind of jurisdiction. Um, the zoning, um, there's not a lot of cities that do it. So if we need to discuss further limiting that or completely um eliminating that, then I think that's a conversation that, that needs to be had. That has been had, by the way. Um, but again, I, I really appreciate Representative Gonzalez speaking with us and, and agreeing to keep working on this issue because it is an interesting issue and, and very important issue. Representative Hall, you asked a question. I want to, want to address real quick.
Uh, the private property Protection Act does protect landowners if the city's regulation devalues the property by more than 20%. That was a law that was passed in 2015. It would, however, not help the situation, uh, many situation I've heard a lot about recently because, um, the land use plan that is at issue has been in place for a long time, but any new regulation that's put on a landowner, uh, ever since 2015 that devalues the property is a cause of action against the city. So again, I would ask that we,
um, I would ask that y'all not pass this. Uh, I do think that there are some revisions and, and needs to change parts of the ETJ jurisdiction, and maybe some substantive ones. But I think overhaul and scrapping it right now is, there's a lot to this that, honestly, I'm not a planner. I'm just looking at it from what I'm hearing, and it's a lot that I really am worried about. We're, we're. Doing a lot where I think we can do a little bit and make do a lot and make some substantive change without throwing everything away.
Thank you, Representative Richardson, you are recognized for a question. Thank you so much, uh,
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
1:39:01
Mr. Chair. So, so I guess uh my question would be. Not
a planner either. My question would be around uh the action of planning that cities are currently doing, not having this jurisdiction. Is that gonna change them from looking 5, 1015 years ahead and
saying this land is, we're gonna, we're gonna put a road here and we're gonna match up this here and we're gonna bring water into this, is that gonna change any
Speaker 281
1:39:33
of that process? And it will, it definitely will. Will it completely eliminate our ability to do that.
Chair
Unverified
1:39:39
I think that we'll, I, I would hope that we can figure out ways to, to navigate this going forward. So, you know, I, I, I, it will definitely change it. There will be some big adjustments. There will have to be some, some changes to, to the law or
additions to the law, I think, to make it work. Um, but I think ultimately, um, well, I, of course not, may not, but I think ultimately we can, we can. can find a way, I hope to do this, but I think it's going to be a shock to the system, and it's going to be almost I don't know. I don't know. I think hopefully we can figure
Speaker 35
1:40:12
out a way. That's my goal. And that's what we've been thinking about and talking about internally. So right
Speaker 179
1:40:18
now we, you, you're not aware if there is or isn't a way
Chair
Unverified
1:40:23
to continue to do the planning that the cities are currently doing. No, there wouldn't be. You'd have to, you'd have to work in a local agreements with the counties that would be the, that would have to be the way to do it, OK. Thank you. I'm sorry, I can't be more definitive. It's, this is a lot. This is a big change all of a sudden. So we're, we're
navigating it the best we can. Representative Carolyn Brown, you're recognized for
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
1:40:48
a question. Thank you, Mr. Chair. um, Mr. Wilkerson. Um, I'm not really very familiar
with extraterritorial jurisdiction, and I'm trying to understand, um, does the city have to announce that they are going to exercise their extraterritorial jurisdiction before they do it? Yes, there, there is some notice.
Chair
Unverified
1:41:06
It's not direct notice. Representative Gonzalez is right, but it does go in the paper. It is announced on the agenda of the planning commissions. It goes to the regular processes of of
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
1:41:17
notice, but people in the area that, that's, that are gonna be affected. They may not necessarily know
Chair
Unverified
1:41:24
about it, again, unless they're reading the paper and looking at the agendas, you know, there's no direct notice. But that's something else that we
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
1:41:36
were talking about trying to fix as well. So if a city does
not. Say that we are going to exercise our extraterritorial jurisdiction if they don't. Get that notice out if they don't make that decision in, in their council meeting and then. Uh, announced it maybe to the, to the.
