ALC-Highway Commission Review and Advisory Subcommittee

Now you. What, uh, That's if you want Members get seated. We're gonna get started. It's gonna be like an auction. You got, you got about 5 seconds. Call the meeting of the Highway commission review and advisory Committee to order, uh, my co-chair representative McNair would like to make any comments cut me off, so I don't need to make any anyway. He, he, we're having technical difficulties with this new system, so. We're going to begin with the report of the September through December 2024 monthly updates, uh, the ALC efficiency study recommendations, uh, Res for implementation. Director Laurie Tudor and anybody that you want to bring forward with you. Just state your names and introduce yourself and you're welcome. Good afternoon. I'm Laurie Tudor, the director of the Arkansas Department of Transportation. Uh, Jared Wiley, chief engineer for preconstruction at RA, uh, before you we get started, I guess all of you know that I've announced my retirement, on January 10th of 2025. And the new replacement, the new director of RA will be Jared Wiley. He, uh, the commission appointed him, so that's why he's up here with me today. I want to make sure everybody knows him and gets to know what a great, uh, leader in, uh, what a great director he's going to be when he takes over. Also have half our staff here today, so if there's any question that we can't answer, we we have this subject matter expert back there, so hopefully we'll be able to y'all lock him in the car? Oh. He's under the weather. He's got called in this morning not feeling well, uh, and before we really, and another thing I'd like to say is we, we, we're going to have commissioner Holder was going to be here today, but she also is under the weather. I think there's something going around pretty, pretty nasty virus. And then the other commissioners couldn't be here. We had 2 weeks of solid district service awards and, uh, we've been going commissioners they are worn out, bless them, and they, they do a lot, but it, it, they're, they're not here today, and they send their regrets. So the agenda today, we have 6 different reports that have been submitted to this committee, since your September 2024, uh, meeting. So, just a preface members, most everything is in, in recommendation 6 and 7, is that, am I correct? In the, in the, That's kind of what I was looking at. OK, all right. All the, you know. I'm not sure I'm following that. I think, are you talking about recommendation? Are you talking about agenda item B. OK, OK, exhibits B1 through B4. Yes, yes everything's in section 6 and 7 that's right, so this first agenda item, agenda to be is to address the efficiency study recommendation updates from September through December, it's exhibits B1 through B4 in your packet. Acts 7:39 of 2019 required an efficiency study, uh, or an efficiency review of ourdot and in November 2020, the final report of the efficiency review included 13 recommendations, 90 rules. And I'm proud to report as of today, we've completed 70 of the rules or we're at 78% complete in implementing these recommendations in the rules to implement them. So, in your packet, if you look at that, you've got those 4 monthly reports and I'm just gonna highlight, uh, some of the bigger things that have happened since your last meeting. Uh, as a reminder, if you look through the reports, if you see anything underlined, that means it's, it's a new, uh, it's and the underline means it's a new implementation of a rule. It's the first time it appeared in the report. So for recommendation number 3 under the portfolio planning category, uh, which was published the status of construction projects and maintenance activities, we completed the process of soliciting stakeholder comments, and our consultant that's helping us with that, Garver is now finalizing all the data connections and once the final dashboard, it will be a dashboard that we're going to put out on our website. Once that dashboard is approved by our dock management, it will be released to the public and we're hopeful that this recommendation will be complete early next year, so a lot of progress to be made, that's gonna be a wonderful tool for you guys, the public as well as the legislature. Then for recommendation number 6 under the procurement category, which was to implement construction contractor performance measurements. The 7 projects that we selected and and uh and used as our pilot application of this, uh, of this rule, uh, has been completed. All of that's done and we're currently developing some guidance for the type or size of projects where this, uh, type of evaluation a construction contractor performance evaluation would be most beneficial. Obviously, it would be a waste of time to do it on all projects that small and not very consequential, but what we do want to do is pick and choose that wisely to reduce the amount of burden on the staff and the contractor. For recommendation number 10 under the information technology category, which was implement. Uh, midterm IT initiatives that can optimize business operations. And I'm not sure what that means. Not It's a good thing. I'm pleased to report to you that this recommendation is now complete. We, what we did is we conducted an