Judiciary Committee- House

Representative Collins, did you get that written down? You got it on your calendar. Had to tease you just a little bit. With that, members, if you'll turn to House Bill 1407 and I'll ask Vice Chair Underwood if he will please chair the meeting. Represented all year recognized to present your bill. Thank you, Carol Dalby, District 100 out of Texure Canada members I have before you House Bill 1407. Those of you who served on a judiciary from the last term will recognize that this is a bill that's coming out of the task force that we did on the, on the district courts, just for background, uh, Amendment 80 that was passed by the voters a number of years ago, vested the judicial power of uh Arkansas in the judicial department, so fast forward over 25 years, we transitioned from hundreds of local city, county judges to the state district court system, so now we have 70 district judges instead of the hundreds that we did have that was a 25 year process and so in January of this year, the Supreme Court issued a procurrium that was a unanimous procurrium setting up The district judge's judicial counsel, just like the circuit judges have their judicial council and with that the AOC will be staffing, um, that judicial council just like they do the circuit judges, judicial counsel, and in, uh, current statute, there is a provision which allowed for the district judges and remember it's during the 25 year transition period to have uh an administrator, uh, with that, and that administrator was being paid out of funds from the AOJ fund. There is no need for that position anymore. There is no need to spend that money on that position anymore because that position will be fully staffed out of the um Supreme Court or AOJ. Uh, so, AOC, we've got too many acronyms. Administration Office of courts. So with that, that's what it does. It strikes that language on Thursday, I'll be running a member's own and budget to strike it out of the budget to clean all that up, so this is really just to clean that lang language. With that, I'll be happy to take any questions. Any questions from the committee? Seeing their questions, we don't have anybody signed up to speak for or against the bill. Uh, I'm close for my bill and I'll make a motion to do pass. Uh, there's a motion to be passed on the floor. Any discussion on the motion? Seeing no, um, all in favor say aye. All opposed. I have it. I presume all be congratulations, you passed your bill. Thank you. Thank you, members of the committee. All right, members. Now we're turning to our technical correction bills today that we all look forward to in House Judiciary with that, we're just going to start at the very top. House Bill 1355 represent Gassway, you're recognized to go to the end of the table, identify yourself and present your bill and you get to stay down there the rest of the morning. So welcome. Yes, Representative Beatty, you are not allowed to leave. Thank you, Madam Chair. Jimmy Gazaway, State Representative, District 31. And Madam Chair, with your permission, Would you mind if Kevin Koon from the Bureau of Legislative Research joined me, that'll be just fine, Mr. King. You recognize Mr. Miller, if you want to join, you're welcome too. And gentlemen, if you'll identify yourself just so we have the record and then that way we will not identify on each bill. We'll just let this go for the bills. Kevin Coon, Bureau of Legislative Research. Matthew Miller. I'm the assistant director for legal services with the Bureau of Legislative Research. Madam Chair, if you don't mind, I can give a little explanation on why we're here. Of course, as bureau employees weren't here to neither testify for or against the bills. Um, the Code division commission, the Bureau is the staff for the commission as well. There's actually a statute that requires staff for the commission to keep track of technical issues that we run across throughout the biennium as we're working the code, prepare those, present them to the commission before a regular session and then that's the commission's prerogative of whether to pursue those in bills, so these are the bills that they chose to do. We arranged them by title to kind of simplify it and help a little bit for the processing of them. But Kevin and I are here to answer any questions, but Representative Gazaway is ready to rock, I believe. As much as we would love to, since Representative Gonzalez, this is really your first opportunity to hear all of these. I'm going to deny any motion to batch. I want you to have the, the distinct privilege that all of us have had over the years in Galway, you're recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. So the first bill that we have is House Bill 1355, and this concerns Title 5 of the Arkansas Code, which is the criminal offenses section of the Arkansas code. And so I'll just go through section by section, there are 8 sections that we make changes to in the criminal code. Uh, in this particular bill you'll see in Section 1. Where we're, this is a section related to Uh, fines, additional fines for offenses committed in the presence of the child, and it refers to the offense of sexual indecency with a child, and it says, if it's, if the offense is a class. is a felony or a class A misdemeanor. Well, the problem with that is the sexual indecency with a child is never a class A misdemeanor. It can be a felony or it can be a Class C misdemeanor, but it will never be a class A misdemeanor. Therefore, we're striking Class A