ALC-JBC Personnel

kick off? Yes, sir, uh, Mr. Chairman, committee members, this morning, uh, Nick Fuller gave a brief presentation over higher ed budget. Nick will also give a presentation over item B in your packet. It's the legal size paper. Um, and he'll go over, uh, each of the institutions and their changes moving forward and then once he's done with the positions aspect, Angelica will do the special language, uh, for the institutions of higher ed, once we're done, Mr. Chairman, um, in the past, what we've done is taken this, uh, Spreadsheet and done one vote for the spreadsheet, which would take care of items, uh, B1 through B. 34. OK. I don't see any reason to change. OK. Mr. Fuller, Miss McCaro, if, uh, if you would identify yourselves and then you may begin, Mr. Fuller. Nick Fuller with the division of Higher Education. Angela Mercado Bureau for Legislative Research. You recognize. Thank you. Good afternoon. As you will see on the chart that you have in front of you, this is a list of all of the currently authorized positions within the institution of higher education. Along with their requested deletions. Requested additions, the ADHE and coordinating board recommendation for positions and the new total positions. I will add, as, as we get through this, since you're looking through like the vacant positions that institutions have, those vacant positions do not have a dollar amount tied to them. Institutions don't have a contribution for vacant and budget positions to their insurance payments as state agencies do to EBD. So any vacant positions don't cost an institution anything until the position is filled. I'll tell you, looking at all of these recommendations, these are all line out of maximum non-classified positions at institutions. The line out maximums are requests are recommended to be increased by 3.2% over the current yearline out of maximums. The maximum is, is set there that does not mean that the institution is paying at that maximum. Majority of them are well below what the maximum salary is set at, but we do recommend an increase those linear maximums to account for the price index change each year. Currently, institutions have 27,057 positions with the exclusion of UAMS. The 8 ADHE staff and coordinating board recommend an increase of 52 positions over that number. That is a 0.2% increase over the prior year to 27,110 positions. UAMS has 11,974 positions, and they are requesting to continue that level of positions. Now within those total numbers, there are quite a few some institutions are the leading positions. Some are adding, but overall it is an increase for higher ed of 52 positions. With that, I'll take any questions you may have in regard to these. Members, do we have any questions so far? Representative Wootton, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Fuller, uh, you have 19,03084. Employees, correct? That is in within the four-year institutions. Yes, sir, without UAMS. Yes, sir, and that's the four-year institutions. Yes, sir, without UAMS. Yes, sir, and that's what's, what's the ratio of Teachers Oh no. You love that staff to student body staff to student body. If, if you'll look on the very first column. In that chart, it's the academic year 2024 FTE. That's the full-time equivalent enrollment number of students on each campus. So I don't have the ratio, but as you see for like for Jonesboro, they had 2200 employees authorized for 13,194 FDE students on their campus. So how many, well, uh, OK, how, what's that number? First student. In other words. For total employees or faculty. I'm talking about, I'm talking about the total staff on the campus. It's 13,000 of the the uh equivalent student bodies is 13,0194. Yes, sir. The total Positions is 2232. What, what is that per? It's a little over 6 students to 1. Little over 6 students to 1 position. So if you look in the second column, that's the total field positions I do not have the national average of that on that I, I didn't see if I can get that for you. Because I think it would be interesting relative to The staffing and as I said earlier today, The paper gave you all a pretty rough going over relative to increasing possessive rough. They mentioned the fact that of all state agencies probably higher added more than any. So, I think this would help to look at the national average of what they're, if, if we can come up with the apples to apples. Yes, sir. And follow up one question, if I may, uh, of the, the lad positions, um, 225. How many of those were budgeted, do you know? I believe if they're they're being deleted, they weren't filled, so they're, they're not were not filled, so they weren't you all didn't budget. Um So really what you're ending up with is 19436 versus 19,384. Yes, sir. Is that correct? Yes, sir. And those are new positions or are they reclassifications. Those those are new positions above what they previously had. Yes, sir. Well, what, what is the bulk of a man, what it was for. So you, A majority Let's see you within. The University of Arkansas system. They had an increase of 39. positions. Which is one of the, the larger numbers. And that was an increase to the, the University of Arkansas system. If I get, if I got my, it should be, I see 73 new positions at Fayetteville, including 40 in administration, 11 an academic, 22 in auxiliary and told how Yes, sir, and they're, and they're deleting 41 while they're adding you know how many hours a week, a full blown professorins in the classroom with his students. I do not know that number? No, sir. Can you give us that? I will see what I can get for you. Yes, sir. I think it'd be interesting to know. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Do we have any other questions for Mr. Fuller? Ms. Micardo, cover special language, please. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We're going to start on page 4. And this is for ASU Jonesboro. They're requesting to continue language stating that no position currently funded by tobacco funds will be continued using non-tobacco funds if and when the tobacco money runs out. State funds shall not replace, expired or exhausted tobacco funds without appropriation from the General Assembly and authorization from the governor. In addition, this information will be disclosed to new hires and to positions currently funded by tobacco funds and any employee handbooks and or professional service contracts for tobacco funded positions will contain this information as well. The Bor. Recommendation provides for this institution's request, and that's all I have for that one. Any questions? Ma'am, you're to continue. The next one is for UA Fayetteville. It is essentially the exact same language I just talked about with ASU Jonesboro, dealing with tobacco settlement funds. And the AEGB. Provides for the institutions. Any questions? Ma'am, you recognize, continue on page 6, again, deals with the tobacco settlement funds. And the heck be board recommended recommends for the institution's request. Seeing no questions, you may continue. Moving on to page 7, it is continuing language whereby the institution requests 410 part-time or temporary positions to be known as PRN extra help. This pool will be comprised of registered nurses and LPNs. The pay rate will be comparable to like positions authorized by this act. Funding comes from appropriated funds for this purpose. In addition, if UAMS requests continuation of any PRN extra help positions during the next fiscal year. They must be requested institutions budget requests as new extra help. positions. The AIB recommendation provides for the institution's request, and that is all I have for that. Seeing no questions, you may continue, ma'am. Moving on to page 8. It is requesting to continue language that requests 530 part-time or temporary positions to be known as UAMS temps slash extra help. The pay rate will be comparable to like positions authorized by this act. Funding comes from appropriated funds for this purpose. And AECB provides for the institution's request. Do you have any questions? Seeing none, you recognized continue on page 9 is continuing language, giving the institution authorization to pay stipends to medical students, or I'm sorry, medical residents and postgrad clinical training at UAMS from regular salaries or maintenance in general operations. Seeing no question, you may continue, ma'am. Page 10 is continuing language that adjusts the growth pool to 600 non-classified positions. A position established under this section is to be administered by DHE with a max salary authorized by the General Assembly. The reason for this change is that UAMS no longer has classified positions, those previous 300 positions are being adjusted to the current act. No specific titles are given until the personnel is requested by the university to DHE and ultimately the Legislative council. Any growth? pole positions requested to continue through FY 2526 must be requested as new positions and UEMS's budget request. The the AECB uh provides for the institution continue, ma'am. All right. And finally, page 12, is continuing language, changing the dates that establishes a clinical expansion and research pool of 700 positions for patient care, research, and the recruitment and retention of personnel. UAMS may access this pool at any time when it is determined that the need for an additional position is needed, and only medical or research positions may be established. A quarterly report of pool positions is to be provided to DFA, DHE and the ALC or JBC detailing names, titles, salary, source, and duration of the positions. funding of those employed in the pill positions. Any position from this poll requested to continue through FY 2526 must be requested as new as new positions via UAMS's budget request. The remaining language provides justification and details legislative oversight. TheB provides for the institution's request. And that is all I have. Mr. Chair. Does anybody have any questions? See no questions. Can I get a motion? Got a motion. Got a second. Any discussion Representative Wootton, I believe you are you for discussion for these guys? It's appropriate. All right, go ahead