inventory of all of our databases, all of our systems, and we applied a, uh, a scoring system to determine what their reverence was and how much we needed to either maintain it, eliminate it, re-engineer it, or, uh, migrate it to a more modern platform, so it was just a really in depth and it do we have hundreds and hundreds of different databases and applications that we're using, so it was a great exercise and we're nearing we're, we have completed that inventory of everything that we've got. Now, if you, I'll stop there, any questions? Any questions from the members? Go ahead and, uh, as soon as I've, Are you signed in? Go ahead, what do you do? I can hear you. Yes. How do you go about that? How do we, well, obviously. If they'd get a, we're looking at what it will mean if the if a contractor continually performs. Under par, you know, sometimes we have really good contractors that have a bad job and it's kind of a one off, it doesn't happen very often. Sometimes we have contractors that continually don't. Don't perform up to standard. For those were looking at different way uh uh different things to do, possibly reduce the amount of pre-qualification, we, we prequalify contractors for an amount that they can bid on. We're thinking about, um, reducing that amount, not as a penalty, but just as until they can. They can up their game and become a better contractor, um. Have we ever what contractors because low performance. We have not yet. We have, we have eliminated, uh, working with contractors based on if they defaulted in other areas in other states, there's certain things that we've done where they get off of our list and they can't bid with us, but we have never taken someone off of our bidder's list that can bid with us just based on poor performance because we've never had anything like this in place, so. we can have justification for it. Do you, you can pull up the history. Yeah. Of how well they perform in other. Yes, we've got, you know, all of that data, every job has tremendous amount of data attached to it, and if they were went into overtime, into liquidated damages, you know, all of those things, and we have a really documented if there was any kind of problem with that contractor for sure. Thank you, thank you. Senator Hammer. Thank you, Mr. Chair. It wasn't that you never wanted to pull somebody off. It was just you didn't have the Legal terms or the legal mechanisms to Put somebody on on the list where they couldn't bid again. Is that correct? That's correct. We just, you know, tread lightly there. It's slippery slope and you got to be able to defend that free market and also. Just making sure we're able to defend whatever actions we take. And so with Is it in here, and you mentioned if, um. And just be real honest, the experience down there 9:30, which you've done a great job, you and your team have done a great job on getting that thing back on track, did a great job. The A company that would forfeit a bond in another state on another job, would that put them on the list of not being able to bid here. That's correct, right, Jared? If they default they're. Yes sir senator, that's part of the pre-qualification package that we look at and when that particular contractor was pre pre-qualified, they hadn't had those instances, but since then things have changed, yes sir, but if, but if they, if any contractor defaults in another state. And the bond is pulled that automatically. Puts them on the on the. Not to be able to bid in our state is that we have a process that we follow to prequalify those contractors and so it's certainly a red flag we have to look at it more carefully, and we don't have that happen very often, but, but yes, it's a red flag for sure. OK, is our grace period that they're allowed if they get back on track to where they could be able to requalify or is that? You know, like maybe 3 years or whatever the terms would be is that addressed in all this. There are some time constraints on it. I don't have those with me. I can get that information and get it back to you have to do that, are there, sir, thanks. Any other questions? OK, um, agenda item MC report of 2024, 3rd quarter land conveyances. Uh, this report is required as of at 3:15 of 1997. It's required of all state agencies. And uh we've submitted that you'll if you're if you'll refer to exhibit C, you'll see that there. We had 2. Um, 2 surplus property sales during the 3rd quarter. Uh, those properties were determined not necessary for future highway purposes, so I'll stop there and let you look at that for a minute and see if you have any questions. Good questions. members See none, move on. OK. Um, moving on to agenda item D. Uh, report of annual expenditures, expenditure of revenues at this time I'm going to hand off the presentation of this agenda item to Jared. OK, um, Act 416 of 2019. It provides revenue to the department that is dedicated solely for the purpose of maintaining and preserving our highway system. So on the slide on on the screen you'll see, uh, last year we, uh, received $61.9 million in fuel tax revenue as part of that, uh, that act. $3.1 million through electric and hybrid vehicle registration fees and $35 million in casino revenues. Uh, the submission of this report and exhibit D, uh, complies with Act 416 