misdemeanor. Section 2 deals with contraband and seized property, and they just for clarification, where it refers to a federally licensed dealer, there was no distinction as to what type of dealer it was referring to, I suppose it could have been a car dealer or a drug dealer, although I'm not aware if there are any federally licensed drug dealers, but nevertheless, for clarification purposes, we wanted to make it clear that we're referring to a federally licensed firearms dealer, and so where that uh We that term appears we've added firearms in front of dealer. Section 3 is the fentanyl enforcement and Accountability Act, which some of you may recall from last session, there what we do is, and you'll see this in section 3 of the bill where we talked about the injection geion inhalation causes the death of, and we said the person, well, it really wasn't clear to whom we were referring when we said the person maybe that meant. The person who um Delivered the drugs and that's not who we're referring to. We're referring to the person who Received the drugs and who took the drugs and so it should have been is the cause of death of the other person, to be clear, to whom we're referring and so that's the change there. Section 4. similar same change make it clear we're referring to the death of the other person. Section 5. Uh, in the fentanyl enforcement Accountability Act. We talked about delivery, but we also specifically defined conveyance. We, we put a specific Term for convey, which is a different definition from delivery, which is found in the uniform Controlled Substances Act and conveys again specifically defined in the fentanyl enforcement Accountability Act, but when we were talking about the factors to be used to determine whether a person possessed the controlled substance for personal use. We only referred to delivery and we left out conveyance and since both of those terms are used and they do have a slightly different meaning. We needed to not only say it packaged in manner to facilitate the delivery, but we also needed to say packaged in a manner to facilitate facilitate delivery or conveyance because That is another term that's used. And has a slightly different meaning. Section 6. Uh, is just correcting a reference where we Uh, where we talked about accomplice liability, we're still in the fentanyl enforcement Accountability Act. What we said here was a person is an accomplice for purposes of this section. Well, that section was only dealing with accomplice liability. So it That really doesn't make sense. What we really meant to say was a person is an accomplice for purposes of, and you'll see we've added an offense under this subchapter which would be all of the All of the language in the fentanyl enforcement Accountability Act, not that section. So we fix that section 7, deals with vulnerable persons as defined in the Criminal Code and there was a reference to a person clearly we were referring to the vulnerable person as mentioned in that section, so this just for clarification purposes and then Section 8. We uh Add the word to. Which was omitted and that clarifies which party is to receive damages. Um Because otherwise it would be silent as to whom the damages are paid to, so. That's I think a full and complete explanation of House Bill 1355, and I'm happy to answer any questions. Members, any questions? Seeing no questions, we have no one who signed up to speak for or against the bill referencing Gassway, you recognized clothes for your bill. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm closed for the bill. I'll make a motion to pass. Members, we have a motion to do pass on the table. Is there any discussion of the motion? Seeing no discussion, all in favor, please say aye. Any posts say no. The eyes have it. You congratulations, you have passed your bill. Let's move to House Bill 1356, and you're recognized to present that bill. Thank you, Madam Chair. The Title 5 criminal offenses was one of the more involved. technical correction bills that we'll hear today, so hopefully these others will go a little quicker. House Bill 1356 primarily makes some changes that We're a part of the Protect Arkansas Act, some language that was just left out. So what you'll see in section 1 of the bill is we're adding language to recognize post-release supervision. That's a term specifically from the Protect Arkansas Act. Uh, we, we talk about parole, which parole still exists under people sentenced under previous law where parole was an option, but going forward under the Protect Arkansas Act, it no longer referred to as parole. It's referred to as post-release supervision, and there was just a That was left out there that should have been added. Section 2 adds language once again to recognize post-release supervision from the Protect Arkansas Act. It refers to status of an inmate, parolee and it previously had inmate parole and probationer, but under protect Arkansas Act you're going to have a person on post-release supervision. So to be clear, um, We're including that new term. A person on post-release supervision. Section 3. This adds clarifying language about an exception for being presently employed by the Department of Corrections and the identification required, uh, OK, I recall this. If you look at subdivision D2. It allows a former employee of the department to continue to carry and we're talking about carrying a firearm as I recall correctly, so. There's this distinction made in this section between current employees and