House of Representatives

Feb. 6, 2023

Jump to section below

Speaker Shepherd I invite the members, staff, press and guests in the galleries to stand and be led in prayer by Pastor John Kates of Mount Devonshire Church in Heber Springs, a guest of Representative Shad Pearce, and remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance to be led by Representative Lane Jean.

[Prayer and Pledge]

Speaker Shepherd Members, please indicate your presence by pushing the yellow present button. Prepare the machine, Madam Clerk.

Rep Gazaway Cast up the ballot, Madam Clerk. With 99 members present, the chair sees a quorum. Are there any requests for leave? Representative Evans, you’re recognized.

Rep Evans Leave for Representative Meeks.

Rep Gazaway Is leave granted for Representative Meeks? So noted. Representative Jeffrey Wardlaw moves that we dispense with the reading of the previous day’s journal. With no objection, so ordered. Are there reports from select committees? Read the reports, Madam Clerk.

Clerk Mr. Speaker, we your Committee on Public Retirement and Social Security to whom was referred House Bill 1202 beg leave to report that we have had the same under consideration and herewith return with the recommendation that it do pass. Respectfully submitted, Mark Perry, Vice Chair. Mr. Speaker, we your Committee on Public Retirement and Social Security to whom was referred House Bill 1183, House Bill 1184, House Bill 1199, House Bill 1200 beg leave to report that we have had the same under consideration and herewith return with the recommendation that it do pass. Respectfully submitted, Representative Warren, Co-Chair.

Rep Gazaway Are there reports from standing committees? Is there any unfinished business? Any executive communications? Madam Clerk, read the letters from the governor.

Clerk January 27, 2023, to the Speaker of the House. Dear Mr. Speaker, this is to inform you that on January 26, 2023, I reviewed and approved the following measures from the legislative session from the 94th General Assembly: House Bill 1023, Act 11; House Bill 1090, Act 12; House Bill 1100, Act 13; House Concurrent Resolution 1002, House Concurrent Resolution 1005. Sincerely, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Governor of Arkansas. January 30, 2023, to the Speaker of the House. Dear Mr. Speaker, this is to inform you that on January 30, 2023, I reviewed and approved the following measures from the legislative session of the 94th General Assembly: House Bill 1017, Act 20. House Bill 1028, Act 21. House Bill 1055, Act 22. House Bill 1063, Act 23. House Bill 1073, Act 24. House Bill 1083, Act 25. House Bill 1122, Act 26. House Bill 1137, Act 27. House Bill 1138, Act 28. House Bill 1145, Act 29. Sincerely, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Governor of Arkansas.

Rep Gazaway Members, today we have with us as Arkansas state troopers, both with the Highway Patrol Administration, Corporal Kevin Browns and also Corporal Doug Cash. Let’s welcome them, please. Members in the East Gallery, we have guests from the Little Rock Air Force Base Leadership 19th Operations Group, guests of Representative Ray, Karilyn Brown, Perry and Mark Berry. The morning hour is ended. Representative Gonzales, for what purpose?

Rep Gonzales Motion.

Rep Gazaway Let’s hear your motion.

Motion to Re-refer HB 1248 to committee

Rep Gonzales I move to re-refer House Bill 1248 to committee.

Rep Gazaway That’s a proper motion. It’s debatable. Representative Gonzales, you’re recognized to explain your motion.

Rep Gonzales Colleagues, I had a great idea for a piece of legislation. Didn’t quite get it right and it got out of committee. I need to send it back and work on it. If you would allow me to do that, I’d appreciate it. Or the other option is we can kill it in here on the floor and I can start all over on it. It doesn’t matter to me.

Rep Gazaway Representative Gonzales has explained his motion. Would anyone like to speak for the motion? Against the motion?Representative Gonzales, are you closed for your motion? The question before the House is the passage of the re-referral of House Bill 1248. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed? The ayes have it. Send the bill back to committee, Madam Clerk. Madam Clerk, read House Bill 1182.

HB 1182 Rules relating to vet tech specialists

Clerk House Bill 1182 by Representative Vaught to provide clarity regarding the certification of a veterinary technician specialist and to authorize prescriptive authority for a veterinary technician specialist in a collaborative practice agreement with a veterinarian.

Speaker Shepherd Rep. Vaught, you’re recognized to explain the bill.

Rep Vaught Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’ll probably spend more time than what I’ve ever spent in the well. And first, I want to say that my husband and I are large farm– we do have large animals. And I do understand how hard it is for us to get veterinarians out to our farm. If you get a cow with milk fever, I think Representative Delia Haak would agree, you need a vet now. You don’t need a vet two days from now. You need them now. I know there’s been a lot of talk about, we’re going against federal rules and laws. There’s nothing in this that goes against federal or their rules or their laws.

So I’ll do my best to try to explain a little bit to you. We’ve been working on this bill for right at a year from both sides. I have given the ARVMA everything they wanted except for I didn’t take out the prescriptive authority. But if you look at just that part about this prescriptive authority, you’ll notice that there’s lots of safeguards in there. It says that only if the federal government allows it to happen will it happen. It also says– and that would be, if you turn to page 5, it’s lines 10 through 11. The Veterinary Medical Examining Board may grant– it doesn’t say they shall grant. It says that they may grant a certificate of prescriptive authority if the federal government was to allow that to happen by having it pass through the federal law that they can administer these or prescribe these medicines. They can already administer a bunch of these. If you look at page 6, if you turn to page 6, it covers even more of this around the prescriptive authority in lines 15 to 17. This bill has lots of safeguards all throughout it, actually. It even talks about the collaborative practice. It has it written out what they have to do to have a collaborative practice, and that’s on pages 1 and it’s lines 29 and page 2, lines 1 through 8.

There are things in place that keeps it safe, so you can’t go against federal law or state law that’s already here. I know that somebody asked me even this morning, these vets are worried about somebody coming from out of state and then having tons of these vet specialists in their practice. In the actual bill, it says they can’t have more than three. They can’t even become this vet specialist until after they’ve had five years in training in the field. So it’s not like we’re turning them loose and the food supply is going to be in danger because you’re talking about seven years before this person can even begin to practice. So we’re not doing anything to destroy the food supply. Actually, what we’re doing would be helping the food supply because we have animals that are sick who need to see somebody.

And it is awfully hard in my area to get to see a veterinarian whenever I only have one vet that does two counties. And I have one vet that does several counties, and he’s not even in my district. He’s just in a portion of the district that I have. We have this major shortage of veterinarians. And yes, we’ve got two schools that we’re trying to put in here in Arkansas, and I applaud that. I’m excited about that. And I would love to even add more money to Mississippi and LSU seats as long as it was tied back to they have to come back to a rural area here in Arkansas and work for so many years. I’d be great with doing that. But what we need right now is relief for our vets who are in these large mass land areas who need somebody who can help them. I mean, I want to say that my husband said, heck, he thought this would be a great opportunity for some vets to triple their income, triple their income by hiring these vet technicians.

I will say Texas, Oklahoma, Colorado and even California– take this– even California is looking at passing this legislation. And yet I fought all weekend trying to make sure that you had enough information that you could actually answer questions in an intelligent way so they would understand what the bill actually did. And I realize misinformation is out there on this. And there’s a lot of misinformation out there on this bill. And once it’s misinformation, it’s hard to flip that around. We learned that in our elections. I’m pretty sure once something negative is said, it’s nearly impossible to get it turned around to where it is showing you the positive. I’ll close by saying this. This is a choice. Vets do not have to hire these people. It’s a choice. Maybe they don’t need one. Maybe their clinic isn’t big enough to need one. But I would like my vet in my area to be able to service my cattle whenever we call. And we need help. I would like for him to be able to come out and service my neighbor’s pigs if he’s got a pig that’s down and sick. I would like for the opportunity for those vet technicians specialists to be able to go up in their fields.

I will say this is no different than a physical therapist. My daughter’s a physical therapist. If she had her own business, she would have what you call PTA’s underneath her. She is still totally in charge of all those clients that the PTA would be seeing. She would still be in charge of those clients. She would be telling the PTAs how to address the needs that those people need to get better, whether it’s their shoulder, their knee, their foot, whatever it might be. But she would be the doctor in charge. This is no different. That veterinarian still is in charge of their clinic. They’re still in charge of their animals. And they can tell their vet tech specialists what to do and how to do. And with that, if you have a question, I’ll try to answer.