of 2019, specifically the code, uh, annotated 2664104B. Um, so, Last year, state fiscal year 24, 73 resurfacing projects were, uh, undertaken with this funding in one bridge rehabilitation project. Uh, these were awarded to contractors for a total cost of $65 million. Um, additionally, our department forces were able to utilize this funding on 15 resurfacing projects, one slide repair project, a bridge replacements and 3 bridge rehabilitation projects totaling $27 million. A list all these projects is included in pages 3 through 5 in that report and maps showing the location of these projects are on pages 7 and 9. So with that I'd hap happily try to answer any questions you have. I don't know if the members are present that was here last time, but there was some questions asked on how those general revenue funds, uh, were utilized. This is, this is how they, how those general funds that, that we put into the highway department have been utilized, so, uh, you guys, Exhibit C is that, is it a C, uh, on, on D, D, yes sir, I'm sorry. Is there any questions from the members? See then, move on. OK. Our next, uh, agenda item, uh, to me, um, is our proposed legislation that we plan to file during the regular session as required by code 2765146, um. Submission of this report complies with Act 299 of 2019. We have 9 bills we'd like to submit. Uh, we plan to submit this year and, uh, Senator at this time I'd like to invite our chief legal counsel, Michelle Davenport, to the table to go over these, these, uh, legislation with you. Absolutely. Whoever's not talking could shut their mouth off that way you don't get, OK, if you would introduce yourself and you're recognized. Good afternoon. My name is Michelle Davenport and I'm the chief legal counsel for the Arkansas Department of Transportation. We're bringing to you today 9 bills that we would like to work with membership that we believe will benefit the department and the commission. Safety is always foremost with the department. And the 1st 3 bills are really safety focused. The first that we are going to be looking at is increasing the funds for moving traffic violation in a mobile, um, construction operation or a mobile repair operation. So many of our jobs, potholing things of that nature occur in a mobile situation, not where we have up the traditional signs that say fines may devils. So we're looking at expanding that definition to protect our workers that are in those mobile work zone areas by having that same process that we already follow when it's a set construction zone. Next, we'd like to ensure the continued use of green lights on construction vehicles. We have found after testing in a pilot project that is much more visible in rain or snow. So we'd like to ensure that the code keeps up with that, uh, technology advancement and ensures the continued use of green lights for department construction and our, uh, how I contractors work vehicles. Next is a bill that was brought to us by Senator Mark Johnson, and that's to help educate our new drivers on the importance of being careful and cautious in highway work zones. And to do that, they want to include additional information in the driver's manual and on the driver's test, so that we just include that safety zone information and the importance of being cautious in how I work areas. Next, we have a series of bills that we hope will provide a little bit of clarity. Uh, the first is a deregulation bill. Currently, when we are talking about the movement of mobile homes, certain types of office trailers in school trailers that are used for those purposes are technically classified as mobile homes. We're looking at pulling that regulation off of that so that they do not have to follow the same permits as someone who's transporting a mobile home a long distance. Next, after several very successful CMGC projects that we operated under a pilot program, we'd like to expand that program so that the department has the availability to use that program on projects that it believes to be appropriate, and that's working with the industry to actually make those accommodations and to change that legislation. Finally, there is some information in our current bonding requirements that is outdated. I don't believe it's changed since 1947. So we'd just like to have a bill that cleans that up and brings it into modern language for the statutory bonding requirements. Next. There are 2 different types of property that the department can have as surplus property when we're being able to recognize that the department does not have a need for that property any longer. There's a capital asset provision and a surplus property. We would like to bring uniformity to that statute. One type requires two appraisals. One type requires 3. We'd like to make sure that that's a standard amount of appraisal that's practiced so that we have uniformity across that statute. The last two are ones that we are currently working with industry on first is changing the process for utility relocation. We know that it's very important for the department and the industry to work together to ensure that not only the highway contracts can be delivered in an efficient and cost-effective manner, but that the utilities have a voice and are able to know what that process is