and ask your question. OK. They're not under the state pay plan, are they separate. OK. Will we have to go back and redo. Any of the salary information that we Run through this committee. After the pay plan comes forward. But we have to the question. Representative, I mean, Mr. Fuller. You'll recognize the answer to that question. Yes, sir. I don't believe you'll have to with the the pay plan for those classified employees in state agencies because every employee at an institution is a line out of maximum non-classified position. So adjustments to salaries in classified positions would not affect those salary levels won't. Correct. OK, what about the others in state government regular employees of If we approve, if we go through and approve their budgets, where we have to go back and redo the uh line item if it's more than what we Approve So Representative Wootten, are you talking about for higher education the higher education. If when the pay plan is approved, are we gonna have to change state employees, is that what you're asking? That, yes, that's the I think that process would have to be figured out, but, you know, and I think there's work's being done on that. It, it's gonna depend when the pay plan is actually brought forth and, and see, I'm not sure what adjustments are gonna have to be made yet. OK. And if, if a lot, in other words, if a line out exceeds what it is presently if it goes above that or we have an employee at that limit, then we'll have to go back and read. do all those salaries. Is that correct? There are different ways to handle that. It depends on what the pay plan does if it changes the, uh, if it changes grades, uh, it, it, it, I, I don't know how to answer that. It's possible. The answer to your question is, it is possible that we may have to make adjustments. It may be possible that we don't have to make adjustments until we see what is brought forth from the executive branch, we don't really know. I don't want to put you on the spot, but basically we're in the same position all the agencies are right now because we don't have it. Is that correct? a correct assumption. If we, if we approve all these budgets. Just a minute here, we'll get Kevin up there. Maybe he can. Strained some of the mud out of this. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman Kevin Anderson, Bureau of Research, I get, there are mechanisms in place if we like if they get a higher grade during the interim, where that we can give them additional authority for that spending, and they're, there are, uh, various ways to address your line items for regular salary and match. They can, they can get additional appropriation. They can even get additional funding through the performance fund and all that's being discussed in conjunction with this. plan for a smooth transition. I understand what you're saying, but the question I'm asking is improving the structure, the budget, the budgets now. Right. That with the salaries in there and the positions in there. We'll have to go back or DFA will have to go back and alter all those pay plans, correct? Well, what, what we'll probably be submitted will be a new pay plan and then. With that pay plan, there is talk of having a crosswalk for the existing positions to the new titles and then that would automatically go into effect if approved by the General Assembly if they needed more funding, there is a mechanism for them to also come get additional funding, yes 1 last session to, to cover pipe plan, but we didn't, that, that way we didn't have to change all the numbers. That's correct. OK. All right. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You're welcome. Any other questions? We have a motion and a 2nd. Is there any other discussion? So you know. And we're voting on B1 through B 34. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? The eyes have it. Thank you guys. Members, if you look at your packet, we're on item C. Miss Brown is on her way. Barnhill was coming up and Ms. Barnhill. Ladies, if you would, when you're settled, go ahead and recognize yourselves. Identify yourselves and then you're recognized to begin. K Barnhill, uh, transformation and Shared Services. Barbara Brown Beerau legislative Research. You recognize Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We're gonna begin with uh exhibit C1 which is on page 15 of your packet and it's Department of Agriculture Administration and Shared Services. This agency and the uh executive recommendation provides for 5 growth pool positions also the agency and the executive recommendation also provides for one reclassification. And that's my presentation, Mr. Chairman for that particular, uh, agency. Yes. Tony, Tony's gonna add a little bit here right quick. Just before we vote on this particular one, as we have for the past couple of meetings, uh, each of the analysts will be skipping over the position eliminations as those aren't being taken up right now because of the other positions that were eliminated until EBD is dealt with how we're going to fund EBD. So I just wanted to make sure everybody was aware of that. That's why we're skipping over eliminated positions. Do you have any questions? Can I get a motion? 