Do they work with the county to identify that they're going to exercise this or
Speaker 63
1:42:00
I know, I know Fayetteville does. They work with Washington County on how to navigate it, um, I think cave, uh,
Chair
Unverified
1:42:06
Springs, uh, works with Benton County on how to navigate the issue. So a lot, I mean, it's encouraged, of course, to work with the counties because that's kind of just natural. But as far as any formal requirement, that's why I was just kind of thinking about how to have, how to have something formal where the city has to go to the county to make sure the counties know about it. Now, I'm not speaking for the counties of
Of course, this is just an idea that I was, we were thinking about to ensure that we can, we are required to go to the counties to talk this out, at least, at least have them
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
1:42:40
be heard by us. So a person could. Theoretically on the family farm that
they've had in the family for 100 years, and, uh, the city is, is budding right up to that. Family farm and, uh, at some point the city could say, well,
we're gonna, we're gonna exercise our 1 or 2 mile or 3 mile, let's say 1 to 2 mile extraterritorial jurisdiction, and then it that family farm falls within that, then that will, um. Impact
Speaker 61
1:43:08
with that. Property owner can do. Yeah, that's a story I've heard.
Speaker 85
1:43:15
I, I think from our perspective that really the law as it stands now talks about when
Chair
Unverified
1:43:21
subdivision of the land happens. That's really when this kicks in. So
yes, the ETJ is there. We've set, we've set the road out there, but the, the idea is that once it's subdivided, we, we sort of, the city sort of has a, has a stake a claim
at least and when you, when you subdivide it, you have to keep things in the planning ideas in mind when you subdivide it so
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
1:43:44
that, so this property owner, if they decided then, um, They're gonna subdivide it in, you know, sell it and. allow people to build houses on it, then that's. That's when the ET, yeah, that's
Chair
Unverified
1:43:57
when the planning jurisdiction will really kick in. It wouldn't prevent a family farm from operating as
a family farm, it would just win the family farm if they wanted to sell it, then, you know, the, the person buying it would have, would then know that, OK, well, you can buy it, but if you subdivide it later on, you have this street right down the middle of it, that the city, well, it's not really a street, it's really just a line on a map, but the city has exercised that plan jurisdiction on that farm or that
area so that if it gets subdivided, it would have to comply with the planning
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
1:44:27
jurisdiction or the planning regulations. current people who If, if Let's say I have property. But it up next to my community I live in. It wouldn't affect me. Unless I wanted to sell. That's the way I've,
Chair
Unverified
1:44:46
and that's the best way I can explain it, yes. Now, other than zoning, now zoning is a whole different thing for cities
that exercise zoning, it does, it, it would impact the property. So I couldn't just put in a little grocery store.
Speaker 35
1:44:57
No. Not an agricultural zone or residential zone. Which would
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
1:45:06
have been identified by the city. I mean, that's the, if they were
Chair
Unverified
1:45:09
exercising the the zoning jurisdiction or the zoning
in the ETJ, yes, which is rare, but it it does happen. Thank you. I'm missing anything, please
let me know. Representative Hudson, you are recognized for a question.
Representative Ashley Hudson
Unverified
1:45:30
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Get me out from behind, Representative Andrews, um. Just uh for my own clarification, um, you've
mentioned a couple of times continuing to work with Representative Gonzalez. Are, are you saying that there are active discussions about some sort of amendment on the Senate end or, or what are, what do you mean by these ongoing discussions?
Speaker 80
1:45:48
Oh, no, no, no, it's just we, we, we talked, um, before the, as the bill after the
Chair
Unverified
1:45:53
bill was filed, we talked, we had some good discussions, um, he, they, he listened to me, I listened to him, um, I've proposed some ideas, but, you
know, we're, we're here now. Uh, I think the ongoing discussions are Regardless of what happens right now or later on, uh, we'll keep working together to try to find ways to
minimize the impact of this or maximize the value of, of our ability to help planning
Representative Ashley Hudson
Unverified
1:46:16
outside of the city. And then, uh, kind of building off what representative uh Brown was saying down there, how would a potential buyer of real estate that might be impacted by this 1 mile. Radius or zone, how would they get noticed, um, In, in the course of a real
estate transaction, that property that they, um, are purchasing maybe burdened by what is, I mean, essentially operates like an easement. Um, so how would they, how would they find that information out? I would assume the title search would, would, would, um, showcase that,
Speaker 80
1:46:45
but I, I think just to review of the city records as well. That would be my guess.