going to look like when they are, in fact, moving those utilities that may be in conflict with the new roads. So we are working. with industry, both uh contractors as well as utility companies to develop a process that we can standardize that and make sure it's efficient for all parties involved. And finally, the last bill that we are researching and working through um concerns denatured ethanol, and the definitions of denatured ethanol in both the motor fuel tax and the special alternative fuel tax language. There has been some, uh, questions and concerns over how those are defined, and we want to work with DFNA. To make sure that the definition there is clear so that everyone knows what the tax is that should be applied in that situation. And that is the non-proposals that we have that we look forward to working with membership on, uh, to assist the department and the commission. And I'd be welcome any questions. The, uh, in the mobile, in a mobile operations is, is that gonna be defined? And how, and how would it be defined in, in legislation that, that you would absolutely we were working with BLR right now on the final language, we envision something to the, um, I, I have the definition. I don't know if everyone wants to, to read that, but basically, if we have a mobile truck out there with lights and signs on it. We want that to be as recognizable as any other type of operation and the definition would be if that mobile work is going on and there are flashing lights, there are signs up that you should, if you're convicted of a, um, driving violation with regard to that mobile operation that the judge would have the option to double the fine the same as happens. Currently, if you're, uh, violating one of the motor, uh, vehicle laws and traveling through a posted work zone. So, yes, sir, we would have definition of using those signs and barriers still to identify that to the driving public. But I'm happy to read the definition if that would be more of assistance. Well, I mean, the explanation I read was the signage wouldn't be present. So I mean, how can you identify that, that zone, you know I cannot. I've seen, I've seen, I've seen DOT trucks with uh our trucks with their lights flashing, and if I get in a wreck or rear ended. You know, it's not That they are working, but it's not in a, I'd like to just give a kind of an example to kind of get you, you understand what we're coming from. If we have a, if we have a mobile operation, a maintenance operation, and we have a truck on the side of the road. And the the lights are going and you have to move over law already, right? You're supposed to move over if, if possible safely to give them room while they do their work and uh so say they didn't move over and something happened then whatever fine. would be association associated with that would be doubled. We had an incident on October 7th where we had a mower and he was mowing, um, he got out into the road. He had the lights, he had to get around an obstacle, a loaded gravel truck, didn't want to wait behind him, but in so passed on a double level, double yellow line. And there was a crash in the employee was severely injured. So, you know, I, it's just a matter of saying instead of of a regular traffic violation, if you, if you don't follow the laws and if you, if it has something to do with the mobile, um operation out there, it'll be doubled, that's the idea behind it. One other question that the, uh, is there gonna be any requirements with the signage to be on a truck. You know, those bumper trucks to be considered this mobile operation. We can definitely look into that. We haven't talked about that, but we can. And for further clarity, the signage that's not going to be required is the legislation currently requires a special sign that not just highway work zone ahead, but it requires that state's fines may be doubled in this work zone. That's the sign we're looking at not having to have present in those mobile work operations, but regular, um, signage to alert the traveling public of the road work ahead would be still available. Thank you, uh. I think Senator Stubblefield is, was the first in the queue. Senator Stubblefield. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I've just got one, If you've got a driver who's impaired or on the influence of, of drugs and that driver takes out. 200 yards of guard rail cable takes out a couple of signs. How hard is it to recoup the, the damages. From the insurance company. We are actually fairly successful in working with those insurance companies, um, our legal division actually handles our demands for guardrail and cable barrier, and we've had fairly good success with the insurance companies recognizing that that damage has been done to state property and that we are reimbursed for it, including the labor to reinstall that information that facility. Thank you, thank you Mr. Chairman. Senator Hammer. I think Mr. Chair, how, uh, we passed the law about cameras in the work zone. How's that gonna play into this? Would the cameras be able to be used in the mobile work zones as well or did y'all address that? That wouldn't be an application there. The cameras are, are just for, um, construction work zones. OK. Would you see any benefit to that? Not really, because these mobile operations are just all over the place, um. Um But you know, it's food for thought. Maybe we start putting cameras in our, in our work vehicles that can capture what happens. I don't know that's something that people have talked about before, we've never gone there, but. OK. Not kind of like the police have those uh video cameras in all of their vehicles. I don't know, it's a big expense, but we could. OK. All right. Thank you. Represented a Vot. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a couple of questions. Um, you alluded to the law about the moveo law, but that law, if I remember correctly, only in scopes police because I tried to add records to it and records would not. Was not allowed to be put on there. So I'm pretty sure that that code is just for police officers and would not be the same in this case. OK, well, we'll look into that. I thought they were supposed to move over for any type of flashing vehicle. OK, because it's a big deal for records in my area when they have no, you know, no side part to pull over on, and they can't, um, There's no, there's no law for yellow. The only thing that's pull over is for blue. That's it. So, uh, just so you know, um, and then I was gonna ask on the signage, um, you were talking about the Signage for the fee, and he was going to not use the signage for a double fine, double, so will they still be being double fined. If they are convicted of one of those traffic violations, and it is. Recorded by the officer that there was a mobile, um, work zone in place at the time. Yes, they would be subject to that double fine. OK. So I think I have an issue with that just because I don't know how the general public is supposed to know what is double fine and what is not double fine if you're mowing the highway and I somehow something happens, I'm gonna be double fined for that because that would be considered mobile, correct? That's correct. And so I think that to me is very worrisome. for the constituents in my area or across the state of Arkansas, not knowing. I would have never known that something happening whenever it's a mobile area would be something that would be double fined and I, I really think I have a big issue with that signage not being there. Thank you for the input, and we'll definitely take a look at that and that's. You know, from our perspective, as we put this together, this came out of uh conversations with family members that employees that had been hurt or killed, and we were just trying to find, you know, something to show that we were trying to make things safer for our employees, but there's a lot of moving parts with that and we're open for all, you know, everything that needs to be thought of. Obviously, I thought. move our law would apply to all flashing, so these, as we get this going, I mean, of course, it won't be me. But, um, we're always open to all this discussion and we. You know, when we want all this input and we might even just drop it, but right now it seemed like a good idea. You know how that goes, so mhm. I don't think it's worth dropping, but I think it's something that you need to have that pretty much on the back of the truck. On every truck. So the public knows that, you know, or, you know, like I said, that bumper truck that might not be very practical for a mowing situation, but if you had a sign on the, on the back of the truck that followed those mowers. That, uh, you know, let the people know. That, you know, that's a possibility, then I think, I think you might get more support, uh, Senator Hammer. Thank you, Ms. Cha. Would it, would it require legislation for you to put that in the driver's handbook as far or at the DMV. As far as uh, you know, uh, a place of visibility to make the public aware of that, that would, could you work with DFA in order to do that without it requiring legislation. I believe so, yes, sir. And with the increased information, um, in the subsequent bill about increased work zone safety, it would be definitely part of that part of that process is informing everyone of those fines, where fines double, where they do not in that work process. But yes, we can definitely work with DFNA to include that information in driver safety or would there be anything that would Other than the cost of signage periodically throughout the state. Um, at key locations that you could add to your road signage that would also alert the public to that. Would that Would that be, I mean, other than the expense to the department because of the additional road signage, is that something you could do as well? Yes, sir, and I believe that other states do that. They have information posted periodically because they have a little bit different structure in there, um, system that they do have, um, more extensive laws. So yes, we can look at some of the other states and how they handle that. All right, thank you. Is there any other questions? Senator Hill, Director tutor, I don't Not 100% sure this falls under y'all, but I know you'll be familiar with it. I'm hearing a large number of constituents talk about, uh, non CDL licensed drivers of big trucks in the state, accidents, what are, what are we doing about, about any of that. Can I, can I get back with you on that, Senator fell under you. There's been a, there's