2nd. Got a second. Any discussion? All in favor say aye. And he opposed, the ayes have it. He may continue. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We're going to Department of Agricultural, um, they have an authorized position total of 539 positions. The agency and the executive recommendation provides for 3 growth pool positions. In addition, the agency and executive recommendation provides for the reclassification of 6 positions and that's my presentation, Mr. Chairman for that particular agency. Thank you, ma'am. Do we have any questions? See no questions. Got a motion, got a second. Any discussion, see no discussion, all in favor say aye. And he opposed, I just have it. You may continue, ma'am. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is the Department of Agriculture, Arkansas Natural Resources Commission, they have authorized positions of 68. The agency and the executive recommendation provides for two growth pool positions also the agency and executive recommendation, uh, provides for the reclassification of two positions, and that's my presentation, Mr. Chairman, for that particular division. Thank you, ma'am. Any questions? Got a motion, got a second in discussion, seeing no discussion, all in favor say aye. And he opposed, the ayes have it. Thank you, ma'am. Mr. Angel, when you get situated, identify yourself and you're recognized. We're on part D members. Bart Angel Bureau of Legislative Research. Uh, first item is D1. We're at the, uh, Department of Energy and Environment. This is gonna be the administration and Shared Services Division. They currently authorized 64 positions. Uh, they made two swaps in the interim, both in 2023. They made a 1 for 2 swap and got an E&E executive chief of staff for a maintenance assistant and an admin specialist too. Uh, they gave up one in August of 23 as part of a larger swap and admin specialist 3. If you look online 8. Uh, you'll see that chief of staff that they got. Uh, passing over the eliminated positions, there are 14 reclasses that start on page one, line 2. Those run to the end of the report, and then none of these changes is 64 positions, that's no change in position number, Mr. Chairman. That's all I have for this division. Thank you, sir. Any questions? Yes, sir. Just a minute. You recognize representative. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. How many, how many employees do they totally have? I don't total. They're authorized for 64. Well, that's in, is it an administration Shared Services. How, how many do they have total in their agency. I don't have that handy, uh, perhaps. Do we have anybody here from the agency? 4079, is that correct? Let me, let me bring somebody up from the HC representative. Yes, ma'am. When you get situated, if you would go ahead and recognize yourself. Or identify yourself and you're recognized. Thank you, Lauren Ballard, a chief of staff at the Department of Energy and Environment, and I believe we have 475 authorized79 is what I saw on my sheet. You have 81 vacancies and, and then he turned or you have 16 in over 2 years old. What, what did those 64 people, 63 people do in a shared services. So that will include, um, our executive team and then it also includes, uh, the shared services of fiscal, that's our fleet facilities. It includes our, um, communications department or human resources department, all those positions we pulled over to administer those shared services on behalf of the entire department. OK. So how many is that per employee with 479 authorized. Divided by 64, I don't have my, I'm not great at math, but I'll pull up my calculator if I need to. One moment, please, and put this shared services here. So, I believe 6 well. I get approximately 13%. 1313 per employee. Oh, no, I'm sorry, I was doing a percentage. I got 13%, so I would say. Well, well, 13% would divide. The van 479 by the number 64. I can do that. 77 employees 7.5. OK. Would you all look at that and see if you need all those people. Will do. Uh, and not just your agency, but we're going to ask the rest of them to do the same thing, but it just seems like to me, those central officers, or the office staffs or stuffed stacked, I, I just don't know if really if if we need that many people in the shared service operations. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ma'am, why, why don't you just stay there in case we have some more on this, Mr. Angel, you recognizedin. Mr. Chairman, that's all I have for this division. OK, very well. Do we have any other questions? Seeing none. Can I get a motion? Second Got a second in discussion. All in favor say aye. Any opposed? The ayes have it. Thank you. You may continue, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Item D2 is the division of Environmental Quality or DEQ's energy and environment. They're currently authorized 351 positions. If you look at lines 8 and 9, you'll see two positions they received by a 2 for 3 swap. It's an air quality modeler and an E&E branch manager. Uh, passing over the for eliminated positions, there are 6 reclasses. They start on line 24, the first page, and they finish out DEQ's report. Bring brings DEQ to 350 positions, that's a decrease of one and that's a result of the swap. And Mr. Chairman, that's all I have for this division. Any questions? See no questions. Can I get a motion? Got a motion. You get a second. You got a second in the discussion. So no discussion all in favor say aye. And he opposed Guys have it You may continue, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Adam D3 is the liquefied petroleum gas bore or LP gas board. Currently have 6 positions. They made an even, uh, one for one swap in the interim where they got a business operations manager for a fiscal support specialist. Uh, this is the only change at the LP gas board that keeps their position numbers at 6. Mr. Chairman, that's all I've got for the LP board. Thank you, sir. Do you have any questions? See no questions. Can I get a motion? Got a motion. Got a second. Any discussion, no discussion, all in favor say aye. Then he opposed, the eyes have it. Yes, sir, continued. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, D4 is the oil and gas commission. Currently authorized 55 positions that made an even swap. In the interim they got an administrative services manager at GS 10. It's gonna be on line 8. And they gave up an administrative specialist to to get that position passing over the eliminations. eliminated position. There are 3 reclasses. Two senior petroleum engineers going to two ENE operations managers, uh, those are all GS 12s, those will be on lines 20 and 21 of your report. The oil and gas technician GOO GSO4 is going to admin specialist 3 at GSO4, that's on line 22. This keeps their position number at 55, and that's all I have for you, Mr. Chairman. Anybody have any questions? Got a motion. Got a set up, got a question here, just a moment. You're recognized. Thank you. One quick question. With the lithium development down there and the investment that numerous companies including ExxonMobil have made. Are they gonna have to make any adjustments in their staff down there to cover the inspection or whatever they're going to do with the lithium to be sure that we're protecting the landowners down there and the security and safety of uh the citizens and the employees down there. Uh, well, of course, you know, that, that's an ongoing issue, but uh we do have an office of, uh, office in El Dorado that is, um, operational and has, has employees down there. So we, we certainly have some staff that's already there, and we would, of course, probably come back if we were to need to, to expand the need for employees there, but at, at the immediate time, there's not a need to add employees. So, so we're not, we, we, have we made any observations or I understand their offices located down there, but have we made any effort to look at what the lithium industry is going to require for us to be able to assure that they're protecting the environment and that type of thing. Well, they already, uh, there's already some brine development down there that we are regulating. So this is just another, uh, a few other companies entering into the, to the into that development. But, but the oil and gas commission has had that brine authority since about 1970. So we've got, uh, inspectors and, and, and people of that nature down there that are capable of doing that work at the moment, um, as you know, there was a hearing, um, this past Monday and Tuesday considering some of the royalties, but at this moment, we don't have the need to, to expand that, uh, but we'll, we'll keep an eye on it and, and if that need were to arise, we could come back you don't, you don't feel that we'll have to have an expansion of personnel in order to take care of the new. Activity down there. And not in the not in the immediate future. We may eventually need to come back and ask for that, Mr. Chairman. Any questions? Any more questions? Seeing no more. Can I get a motion? Got a motion. Got a second in discussion so no discussion, all in favor say aye. He he opposed The I have it. Members on this next item, which will be item E, uh, if you recall Senator Rice put a hold on that. Senator Rice has released that and so we're gonna try to finish that. Treasurer's department. At this point Tony, do you have anything you need to add or anything? No, sir, uh, uh, Bart is gonna go over their request. The, the agency did send us a letter, uh, revamping their agency request, uh, that lowers the number of changes that they've requested. So Bart will go over that at this point. Yes, sir, you're recognized. Thank you Mr. Chairman, um, as you said, uh, we're invited me to the office of the treasurer that currently authorized 33 positions. They did revise their request down to request for a line to maximum increase for 2 positions. The director of investment accounting and chief technology officer both to 130,000. There's a small reduction in their, uh, regular salaries, appropriation as a result