previous employees, but the way it was written, uh, It wasn't It wasn't clear without adding this little phrase, except as provided under subdivision D2 of this section. Because that's the section that refers to former employees, and we needed to distinguish that from the section that refers to present employees. So that's what you see in 3. For section 4 simply changes the term juvenile, um. To child Because that child is the term that's used throughout that section and so for consistency we use child as opposed to juvenile, and then section 5. is correcting a reference to the department. Hang on, just give me, bear with me. So Section 5 in this particular section of code it referred to the Department of Corrections and the the correct department to which it should have referred is the Department of Public Safety. And so that All the bill does. Happy to answer any questions members, are there any questions? Representative Springer? You're recognized for a question? Good morning. Thank you, Ms. Madam Chair. I just want to indicate that in section 2 you didn't go with that part regarding the change may develop the Hang on just a second. OK, section 2, OK, yeah, this. OK. Where, where have I missed this? This is the this is the section where we talked about post-release supervision. That section referred to an inmate, parolee or probationer. And because of the Protect Arkansas Act, you will also have the term to be accurate person on post-release supervision. That may not be the part that you're referring to though. I'm referring to under Section 2, the Arkansas Crime Information Center may develop instead of its authorized. Page 1 line 33, that you just skipped over that one. That's essentially means the same thing. They may They're authorized to There's no change in in terms of About the What they're able to do, um. It's just, it's simply a different term if you you guys have anything to add to that, please feel free. Typically in statues like this you use the words may or shall, depending on if you're commanding or authorizing and in general the preferred drafting style has been to use May instead of is authorized to. Members, are there any other questions? Seeing no further questions, we have no one who has signed up to speak for or against the bill, representing Gazaway, you're recognized clothes for House Bill 1356. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm closed for the bill. Make a motion to pass. Members, we have a motion to do pass on the table any discussion of the motion, seeing no discussion, all in favor, please say aye. Any opposed say no. The eyes have it. Congratulations, you have passed your bill, members, with that, let's move to House Bill 1357. You're recognized to present House Bill 1357. Thank you, Madam Chair. This is, ah, technical corrections to Title 16, which is practice procedure of the courts. Most of this comes from, or some of this comes from the Protect Arkansas Act. Uh, others were some changes that we discussed in the code revision commission over several meetings, so beginning in section one, where it referred to parole. Here we're changing that to post-prison transfer board. Because that is the would be the correct term. Under the Protect Arkansas Act. You'll see that uh throughout in several. Several references to that in section one where we're just adding post-release supervision, uh, post-prison transfer board again, all to be consistent with the terms that are used in the protect Arkansas Act where going forward we're no longer using the term parole, we're using post-release supervision. post-prison transfer board for the parole board. etc. and so you'll see that in section one. It's the same thing in section 2 person's parole or post-release supervision. Section 3. This was discussed in the Code Revision Commission. As I recall, You guys may have to chime in on this one, but there was an issue about the the the sentencing grid. And the seriousness grid, these are uh It's commonly used in the criminal courts when you're trying to determine a presumptive sentence. And so We added a lot of language here, Mr. Koon, I'm going to let you kind of explain that if you'd like. On that section 3, it was brought to our attention from the Sentencing commission that they don't use the term serious seriousness grid that it should have been sentencing grid and so the commission made that technical correction and then this section is just ratifying that decision. And, and I'll clarify because it's gonna be on the next few of these, a lot of time the commission generally meets after a regular session. They'll be meeting this summer likely to take up conflicts and omissions that happened during the legislative session, and they have the authority to make some technical corrections. It's been their norm in the past that while they go on ahead and make those corrections in the law, they also ask for them to be included in the next year's technical correction bills just so that in case anyone had a concern with the action they took or anything, the decision would be ratified by law. If you looked at the code, this change actually is already made, but this is just a belt and suspenders approach so that the history to the act will reflect the change that they made. Yeah, it's all coming back to me now. Part of it, part of what we did in the ProTECT Act as Mr. Miller said as we gave the sentencing commission. The ability to make certain technical corrections or corrections that needed to be made to the Protect Arkansas