Revenue & Tax - Senate

Or Uh, we have a quorum here today at this moment, so, uh, the only order that we're going to do today is Senator Hester. Has looked through a lot of our uh reports that we have and we've, we've been having discussions that, you know, over the years there's a lot of reports that may have been done for certain reasons. Maybe those were needed at that particular time, not for sure if they are so in an attempt to be more effective and efficiency for our agencies. We're going through those reports to make sure that, you know, if there's anything that we feel like that this body's OK. With deleting. I thought the best way was to have the entities involved, which as you can see, the first On your list. This will be this list we have here, you all. So, you know, like the uh Arkansas Department of Finance, Economic development and those top ones right there. We probably need to get those over to those particular entities, but DFNA, they're going to be here today and we're going to start with the top one and just start with each one of them individually, uh, see what they think if the report's needed, and of course the final decision will be upon this committee, if we all decide that that we believe that report needs to be. deleted since these are in statute, we'll have to have our staff to prepare bills, and we'll have to run them through the process. So I hope that's an explanation. Senator Hester, you got anything else to say? because I know you've been the one that's heavily involved with this. No, I think that's just it. I mean, we claim we're for efficiency. Maybe we're requiring a bunch of work that's, that's no longer needed necessary. I'm glad we're looking at it. Yes sir. OK, uh, with DF today, would you mind coming to the table and introducing yourself, and we'll just start with report one. we may or may not get through with all these today. Uh, we'll just see how it kind of rolls, and if not, we'll. Take it up, but one of the next meetings. Good morning, Mr. Chair. Paul Gehring, Department of Finance Administration, Assistant Revenue commissioner. Good. Good to have you here, Mr. Garin. So like we said, I guess the first one right there is going to be the one that's titled DFNA Office of Accounting. Financial reporting section. Is that correct? The annual comprehensive financial statement. That's correct, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. We appreciate the General Assembly and the members of this committee evaluating the reports that the department is required by statute to provide to the General Assembly. DFA is always looking for areas to improve efficiency, and to allow this opportunity to to balance the usefulness of the report. against the the resources that are required to generate the information, so we have shared the committee's spreadsheet with members of DFA or administrators, to just gain information. About the usefulness of the reports and how essential they are for functioning of the department as you see previously DFA had provided information regarding the amount of employee hours that are required to prepare that report as required by the statute. So we have gone through the spreadsheet and identified those reports that are that we would like to keep and also make recommendations as to reports that potentially could be evaluated by the General Assembly to be discontinued in the future, so starting on the spreadsheet, of course, would be the DFA Office of Accounting Financial Reporting section. This is the annual comprehensive financial report ACFR. We've identified that report is that we recommend that we keep that report. And members this was as large as we can make this, so I do apologize. It's just So Senator Hester, you're going to skip the Arkansas Development Finance Authority, the AEDC as well as the tax appeals commission because those reports are outside of DFA's purview. And so the first one would be Office of Accounting, so and then as you go down the list, the remainder are DFA reports. And so the next is the schedule of expenditures of federal awards stop right there. So as let's just take each one. So I think under that particular one, there's no doubt that we want to, we'd want to keep that but any other members have any other comments in regards to that report. Yeah. Yes, sir, Senator Petty. Just clarification, is that the annual audit? Is that what you're talking about there? Certainly it's the report of the financial statement of state government entities, so it's a, it's, it's a crucial report for purposes of DFA's not the actual state the state audit, it's not an audit, correct? It sounds like there would be an audit opinion associated with that. I just want to make sure that that that's. Uh, not what we're talking about here. And if you want others to come to the table, call if they're needed get back with me on that to be that's a great question, Senator Petty. Paul, if you want to have others come to the table, because I would really I would like to try to deal with each one of them and get all, all the questions answered. I want to make sure that there's no one in the audience that disagrees with you all or has any other opinions also, so, so, Mr. Babbitt, you wanna OK. Senator Petty may just want to make sure that Babbitt understood what you were asking. Andy Babbitt, DFA State Controller. Uh, can you repeat your question for me, please. Yes, sir. So I understand we have uh audit requirements and, and we produce an annual audit. I just wanted to make sure if this was part of that audit or or that was the audited financial statements or, or exactly what this was. The ACFR, the Act for, um, is the complete picture of the state of Arkansas's financial position, and it is audited by legislator. audit in coordination with the next report that y'all will be discussing. Those are the two that must be filed with the federal government for our federal grants that that's what I wanted to get