Speaker Shepherd Rep. Dalby, for what purpose? You’re recognized for a question.

Rep Dalby Excuse me, Representative Vaught, I meant to ask you earlier and I forgot to do it, but when I read the bill, there seemed to be something in there that a veterinarian couldn’t open another office. Could you explain that because I didn’t quite follow–

Rep Vaught Yes, ma’am.

Rep Dalby –what going on. I’m not against the bill, but I didn’t understand that clause.

Rep Vaught Yes, ma’am. Thank you for bringing that to my attention, because I did forget to speak to that. So in the bill, it’s clear that they cannot hang their own shingle or start their own business. They have to be in collaborative agreement with the veterinarian that they are working under and they have to work under them in that building. They can’t go start their own business. So it’s not going to be a bunch of veterinarians out here or veterinary special technicians who hang a shingle. That’s not going to be able to happen.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Magie, for what purpose? You’re recognized.

Rep Magie Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So you mention that Texas, Oklahoma, California are considering this similar kind of legislation. Are there any states throughout the United States where they’ve already adopted this type of legislation that expands the scope of practice.

Rep Vaught Well, they’re putting these technicians out. There’s already a thousand of these technicians in the United States because it takes so long to get your schooling. There’s not as many as there could be. But I don’t know. I don’t know if there’s another state that’s already adopted this. But why can’t Arkansas be the first?

Rep Magie So you said there– these thousand you mentioned, you said there are a thousand technicians that have this specialized certification or whatever. Do we currently have any technicians in Arkansas that are certified veterinary technicians or technologists?

Rep Vaught We have three that are about to take their exam. You have to go through five years of fieldwork and you got to do 50 case loads and you’ve got to do several things before you can actually even sit for the test. And we have three that are getting ready to sit for their test.

Rep Magie There’s not currently anyone that currently has that certification?

Rep Vaught They do not yet. They will as soon as this test takes place.

Rep Magie Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Brown, for what purpose?

Rep Brown Question.

Speaker Shepherd You’re recognized.

Rep Brown Representative Vaught, I attended the A meeting last week where LSU’s veterinary clinic made their presentation. Am I correct, was their assessment of the situation in Arkansas accurate, that we are extremely low on veterinarians in our state?

Rep Vaught Yes, ma’am. We’re at a crucial point in our state. Actually, the vets that are large animal vets, the average age is 55 plus.

Rep Brown They’re going to retire soon.

Rep Vaught Yes, ma’am.

Rep Brown Thank you.

Rep Vaught Thank you. I would appreciate a good vote.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Vaught has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? Representative Magie, you’re recognized to speak against the bill.

Rep Magie Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Really I just wanted to come to the well since I hadn’t been down here this year. I respect Representative Vaught intensely, and we’ve worked together a lot on a lot of different legislation in the past, and she’s worked very diligently on this bill. But what I want to do is let everybody know a little bit about veterinary technologists and technicians and then the specialty. There are various schools around the United States, and they’re either two year, four year programs that are approved by the American Veterinary Association that these individuals go to. So they get out of school and they’re certified as a technician or technologist. In Arkansas, we have, I think, about 126 people that are recognized and there are like 56 people whose licenses are no longer active for whatever reason.

They work with veterinarians in their office. And to become a certified veterinary specialist, they have to spend anywhere from 3,000 to 10,000 hours working under the direction of a veterinarian. And then they submit a number of cases and take an examination and then they can get their certification as a certified veterinary technologist. And there are various fields that they can specialize in. They can specialize in internal medicine, behavioral health– if you can believe that– I don’t know how they do behavioral health in animals. But there are a lot of different fields within which they can specialize. Once they have that certification, if you go to their website that says vettech.com, it talks about all of these different levels of certification, it talks about what they do and it says once they have this level, they can assist the veterinarian in the practice of veterinary medicine.

The vets can do this now. They can hire these people now. And as an employee, which is fine, and a vet as a physician as me can delegate whatever they want to that person. They’re taking full liability and responsibility for that– in my case, human; in their case, the animal. What this bill does, though, is it expands that scope of practice to a collaborative agreement, and I’m not opposed to a collaborative agreement. We do that in medicine with various fields. And it sets up independent billing so the veterinary specialists can independently bill. And they work– the vet can only have three of them. That’s in this bill. So that probably would work pretty well. They become– basically if you do a collaborative agreement and this other individual is billing themselves, then you’re actually, that’s a 1099 employee of your office. They’re billing for their services. Now, who’s going to pay for that? I don’t know if the farmer’s paying for it or if the vet’s paying them for that service, whatever. If the vet’s paying for it, it’s a 1099 that they get. Those people are then liable for what they do, and the vet is then liable for what they do. So there’s a lot of safeguards in the bill which make it reasonable.

Where I have some problems with the bill is the prescriptive authority. And the bill doesn’t give them anything they don’t have now. In other words, from the FDA and the DEA, those individual veterinary specialists are not recognized as providers so they can’t prescribe right now. And I doubt seriously, particularly from the DEA standpoint, that they will ever have a license or a DEA number to prescribe schedule 2 medications. Some of the drugs that are used, if they go out to euthanize an animal, those are dangerous drugs and they can be abused. So even when I talk to my local veterinarians now, the DEA has gotten so strict on the vets, a lot of them, the only thing they even keep in their office anymore is what they’re going to use as an anesthesia or what they’re going to use when they euthanize an animal. They no longer– a vet’s a little different than medicine. You go to the vet, they prescribe you medicine, then they give you a bottle of pills. Most vets now don’t even dispense schedule 2 because of the paperwork trail and that sort of thing. I can’t imagine there’s very many vets out there that are going to allow someone else to utilize their license to use a schedule 2.

So I don’t know that it’s going to be– that part of the bill, I just don’t think it’s really workable. So overall, I kind of like the bill, but respectfully, because of the prescriptive authority, I’m going to vote against it. Any questions? Thank you.

Speaker Shepherd For what purpose? You’re recognized for a question.

Rep Miller Representative Magie, I appreciate your approach to this. And I’ve sat here for a long time trying to figure out if you’re for it or agin’ it, which means you’ve done a great job. But what do you suggest that our farmers do, especially rural areas. In my district, I hear from folks all the time it’s very difficult. I can understand what you’re saying, but I mean, what do you suggest that we do to avert the problems that we’re having now?

Rep Magie I think, number one, they have to establish a relationship with a veterinarian. Even if they use a certified veterinary specialist, that person has to have a relationship, either be an employee of or having a collaborative agreement– if we pass this, have a collaborative agreement with that vet so they have a relationship. Now, there is a part of this bill that doesn’t really go very well with federal guidelines. It says if there’s not a preexisting relationship and the veterinary specialist sees the animal, then the vet within 15 days has to personally see the animal. According to federal guidelines, it’s 24 hours. I think it’s one day. So that’s a little bit out of the– it’s not in compliance with what the feds do. So, any other questions? Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.

Speaker Shepherd Represent Magie has spoken against the bill. Would anyone like to speak for the bill? Representative Beaty, you’re recognized to speak for the bill.

Rep Beaty Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, as a member of the Ag, Forestry, and Economic Development Committee, I sat in on the testimony or the presentation of the bill last week. And I guess the key takeaway that I left with was we can put a lot of things in that bill and you see there’s a lot of authority and different things that we allow, but the ultimate answer and what I took away is that the vets are in control of their practice. This in no way, shape, form or fashion takes anything away from the veterinarian that runs that office. It is solely at their discretion as to what they allow the vet tech specialist to do.

You know, it’s time– one of the comments that was made is that maybe we should sit back in Arkansas and wait and see what other states do in this area. And I made the statement then, I make it again today, that at some point we need to quit sitting back in Arkansas and waiting to see what others do and take a forward approach. And right now is the time to advance veterinary medicine in the state of Arkansas. This provides a career path and a career track for certified vet techs to increase the scope and skill sets that they have in the state. I think it’ll promote competition. It’s definitely going to help in your rural areas. I think the comment that I heard in committee was that we have 14 vets in the state of Arkansas per 100,000 residents.

