Arkansas Legislative Council
January 16, 2026
Senator Ben Gilmore Alright members, if we can go ahead and take our seats. Members, let’s go ahead and find our seats, please. All right, members, going to ask you to go ahead and find your seats. Can you hear me? Nobody’s listening. How about now? All right, members, I’m calling ALC to order. Thank you very much. It was kind of hard to get your attention there for a second. Good morning. Good to see you all here. All right, I’m going to ask Representative Rye if he would hit his button, and he will be recognized for the opening prayer. And you’re recognized.
Representative Johnny Rye Dear God, thank you for this great country that we live in. God, we take a lot of things for granted, dear Father, but never, ever let us forget about freedom and what it means to the people around this whole world. We ask you to look down upon all the situations here in the world that’s going on. We ask you for a loving peace, if at all possible. We ask all these things in Christ’s name, amen.
Senator Ben Gilmore All right, I will entertain a motion to adopt the December 19, 2025, minutes. I have a motion. I have a second. Any discussion? All in favor, say aye. Ayes have it. Thank you. Moving on to item D. We have a presentation from Dr. Silva. As he makes his way to the table, doctor, you may introduce yourself for the record and you may proceed.
December 2025 Revenue Report
Carlos Silva Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Carlos Silva, Bureau of Legislative Research. I’m your staff, and I’m here to present the December 2025 monthly revenue report. That is half of our fiscal year right now. As we look into our gross collections, we have $4.02 billion of collections.
That is around $4.9 million above the first six months of the last fiscal year, or around 1.2% higher than the last fiscal year to date for those first six months. As we start going down into the bottom here on the first page, we see a net available for distribution at $3.4 billion. That is $73.4 million above the last fiscal year to date, or 2.2% above.
If you look into some details on that first page there, we see the bottom line, individual income tax refunds, as well as our corporate income tax refunds. We see the decrease as we expected.
But as we move into page number two, the cumulative deviation from DFA net general revenue available for distribution forecast, we’ll see that the net available for distribution have been going down slightly when compared to the last month of around $5.8 million. That is a decline based on the corporate income taxes was slightly higher refunds than expected. And that’s why there’s that difference there. Again, it’s still above forecast, but it has slowed down based on this month. DFA will provide an updated forecast in the next few weeks. So we will have that for the next presentation.
As we move to page number three to page number five, we have our general revenue collections. We will see in the top there, gross receipt taxes still somewhat strong at 2.9% for the month, 3.2% for the year. The income taxes, you see the final payments for corporations and individual payments there. This portion of that’s due to the extension, right, that we have until December 3rd. So some of that would be here. That’s why we have the increase.
As we move to page number six, and so on, we’ll have the special revenue collections. When you look into the state of Arkansas compared to the adjacent states, it’s following a similar trend as they have some strong collections there on this month and on the fiscal year to date. CPI, somewhat steady for this month. We’re still looking to the next few months to see exactly how this is going to turn around after the update with the data sets.
Unemployment, we have seen a slight increase there from 3.9 to 4.1, but we had that gap of one month. So we’re looking at the change between two months, rather than one month. But as we look into detail there, we see that the state had added more workers, around 3,000 more workers year over year for November. And that is a positive thing. With that, I’ll take any further questions.
Senator Ben Gilmore All right, thank you, Dr. Silva. Oh, you almost got away. Representative Wooten, you’re recognized.
Representative Jim Wooten Doctor, on the corporate income tax, is that a result of the throwback rule changing? Is that resulting in that drop in that income?
Carlos Silva A portion of it, it’s part of the extension, because we have until December 3rd. So we have seen that right now. And then that’s kind of a portion of that.
Representative Jim Wooten One more question. The trend started this month or January or December being downward from what you had said. You think that’s going to continue? Or do you think that it’s just a miscalculation– not a miscalculation, but do you see a trend?
Carlos Silva Movements happen from month to month. We have seen a decrease there for this month. But just one data point doesn’t really make a trend. We will continue to follow closely. And we also have some major changes coming in the beginning of this calendar year and in the middle of the fiscal year, which is going to be positive changes. So we’re keeping an eye on that as well.
Representative Jim Wooten It doesn’t appear that the tariffs are affecting inflation, but have you all ever been able to come up with how it will affect the state income?
Carlos Silva So some of the tariffs have passed through. We still have some that have yet to move forward. The expectation is that we still have some to still be moving through this. And when you think about the tariff impact here, we’re probably going to see most of it through our sales tax collections, right? So the price of things might increase. We’re going to see that here, which we will be showing an increase of 3.2%. That’s how we’ll be looking at.