Chair
Unverified
1:46:50
I'm not a title lawyer, but I think the title search would, would probably unveil it. Thank you. Representative Kavanaugh, you are recognized for a question.
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:47:03
Thank you. Thank you for coming down, um, and you, you and I know we have, we're on different sides on this one, which is unusual because I'm usually with local control, but much like Representative Milligan, I have a little heartburn. I didn't change your mind. OK, I'm just kidding. so when Representative Hudson was asking her question. It brought up something that because it really does act like an easement. But an easement, I didn't agree to. An Eastman, I had no say in. An easement that affects the
value of my property that. I had no authority on. So that's really where my heartburn comes in, is that we're taking control of people's property that they have no control over, uh, for me, it kind of smacks of imminent domain and we're we're we're, we're, and that's not right for property rights. And so that's my real problem. So, How do you fix that? They're not, we're not being compensated because the city wants to put a, uh, road through
my property and my value's gone down and it, it. It changes the whole value of the way your property can be looked at. So, how do you fix that when you're talking about, you know, a person's property rights versus a city's right to plan. Yeah,
Chair
Unverified
1:48:20
Perhaps it's representation in, in the decision making process because a lot of, a lot of zoning issues that are made inside of a city are, you know, not everybody gets the, the, you know, a vote on it. It happens at the, the representative democracy sort of level that the representation is
there, so perhaps, perhaps that's an answer that we um have representation for folks in the ETJ. That was an idea that we had floated as well. Um, so perhaps that's the way thank you. I think, I think there's ways to, to deal with these issues. I really do. And I understand them. I, I really, I, I represent Gonzalo knows I've, I've, I've tried very hard to understand these issues as best I can. And it is not an easy topic. And we, we've talked about this. It's not I can come up here and just say, oh, this is easy peasy. It's not, it's complicated and it's complex.
Um, but we, we are, we are trying to understand the issues and try to address them. Saying
no other questions from committee. Thank you, Mr. Wilkerson. You are very much of course. Is there anyone else in the audience who would like to speak for or against this bill. OK, seeing none, Representative of Gonzalez, would you like to close for your bill?
Chair
Unverified
1:49:46
Before I start closing you, I'll take any questions if committee has any. But
Any questions from committee? Representative Hudson, you are recognized. Uh, thank
Representative Ashley Hudson
Unverified
1:49:58
you, Mr. Chair. Uh, Representative Gonzalez, sort of same question I was asking Mr. Wilkerson. I mean, are there ongoing discussions? Is there some sort of, uh, you know, ongoing planning that you're having with the municipal League or is, are we just moving forward as as is. I just wanna make sure I understand what I'm, what we're doing and what the plan is. OK,
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
1:50:16
yeah, so we, so as, as he said, we've had many discussions about this and haven't uh came to any agreements on, on what amendments would would be appropriate. Uh, he's. offered up several different things, but I didn't, I just didn't agree with them because it, it didn't still, we still didn't get to the point of giving those people in that ETJ area uh a voice or an appropriate voice in, in my opinion, um, they proposing it to city council 45 days before implementing it, but, but it was just proposing it to city
council or not to city council, I'm sorry, to the Quorum Courts, um, which would give more notification to those people in the areas that they should be more. qua ran t ine with the Corm courts and they are, you know, the, the city government that's next to them, um, but it still didn't give Corn court approval. It was just a presentation and then, you know, I, we, we do what we want to outside of city limits anyway, so we, we did not come to an agreement there, but I am willing to work with him still like I said on the annexation agreements and