So again, the language in the bill is what the vet would allow in their practice. They were even discussing what a vet tech specialist would add to a practice, and that additional revenue on average from national numbers is that a vet tech specialist would add $160,000 to $220,000 to the income for that practice. Along the same lines, the pay for those who take in vet tech specialists is somewhere around $15 an hour. So if this helps one Arkansan and their animals have good veterinary medicine and access, then it’s a good bill. Let’s not get tied up in the details and the information in that bill of what’s allowable because it is solely at the discretion of that veterinarian in their office and takes nothing away. And based on that, I would highly encourage all of you to support this. And let’s expand veterinary medicine in the state of Arkansas. Thank you.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Beaty has spoken for the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? Would anyone like to speak for the bill? Rep. Vaught, you’re recognized to close for the bill.

Rep Vaught Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Another first for me. I don’t usually come close for bills. This actually came out of a task force and it was actually through the AVMA, which is the national veterinarian– and this idea actually came from their own task force. I want to again say that it is the choice of a vet if they want to hire vet technicians, they can. If they’re not comfortable, they don’t have to. We’re not like telling somebody they have to do this. I want to explain again, a veterinarian technician specialist board certification can only be obtained after a minimum of five years of clinical experience. That’s way more than what we expect of even an APRN, guys. And they must spend at least 75% of their clinical experience in the area of their specialty, and they’ve got to do a minimum of 50 hours of advanced clinical relevant continuing education with a minimum of 50 cases and complete four in-depth case reports within the application year. So they got to do all of that in a year. This is not putting anything at risk. And I understand that any time we play in someone’s playpen, they get a little bit scared. And I get that. But I do remember whenever we’ve been running nurse practitioner stuff around here, I think that there was a lot of people that thought the sky was going to fall and the sky’s still up in the air. And I would appreciate a good vote.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Vaught has closed for the bill. The question before the House is the passage of House Bill 1182. Prepare the machine, Madam Clerk. Has everyone voted? Has everyone voted? Cast up the ballot, Madam Clerk. With 67 yeas, 17 nays and 8 present, the bill has passed. Madam Clerk, please read House Bill 1196.

HB 1196 Requiring public housing recipients to work, train, or volunteer

Clerk House Bill 1196 by Representative Underwood to modify the requirements for public housing and to celebrate the Housing Welfare Reform Act of 2023.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Underwood, you’re recognized to explain the bill.

Rep Underwood Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this bill is based on a very simple principle, that if the government is helping you with taxpayer funded public housing and you’re able bodied, we’re simply asking that you work part time. And I believe that most Arkansans would think this is a common sense reform. Now, the worker requirement in this bill only applies to those individuals between the ages of 19 and 64 years of age and don’t have some other exemption, like having a disability, a child with a disability, or participating in a drug or alcohol program. In order to meet the work requirement, it’s very simple and reasonable. You just have to have an average of 20 hours of work per week, or you can satisfy it by volunteering an average of 20 hours per week or being in a work training program. I quickly want to address a few things as to why this is good policy.

By passing this bill, we can help able bodied adults get out of government dependency and get back into the workforce. This means higher incomes for these individuals and also lower enrollment, which is great for taxpayers, workers and businesses. It promotes self-sufficiency and less government spending. And currently we have approximately 60,000 unfilled jobs in our state. And this bill can help reduce those numbers. But I’d be remiss not to talk about one of the most important items of this bill, which is it preserves government resources and our safety net for those who truly need it, those who can’t work, those who can’t support themselves and have nowhere else to turn. Currently, 45% of able bodied working adults receiving public housing benefits currently do not work at all.

On average, families spend about a year and a half to two and a half years on waiting lists to get into public housing. And this includes disabled veterans, homeless, the elderly and victims of domestic violence. So, in short, if you can work and you are able bodied and you’re receiving these government benefits, you should work. And this reduces government dependency and helps preserve these resources for those who truly need them. And I’m happy to take a few questions.

Speaker Shepherd Representative McCullough, for what purpose? You’re recognized.

Rep McCullough Amount. So public housing is a federal program administered directly at the local level. Does the state have any jurisdiction over this program?

Rep Underwood Yeah, I think that this issue was kind of raised in committee, and I believe this– obviously, we worked out through some of that in committee. Department of Labor stated they had no issues with this bill. But I also addressed the HUD requirements. The HUD secretary has the authority to waive certain requirements, federal law, for local flexibility. And so all we’re asking is that we request that flexibility. And the bill actually states that. I think it’s on page 3, kind of toward the end of the bill, it requires that these public housing authorities ask for permission from HUD. And if they’re denied, then every so many, like 24 months, I think is what the bill says, they are to request for permission again.

Rep McCullough Follow up, Mr. Speaker?

Speaker Shepherd You’re recognized.

Rep McCullough Thank you. Did you, in the drafting of this bill or afterwards, have you had any conversations with the executive directors of these Arkansas housing authorities?

Rep Underwood I think there’s– I have not. I personally have not. I think other members have, and I’ve tried to address those concerns with them.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Clowney, for what purpose?

Rep Clowney Question.

Speaker Shepherd You’re recognized.

Rep Clowney Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Representative Underwood, where do you anticipate people who fail to meet the work requirements and therefore lose their spot in public housing, and more importantly the children of those people, where do you anticipate they will go after leaving this housing?

Rep Underwood Well, look, I think that this doesn’t put them in a position where they lose this housing. I think that the work requirements are very reasonable. It’s a part time position and you can get that through working just 20 hours a week or volunteering or a combination of those things. And actually, I neglected to say this and I said I would say this and I forgot to do it. Representative Mayberry brought this concern to me earlier and I talked to my Senate sponsor about this. Currently, the exemption is for people with dependents of four months of age– children four months of age or younger. And Senator Gilmore and I are going to amend that on the Senate end to raise that to 5 years of age. So that way, once they’re in school, you know, it should be plenty doable to get that work requirement.

Rep Clowney Follow up?

Speaker Shepherd You’re recognized.

Rep Clowney What is the penalty for failure to meet the work requirement?

Rep Underwood Well, if you don’t meet the work requirement, we are prioritizing– we’re asking that public housing authorities prioritize those people who are not– that really need the services over those who are able bodied and are not meeting the work requirement.

Rep Clowney Thank you.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Lynch, for what purpose?

Rep Lynch Question.

Speaker Shepherd You’re recognized.

Rep Lynch Representative Underwood, who will administer the the investigation on whether or not these people are working and meeting that requirement? Who does that follow?

Rep Underwood The public housing authorities are required to have a program in place to implement this.

Rep Lynch So what’s going to fund this extra activity that we’re asking the housing authority to go through?

Rep Underwood Well, I think in the long run, I think we’re saving money because we’re saving these resources by helping them with keeping these resources for people who truly need them. But I will also say two years ago in the 2021 session, we passed a similar bill. I ran the bill and this legislature passed it requiring that public housing authorities have a child support requirement and prioritize those people who are current on their child support. And so they’re already required to meet that requirement as well. So this should be something they should be able to comply with.

Rep Lynch Follow up? I had a call from the person that heads up the housing authority in Lonoke County. He’s really concerned about the extra work that we’re asking them to do. Basically, he said it’s an unfunded mandate. So there is a concern there.

Rep Underwood Yeah, and I appreciate that concern. And I would just say, I think, you know, again, if we’re being tasked with being responsible taxpayer money and these resources are for people who truly need these resources. If you can work, you should work. And I think by getting those people to work, that gets them out of government dependency because it builds their skill set, it allows them to raise their incomes and so they don’t have to come back to public housing authorities or come back to get government resources and helps us get those resources to people who truly need them. So I think in the long run, we’re saving taxpayer resources by doing this. And I appreciate the questions. I appreciate a good vote.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Underwood has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? Representative McCullough, you’re recognized to speak against the bill.

Rep McCullough Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So I just wanted to say real quickly this that I believe this conflicts with federal law and state overreach. Public housing is a federal program managed at the local housing level by public housing authorities through a contract with Housing and Urban Development and there’s no state funding or jurisdiction. Also, local communities require local decision making. Local control allows PHA’s the flexibility to address specific needs within their communities, and HUD has a local preference system in place to implement this flexibility. Also, there would be an administrative burden. Administrating public housing already comes with significant regulations and compliances that must be followed. Public housing access is already incredibly scarce. This bill would create an additional barrier for entry for low income Arkansans. So I ask for a no vote on this bill. Thank you.

Speaker Shepherd Representative McCullough has spoken against the bill. Would anyone like to speak for the bill? Represent Ray, you’re recognized to speak for the bill.