of this. And it keeps their uh position number at 33. There's a piece of special language, Mr. Chairman, it's Section 5 and it's continuing language. Allows coals to the colas to treasure personnel. It also allows increases at the treasurer's discretion. Allows a merit pay program as well, and this is approval language. And Mr. Chairman, that's all I have for the treasurer. Do we have any questions? All right, we need a motion for the agency's request to revised letter. We have that Got a second. Including and this motion includes the regular salary reductions. Make sure we have it all in that. Any discussion? Seeing no discussion, all in favor say aye. Can you post, I have it. Let's see, where are we? All right Members, if you look at uh Get your hand out, we've got coming up next is item F. And Mr. Wirth, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair, Spencer Worth, Bureau of Legislative Research. We're moving on to item F. This is the Department of Transformation and Shared Services. Beginning with F1, I'm on page 30 in the packet. This is the administration Shared Services Division, currently authorized 28 positions. Again, we'll skip over eliminations, move on to reclasses. There are 4 recommended reclasses through executive recommendation. And those are all found on lines 14th or 17 in the report, and that concludes my presentation on this division, Mr. Chair. Thanks sir Any questions? See, no questions. Can I get a motion? Got a motion. Got a second. Any discussion, seeing no discussion, all in favor say aye. Any opposed? I just have it. You're recognized, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Moving on to F2, this is the building Authority division. currently authorized 63 positions. Again, we'll skip over the eliminations and move on to reclasses. There's 2 that are recommended through the executive recommendation. Those are online 17 and 18 to TSS division manager to a construction maintenance coordinator, and then a real estate manager to executive assistant to the director, and that concludes my presentation on building authority, Mr. Chair. Any questions? So no questions, got a motion. Got a second. Any discussion no discussion, all in favor say aye. Any opposed? I just have it. You're recognized, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Moving on to the geographic Information System division. I'm on item F3. This is page 32 in your packet. They are currently authorized 13 positions, uh, just one change here members. It's on line 8. It is a swap pool position. Ah, this was done in a one for one swap in March of 2024. It is the state Geographic Information System Officer Agency is requesting the continuation of this in the executive recommendation provides for that, and that concludes my presentation on GIS, Mr. Chair. Any questions? Say no questions. Can I get a motion? Got a motion. Got a second. Any discussion, seeing no discussion, all in favor say aye. In the post, the eyes have it. You recognize, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Moving on to F4, this is the division of information systems. I'm on page 33. Currently authorized 207 positions. Again, we'll skip over those eliminations and move on to pages 34 and 35. There's 3 reclasses. Get on page 34, it's those last two lines, 25 and 26, and then moving on to page 35, line 6. And there's one other thing here agencies is requesting to transfer out one position to statewide shared services. It's the IT procurement administrator at a GS-12. And again, that'll be transferred to statewide Shared Services agencies requesting this and the executive recommendation provides for that, and that concludes my presentation on DIS Mr. Chair. Any questions? See no questions. Can I get a motion? Got a motion. Got a second. Any discussion, see no discussion. All in favor say aye. And you opposed? The ayes have it. You recognize sir. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, this is the last one here for DTSS. It's statewide Shared Services currently authorized 141 positions. I'm on page 36 here in the packet. Uh, there's 16 pool positions here, lines 8 through 13 were added in a 6 for 7 swap that was in November of 2022, and then 14th through 23 were done in a 10 for 10 swap on August of 2023. Agencies requesting the continuation of those positions and the executive, uh, recommendation provides for that. Again, we'll Skip over, uh, the eliminations and move on to reclassifications are 7, beginning on line 22 on page 37 and going on to page 38. And then again here you'll see that transfer position coming in, that's that, uh, IT procurement administrator GS 12 being added in through agency requests and executive recommendation, and that concludes my presentation on statewide Shared Services. Any questions? So you know questions. Can I get a motion? Got a motion. Got a second. Any discussion no discussion, all in favor say aye. In your post, the I have it. The only other business members is that tomorrow immediately adjournment of the JBC ALC personnel committee will meet. So thank you, we are adjourned.