Act because it was so extensive, we knew that there were going to be some things that likely were missed or that needed to be clarified. And so these changes that you see in Section 3 and 4. Uh, We were given to us by the Sentencing commission. Is that correct? Yes, sir. OK, very good. Section 5 is, I believe, the same thing, changes that came from the Sentencing commission that they considered to be technical or clarifying in nature based on their authority under the Protect Arkansas Act. Section 7, you see it deletes public funds is defined there. That's deleted because it's not used in that subchapter of the Arkansas Code, so we define a term that's not used in that section, which makes no sense. Why would you do that? Section 8, adds clarifying language concerning settlement agreements for minors. This and I recall this. I think we did this in the Fairly recently, we acted on the statute. There was a little bit of clarifying language. That needed to be added by entering into a settlement agreement, which is clearly what that section. relates to, but in order to clarify and Mr. Koon, you may have something you want to add to that. We just thought that it read better and made more sense with that phrase in there and captured what the intent was that that's how you entered into the settlement agreement. And, and is that a change that we made last session on the minor settlement agreements. No, sir, this is something being recommended by the commission as new language for this section, so this is how it was enacted was without that phrase and the commission as part of its legislative package is recommending that that phrase be inserted, right, but as I recall on as I recall, it was the 2023 session, we made some changes to settlement agreements and the thresholds related to settlements for minors. This was just language that clarifies and should have likely been included that was just left out doesn't change the meaning. It's very clear that it is with a, goes along with the intent of that section. And again, just for clarification purposes, so with that, happy to answer any questions members, are there any questions? Representative Beatty, you're recognized for a question. Just, just quick clarification when you said commissioner, are you talking sentencing commission or are you talking code revision commission. Recommendations. That's from the Arkansas Code Revision Commission. There were some changes that we discussed earlier that were recommended by the sentencing commission, these that, yeah, these at the end were and what we just discussed about the minor settlement that came from the Code Revision Commission. Members, any other questions? Seeing no other questions, we have no one who's signed up to speak for or against the bill referencing Gassway, you recognized clothes for your bill. I'm clothes for the bill. I'll make a motion to pass. Members, we have a motion to do pass on the table. Is there any discussion? Seeing no discussion, all in favor, please say aye. Any opposed say no. The eyes have it congratulations you have passed your bill. Members, let's turn to House Bill 1358 representing Gazaway, you're recognized to present House Bill 1358. Thank you, Madam Chair. House Bill 1358 concerns Title 18, which is the property section of the Arkansas code. Section one, what you'll see is it's clarifying a criminal offense and making it consistent with the Arkansas Criminal Code. As written in this particular section, there was no conduct element for the offense and so in order to clarify that, uh, we added a prohibited foreign party controlled business entity that violates this section. So that's how you commit the offense. There was nothing in the existing language that indicated how a person committed the offense, and so it would be you commit the offense by violating. This section And then there was just some additional clarifying language. It's an unclassified felony. Because it it referred to that it was a felony punishable by not more than 2 years' imprisonment, that doesn't fit into the traditional felony classifications of DCBAY, etc. which means something that would be punishable by not more than 2 years would be an unclassified felony. So again, you add an unclassified. Just for clarification purposes. And $15,000 that clearly falls into an unclassified felony. And then section 2 ratifies decision by the Code Revision Commission to clarify. Uh, subdivision references and I'm gonna let there's quite a bit of language here. I'm going to let Mr. Koon, uh, explain that. This was a situation where there was a specific reference in the original act of subdivision 5A, but when you looked at the act as a whole, those different parties it's discussing were discussed throughout subdivision 5, and so it did not appear to make sense to refer just to that specific subdivision 5A because those parties are actually mentioned all throughout that subdivision 5. OK. And that's all that uh House Bill 1358 does have to answer any questions. Members, are there any questions? Seeing the questions, we have no one who's signed up to speak for or against the bill representing Asaway, you recognized the clothes for your bill. Close for the bill. Make a motion to pass. Members, we have a motion to do pass on the table on House Bill 1358. Any discussion of that motion? Seeing no discussion, all in favor, please say aye. Any opposed say no. The eyes have it. Congratulations you have passed your bill. Members, let's turn to House Bill 1359 representing