Rep Ray Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Colleagues, I think this is a very good common sense piece of legislation. The number one concern I hear from employers in my district and around the state, and I’m sure you hear it too, is the lack of available workers to fill jobs. I sat through a presentation at the State Chamber a week ago where they told me that there are currently 60,000 unfilled jobs in our state. I just read a book called Men Without Work by Nicholas Eberstadt, who is a political economist with the American Enterprise Institute. And his research finds that we currently have 7 million prime age adult males in America, 7 million– that’s more than twice the size of Arkansas’s population– who are just not participating in the workforce.

To the extent possible, we should require work as a precondition for many of our government support safety net programs. The work requirement contained in this bill is eminently reasonable. It’s not even a full time work requirement. It’s a part time work requirement. It’s 20 hours a week that you can fulfill by working, by training, or even by volunteering. I don’t think it’s cruel or inhumane in any way to ask people to work part time in exchange for government benefits. People who can, who are able bodied, as this bill stipulates– this requirement does not apply to people who cannot work or to a host of exemptions that are listed in the bill. I’ll finish by saying that I think our society needs more policies that promote work, not less. Work is good. It’s beneficial for the individual. It’s beneficial for society. It raises people’s incomes. It helps lift them out of poverty. It provides fulfillment and promotes human flourishing. So I would ask for a good vote on this bill.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Flowers, for what purpose?

Rep Flowers Question.

Speaker Shepherd You’re recognized.

Rep Flowers I would agree with all those things you said about work, and I know many of my constituents would as well. But I also wonder and worry about areas in the state where there are few, if any, jobs. I mean, even in today’s economy where we have unemployment the lowest it’s been since 1969– I heard that on the news just yesterday– there still are parts of Arkansas where there just, there are no jobs or there are very few jobs and very little infrastructure where people could even volunteer. So if you have a community, let’s say, where there are 200 people living in housing, in public housing, and let’s say half of them could reasonably find a part time job or volunteer, but the other half couldn’t. It’s just not there. What happens to those people?

Rep Ray Well, as I stated, there are 60,000 open jobs across the state today. I’m sure there are jobs available in virtually every community across the state. But even in the situation that you outlined, the beauty of this requirement contained in this bill is that it’s so flexible you could fulfill it not just by working a job, you could fulfill it by training, you could fulfill it even by volunteering. You could literally go to the needy paws shelter and walk dogs, and that would qualify to fulfill this work requirement. So I don’t think any able bodied working age adult is going to have problems complying if they want to.

Rep Flowers Follow up? I am keenly aware that there are areas that are so desolate economically that that doesn’t exist in some places. And I know it’s hard to believe, but I see it. And that actually is a reality in a couple of parts of my district now. In those areas, however sparse, wouldn’t you agree that that would be problematic for those communities and those families?

Rep Ray Well, there are other portions of our social safety net that already have work requirements. And so I assume the hypothetical Arkansans that you’re talking about, you know, they run into this issue with other work requirements. And so this is something that has worked itself out through other areas of our social safety net. I think we need to promote work wherever possible. And I think this is a good bill that does that.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Ray has spoken for the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? Would anyone like to speak for the bill? Representative Underwood, you’re recognized to close for the bill.

Rep Underwood Just a couple of points that was raised. On the compliance with federal law, like I mentioned, there actually is– I didn’t say this in my answer earlier– but there actually is some areas where they’re already implementing work requirements across the country. Beaumont, Texas, for example, they’re doing this above and beyond what HUD is requiring, and there’s not been any issues to that to my knowledge. Again, the HUD secretary has the flexibility to waive certain aspects of federal law for these requests. And so, but even if that weren’t the case, the bill does state that we’re going to request permission for this, and if it’s denied, they can continue to request permission to do this. And at some point, I mean, work requirements work. And so at some point, there’s going to be an administration that will recognize those work requirements.

And so I think that’s a good thing. I think there’s dignity in work. And the last point I want to make is on the scarcity of public housing. I think that’s a great point. And I think that’s exactly why we need to pass this legislation. If we have people on waiting lists who truly need it, that includes disabled people, veterans, homeless people, victims of domestic violence. And so if we can get people who are able bodied to work, and those who aren’t, if those who are choosing not to work, then we can get these to people who truly need those resources. And so they don’t have to sit on waiting lists for a year and a half to two and a half years. Thank you so much for your time and I appreciate a good vote.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Underwood is closed for the bill. The question before the House is the passage of House Bill 1196. Prepare the machine, Madam Clerk. Has everyone voted? Has everyone voted? Cast up the ballot, Madam Clerk. With a vote of 79 yeas, 18 nays and 1 present, the bill has passed. Madam Clerk, please read House Bill 1144.

HB 1144 Specialty court for dependency and neglect cases

Rep Flowers House 1144 by Representative Dalby to create a special program for families involved in a dependency neglect proceeding that are affected by substance use disorders or mental health disorders.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Dalby, you’re recognized to explain the bill.

Rep Dalby Thank you, Mr. Speaker. House Bill 1144 is allowing circuit courts to establish another specialty court within that to deal with dependency and neglect cases that come before that court. It is certainly voluntary. The whole goal of any specialty court, and particularly this one, is to keep a family together, let them work services and try to keep that family where they’re not having to move the children someplace out of the home. It keeps people employed. And overall, it is a great bill for the reunification of the family. The services will be provided through our traditional ways of providing services. All folks are on board with this. And with that, I’ll be happy to answer any questions. Thank you. I’d appreciate a good vote. And there’s a vote coming in, calling in.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Dalby’s explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? Would anyone like to speak for the bill? Representative Dalby is closed for the bill. The question before the House is the passage of House bill 1144. Prepare the machine, Madam Clerk. Has everyone voted? Has everyone voted? Cast up the ballot, Madam Clerk. With 98 yea, 0 nay, and 0 present, the bill has passed. Madam Clerk, please read House Bill 1009.

HB 1009 Creates a study group for non-emergency medical rideshare transportation

Clerk House Bill 1009 by Representative Pilkington to establish that non-emergency transportation rideshare expansion study work group to study expanding rideshare services covered by the Arkansas Medicaid program.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Pilkington, you’re recognized to explain the bill.

Rep Pilkington Thank you, Mr. Speaker. For some of us who were here in the previous sessions, you may recall I ran a bill to create a pilot program at DHS to use ride sharing options to pay for non-emergent transportation. And this was a ‘may’ not a ‘shall,’ so they didn’t have to do it. But luckily, they did. And they started the program and was running it for a little bit in the Little Rock Metro area using Lyft as a way to help pay for non-emergent transportation, which for those who work in the medical field know that that’s a massive issue with low income people. There were some issues with the program. They shut it down. COVID happened. Bigger priorities were in the state than doing this, which I understand, it makes sense.

So we were looking to get the program back online. I had some different legislation, but DHS came and really said they’d much rather have this kind of work group to work through the issues, bring the non-emergency transportation vendors to the table, as well as a few other organizations that do free transportation for those looking to seek medical care that’s non-emergent. So the idea is we’re going to pass this. We’re going to give them the authority to start meeting and then send a report to Senate and public health in December of this year. So that’s essentially the bill, not super controversial, but I think it was a really great program, and I think it’s a great way to kind of fill the gaps. And I’m excited to get it back on track and get it running again. So seeing no questions, I ask for a good vote. Thank you.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Pilkington has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? Would anyone like to speak for the bill? Representative Pilkington has closed for the bill. The question before the House is the passage of House Bill 1009. Prepare the machine, Madam Clerk. Has everyone voted? Has everyone voted? Cast up the ballot, Madam Clerk. With a vote of 95 yea, 0 nay and 0 present, the bill has passed. Madam Clerk, please read House Bill 1155.

HB 1155 Home child care zoning requirements

Clerk House Bill 1155 by Representative Bentley concerning the compliance of child care facilities with local regulations when seeking licensure under the Child Care Facility Licensing Act.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Bentley, you’re recognized to explain the bill.

Rep Bentley Good afternoon, colleagues. For many of our members and many of our constituents, it’s very tough to find good childcare, especially for those folks that are infants to the age of 3. This bill is simply a bill to try and make it a little easier for those who have residential daycares to not have to follow through with some commercial zoning issues. No, excuse me, not zoning– commercial fire issues that they have run into. So if somebody has a residential daycare, they have to be licensed to early childhood development. So they have to follow through certain zoning regulations in order to get that license through early childhood education.