clarification on. Yes, thank you. Great, great question. Just members, just, just so you know, these reports were all inclusive, uh, you know, we understand that some of them, you know, we're going to keep, but again to be to be that way, we want to make sure that we had them all, so send her history. This question is not necessarily about this one, but overall, if you would say this as you go to these. It's required by statute, but if we didn't require it, couldn't you still just do it? Yes, Senator Hester, we would still need to do it because that is a piece of the federal Single Audit Act, so they must see our financial statements along with that the um schedule of expenditures of federal awards. Both of those must be filed with the federal government, so even if it wasn't required by statute, we would still need to do it. Right, and I think based on what I heard earlier is the DNA is going to say a lot of these you want. I say great. We don't have to require it if you want it, you can still do it. Right? Is it easier for you that we require it by law for any Uh I believe that um I'm trying to go back in my history here. The reason that it was required dates back to about 20 or 21 years ago when, and I'd have to review the statute whereby DFA took over the the uh preparation. Of, of the financial statements themselves and then legislative audit took over the audit of that. So I believe that statute kind of encompasses that whole thought, but to your point, uh, it's obviously the prerogative of the legislature as to whether they want to have it in statute or not. Right, and yeah, and that is a that is a good thing appreciate your experience with the leg audit that was You know, some of this stuff, if it's in statute and it's not followed correctly and then of course whenever they got it looks at it and does their finding for future. Uh, management of DFA or whatever that that could be a benefit that we do have it in statute. So again, that's a good one to start with. I think we, unless You all think differently, I believe that's one that we probably need in statute for sure. OK. Any, does anyone in the audience have any uh Anything they want to discuss as far as this report. We give everybody the opportunity, OK? All right, so we'll just say we're gonna keep that one and then Paul, you can go to the next one. Yes sir, Mr. Chair, the next is the schedule of expenditures of federal awards or also called the CIA report. Again, this is a report that DFA would like to Continue to keep preparing and providing to the General Assembly. We have to answer any questions about that report. OK. Senator Crow, is this a required federally required report to? Uh, yes, sir. That is a federally required report. OK, any other questions in regards to this report? I'm going to keep asking this just so that, you know, we're being transparent. We allow the public to comment. Anybody in the public on this particular report. Everything you want to say? OK, so we're gonna, we're gonna mark that one to keep also. Mr. Geering, you have the next one thank you Mr. Chair. Next report is the American rescue Plan Act. That's a monthly report that provides monthly expenditure activity to the Legislative council. We recommend that the report be kept, however, as the funds of the American Rescue Plan Act have, you know, this was primarily related to federal relief from approximately 3 or 4 years ago instead of it being a monthly report, Our recommendation was to keep but make that a semi-annually report. OK. Senator Hester. So I'm agreeable to that, um, we say semiannual report until the funds were spent and then it automatically sunsets like we don't have to readdress it. Again, any thoughts on that? I think that would be a good idea, Senator Hester, and those funds we expect to be spent by when? December 31st, 2026 is the deadline for expenditure of funds. After that, any remaining would have to be returned to the federal government, OK. Unless I change it again. So, And and staff right here is going to, so on this particular one, Of course we're going to have to, we're going to do some legislation, so on that particular one, I want to make sure that I fully understand this. So what we would do instead of that being saying in statute it's going to be a monthly report. You all think that we'd be OK with a semiannual report, which is presented to ALC. Is that the way that's done, or is it just a report you all are preparing? Yes, sir. It's, it's part of special language within our appropriation Act and that language you just need to change. the prerogative of the body, uh, but yes, we believe now that the funds have been obligated and it's just a monitoring of the expenditures that that semiannual might be the better course of action and yes sir, it will be filed with ALC as normal. So I know I'm asking you a lot, but so we're going to get our staff to prepare this statute. And in addition to that, in addition to that with what Senator Hester said, we also need to put a sun sunset. date on this, so I don't know if the sunset date should correspond with the date that Senator Hester just said, or if that possibly should be a year later. I don't know if there's a benefit to Still providing the membership and the public with that report after the fact. So if there was something in that was done on December 31st of 26 on the last day. And if that is the final deadline. I'm just wondering if we should say at least Through the middle of the next year. So yeah, so we'll just put that the sun, the sunset will be, uh, we'll, we'll get the language, so, but the sunset will be 6 months, uh, After the deadline of the funds to be spent that way if they were to, if they were to move the deadline. Then what that would do is that would go ahead and make that report so at some, at some point it would be obsolete and you all could stop and we would, you could quit providing that. Does that work? Anybody on anybody else in the, in the audience have anything different they want to say on that? OK. Did you get all that? OK. OK, so we're gonna rework that one. OK, Paul, you want to go to the next one. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Next report is general revenue allotment reserve report also that is a report that the The Department is recommending no changes to continue that report. And y'all, y'all, y'all present that to, that's one of the reports y'all present to ALC. Is that correct? Yes, sir. Yeah, it's any, any of the members have any questions on it because That is that is a beneficial report. Senator Hester, do you have something or you, yeah, I, I guess some of these um. Even if we said we're not doing it anymore. In 6 months members could say, hey, I want that report, and you could produce it. Yes, sir. The, the statutory requirements around the chief fiscal officer in the accounting for the books of the state require us at any time to be able to present uh information as to the fund balances, the revenues and expenses of the state by the state fund. So yes, sir, we could, yeah, so, so my point is I, I'm not as maybe apprehensive about eliminating a bunch of these because I feel like if We eliminate them and tomorrow the membership says we want it, we just. Ask you for it again and you start creating it again, yes, OK. Senator Petty, yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Follow up to that just uh Senator Hester brings up a good point. So you've got the estimated time to prepare it each month are, and this is more of a broad across several of them, but if it takes 10 minutes to do it and you're doing it monthly, if you do it every 4 months, is it going to take you longer to do it or is it still going to be 10 minutes because you're looking at a snapshot in time. No, sir, the estimated the estimated amount To, uh, does not change here again, our, our underlying accounting system provides the information we need. It's just bringing it out, preparing the report for ALC. more Just You have some shares. We do a senate, Hester says every time someone asks for it every 3 months or 6 months or whatever it's going to take the same 10 minutes most of these reports, the same 10 minutes or 30 minutes. Yes sir, that's what we anticipate. Mr. Secretary, would you please introduce yourself? Jim Hudson, Secretary of DFA. Let's see if I can't help confuse the situation. Uh, these reports on fund balances. I want to see them. Uh, every single month, so they're gonna be coming to me. So really the level of effort for us is just attaching it to an email and send it over to BLR. So it, it will be prepared at least monthly, but you know, to Senator Hester's point, anytime y'all want any fund balance information, it's available at the drop of a hat, so we can provide it to you as needed. I guess the only, the only thing that I have with that is I believe, you know, with it coming before ALC and that whole body, you know, I think that, you know, some members may go through the thing. I'm also not for sure. If if that report was to be, was to not be produced that way through statute. Does that, does that create any issues or something? It would be harder to fool you, because I guess the thing is, is if you know the media or something wants to know, you know, OK, our general revenue allotment reserve report, uh, you know, what was that again right now it's being presented, I guess in ALC monthly. It's, it's readily available to the public if we were to not do that. I just, I want to be very cautious, you know, that. That if somebody wants it, that it's available. Now my view would be it's, it's a record and so it is foible anytime. And let me, let me make a clarifying point. The 5 reports we're talking about now, they were filed with ALC. They're actually not in statute. It's, it's a historical uh request from ALC that we're continuing to uh to provide. So these reports are not in statute. I thought the the general revenue allotment, the, uh, uh, securities reserve budget stabilization and I'm missing one, I apologize. Those 4 are not in statute. It's only the ARPA and obviously the other two. But we do provide it courtesy of, yeah, OK, and so here's the thing, a little bit of a mistake on my part. I don't even know if we should be discussing those. We, we continue to discuss them just so that the members here understand. But if it's not something a statute since we're in session to change. Uh, I think our thought was whenever these were first coming through, we thought that they were an actual statute to their self. If they were to be, uh, if they were to be in our uh Requirements of ALC then they're going to have to continue because that change will have to be made through that next. body, so If, if I, if I can, yeah, I, I like us going through it because if we go to make that change in ALC, we could say the revenue tax we've we've considered all these heard reports on it, yeah, so appreciate it, Mr. Babbitt. That was a good catch right there. OK, so the next one. Uh, it's gonna be which one Securities reserve fund? That'll be the restricted reserve funds. Mr. Chair, that's also recommended that we maintain that report, OK, and again, no statute change on that one. So whenever I go back up here to the American Rescue Act, that one doesn't have a statute either. It doesn't appear like it's, it's special language in the Appropriation Act. Oh, it is special language, sir. OK. So that special language will have to be run this year. Yes, sir. OK. And I think through special language, you all make the request whether to continue or change it. I've asked staff to do it, but would you all make sure that we change that particular one. The way that we need to, because that's going to be a little bit different since that is special language. So we'll just change that one to what we said, to what we said earlier, so you won't have to do anything on that particular one. It's showing not in statute, but really it It is with special language, but that request will come through you all. OK. Confusing. OK. Any other questions on that? Anyone from the audience have any any uh further input on that. Either of those, OK? You can go to the next one. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The next is the securities reserve Fund, also DFA recommends that we maintain that report as stated in the statute. OK, so it's not in statute. No, I'm sorry. Yes, that's correct. It's non-statute. So it's not in statute, same thing. It must be something with AOC, so. Anyone want to Everybody understand what that is. Right Yes, basically Yeah, yeah, so just so the committee understands, security reserve is is the treasurer's report kind of showing where we're generating interest off the state investments, so that's again another one of those fund balances that we're watching and we're aware of on a regular basis. Yeah, I know, I know 11 senator who wants to keep that. Anyway. OK, you'll go to the next one. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The next is the budget stabilization Trust report DFA's recommendations to maintain that report. OK. members having any thoughts, comments, questions on that. Anyone from the audience on this particular or the last this one and the one prior. OK. So we're gonna go to the next one and the next one is something that's in statute, it appears like. Correct that is correct, Mr. Chair. That is the revenue division Office of Child Support Enforcement. It is a semi-annual report required by statute. I did confirm with our administrator for child support that that is not a federally required report. This report requires 6 hours to prepare. It's a report that we are not recommending to keep it could be discontinued. That would just be we would defer to the usefulness of the report of members of the General Assembly if they. that that's something that would be valuable to maintain, but it could be eliminated if the General Assembly decided to do so. OK That's going to be the task of this committee is to come up whether or not we prepare legislation to To do away with it, so I guess at this point, anybody have any ideas with that or say that. It's important enough to keep, or is that something where we can save them. 6 hours of work. my default position on this is I, I would say we eliminate it, and if there's a member that thinks They need it right now, it shows over here that no members asking for it, you know, it's possible that we get stacks of these reports and somebody looks at that every month, but no one's ever had a question for it or um there might have been a reason. I don't know when that uh when that became law. Um If, uh, But some of these things I know that maybe there was a very valid reason that we started it 10 years ago or 25 years ago, and that's no longer the same if I may, Senator Hester, I think what we'll find in a lot of these reports is there is a point in time issue. And maybe just a need for information that the legislative branch had to monitor performance of the executive branch that probably folks have long since forgotten what the issue really was. And this particular report really is less about the financial operation of the agency. It's more about how they're collecting the money, how much money they're collecting, who all's getting it. You know, we have access to that information if any member of the General Assembly would like to know at any point in time, how good a job we're doing in child support, we'll be happy to provide that information. Um, or you know, if, if the committee doesn't feel calm with that, it leads to reduce the number of times that we have to submit it, you know, that's the thing and to your point, Senator Hester, nobody's asking about it. OK, just anybody from the, uh, anybody from the audience. Want to have any discussions further discussions regarding this. OK. I don't, I don't. unless it looks like there's gonna be some controversial unless anybody here disagrees, then what I would just say, you know, without objection from anyone in here, we'll just have staff to uh all you're gonna have to do on that particular one is just uh Take that code, we'll just do a repeal of it. So do a repeal, uh, that, that's also going to have to have a member to uh to carry it in here. We'll start that. So I guess if, if we get them, if we get them all done, do you want to carry that motion the vice chair carries all. That's a good idea. I love that. We're in. I know, I know everybody, everybody maybe except for ones in agreement, so it looks like we got a trade on the vice chair. We're gonna let Senator Crow carry all these unless he just 100% objects on something that he feels, feels differently. And we overrule that. OK, so, uh, Senator Crow will be carrying these. Well, I like I say just do a repeal, OK? Thank you, Mr. Chair. The next section of reports pertain to the Office of Budget. The first report is the state central Services report that is a report that DFA recommends that we that we keep providing. OK, and it's not in statute, correct, yeah. So If it's provided for AOC again, it's going to be one of those reports, so I think everybody, anybody in the audience have anything they want to say on that in case. So let's just go to the next one. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The next report for the Budget Office is the approved miscellaneous federal grant and miscellaneous workforce Investment Program requests that is required by statute and we DFA is recommending that that um. Report continue. OK. I see that, you know, this is one that's in statute to show all approved federal grant appropriations for agencies over the biennium. Keep it. Right. Sounds good. Let's, uh, let's just leave that one as is. OK. Next report is the budget manual Capital projects reappropriation Transmittals and the recommendation from DFA is that we've maintained that report and the secretary did have a comment about that report. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I think you know obviously we need to put together the budget manuals for, you know, regularization for the fiscal session. I think what what I'd like to see if we could. I maybe get, you know, our budget director Robert Bragg, the governor's budget director, maybe Kevin, uh, Anderson, and a few others, and let's just have a conversation about the formatting and the data elements. Those budget manuals are very, very thick, and of course DFA produces those for every single member, every single time. And if there's a change, we got to go back and do it all over again. So it's, it's not a small amount of effort and it takes us months to do that. I'm not sure if all the data elements are still needed and if they're still needed in the format, they're being presented. I think we feel like at times and Robert's free to comment as well that, you know, we can't really make any adjustments on the fly with y'all's consent, uh, because it is for, for your use and so I just, I'd like for us to at least go through a review and see if any changes are warranted and whether or not that requires changes in code, OK? Is that something we can do during the session? I think so. I think so. So if it's OK with the membership on this particular one as, as you said with Mr. Anderson, of course he's who's who handles it for the legislature. Uh, so if you all just want to uh have a meeting, uh, try to see if the structure, you know, and if there's something needs to be amended within the statute to make that where it's more efficient and more effective, then if y'all will get that drafted for us and bring it back to us on this particular one, and we'll take a look at it. If that's OK with the membership. Yeah, send her history. So your concern is the actual data points that we require, or is it the actual printing of 200 printing and putting together the 200 of these binders that are this thick. Well, it's both, you know, that's be my question for, for Mr. Anderson and for the members would be, is it useful for us to produce, you know, thousands of pieces of paper or can we have that the detail available, but they maybe present to each member a more concise, you know, display of the data by appropriation. Bill that would be someplace I'd like for us to work toward. Again, having all the detail available, you know, to, to the members. But the main thing, I think also as well some flexibility in the formatting, um, because we have to hard code that formatting in our budget system and it'd be nice to have some flexibility. This is what we're using it. I'm sorry, I do believe that now House and Senate, all members, I've been, um, you know, provided that. Yeah, an iPad that that that that all that could be accessed. Now, I'm, I'm sure a generation removed, but I still prefer, if I'm getting serious to have it in paper, but, uh. Anyway, we'll work through that. Yes, sir. Senator Petty. So at some point we put it all electronically. Is there a good, I mean, produce it one time and we can publish it and we can get the new fancy ALC system to work where we can have on our system. That would eliminate the. I. Paper version of Yes sir, that, that I think that would be a huge benefit to us. Hold on, hold on a second. Senator Petty. If you'll push your mic right there because whenever we're live streamed it needs to be be showing red. It was, it was not working, so sorry, and your question was just so it'll be a, so the question was, we eventually put all of that and, and, and what we just went through is out on, on the legislative website anyway. If we could work with you producing it one time and and made it on the uh ALC new system where there's, there's at least Uh, looks like a uh a slot to put the documents, then that would, that would eliminate the need for the paper binders. It just be a huge, I think, helped us and reduce expenses, but it would really be less wear and tear on the staff and the staff, the same staff who actually prepared the detailed information are also the ones doing the collating, so it's that piece and that I really do think it'd be great to have a conversation about the data elements themselves and we had one particular member who was, I think, frustrated with us at times during the last budget hearings because there's a data element he wanted to see. We don't have the authority under under the code to just change that on the fly. We're doing what you've told us to do. And so I suspect those data elements were put together, you know, probably a dozen general assemblies ago. So let's just have a fresh conversation about what we need to present, and we'd be, we'd love to work with you on that. Yeah, great discussion, great conversation on this particular one, and like you say, I mean, if somebody wants a hard copy, I'm, I'm gonna be one of the dinosaurs in the room that, you know, I have our staff to uh print all of our bills that come before us in the session, and that's the way I'm going to continue, but uh, but anyway, again, we could eliminate a, a ton of paperwork as a Senator Petty has said. Anybody in the audience have any anything additional on that particular one? OK, so yes, sir. I would just suggest to you is perhaps the members are interested in looking at budget information maybe in a different way, if you write your own business, you may look at information one way, one way different from how much here maybe there's some, some type of a format that would actually be even uh even our budgets. That sounds great. Whoever thank you, Mr. Collins, whoever the, uh, You know, whoever we need at that meeting, like I say, as long as we want to make sure the legislative staff's involved. I know you all are going to have the executive branch there, but I think uh we'll make sure we're getting that balance of power right there and then we have our staff in the legislature to make sure that they're actually getting the input that they need, you know, for this membership to the public, we have a great relationship with Mr. Anderson. He's wonderful to work with, and Robert, he worked very well together and so we'll make sure we get the right right people in the room. OK. All right, so staff understands what we're going do with that. They're gonna work on that and at some point during the session, we'll bring it back with a Probably a A bill that needs to be run and we'll take it through the process or try to or attempt to take it through. OK. OK. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The next report from the Office of Budget is the carry forward report DFA is recommending that we maintain that report. It's not in statute, but it is in special language. OK. So same, same way with that on special language. So you all are just going to keep your current special language in place is what you're looking to do year to year. OK. Senator Hester. Is there a reason that needs to be in special language instead of me just running a bill. I mean we talk about this every time, having less special language. Is there objection to someone just running a bill to require it. I, I'm thank you, Senator Hofstra. I agree. If there's a report that's required, it's preferred to be in the actual Arkansas code as opposed to being in special language much more easier to keep track of, yeah, so yeah, you wouldn't find that, yeah, OK, so we'll consider that then. All right, so. If I understood, and maybe that's what we're going to do right now before special language starts meeting. So, did I understand what you just said, Mr. Geering, you, you believe that actually instead of doing the special language that if we just went ahead and put it into the code. would probably be more effective. Certainly, I mean, certainly many of these reports are going to be required continually over time, so certainly it's it's better to have a statute, the requirement. There are reports, for example, the ARPA report that we discussed, that certainly is something that is really temporary in nature in terms of a few years, but many of these budgetary reports are going to be required, um, on an ongoing basis just as a practical matter, what this particular report refers to really, it's my approval as CFO of the state to say that appropriation request is appropriate, permissible. I'm kind of the last stop in the executive branch before it goes to you. I suspect it really kind of is there because it It makes sense sequentially that I send it to you for get on the peer agenda so practically speaking, we have to do it, otherwise, you know, y'all won't be able to take the matter up. OK. Senator Body Did you have a question, sir? I did. I'm not sure that it makes sense, but I'm gonna ask it anyhow. Uh, I don't know how we would do it and keep up with it. So the question I would have is, I, I agree that things should go in statute rather than special language. I think that's important. The question I had is there a way to do that where it has some kind of sunset so that it forces the General Assembly to review it. You know, every 5 years or every 10 years or something, so again, maybe we don't have this exercise, so that, that's just my question. I'm trying to think structurally how that would happen. Again, I'm, we got people smart enough to do that. I, I would think that. I would, I would think personally we probably wouldn't sunset it if we, if we wanted to do something if we, if, if you would like and the rest committee would like some language on like this particular one, since we're taking out a special language just that, uh, uh, you know, I guess the legislation itself could actually say In In the year so and so that it'll that this report will be brought back before the uh uh you know, the Senate and House Revenue and Tax Commits just to reexamine its usefulness or something of that nature. So instead of actually doing a sunset, you know, I think we can probably put some language such as that. And again, I'm not saying there's not a better idea now. um. And y'all are welcome to comment this we're, we're informal here as you can see. Uh yes sir, Senator, Senator Hickey, I didn't have any further comment. OK. Yeah, you know, it's this board, if that's what you want in in in some of these we we probably could look at that like this with this carry forward report. I know that that is a large, you know, a large thing with our members. And I believe that, you know, there's been more and more and more agencies, you know, they're wanting to do, do their carryover funds and as you, as you heard during budget hearings, you know, I think sometimes that's an issue with some of the members. So I think that that that the the that report being beneficial, you know. to this general assembly to this general assembly, and probably next is is going to continue. But again, I'm more than happy if you all want to structure on, and there may be different reports that we could do that on, but this particular one, I don't even know if it, it should be or shouldn't be. I would think maybe not, but I, I, I defer to you. So what, what I would say is I'm new to this committee, but I'm all about efficiency and if it makes sense to go rather than going, hey, we got all these reports again in 10 years or. something we do the next some other general assembly of favor and saying, hey, maybe you want to think about this and, and it, and I agree it, it wouldn't make sense on everything, but on some, and I'm just throwing out an idea and if it fits, it fits. I'm not tied to it and my feelings aren't going to be hurt either way. I'm just trying to contribute something to the discussion. Sure, and to give you, to give you any credit, but that is a that is a that is a great comment on on particular ones as we're going through here. again on this. carry, carry forward report. I don't think we probably need a sunset or that, you know, unless membership disagrees with me, so, so what we're going to do on that particular one, this is one that you'll need to, uh, whatever they have in special language right now. We're just going to take that and and do a do legislation so that we can actually get it out of special language so you all will not have to run that. Of course we've got to get it passed, which I would think this membership will pass it, but I can't say. So we'll get that prepared. We'll start the process on it, put it in statute, and see how it goes in the event for some unknown reason, it were to not make it through the process, then we should have time, I guess, towards the towards the end of the session to go back to your special language on it or whatever we want to try. Yes, sir. OK. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Anyone from the audience have got all that discussion? Anyone have any other input? I know this is This is kind of boring, but like I say, it's a huge amounts of time, so. OK. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The next report for DFA Office of Budget. It's the ALC, JBC, peer report. It's monthly. To submit agency appropriation funding changes that are approved by the CFO of the state. It is in code and special language, and the DFA recommendation is that that we keep that report. OK, same type of conversation right here, uh. So I guess the thing is, is, is it's in code and then we have something for special language is this is a special language. Do you know on that particular one, is it, uh, is it drafted? Because things could change. From year to year or for and we need to leave part of it in special language, or do you know if that particular one could actually just be put all in code. I Mr. Chair, we might. OK, well, why don't y'all just take that one back, take that one back and look and like I said we'll try on the next meeting, uh, at the next meeting, the ones that we've skipped over here we'll just, uh, See what you all come come up with on that. Yes sir. Anyone else of the committee have any? Comments on that one. audience It will wait on you all to Kind of look at that again. Yes, sir. OK. And the next report for the Office of Budget is the balanced budget economic forecasts. It is statutory. DFA's recommendation is that we maintain that report. Everybody here in agreement on that one, correct? Even the audience of yours, OK. Yep. That's an easy one. OK. As long as you get that forecast correct we can discuss that right now if you want. Be careful, secretary. I'm reminded that there's a need for that every, about every month or so. So yes, I'm I'm on that one. Thank you, sir. OK. OK. And then the next report is the Office of Economic Analysis and Tax research. This is is the biennial report of state tax exemptions. Many of you that were in JBC yesterday, this is a report that DFA provided Two JBC and to the General Assembly. This is a report that is presented every 2 years prior to the beginning of a legislative session. The origin of this report was Act 819 of 2019, which followed the tax reform and relief task force. What this report provides is the fiscal impact for state tax exemptions, deductions, or credits that relate to income tax or sales tax. This report is required in statute. It does have a substantial amount of DFA resources that is dedicated to this report, but when we evaluate the information contained in the report provided to the General Assembly and the resources that DFA is required to invest to make sure this report is provided is prepared and provided DFA is recommending that this report be discontinued. OK, members have any just and, and just to make sure everybody understands this is the one that Senator Dima asked during the during the committee that it would be actually be sent to the House and Senate, Reverend tax members, so this is actually what you're probably received here because staff got with me yesterday to make sure that was OK. So. Yeah, that's what I was gonna say. We got it yesterday. I, I, I actually spent some time looking through it, um. So tell me what. 2 months means is that mean 1 employee. You know, 2 months or you know, 2 employees one month, I mean that that's what that's basically how that's breaking down. So, so what we do every every other year in preparation for the session, the Office of Economic Analysis and Tax Research is the project lead for this project every 2 years, but the the tax administrators that work on the fiscal impact statements for the legislative session. It's a team approach, so it's difficult. to quantify that it's a 2 month period that multiple individuals are contributing to the project, but it's, it's so it's difficult to put an hour estimate, but I would certainly it would not be. being, I think a couple 100 hours at least is is dedicated to this endeavor, but we probably 10 people that are regularly daily doing something again forecasting out into the future years component. So this is the heavy lift from the. this. We'll talk about some of this seems to be very valuable information, but the lift is really heavy. I acknowledge that. I think. Um, I'll talk with some of us about this. And uh A budget director some too. Does anyone have any, well, anyway, I'll shut up. Let's just on that, on that point, I think it's, you know, back to my earlier comment. It was produced out of a different general assembly, you know, I think when the leader Hendron was was focused on some of the tax stuff. You know, for us, if we can maybe be a little bit more focused in the effort. You know, things that maybe the members are going to be looking at in the upcoming session that could probably help us a little bit because there are a lot of things in that report that probably are not gonna get touched or changed, yet we still have to go do that work and some things we just can't estimate and then you see that in the report in several places cannot