been a lot of discussion between Chief Holmes and Shannon Newton, and there's things going on and I'm not sure I can answer that very well I've been hearing a lot of uptick on stories of illegal drivers in trucks and a lot of different issues from. Trucking companies and want to kind of get some input from y'all because I know y'all work accidents and everything. I can say we're aware of it and we're working with the trucking association as Shannon and them as well on how to correct some of that there's ma'am uh-huh. Is this something that, that we can come back to with your personnel later or? Uh, we'll go back to that under other businesses. Oh well, well, Chief Holmes isn't here to next time we meet. But will we, but we'll provide it, we'll provide you, uh, a white paper or something to the, to the membership, uh, to get you up to speed and then next time you meet, he can come and talk about it. Alright, thank you. Is there any other questions? All right, let's move on to the infrastructure investment Jobs Act. Section F. In a in section F you'll find our infrastructure investment and Jobs Act, or IIJA report. This report identifies a total amount of IJA funding that has been obligated since the beginning of IIJA 3 years ago. Through September of 2024. Uh, the purpose of this report is to provide detailed project funding. For the consideration of each quarter's IJA appropriation request. Um, just as a point of clarification, this IJA funding is the department's latest iteration of our, our regular federal aid funding that we've been receiving since the, since the 60s. Um, this year we expect to receive about 780 million in regular federal aid funding. Um, in addition to this, we did receive 2 grants this year, uh, totaling $70 million for some upcoming projects. And our congressional delegation has also requested about 140 million for major projects around the state for us for this year. Um, so all this federal funding we're so appreciated, appreciative of it, uh, but it, it must be matched with state funding, um, this year, the amount we anticipate needing for state matches 200, uh, 210 million. And, uh, uh, Senator Johnson, you mentioned about the, uh, general fund revenues, uh, a moment ago, uh, that 20 men that we received through Act one of 2016, the 50 million that we receive, uh, from the state surplus. They go directly to matching, uh, our federal aid funds and the remaining state match, we meet that through tradition traditional highway, uh, revenue user sources, user revenue sources, pardon me. So Um, as shown on the report, I'm jumping ahead here. It's shown on the report. A total of $2.3 billion in IJ funds have been obligated over the past 3 years, and this has been matched with about 500 million of state funds. So with that I'll close and answer any questions you may have. Thank you. Is there any questions, uh, Senator Rice? Yeah, thank you. Uh. I don't remember where the, I, I read it, but it's something I think Ardo puts out information, bulletin, and, and just seemed like in the last couple of weeks and when I've seen all these projects made me think of it. You'll put out how much savings y'all had from doing I'm saying in-house. Uh, construction, uh, on some recently the the Laura Jerry one, do you remember? What that was and and made me think about the project, uh, that I was getting in a new district a couple of years ago, uh, I called Director Tudor. Uh, because I'd heard about it on a Saturday they've got notified that highway was being shut down to anything other than a, uh, just a car pickup, uh, because bridge deficiencies and the kids couldn't even go to school without going a long way around Director Tudor. Was out of state at a conference, but took the call, got back with me with an answer that afternoon, they ended up doing pre-form bridge tops. 5 bridges and what I'd been told was gonna be shut down for 2 years was only down 7 months, so he did excellent job, but something I read and something y'all put out information books recently told about the, the things that y'all were doing was considerable savings. Do you have that figure? I just thought that'd be good to share with the committee. I, I don't have the figure. We, we report it to the commission recently. I'll get that for you, but that, that $27 million I mentioned earlier that we spent in-house. do that work, we saved a ton of money by doing it with our forces and that's part of that expend I just thought that was impressive and maybe you remember back to that day so there's some more, OK, here we go, 37.5 million last year, 37.5 million that's appreciated again they did fantastic work, did it quicker than you could have contracted, you know, all the things that go along with the contracting out and all, so there's, there just shows highway department working again, so made me proud to support the highway department. And uh, the monies that we've been able to get them and, and actually put, put stuff in the place, so thank you for that. I've stated it before, but uh there's been a time. Uh, and even Senator Rice's time being down here. That That kind of responsiveness would not have happened in the past. And uh I want to tell you how much, you know, I appreciate it in these legislators appreciate the responsiveness that, that