So this bill simply says, if you look on page 2, a local government authority shall treat a child care family home as a residential property use and application of local regulations, including zoning, land use, development, fire, life and safety, sanitation and building codes. So this situation came up with someone wants to put a residential daycare in and the fire marshal comes in and says, I’m sorry, you have to treat this like a commercial property. You’ve got to put sprinklers in here, you got to change the vent a hood. You’re going to put extra doors in here. And by the time they get done with them, there’s absolutely no way they can financially afford that. And we have disallowed those folks to get some good childcare. So it’s a very simple bill, been worked through, Representative Mayberry has done a lot of work on this. I want to thank her on that to make sure things are good with our fire marshals across the state. And with that, I’ll take any questions that any of you might have on the bill. Seeing no questions, I would appreciate a good vote. Thank you.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Bentley’s explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? Would anyone like to speak for the bill? Representative Bentley is closed for the bill. The question before the House is the passage of House Bill 1155. Prepare the machine, Madam Clerk. Has everyone voted? Has everyone voted? Cast up the ballot, Madam Clerk. With 95 yeas, 1 nay and 0 present, the bill is passed. Madam Clerk, please read House Bill 1171.

HB 1171 Insurance exemptions for certain religious denominations

Clerk House Bill 1171 by Representative Haak to amend the law concerning the requirements for religious denominations to qualify as self insurers.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Haak, you’re recognized to explain the bill.

Rep Haak Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this is a small bill that allows a religious denomination in the state of Arkansas to self-insure. The only change today is that these denominations do not ‘prohibit’ their members. So it doesn’t change any of those requirements on their behalf. It just wants to make it more correct in saying the denominations ‘discourage’ their members from purchasing insurance of any form from ‘prohibits.’ So we’re not prohibiting anything. We’re saying that any denomination that discourages its members for insurance because of religious tenets may do that, but they currently do not prohibit. So we’re not requiring them to purchase insurance and we’re not preventing them from doing that in any way. And with that, I’ll take any questions. Seeing none, I appreciate a good vote.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Brown, for what purpose?

Rep Brown Question.

Speaker Shepherd You’re recognized.

Rep Brown I’m just curious, because I didn’t study this ahead of time. Does this pertain to nondenominational churches? You know, a lot of churches say they’re nondenominational. Why the distinction?

Rep Haak So there’s no change in the other laws concerning other groups. It only is a change in this particular part of the law.

Rep Brown Follow up? So you’re just saying that they’re discouraging them from signing up with other insurance or I didn’t understand that part?

Rep Haak Yes. So the current way that it’s stated is that these denominations, because of religious beliefs, prohibit their members, and that’s not accurate. They do not prohibit their members from purchasing insurance. They only discourage it.

Rep Brown Thank you.

Rep Haak Thank you. Any other questions?

Speaker Shepherd Representative Eaves, for what purpose?

Rep Eaves Question.

Speaker Shepherd You’re recognized.

Rep Eaves I’m just trying to follow what we’re doing. Why do we need to do this? What’s the whole point of this?

Rep Haak The purpose came about from a denomination that was just wanting to clarify. They do not prohibit their members from purchasing insurance. They only discourage it. So this just follows their actual practice in making it accurate in the law. There’s no requirement or prohibition against purchasing insurance.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Ray, for what purpose?

Rep Ray Question.

Speaker Shepherd You’re recognized.

Rep Ray Representative, I think I remember voting on this bill last session. Is this the same bill?

Rep Haak It is not the same bill. It’s actually a different bill. And this, the way it’s currently worded, was passed last session. So this is just a clarification that an actual prohibition is not in the active practice of this religion. It’s only a discouragement from purchasing insurance.

Rep Ray Okay. Thank you.

Rep Haak Thank you. I appreciate a good vote.

Speaker Shepherd Represent Haak has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? Would anyone like to speak for the bill? Representative Haak is closed for the bill. The question before the House is the passage of House Bill 1171. Prepare the machine, Madam Clerk. Has everyone voted? Has everyone voted? Cast up the ballot, Madam Clerk. With 81 yeas, 8 nays and 3 present, the bill is passed. Madam Clerk, please read House Bill 1321.

HB 1131 Truck platooning systems

Clerk House Bill 1321 by Representative Holcomb to amend the law concerning truck platooning systems.

Speaker Shepherd Rep. Holcomb, you’re recognized to explain the bill.

Rep Holcomb Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m going to kind of approach this like I did in committee. When I was a young man, which you can tell by looking was many, many moons ago, I heard Ford Motor Company advertise a heated steering wheel. And I thought to myself, What kind of candy stick is going to get a heated steering wheel? But last Wednesday, when we were here on the House floor, before I left the House floor, I walked to the back window here and hit the fob on my truck. And when I got out to my truck, the steering wheel was nice and heated. My seat was heated. All of the mirrors were defrosted. I got on the expressway and I put it in cruise control and it’s got a gap control for me when I get it behind another car in case. I’m not paying attention, it keeps a certain distance. If he stops, it stops for me. And if you’ve got that on your vehicle, you know what I’m talking about. It’ll even back up if I don’t see something behind me. It’ll even set down for me like that. It’ll break that way. It’s got lane control where if I am not paying attention, it keeps me inside the lane. It won’t let me get outside. If I try to get outside of the lane without hitting my blinker, it gives me a little shock on the seat which alerts you to the fact that you’re getting out of the lane. So in saying that, technology is just rapidly advancing in our personal vehicles and in our commercial vehicles.

So HB 1321 is actually just a bill designed to keep up with the statues up to date with the latest trends and applications of truck technology. In 2017, this body enabled legislation to establish a framework for platooning technologies to be deployed in Arkansas. That legislation required a driver to be present in following vehicles. Since that time, this body has subsequently passed legislation for autonomous vehicles. We did a pilot program, as a matter of fact, in 2019, and then we did a full scale application for autonomous vehicles in 2021. So HB 1321 is designed to update the 2017 legislation to match the more permissive and advanced language that was adopted in 2021. It eliminates the requirement for a human operator in the second truck making our status on it actually technology neutral.

So this change is needed to update the law to the current model in the marketplace and legislative trends that are surrounding our state. If a motor carrier wants to deploy an autonomous technology in the state of Arkansas, we have a plan for that. If a motor carrier wants to deploy truck platooning technology in Arkansas, this legislation updates that plan for that. All trucks deploying any type of technology are equipped with advanced safety systems. The Arkansas Highway Commission retains the plan approval, the number of trucks, the time of day, how they market the routes. All of that is preplanned for platoon operations in Arkansas. This model is legal to deploy in approximately 30 other states. Matter of fact, connecting states to us, Texas and Oklahoma, are both doing this at this time. I’d be happy to take any questions if you have any. If not, I appreciate a good vote.

Speaker Shepherd Thank you. Representative Holcomb has explained– Rep. Miller?

Rep Miller Question.

Speaker Shepherd He left the well. Rep. Holcomb has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? Would anyone like to speak for the bill? Representative Holcomb is closed for the bill. The question before the House is the passage of House Bill 1321. Prepare the machine, Madam Clerk. Has everyone voted? Has everyone voted? Cast up the ballot, Madam Clerk. With a vote of 96 yea, 0 nay, and 0 present, the bill is passed. Madam Clerk, please read House Bill 1324.

HB 1324 Allows cops to pull over drivers with lights off while wipers on

Clerk House Bill 1324 by Representative Vaught to amend the law concerning vehicle handling requirements.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Vaught, you’re recognized to explain the bill.

Rep Vaught Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I don’t think this one is near as controversial maybe as the last one. But right now in Arkansas, it is a law that you have to have on your windshield– when you have your windshield wipers on, you must have your lights on. And we have a lot of people that still don’t realize that. And this will actually allow the cop to be able to pull them over and talk to them about having their lights on while their windshield wipers are on. And with that, I will take any questions or– yes, ma’am.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Lundstrum, for what purpose?

Rep Lundstrum Question. But this doesn’t allow for a ticket, correct?

Rep Vaught I mean. I don’t know. I mean, right now it’s illegal for it to be done. They just can’t be pulled over for it. I don’t know if they’ll give– I’m sure at some– one, two times, maybe they give them a ticket? I’m pretty sure if I’m speeding and I get pulled over, I get a ticket. I don’t know.

Rep Lundstrum Follow up? So this will be an offense that they could be pulled over for and then ticketed?

Rep Vaught Yes, ma’am.