codifying that um to to make to make these things work that that need to happen, but just to not let them run over people in in the county. um, with, with their ordinances. So with that being said, on It it was mentioned that these that this only applies like to subdivisions and stuff which I, I don't read it that way, um, if you look on, on page one, you talk about it, it, there is Arkansas code they're referring to subdivisions, um, but then on page two, you, you get into
something different with the populations and all of that, and I'm sorry, on page 3 that, that starts, um. And then on page 4. It was also said this only applies to like zoning, I believe, but I believe that's, uh, Inaccurate as well and some of this stuff is complicated like it's, it's kind of hard to, hard to read through, um, but if you look on, on page 4 of starting on line 5, the planning commission shall designate the area within the extra within the territorial jurisdiction for
which it will prepare plans, ordinances, and regulations so they can enforce plans, ordinances, and, and regulations outside of of city limits in these ETJ areas. Um Also the private property Protection Act that that was mentioned, um, we're striking this language dealing with ETJs out of that as well because if they don't have, if they no longer have ETJ jurisdiction, we no longer need that in the property protection.
Act, um. But if you look at what that says, it, it, it applies. If the ordinances and regulations are the same. Inside the ETJ as they are inside the corporation limits. So if they, if they enforce something, you know, outside of, of what they do inside the city limits in the HTJ area is the only time that you have that, uh, Recourse to recover your lost
property value, I guess, um. And I think, you know, one way you had mentioned how, how will people know if they are in these areas or if their property is, is, is in the areas I think was one of your questions as well. And, and I think he nailed it, you know, a, a title search would do that. The title companies are required to notify, uh, a buyer of, of these plans and, and if they're in the area, um. So that's one way. So they should show up title shirt, title search, new survey that you would probably have done,
uh, if you're, if you're selling your properties, you'll find, find out through that. So Well, I think that's all I have if I'm close for my bill and I would make a
pass. Is there any discussion from committee? Seeing none, all in favor of the motion do pass, say aye. Aye all opposed. The eyes have it. Congratulations. Thank you. Seeing no other
Speaker 298
1:54:19
business before the committee, we are adjourned.
Agenda
Subtitle Sponsor Number
C. Cooper HB1387A TO REQUIRE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF A PUBLIC WATER UTHORITY TO PUBLISH THEIR CONTACT INFORMATION UNDER THE WATER AUTHORITY ACT.
REGULAR AGENDA
Subtitle Sponsor Number
Steele HB1436 TO PLACE LOCATION RESTRICTIONS ON CERTAIN FOOD PROCESSING PLANTS OPERATING A SLAUGHTERHOUSE ON THE SAME GROUNDS AS THE FOOD PROCESSING PLANTS.
Puryear HB1448TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING MUNICIPAL PLANNING AREAS; AND TO REQUIRE NOTICE AND COMPENSATION TO PROPERTY OWNERS.
Painter HB1462 TO AUTHORIZE AN OWNER OF A PUBLIC WATERWORKS SYSTEM TO EXPEND PUBLIC FUNDS AND TO ISSUE BONDS TO PAY FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF LEAD AND CERTAIN GALVANIZED CUSTOMER SERVICE LINES.
Painter
Clowney HB1503 TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING MUNICIPAL REGULATIONS; AND TO PROHIBIT CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS ON THE REGULATION OF ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS.
Gonzales HB1510TO REPEAL THE AUTHORITY FOR A MUNICIPALITY TO EXERCISE TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OVER AN UNINCORPORATED AREA OF A COUNTY.
Gonzales
Womack HB1522 TO AMEND THE LAW TO ALLOW FOR THE DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS IN THE MUNICIPAL AID FUND, TURNBACK FUNDS, AND COUNTY SALES AND USE TAX REVENUES TO NEWLY INCORPORATED MUNICIPALITIES; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.