all of you guys give and Uh, to us currently, and, and I think that's, uh, a reflection of how, how us working together as a team for the, for the Arkansans is, is better for everybody. Is there any other questions, Senator Stubblefield? Thank you, Mr. Chairman, uh. Either one of you can answer this, Laurie, has there been any communication between the Department of Transportation and the correctional department about Uh, any kind of roads being built for the proposed prison over in Western Arkansas. So, uh, we were, we were approached, um, In the spring Uh, about the spring about some potential uh property that was going to be uh looked at all over the state. And we were just asked to do some some to look at some traffic numbers that might be generated from from prisons and so uh we we provided some some traffic data to that group several months back the at Charleston included in that group? I, I don't remember at that time. There were several sites they were looking at and so we, uh, we actually took some accounts, uh, near Tucker Max. over there to see what traffic might be generated there during shift change, and we provided some data to them, uh, based on that. Well, there's a big difference in the population of Tucker Max and a 3000 bed unit. And where they're located. So I, I was just curious as to whether or not that. This was back in the summer or spring, I think it was probably April, May, June time frame. I have to go back and look in the emails. Yes, sir. Seeing no other questions, we'll move on. Go to G. It was a large projects. So in um agenda item G, uh, you'll find our report on how we projects of $10 million or more. This report covers through the first quarter of this state fiscal year. Um, the submission of this report is, uh, made in compliance with the Arkansas Highway Improvement Act of 2016. I know my slides here, sorry about that. Um, on the screen you'll see, uh, a graphic showing you how, uh, everything is ordered in the report, but beginning on page 5, we have a list of projects. Uh, in the report, Sorted by the route or the highway it's on by number, uh, interstate projects were shown first and then state highways are next. Page 11, we have a list sorted by county so that you can find them that way if you'd rather uh search that way. Um, on page 17, you'll find information about each project that is over $10 million. And, uh, if you look on these, uh, reports, you can see which projects are ahead, behind schedule, how much money has been paid to date, and other important project information. So with that, uh. Answer any questions you guys have. This is the time where most members will Complain about slow projects in their districts, so. I see no questions. And, uh, Senator Hill, uh oh, no. Do that offline. You calm him down. OK. All right, Laurie, I want to tell you how much it's been a pleasure to work with you over the years, uh, uh, and, uh, you're gonna be You're gonna be greatly missed, but you're, you're gonna be replaced by A, a very good, uh, individual there and uh. And I know both of you had rather be in that back row. Than be sitting where you're sitting, and that's Probably why you're sitting where you're sitting, so. So we appreciate that and it's gonna be, uh, it's gonna be good to work with you, Jared, and uh. And, uh, and Laurie, we're gonna, we're gonna miss you and, and uh you have uh, a great retirement. Thank you. Just, you know, you can just come see us every once in a while, even though you don't want to, but. I want, I would like to take a moment. Um, to thank you all for the support and encouragement this committee has been a godsend for us because it gives us an opportunity to communicate. And tell you what we're doing and answer questions and work out problems. And I think communication is key, and we look at the legislature as our partners. We're all in this together, working for the state of Arkansas and for the constituents and the road users of Arkansas. And your support and your encouragement and your help to me is. Especially at the very beginning, it was kind of rocky, you know it really was, but. I had several of you come up behind me, beside me and say it's gonna be fine and And you've just been so good to me along with a tremendous staff at our dot and all of the things that we've tried to do is not. Me, it's a we've done it together. And Jared. has been beside me uh. For a long time and especially the last 5 years, and he is gonna do a phenomenal job. I know I'm leaving our dog in good hands, and he is going to be a tremendous asset to the state of Arkansas and to the legislature, and I appreciate y'all. I just want you to know that and um. Ah, I guess I just want to tell you I'll miss you. I really will. And I, I love the friendships that I've developed and you all are great, just great, and I appreciate you. So thank you. Oh We, we thank you, Laurie, and, uh, Members I, I want you guys, if you don't know, Laurie started at our dot as a secretary. I don't know how old you was if you want to tell us that. As a whopping 20 years old. 20 years old with a 4 month old baby. You don't tell me in the United States. You can't be whatever you want to be. So, thank you, Laurie. It's been great work with you. Is there any other business? Seeing none, or adjourned.