Rep Lundstrum Okay. Thank you.

Rep Vaught Sorry, I didn’t understand the first time. With that, I’d appreciate a good vote.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Vaught has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? Would anyone like to speak for the bill? Representative Tosh, you’re recognized to speak for the bill.

Rep Tosh Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Colleagues, I know there’s several people have asked me questions concerning this bill, and I just want to make sure that everybody understands and Representative Lundstrum just alluded with her question to exactly kind of what’s been a misunderstanding. But currently, so everybody’s clear, currently under state law, if you’re driving your vehicle and it’s raining, you have your wipers on, you have to have your headlights on because of the visibility issue. But that is what we call here a secondary law. When this law was originally passed, they made it a secondary law, which means that if you’re a law enforcement officer and you see a vehicle that’s violating this law, you do not have the authority to pull that vehicle over. You have to be– if you stop them for another reason, then you can address the violation with the headlights not being on during a rainstorm.

What this bill will do, instead of it being a secondary law, it will make it a primary law, which simply means that’s what most of our laws are that we pass here in the state of Arkansas related to traffic offenses. When it becomes a primary law, if we pass it out of here today, then if law enforcement see someone driving without their headlights on during a rainstorm, then they have the authority to pull that vehicle over and address that offense. It simply moves this bill, simply moves it from a secondary offense to a primary offense. And I thought I needed to come down here and explain that. I know there’s been some confusion on it. I like the bill. I’ll be voting for it. I think it’s a great bill and I appreciate your support. Thank you.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Tosh has spoken for the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? Representative Long, you’re recognized to speak against the bill.

Rep Long I hadn’t planned on speaking, but I felt that I should. Many people, such as myself, drive older vehicles. And the older vehicles, of course, don’t turn the lights on automatically. I find myself many times driving down the road and, you know, and if I think about it, of course I do turn the lights on. I think it’s safer. But a lot of people driving the older vehicles, maybe they’re like me. They don’t know that they don’t have lights on. And if it’s really not dark enough to prompt you to turn them on yourself, I think that it’s probably not dark enough to have these folks have to pay a ticket. Something to consider. I’d appreciate it.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Long has spoken against the bill. Would anyone like to speak for the bill? Would anyone like to speak against the bill? Representative Vaught, you’re recognized to close for the bill.

Rep Vaught Twice in one day closing. So this is a true safety issue. 18 wheelers can’t see people in the rain with the mist coming off the tires and everything. So this is really about having safer roads. And there are a lot of accidents that actually happen, which I didn’t realize this, due to even fog and them not being able to see cars in the fog because they don’t turn on their lights. So this is truly a safety issue. And I hope that you will help our police make our areas and our roads more safe by voting yes. Thank you. I appreciate a good vote.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Vaught has closed for the bill. The question before the House is the passage of House Bill 1324. Prepare the machine, Madam Clerk. Has everyone voted? Has everyone voted? Cast up the ballot, Madam Clerk. With 65 ayes, 21 nays and 6 present, the bill is passed. Madam Clerk, please read House Bill 1224.

HB 1224 Penalties for bounced checks on purchasing tax delinquent property

Clerk House Bill 1224 by Representative Bentley to allow a redemption deed or sale deed to be canceled and a penalty imposed if the payment instrument used to redeem or purchase tax delinquent property fails or is dishonored.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Bentley, you’re recognized to explain the bill.

Rep Bentley Colleagues, two years ago, we made it possible for our Commissioner of State lands to do online auctions, increase the number of sales across our counties, helping our counties get rid of land that was tax delinquent and moving things forward with deeds. In the past two years, we’ve had 74 bounced checks in that process, so people were not doing their due diligence. They would go online, buy some property, then they go out there and look at it, realize they really didn’t want that property after all. And they just do a stop payment on the check. And there we are, another year with that deed in limbo and not knowing how to move forward. So this simply allows the Commissioner of State Lands to do what DFA does and allow a $20 fine or 10% of the sale, whichever is greater, to cut back on those people that are doing bounced checks and just kind of abusing the system, making things run smoother for our counties and the Commissioner of state lands. With that, I would take any questions anybody’s got on the simple bill. Not seeing any questions, I’d appreciate a good vote.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Bentley has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? Would anyone like to speak for the bill? Representative Bentley is closed for the bill. The question before the House is the passage of House Bill 1224. Prepare the machine, Madam Clerk. Has everyone voted? Has everyone voted? Cast up the ballot, Madam Clerk. With 85 yeas, 7 nays, and 1 present, the bill is passed. Madam Clerk, please read House Bill 1263.

HB 1263 Amending terms and timeline on sale of tax delinquent property

Clerk House Bill 1263 by Representative Richmond to amend the law concerning the sale and redemption of tax delinquent property and to declare an emergency.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Richmond, you’re recognized to explain the bill.

Rep Richmond Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, colleagues. This is another Commissioner of State Lands bill that was brought to me. I will say that 95% of what this bill does is it updates the language to go ahead and be in line with what past legislation has been done in the past as well as changing certain terms so that is consistent. One of the big terms is changing land to parcel. That’s probably 95% of the bill, but there’s another 5% that we have to talk about here. And what is that 5% that’s contained in? Well, it eliminates mail in bids on parcels at tax delinquent auctions. It standardizes wording to use parcel lands instead of land or property or etc., changes the notification period from starting when the parcel sales at a tax delinquent auction to 30 days prior to the date of the sale, sets the deadline to redeem the online auction parcel to 4 p.m. Central Time the last business day before the date of sale.

This is probably the most important point, in that right now when you have the auction, at the end of that day, whoever owns that land that was auctioned, if it’s been bought, they have 10 more days. They get an additional 10 days to go and pay their taxes. You say, Well, that’s great, that’s great. But that is not taking into consideration the fact that they’ve already had four and a half years, four and a half years to pay their tax delinquent property. That’s more time than you will ever get on a car loan. That’s more time than you will give anybody that you are actually selling a piece of property to and carrying the loan for them.

You’re not going to wait four and a half years plus 10 days. So this is just saying it’s time to change that, to get it where we can prevent this money that comes into the state that somebody buys this particular piece of property and then has to wait 10 more days and then finds out that they went in and redeemed the property. Now, another month or two months goes by before whoever that buyer is can get their check back and actually get their money. The other thing that it helps stop, which I don’t have any statistics, but I was told that it does help stop, by the Land Commissioner is the potential of money laundering, In that if you have dirty money, one of the good ways to clean that money up is you go in, you buy this piece of property with dirty money. In the meantime, you give money to whoever actually owns the land. They go in and they redeem it. They pay their taxes. The state now has your dirty money and you get in return a nice clean check for whatever that amount is. And so I don’t know how widespread that is. I just know it’s not a reportable thing to the IRS for some reason. So it’s a difficult thing that we can also reduce the potential of people taking advantage of the system. Now, we were asked some questions in committee about how many parcels of land is sold that then goes and becomes delinquent again the following year. The statistics I have right now that is redeemed during that ten day period: 115,135 parcels of land redeemed after being sold at an auction and then returns to delinquent status. In other words, I went and waited four and a half years plus ten days, go in and pay my taxes on the land, and then I get to go another four and a half years and ten days before I pay the taxes and penalties on my land again. I know it’s hard to believe, but some people do game the system. It also sets the time that the first bids is received and to run through 4 p.m. Central Time the last business day before the date of sale. That’s part of the other thing. But it’s the clarification.

There’s clarification on this. It costs money to send out these notifications because that’s one of the other things that was brought up, is how about the notifications. You know, we’re worried about grandma or whoever it might be is not receiving notification that they are tax delinquent. Well, they went back and did research so that they could answer this question that come up. Successful notices has reached 90% of those sent out the court accepts as an acceptable notification. The first time it goes out, there’s about a 36% return that does not get delivered or they refuse to accept the notification, whatever it may be. That’s fairly high. But then follow on notifications reduces that down to a point where it’s only about 10% that does not actually get notified.