Womack
D. Sullivan SB181 TO AMEND THE LIBRARY LAW; TO AMEND THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE STATE LIBRARIAN; AND TO AMEND THE REQUIREMENTS FOR REGIONAL LIBRARY SYSTEM DIRECTORS.
Sullivan
Painter HB1555 TO ESTABLISH UNIFORM PROCEDURES FOR FILLING A VACANCY IN A MUNICIPAL OFFICE.
Long HB1564 TO MODIFY MOTOR VEHICLE RACING FACILITY PERMITS AND TO SET CERTAINRESTRICTIONS ON A MOTOR VEHICLE RACING FACILITY IN CERTAIN RURAL LOCATIONS; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.
R. Burkes HB1565 TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE DUTIES OF A COUNTY PROPERTY ASSESSOR; AND TO PERMIT A PROPERTY OWNER TO OPT OUT OF HAVING THE PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION POSTED ON AN ONLINE DATABASE.
McClure HB1567 TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF "MOTOR VEHICLE RACING FACILITY" RELATING TO MOTOR VEHICLE RACING FACILITY PERMITS IN CERTAIN LOCATIONS.
DEFERRED BILLS
Subtitle Sponsor Number
Barnes HB1331TO REQUIRE A COUNTY TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE UNDER THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE FOR THE PRIOR YEAR IF A NEW ANNUAL APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE IS NOT ADOPTED; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.
Pilkington HB1130TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PERMITTING FOR RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION; TO AMEND THE FAST-TRACK PERMITS ACT; AND TO ALLOW A LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO CREATE A HOUSING IMPROVEMENT ZONE.
Andrews HB1414 TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING CLAIMS FOR FIRE SERVICES; AND TO UPDATE THE SCHEDULE OF EQUIPMENT RATES USED IN CLAIMS FOR FIRE SERVICES.
L. Johnson HB1416TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING MUNICIPAL FIRE DEPARTMENTS; AND TO ALLOW A MUNICIPAL FIRE DEPARTMENT SERVICING UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF THE COUNTY TO LEVY DUES.
Warren HB1272 TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PROPERTY VACATED BY A COUNTY OR MUNICIPALITY; AND TO REQUIRE VESTED ABANDONED PROPERTY BE CONVEYED WITH THE ABUTTING REAL ESTATE.
Warren HB1274TO TO ALLOW A TITLE INSURANCE AGENT, TITLE INSURER, OR TITLE COMPANY PAY REAL PROPERTY TAXES IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ISSUANCE OF A TITLE.
A Steimel HB1212 TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING CIVIL OFFICE HOLDINGS; AND TO ALLOW JUSTICE OF THE PEACE TO ALSO SERVE AS A POLICE OFFICER IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES.
Documents
| Title | Type | Pages | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agenda — CITY, COUNTY & LOCAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE- HOUSE, Feb 26, 2025 | Agenda | 2 | Official source ↗ |
Speakers
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
Chair
Unverified
Speaker 20
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
Scott Richardson
Unverified
Speaker 31
Speaker 35
Speaker 37
Representative Wade Andrews
Unverified
Speaker 42
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
Speaker 23
Speaker 77
Speaker 63
Speaker 88
Representative Richard Womack
Unverified
Speaker 115
Senator Dan Sullivan
Unverified
Representative Tippi McCullough
Unverified
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
Judy Calhoun
Unverified
Representative Tara Shephard
Unverified
Speaker 152
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
Speaker 159
Speaker 166
Speaker 177
Speaker 195
Speaker 196
Speaker 199
Speaker 205
Speaker 138
Representative Bart Schulz Chair
Unverified
Speaker 222
Representative Jon Milligan
Unverified
Speaker 257
Susan Norton
Unverified
Speaker 262
Speaker 281
Speaker 179
Speaker 61
Speaker 85
Representative Ashley Hudson
Unverified
Speaker 80
Speaker 297
Speaker 298