Gasway, you recognize to present House Bill 1359. Thank you, Madam Chair. So this is One simple change sections 1 and 2 deletes language that refers to the Arkansas Comprehensive Health Insurance pool. Because That is being repealed in the Title 23 corrections bill, which we'll get to in just a moment. Um And I believe this was referred. And and authorized by the insurance commissioner insurance department, but I'll let Mr. Coon talk. Yes sir, the insurance commissioner has certified that this pool has ceased operations and so this language doesn't have any effect anymore. Would that have to answer any questions, are there any questions? Seeing the questions, we have no one who's signed up to speak for or against the bill. You recognized clothes for your bill. Clothes for the bill. Make a motion to pass. Members, we have a motion to do pass on House Bill 1359, and discussion of the motion. Seeing no discussion, all in favor, please say aye. All opposed. Say no. I have it. Congratulations, you have passed your bill. Members, let's turn to House Bill 1360 representing Gasway, you're recognized to present House Bill 1360. Thank you, Madam Chair. Members, this bill relates to Title 20, which is the public health and welfare section of the code. You'll see in Section 1, there is. This was, this was brought to the code revision commission. There was some discussion about this. I recall, um. This section was originally being added to Title 12. But another act moved Title 12 to Title 20. But as I recall this language didn't come with it. And so we're For whatever reason and so this language that was originally passed and codified to be Title 12, uh, we're moving it to Title 20, where all of the rest of the language for that section went to and Let's see. And then Section 2 just corrects some references and add some clarifying language. The language is about changing, removing, replacing, managing officers, not the permit. And so the way the language read it nonsensical, talked about, uh, You can change, remove, or replace the permit. Well, That doesn't make sense. What it meant is Referred to was you can change, remove or replace the managing partner or managing member, president, or chief executive officer. And so when you read that a section in. light of the rest of the language in that section, it was clear that it was a drafting error and it meant to include those specific individuals because they're the ones referenced in the other parts of that section. And not a permit again, which was kind of nonsensical language. And then the same thing you see in line 24 on page 2, it referred to the change removal or replacement of the permit, which is nonsensical, and here we're adding president, chief executive officer, or stockholder, which would be the appropriate officers. Under that provision that would just make sense same thing on page 3 line 2. Obviously not referring to the changes, removal or replacement of the permit, referring to the change, removal or replacement of the president, chief executive officer or stockholder with that happy to answer any questions, Mr. Coon. You may have something you want to add there. OK. Members, are there any questions? Seeing the questions, we have no one who has signed up to speak for or against the bill. You're recognized to close for your bill. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm closer to the bill. I make a motion to pass. Members, we have a motion to do pass on the table. Is there any discussion of the motion, seeing no discussion, all in favor, please say aye. Any opposed say no. I have it. Congratulations, you have passed your bill. Members, let's turn to House Bill 1361. You recognize. Oh, I'm sorry, Represent Collins? Thank you. This is just a question not about a specific bill, but are these all of the technical corrections that we're going to have, or are there any other bills? I, I'm not actually kidding, um, or, or because I, I thought there might have been some technical corrections to Title 17 and maybe others. Representative Collins, there's going to be 9 Senate bills that are addressed in the other titles of the Arkansas code. OK, thank you. So hang on, you'll get to hear some more down the road. Represent Gassway, you recognize to present House Bill 1361. Thank you, Madam Chair. House Bill 1361 makes technical corrections Title 23, which is public utilities and regulated industries. In Section 1, and I'm gonna let Uh, you guys talk about this, uh. This was brought to the Code Revision Commission about a grammatical error. The original language apparently was missing a verb and the other subdivisions in the list use shall. I remember when we talked about this, but this one did not and so to make it consistent with all the other sections we added shall. Now there's more than just the shell that's underlined there, so if anybody wants to explain that. The other underlying just indicates that the commission is presenting this to the General Assembly to adopt this language again with that change to insert shall. The only actual change to the language was the insertion of the shall. that was done by the commission correcting the grammatical error, and now they're presenting it to you all in this legislation to adopt that change. OK, that's correct. I remember that, yeah. So as opposed to speci uh it says shall specify, which is also consistent with all of the other shells that appear later on in that section. Section 2 also was an issue that came before the Code Revision