And the Commissioner of Land said in the committee meeting that if someone is not notified and they come in and say, we never got a notification, they do go ahead and consider that as a mitigating circumstance. They did not commit to say that they wouldn’t go ahead and auction or whatever. But they, I think that they will look at that and say, well, maybe there’s more time that’s needed here. And they’re willing to do that. How much does this cost? Well, in 2021, from 2020 to 2021, there were 65,785 notices that went out at a cost of almost $500,000. 2022 to 2023, 38,000 notices went out– and of course we are just now getting into 2023– at $284,902. 2021 to 2022, 117,764 notices went out and that cost $883,230. So it does cost the state money. And we need to try to reduce this. And that’s what they’re trying to do is to streamline the system and when the buyers go in and they actually buy lan, that we don’t tie up their money for an extended period of time and also to reduce that possibility that somebody might launder that money and take drug money and turn it into good, clean Arkansa, check back to them. Any questions? Thank you.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Richmond has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? Would anyone like to speak for the bill? Represent Beaty, you’re recognized to speak for the bill.

Rep Beaty I feel like I owe it to Representative Richmond to come down and speak for the bill. A lot of those questions were my questions and the Commissioner of Land’s office provided a lot of statistical information and I’m thankful for that. This is a good bill and I will support it. Thank you, Rep. Richmond. I ask for a good vote.

Speaker Shepherd Rep. Beaty has spoken for the bill. Would any like to speak against the bill? Would anyone like to speak for the bill? Rep. Rye, you’re recognized to speak for the bill.

Rep Rye You know, I’ve been talking to Marcus quite a bit about this in the last two or three days. And, you know, Representative Marcus, what really got me to thinking about this was that money laundering situation where a person can, say, come in and spend $30,000 to redeem something, have dirty money, it gets sent down here. And then if they don’t get it, if they don’t get the land or the house they purchased, then in turn they get a check from the Land Commissioner. So, you know, something I really think we need to think about, and I think that’s a good deal.

Speaker Shepherd Rep. Rye has spoken for the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? Would anyone like to speak for the bill? Rep. Richmond is recognized to close for the bill.

Rep Richmond Just a couple of things. First of all, thank you, Representative Johnny Rye, for those words of support. I appreciate that. And thank you, Representative Howard Beaty, for your kind words and your support. You had some tough questions, but they did get to good answers for those. Also, this bill has an emergency clause on it, so trump it up a little bit here with the support to help get that through as well. Thank you. I appreciate a good vote.

Speaker Shepherd Rep. Richmond has closed for the bill. The question before the House is the passage of House Bill 1263. Prepare the machine, Madam Clerk. Has everyone voted? You’re voting on the bill and the emergency clause. Has everyone voted? Cast up the ballot, Madam Clerk. With a vote of 80 yeas, 11 nays and 1 present, the bill and emergency clause are passed. Madam Clerk, please read Senate Bill 43.

SB 43 Defining and limiting adult oriented performances

Clerk Senate Bill 43 by Representative Bentley to add certain restrictions to an adult oriented performance and to define an adult oriented performance.

Speaker Shepherd Rep. Bentley, you’re recognized to explain the bill.

Rep Bentley In my recent primary election, I knocked on thousands of doors and talked to thousands of folks in my new district. I heard over and over again from constituents the concern they have for our children, that being concerned they had of our children being sexually groomed. I was repeatedly asked, is there not something that you can do to protect the innocence of our children. I believe that there’s a lot that we can do, and this bill was one of those things. The children in our state are struggling. We have a number of students on prescription antidepressants, children that are addicted to drugs and committing suicide. The number of youth struggling with gender identity has skyrocketed. And we continue to see an increase in child molestation and children trapped in sex trafficking. We used to cherish the innocence of our children and do everything we could possibly do to protect it. This bill is about protecting our children. There are multiple things that we deem inappropriate for children, like smoking, alcohol, strip clubs, sexually explicit material. We should be able to add to that list.

This bill is not about whether drag is acceptable as about whether we should be exposing our children to sexually explicit behavior. This is not about anyone’s rights. This is about protecting kids and not sexualizing our children. In committee last week I was told, Representative Bentley, this is not going on in Arkansas. This isn’t happening in other states. Why are we doing this early here? And over the weekend, I was inundated with pictures of what’s happening here in Arkansas, in Siloam Springs, Springdale, Batesville, all across the state. This is happening in Arkansas, and we want to stop what’s happening to our children.

I was also sent a letter and I’ll read part of that letter for Mr. Brian Norse, an account of what happened in Batesville this last summer at a local Pride event. “Just over a year ago, I retired from the Army as a first sergeant and a multiple combat veteran and have even spent a few months at Walter Reed. When deciding on our forever home, we decided to find a safe harbor in which to weather the current tide of crazy culture wokeness and progressivism. I have three daughters aged 8, 9 and 10, and I felt it was paramount to protect them from our wayward society. After searching for several months, we landed on Batesville, Arkansas, a small city in the foothills of the Ozarks and a fair drive from any large populated area. This is the second oldest city in the state with some of the houses dating to the antebellum times. Surely the strange afflictions ailing the rest of the country wouldn’t be here. If they were, surely it would be minimal. Sadly, this is not the case. This disease has found its way to Batesville. While settling in this area this June, we noticed several advertisements for a pride event on a historic stretch of Main Street. We thought no big deal, some rainbow flags, food, silly hair colors and crappy music. But we were wrong. It turns out there was also held a drag queen show on the block streets where children were brought on stage to dance with the performers. Some moments during their routines, the performers would have their genital areas exposed. The further erosion of our society must come to an end. The pillars of our great state and our nation are rotting. What happens when these pillars fall? What will we tell our grandchildren when the nation they inherit resembles nothing like the one that we enjoyed? What will you do to correct small town Arkansas and keep them from becoming San Francisco? I believe that there’s plenty that we can do to push back against the woke agenda, protect the values we love in this state, to keep it strong for our children and our grandchildren.”

This very simple bill simply explains what is an adult oriented performance, lists what those things are. So is what a minor is, somebody that’s 18 or younger. And also says what public funds are and simply says an adult wanted performance shall not take place on public property, shall not admit any minor for attendance, are refunded in whole or part with public funds. And to my amazement, when I went to start working on this bill, I found out that it’s not illegal for children in Arkansas to go to a strip club. It was only because of alcohol that they were not allowed. But after we pass this bill, we will be protecting our kids. I’d appreciate a good vote. Thank you.

Speaker Shepherd Rep. Bentley has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? Rep. McCullough, you’re recognized to speak against the bill.

Rep McCullough Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I was going to ask some of these questions, but I didn’t get a chance to. So I just wanted to talk a little bit about this bill. I think there are lots of problems with it. I think some of the main problems are there are some undefined terms. Prurient is not defined in this bill, and neither is public property. And I think if people are going to get penalized for doing something, they should understand what the parameters are of that and what the definitions are and the terms in the bill. I’m also quite confused about criminal or civil penalties in this bill. I also think it’s very vaguely written and that it’s redundant as far as a lot of the obscenity laws go. And I’m still not satisfied that it doesn’t affect events or concerts or plays or other artistic endeavors. Could the musical Chicago play in Arkansas? So I ask you for a no vote on this bill.

Speaker Shepherd Rep. McCullough has spoken against the bill. Would anyone like to speak for the bill? Would anyone like to speak against the bill? Rep. Bentley is closed for the bill. The question before the House is the passage of Senate Bill 43. Prepare the machine, Madam Clerk. Has everyone voted? Has everyone voted? Cast up the ballot, Madam Clerk, by a vote of 78 yeas, 15 nays and 2 present, the bill is passed. Madam Clerk, please read Senate Bill 68.

SB 68 Creating Holocaust Week in public schools

Clerk Senate Bill 68 by Representative Vaught to amend a law that requires Holocaust education and to establish Holocaust Education Week in the public schools of the State of Arkansas.

Speaker Shepherd You’re recognized to explain the bill.

Rep Vaught Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This just designates the last week of January as Holocaust week. It just asks the department to suggest to the schools that they honor that week as the Holocaust week. It’s not mandated. They don’t have to. They can still move their curriculum around what fits best for the school. But it’s just asking that that week would be designated as Holocaust week. I appreciate a good vote.

Speaker Shepherd Rep. Vaught has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? Would anyone like to speak for the bill? Representative Vaught is closed for the bill. The question before the House is the passage of Senate Bill 68. Prepare the machine, Madam Clerk. Has everyone voted? Has everyone voted? Cast up the ballot, Madam Clerk. By a vote of 97 yea, 0 nay, and 0 present, the bill is passed. Madam Clerk, please read Senate Bill 48.

SB 48 Liability protections for suicide prevention providers

Clerk Senate Bill 48 by Representative Pilkington to amend the Good Samaritan law to include the certain persons and nonprofit organizations who provide suicide prevention interventions.