be estimated. So if if we're going to do it, if there's a way to get more focused about it. I think that might help some of the level of effort on things. OK, you know, and it's uh uh and obviously we've asked you all to put how much time, how much time you were doing and whether or not we could, you know, this, and I think that's probably correct with on this particular one, we'll just kind of, we'll we'll say we're gonna hold and have some more discussions, uh, more discussions on this one because, you know, I think we see the need that it would be, uh, one of the issues that I may see is this may, although Senator Crow had to take the heat on it since he's carrying it off. This could possibly be one of those reports that, you know, this membership just thinks that They want to stay in place too, so it, it may be a, uh It may be a good thing for us just to discuss that one. So let us discuss that one here for a few weeks and uh get back with it. Center history, you're going to kind of take that on, OK. Thank you, sir. Anybody, anybody, any further comments from the audience on this? Senator Hickey, there's also the option that the regularity of the report could also be considered whether it's every 6 years, um, or another period other than every other, every other session every every session is the current requirement. It could be every other session or every 3rd session. That's a great point. It could be that we don't, we don't eliminate it totally, but there may be some parameters within some of this within some of this legislation that might make it more effective too. So that's a That's a great point. So, you know, I guess we started off with this thing that we'd eliminate the report or not, and then maybe now we're moving into. You know, refine refining it which is that's part of this process. That's a good, very good point. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and also and we DFA fully provides the, you know, there was a reason in 2019 that the General Assembly enacted this information. They clearly the General Assembly determined that this information would be valuable. DFA at the time did provide the resources required to in so here in that session a few years ago. This balance was considered by the General Assembly, and they did make that decision. So, but of course on down the road we can always the General Assembly can always re-evaluate the valuableness of the information. OK, sounds good. We'll see if uh we'll see if there's just a desire and want to leave, leave that as it is to totally eliminate it or uh we'll let you all work through and see if there's actually uh again some way to change some of the parameters to make it where you have less. time in it and it still provides the same, basically the same information. So we'll, we'll, we'll kind of approach it that way. I'll commit to this. I'll ask the team just to flip through the report and look at, you know, comparing what we put in this report to the previous report has really been any changes, you know, there's, there's no volatility, that might be one that we can say you don't need to update that very often, but maybe the more volatile categories we could identify those and those could be ones that we focus on. OK. Sounds great. Any anybody else? Senator Petty, well, and we can talk about this offline. I was just curious, uh, I mean, a lot of this information, I would think would be necessary for our forecast anyway that that you're already doing and and and to your point, most recently there when they, when these things go on the books. Then there's not a change until it's repealed and so maybe it doesn't need to be updated or maybe they're updating it because they think they need to update it and and really we can give a pass on certain items, but I, I, I looked at the report, there's a lot of data on there, but I would in a lot of big numbers and I would think that it would be important to the forecast too, so that may be where the The body is coming from, so. OK Why don't we do one more and stop, we have been going about an hour and then we'll just uh Take, take the rest of these up. So let's let's do one more and kind of see where we're at on it. Thank you Mr. Chair. The next report is in the Office of Economic Analysis and Tax Research. It's the monthly general revenue report, not required by statute, but this is a report that DFA would continue to provide. OK, not in statute, so no, no change here. Yeah. You know, I, any, any, you see you need to put it in in statute or any of the members of the body say any reason to actually put it in statute. We don't. The report is primarily produced for use is by the executive branch. Uh, we provide a copy to the General Assembly for its use as well, so we're gonna continue to use it because we did it. Right. Right. Anybody from the audience on that particular one. Let's just stop there and then at the we'll just plan on our next meeting. We'll, we'll take those up. I think what we'll do, uh, members, is we'll try to let DFNA get through the rest of theirs at the next meeting. And then after, after that and staff could go ahead and notify, if you don't mind, let's let's notify the, uh, the other entities there, you know, uh. The, you know, development finance Authority, economic development. Let's, let's. Let's let them look at those and we'll have them to come down here to to go over those with us. No, let's wait. Let's just let DFNA. Yeah, the next meeting we'll plan on having DFNA here and then the following meeting we'll, we'll plan on having the other ones because we're, it looks like to me we're only about halfway through. Thank you, Senator Hester and Senator Hickey, we really appreciate the conversation and the willingness to make some adjustments here. So thank you for having the conversation, thank you. Any, any members have any other business to come before us? OK, with that, we'll be adjourned. So, so far in my notes that we