Commission. Uh, original language was missing as to what was to be refunded after the command of shall refund. And so clearly what it was referring to and I think I recall this. All money received for transmission to the sender within 10 days of receipt of the center's written request and there's a There's a big section here. And as I recall, As I recall, was that language that was ported over from another section. Mr. Coon. On this one, there was a, this list was set up a little bit differently in the original legislation. It was a subdivision B1 and B2, and when the commission looked at it, they thought that that subdivision B2 actually belonged as part of the list that was in B1 also and so that's why that's all set out here. It's, it's a complete renumbering of that subsection. The language hasn't changed at all. It's just the renumbering of it to be B1 through B5. That's right. Exactly, I remember that now. Very good. Thank you. So the language doesn't change. It was just simply a renumbering, uh, section 3. Corrects a designation error, Mr. Koon, I'm needing some help on this one. This is one that I think that you were referring to where the, the language was actually being added to the wrong subsection, um, when this language was enacted, it was part of a subsection, I believe it was subsection B discussing letters of credit. Um, it didn't follow the intro language of how the letter of credit, you know, shall be implemented. And so when the commission looked at it, it looked like it was designed to be part of actually subsection A, which were permissible investments. It's that the commission asked for from the Securities Commissioner, and they agreed that this was the appropriate place for that language to be. Yeah It's all coming back to me now. All right, very good. Uh, section 4. Corrects a grammatical error by changing if to upon, you want to explain that one? Yes, if you read the sentence, it didn't make sense with the word if, and so there were multiple ways the commission looked at correcting that, the Securities commissioner recommended changing if to a bond to make it a complete sentence, and that's what the commission decided to do, and so this is just simply a ratification of that decision. And then section 56, and 7, just deletes obsolete language and once again we're deleting comprehensive health insurance pool Act. And that's referred to On a couple of different occasions and as we heard earlier that Health insurance pool no longer exists. That's been certified to us by the insurance commissioner, so there's no need for that language. And with that, happy to answer any questions. Members, are there any questions? Seeing no questions, we have no one who's signed up to speak for or against this bill representing Gassway, you're recognized to close for your bill. Thank you, Madam Chair. Clothes for the bill. Make a motion to pass. Members, we have a motion to do pass on House Bill 1361. Any discussion on that motion? Seeing no discussion, all in favor of the motion, please say aye. All opposed say no. The eyes have it. Congratulations, you have passed your bill. Members, let's turn to House Bill 1362, representing Gasway, you recognized to present House Bill 1362. Thank you, Madam Chair. 1362 relates to technical corrections to Title 24, which is The part of the code related to retirement and pensions. What you'll see in section one is simply a clarification of Executive director, clearly this falls under the Arkansas Public Employees retirement System and their authority, the board of trustees' authority to appoint an executive director when it says the board shall appoint an executive director and once again, to be clear, the executive director of the Arkansas Public Employees Retirement System. That is the specific executive director to whom we're referring. Then section 2 delete some obsolete language because that date has already passed the rules and procedures shall be adopted by May 1, 2004. Well, that's already occurred. So we delete that and then section 3. Deletes language already codified in another section of the code, 1452106. This relates to vacation pay. This does not relate to retirement. We believe this was misplaced in this section of the code, uh, because this was already same exact language is codified in Title 14 of the Code, which is the most appropriate place for it. This has nothing to do with retirement, so we were a little unsure as to why it was even here. So with that, we're striking it because it's already codified somewhere else. That's all the bill does. Happy to answer any questions. members any questions? Seeing no questions, we have no one who signed up to speak for or against the bill representing Gasway. You're recognized clothes for your bill. Clothes for the bill. Make a motion to pass. Members, we have a motion to pass on House Bill 1362. Any discussion? Seeing no discussion on the motion, all in favor, please say aye. Any opposed say no. The eyes have it. Congratulations, you have passed your bill. Members, let's turn to House Bill 1363 representing Gaway, you're recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. House Bill 1363 makes technical corrections to Title 25 of the code, which is the title of the code that refers to state government. What you'll see in section 1 adds some clarifying language. Um It refers to This is relocation of the seat of government. Uh, in the event, essentially of an emergency and this as I recall deals with the emergency Powers Act, uh, which we had some legislation on in 20. 