Speaker Shepherd Rep. Pilkington, you’re recognized to explain the bill.

Rep Pilkington Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The title speaks for itself. This is expanding the Good Samaritan Law to cover nonprofit organizations that provide suicide prevention. When we presented the bill in Senate Judiciary and House Judiciary, we had We Are The 22 come and tell their story about how they’ve saved over 400 veterans here in Arkansas with their suicide prevention. So they’re just wanting the protection under the law that the Good Samaritan provides and to have that clarity. I’d like to thank Senator Clarke Tucker for bringing this to my attention in writing the bill, Senator Mark Johnson for running it over in the Senate, and Representative Dalby for helping me get it out of House Judiciary Committee. I appreciate your help. So with that, I ask for a good vote. Thank you.

Speaker Shepherd Rep. Pilkington’s explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? Would anyone like to speak for the bill? Rep. Pilkington is closed for the bill. The question before the House is the passage of Senate Bill 48. Prepare the machine, Madam Clerk. Has everyone voted? Has everyone voted? Cast up the ballot, Madam Clerk. By a vote of 98 yea, 0 nay, and 0 present, the bill is passed. Madam Clerk, please read Senate Bill 47.

SB 47 Removes crime from leaving vehicle running

Clerk Senate Bill 47 by Representative Gramlich to repeal the law that prohibits leaving a running vehicle unattended.

Speaker Shepherd Rep. Gramlich, you’re recognized to explain the bill.

Rep. Gramlich So Senate Bill 47 is a constituent driven bill. Essentially, right now it is illegal in the state of Arkansas to leave a vehicle turned on. So for the number of representatives who will not be named, some named themself already, who turned on their car to let the ice melt off about 30 or 45 minutes, I don’t know how Capitol Police didn’t get you a ticket. But in the state of Arkansas right now, that’s illegal. So with 70 years of automotive advancement– thank you, Rep. Holcomb, he explained a lot of that for me already– I think it’s time that if you want to go and turn your car on and leave it warming up for you, it’s time to do that. So thank you.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Gramlich has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? Would anyone like to speak for the bill? Rep. Gramlich is going to close for his bill.

Rep. Gramlich So this bill is going to allow us to do three things. First, it’s going to get government out of your life. Second, it’s going be one last question on your driver’s license test. And third, you’ll no longer be able to use the excuse that it’s illegal when your spouse asks you to warm up the car on a February morning. Thank you.

Speaker Shepherd Rep. Gramlich is closed for the bill. The question before the House is the passage of Senate Bill 47. Prepare the machine, Madam Clerk. Has everyone voted? Has everyone voted? Cast up the ballot, Madam Clerk. By a vote of 97 yeas, 0 nay, and 0 present, the bill was passed. Rep. Miller, for what purpose? You’re recognized for your point of personal privilege.

Rep Miller Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m going to make this brief. I didn’t want to come down to the middle because it takes a while. But we’re about to start having a lot longer days and a lot more bills coming through here. And I’m not admonishing anybody. I’m admonishing all of us, including myself. We’ve got to start paying attention to what we’re doing. And I truly mean that because literally earlier today we passed a law that makes it legal for 18 wheeler trucks to not have a driver. And 5 minutes later in the name of safety made it where we get pulled over for not having our wipers on. We just need to pay attention. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Speaker Shepherd Rep. Evans, for what purpose?

Rep Evans Motion.

Speaker Shepherd Let’s hear your motion.

Rep Evans Mr. Speaker. After the announcements, reading of the bills, transferring of the bills, placing the calendars on the desk, members amending their own bills with their own amendments, members withdrawing their bills, finalizing resolutions, reading communications, any remaining committee reports, I move that we adjourn until 1:30 tomorrow.

Speaker Shepherd That’s a proper motion. It’s not debatable. All in favor say aye. Any opposed? The motion passes. Are there any announcements? Representative Jean, for what purpose?

Rep Jean Announcement.

Speaker Shepherd You’re recognized.

Rep Jean Joint Budget will meet tomorrow morning, 9 a.m. Big Mac A. We’ve got at least three governors’ letters.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Lanny Fite, for what purpose?

Rep L Fite Announcement.

Speaker Shepherd You’re recognized.

Rep L Fite The County Judges Association will be hosting a steak dinner Thursday, February 9, at 5:30 at the Association of Counties Building.

Speaker Shepherd Rep. Lundstrum, for what purpose?

Rep Lundstrum Two announcements.

Speaker Shepherd You’re recognized.

Rep Lundstrum The first, Northwest Arkansas Chamber, Springdale Chamber will be hosting an event tonight from 4:30 to 6:30. Please join us. And then tomorrow morning, pastors at the Capitol, your pastors will be visiting with you and it will start at 9:00. And the honorable Sarah Huckabee Sanders will be speaking.

Speaker Shepherd Rep. Stan Berry, for what purpose?

Rep S Berry Announcement.

Speaker Shepherd You’re recognized.

Rep S Berry Judiciary will meet at 10:00 in the morning, which is Tuesday, in room 149 and Justice Kemp will be with us in the morning in the cafeteria from 8 to 9:00. So if you’d like to be there to have coffee with them and ask some questions, he will sure be there.

Speaker Shepherd Rep. Rose, for what purpose? You’re recognized.

Rep Rose We’ll do our Bible study at 7 a.m., hosted by myself and Capitol Ministries in the Old Supreme Court building tomorrow morning. Thank you. All are invited.

Speaker Shepherd Rep. Holcomb, for what purpose?

Rep Holcomb Announcement. Transportation Committee will not meet until Thursday.

Speaker Shepherd Represent Wing, for what purpose? You’re recognized.

Rep Wing House Management meets immediately upon adjournment just a few minutes downstairs in room 138.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Eaves, for what purpose?

Rep Eaves Announcement.

Speaker Shepherd You’re recognized.

Rep Eaves Revenue and Tax will meet tomorrow morning at 10 a.m. Room 151.

Speaker Shepherd Rep. Johnson, for what purpose?

Rep L Johnson Announcement.

Speaker Shepherd You’re recognized.

Rep L Johnson Public Health will meet tomorrow at 10:00 at 130. We will also be having our pictures at 9:30 on the House steps. Thank you.

Speaker Shepherd Representative Evans, for what purpose?

Rep Evans Announcement. House Education will meet at 10 a.m. tomorrow morning, Room 138.

Speaker Shepherd Any other announcements? If not, the desk will remain open as needed for the reading of the bills, and upon completion of the items named in the Adjourn Resolution, the House will be adjourned until 1:30 p.m. tomorrow.

Feb. 6: House transcript

House of Representatives

Feb. 6, 2023

Motion to Re-refer HB 1248 to committee

HB 1182 Rules relating to vet tech specialists

HB 1196 Requiring public housing recipients to work, train, or volunteer

HB 1009 Creates a study group for non-emergency medical rideshare transportation

HB 1155 Home child care zoning requirements

HB 1171 Insurance exemptions for certain religious denominations

HB 1131 Truck platooning systems

HB 1324 Allows cops to pull over drivers with lights off while wipers on

HB 1224 Penalties for bounced checks on purchasing tax delinquent property

HB 1263 Amending terms and timeline on sale of tax delinquent property

SB 43 Defining and limiting adult oriented performances

SB 68 Creating Holocaust Week in public schools

SB 48 Liability protections for suicide prevention providers

SB 47 Removes crime from leaving vehicle running

Categories

Feb. 6: House transcript

Related Posts

House of Representatives

Feb. 6, 2023

Motion to Re-refer HB 1248 to committee

HB 1182 Rules relating to vet tech specialists

HB 1196 Requiring public housing recipients to work, train, or volunteer

HB 1009 Creates a study group for non-emergency medical rideshare transportation

HB 1155 Home child care zoning requirements

HB 1171 Insurance exemptions for certain religious denominations

HB 1131 Truck platooning systems

HB 1324 Allows cops to pull over drivers with lights off while wipers on

HB 1224 Penalties for bounced checks on purchasing tax delinquent property

HB 1263 Amending terms and timeline on sale of tax delinquent property

SB 43 Defining and limiting adult oriented performances

SB 68 Creating Holocaust Week in public schools

SB 48 Liability protections for suicide prevention providers

SB 47 Removes crime from leaving vehicle running

Categories