21, as I recall. I think I carried that and so we talk about regular session, extraordinary session. Then there was language about an emergency session. Well, there is no such thing as an emergency session. We have regular sessions. fiscal sessions, extraordinary sessions, we do not have emergency sessions and so we delete the term emergency session. We add the term session after regular or extraordinary. And Essentially. What you have in section one, sections, there are several sections here, 23, 1617, 1819, 21, 22, 23, 25, and 27, just deletes obsolete language. The language is tied to dates that have already passed, and so you'll see in all of these sections, you know, no later than July 1, 2004. No later than October 1, 2011, shall be submitted by October 1, 2012. All of these dates have already passed and because they've already passed. We strike all of those references in those sections. Sections 4567, and 24 where the term cybersecurity appears. It was In the code as two words and apparently if you talk to the folks over at the cybersecurity office, they don't like two words. They like one word, cyber cybersecurity should be one word and so every place where cybersecurity appears as two words, we make it one word. Cybersecurity. So that uh that's what you see in sections 4567, and 24. Section 8. repeals obsolete language. It refers to human development centers and it lists a human development center located in Alexander. Well, there is no longer a human development center in Alexander, so We don't need to refer to it. We strike that. Section 9. Uh clarifies a reference and deletes obsolete language. Referring to biennial. And so you'll see Again, just some clarifying language about under the department as opposed to they're under and then when it talks about all requests for biennial appropriations. Well, we no longer have biennial appropriations. We have annual appropriations, so it doesn't make sense to refer to biennial appropriations anymore. So that language is stricken. Section 10 deletes obsolete language, uh, the this language, interestingly, I may have Mr. Coon expound upon this is language from 1844, just a few years ago, that regulates the sale of certain state lands and the sale of state lands is now under the commissioner of State lands and this language is no longer relevant or necessary, so that is stricken Section 10. Sections 1112, 1314, and 15 delete obsolete language. They refer to entities that were either abolished or never created. So you have the athletics and activities Board. That's not a thing. The Arkansas State Board of Registration for Foresters abolished. Veterinary medical examining Board that's been abolished. Commission on water well construction abolished. So uh you'll see several of those uh referred again boards and commissions that were never created. Or have been abolished. Section 20 It is a clarifying reference the utility systems. And to be clear, The utility systems. Provide wastewater service. The utility systems do not provide wastewater. And I think we're thankful for that. So A member said some of them do. So, um, make that clarification there. And we've already referred to, I believe what we did in Section 21, which is repeal obsolete language. Section 26. Delete's obsolete language and clarifies the section. The duty to file articles has already passed. The way this was written, talks about within 30 days after the first meeting of the board, well, your articles were already due before then and that, that you have to file your articles. Well, the articles were already due before then, so that doesn't make sense. And so that language is Being stricken. And it also updates to say, That it shall Keep the articles of incorporation on file with the Secretary of State. Um Not cause them to be fouled, but shall keep them on file. Later And then Section 28, clarifies a reference the Arkansas Emergency telephone Services Board was abolished and became the Arkansas 911 board and so we're making that change and clarification and with that, I'm happy to answer any questions. Representative Springer, you recognized for a question. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to make sure you don't get in trouble with respect to Section 24, and then maybe I'm incorrect. It has um section 24 page 7. Arkansas cyber initiatives, security initiative, is that the way it's supposed to be or is it, is that proper? It would be consistent with the F portion, uh, security, cybersecurity state cybersecurity office. So if you all want to make that, I don't know if I'm just asking. Cybersecurity, that'd be page 7, line 24. OK. I see. OK. So, and this what I'm being told, which I think Makes sense is that the Arkansas cyber initiative is a different thing from the state cybersecurity office and there is no such word as a single cyber initiative. Um, as there is a single word of cybersecurity, so that those are two different things. It's not really clear, but that's a good point. Members, any other questions? Seeing no other questions, no one has signed up to speak for or against the bill representingaway, you recognized clothes for House Bill 1363. Thank you, Madam Chair. Closing the bill. Make a motion to pass. Members, we have a motion to pass on the table. Is there any discussion of the motion, seeing no discussion, all in favor, please say aye. All opposed, please say no. I have it. Congratulations, you have passed your bill and particularly for the 181 years it took us to get to that clarification. We appreciate it. So anybody who wants to criticize the legislature for not, uh, for, um, going too fast on some bills, we can point to this one and tell them it took us 181 years to get to it. So, uh, with that one, I believe we have one more House Bill 1364 recognize you represented Gasway. Thank you, madam. uh, House Bill 1364 makes technical corrections to Title 27, which is the section of the code or the part of the code related to transportation. What you'll see in sections 134, and 13 is deleting obsolete language and once again, this is language tied to dates that have already passed. So you'll see a beginning September 1, 1985. Uh, you'll see beginning January 1, 2006. and we can keep going, but the point is these dates have already passed. Sections 2 and 6 deletes obsolete language, which refers to disabled War One veterans. We no longer have any living World War I veterans. Therefore, Doesn't make sense to continue to reference that term in the code, Section 5, deletes obsolete language. Related to And I may need you guys to talk about this for a section that's repealed by Section 9 of the bill. So Mr. Coon, yeah, this reference in section 5 is to a code section, which if you look later on in the bill in Section 9 is being repealed and uh It's being repealed because it's actually already codified in Title 5, and so it just made more sense since as dealing with criminal procedure and criminal trials that that language stay in Title VI and not be in Title 27. That's right. OK, it's coming back to me now. Yeah, we're repealing code sections that are mentioned here because those code sections are being repealed. Those again just to Restate what was just stated. Those code sections are being repealed because they already appear in Title 5 of the code, which is the criminal offenses. portion of the code, which is the most appropriate place for the For this language. So it appears in two places of the code. It's not needed in 16. It's much more appropriate in Title V5 where it already exists. And so then any reference, since we're striking that whole section, any references to those individual statute numbers should also be stricken. That's what you see in 5 section 7 and 8, clarifying a criminal offense and making it consistent with the Arkansas Criminal Code. We, we did this a lot in techno correction Bill's last session. Where uh there would be Uh, there would be a criminal offense referred to as a misdemeanor. But It didn't set for it only authorized a fine and it wasn't consistent with the penalties that we have for our various classifications of misdemeanors, and so they should not have been referred to as misdemeanors. They should have been referred to as violations. We did a lot of those changes in 2023, but that's the same thing that you see in Section 7 and 8, where there were uh Violations of the law that were referred to if you were convicted that they would be guilty of a misdemeanor. But then it only authorized to find. That doesn't make sense. That's not a misdemeanor. That's a violation. So that's what you see in section 7 and 8, Section 9, we already talked about that, that deletes a lot of language, but that language already appears in Title 5. Section 10 deletes obsolete language tied to a federal law from 1974, which establishes a 55 mile an hour speed limit on public highways. We know that that is no longer the federal law, and so there's no need to cite to it in our state law. Section 11 clarifies the application of the section so that it better matches language in 27, 16, 702, which uses the terms permit, license, and minor. Mr. Coon, you may want to comment on that. Yeah, it's just for consistency between those two sections they referred to each other and so it's just to make sure they're using the same terminology. And then section 12 uh. Clarifies that and corrects an obsolete reference. Section 12, there's a reference to the state highway fund. There is no longer a state highway fund and the appropriate fund that it should be referring to is the county aid fund. If you're going to for counties to receive money under this section, the appropriate fund would be the county aid fund, and so we're just simply replacing the obsolete term with the correct term. And with that, I'm happy to answer any questions. Members, are there any questions? Seeing no questions, we have no one who's signed up to speak for or against the billing Gassway, you recognized clothes for your bill. Clothes for the bill. Make a motion to pass. Members, we have a motion to pass on House Bill 1364. Any discussion? Seeing no discussion, all in favor, please say aye. Any opposed say no. The eyes have it. Congratulations, you have passed your bill. And members, I think that takes us to the end of our technical corrections for today. We look forward to the next batch that will be coming. Thank you gentlemen for coming to aid Mr. Gasaway, um, members with that just a couple of announcements, our committee picture will be Thursday. 9:45 on the house steps, uh, right now I will be talking with Bill sponsors to see what we may have on deck for Thursday, for those of you who are frequent guests of our committee, feel free to reach out to me if you're wanting to know what that list is. We've whittled our calendar down pretty good, but with that being said, a good number of bills have been filed this week. So just watch your emails. I'll let you know and With that, I will see you at 9:45 Thursday morning for our picture. We are adjourned.