Representative Jim Wooten Thank you, Doctor. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Ben Gilmore Thank you, Representative. Any other questions? Seeing none, thank you, Doctor. All right, members, let’s move to item E. I recognize– oh, excuse me. I’m going to recognize Representative Warren for some personal privilege, I believe.
Representative Les Warren Thank you, Mr. Chair. It’s my privilege to have a group from Lakeside here with us, the AP US government and politics class. If you guys would stand, they came to see what we’re all about today. So please welcome them. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Senator Ben Gilmore Thank you, representative, and welcome. Thank you for being here and for participating and learning. All right, moving on to item E, I’ll recognize my co-chair.
Executive Committee Report
Representative Les Eaves Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Executive committee, Subcommittee of the Arkansas Legislative Council met Thursday, January 15, in room B of Big Mac building. House Chair Les Eaves called the meeting to order and saw a quorum present. He’s recognized Mr. Harold Jeffcoat, Superintendent of the Van Buren School District, to present a waiver request for a cooperative purchasing construction services. With no questions from members, Senator Terry Rice made a motion to approve the request for the Van Buren School District. Motion was seconded and passed by a voice vote. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
Senator Ben Gilmore You heard the motion. I have a second. Any discussion. Seeing none, all in favor, say aye. Any opposed? Ayes have it. Thank you. Moving down to F1. Representative Shepherd, you’re recognized for the Rules report.
Rules Report
Representative Matthew Shepherd The Administrative Rules Subcommittee met on January 15, 2026. The subcommittee held one agency’s request for exclusion from the reporting requirements for rulemaking and denied one agency request.
The subcommittee accepted the recommendations of the Division of Higher Education concerning the extension and repeal of rules pursuant to Act 781 of 2017 and Act 65 of 2021. The subcommittee received agency updates on outstanding rulemaking from the 2023 regular session and filed agencies’ monthly written updates on rulemaking from the 2025 regular session. And all rules were reviewed and approved as noted in the report. And I move adoption of the report.
Senator Ben Gilmore Thank you. We have a motion. Do I have a second? Any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor, say aye. Any opposed? Ayes have it. All right. Moving down to item 7. Senator English, you’re recognized for the Hospital Medicaid.
Hospital, Medicaid Report
Senator Jane English Thank you. The Hospital, Medicaid and Developmental Disabilities Subcommittee met Monday morning to hear testimony on the following items. An update on the reimbursement rates under the Living Choices Assisted Living waiver by DHS and integrating the public workforce system. The subcommittee met again Monday afternoon to review the findings presented by the Georgia Center for Opportunity. I move adoption of this report.
Senator Ben Gilmore All right. Thank you, Senator. Members, we have a motion. Do I have a second? I have a second. Any discussion on the motion? Seeing none, all in favor, say aye. Any opposed? Ayes have it. All right, let’s move down to item number 10. This is the Occupational Licensing Review. And Senator Flippo, you’re recognized.
Occupational Licensing Report
Senator Scott Flippo Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The esteemed and ever-influential Occupational Licensing Review Subcommittee met on Thursday and received reports from various occupational authorization entities in group one. I move adoption of the report.
Senator Ben Gilmore Thank you, Senator. I have a motion on the report. Do I have a second? I have a second. Any discussion? All right. Seeing none, all in favor, say aye. Any opposed? Ayes have it. Senator Flippo, thank you for your service and serving as vice chair of that committee. Senator Dismang, you’re recognized.
Peer Report
Senator Jonathan Dismang Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Peer Subcommittee met on Tuesday, January 13. The subcommittee received reports, reviewed requests, and approved the following various temporary appropriations, American Rescue Plan Act appropriations and restricted reserve fund transfers.
One item in the report was marked as held for the full council, G2 and MFG, for the Department of Agriculture making a $7 million grant to Central Arkansas Water for acquisitions in the Central Arkansas Watershed.
The hold came with a request for the department to revise and resubmit the request for the acquisition of properties in Perry County to be removed from consideration. The department was unable to resubmit a revised request. With that, I move for adoption of the report, including review of item G2 in its original form.
Senator Ben Gilmore Don’t everybody light up at once. Going to Senator Hickey first. First of all, I need a second on the motion for discussion. Thank you. All right, now we’re going to discussion.
Senator Jimmy Hickey I have a substitute motion at the appropriate time.
Senator Ben Gilmore Senator, do you mind if I come back to you and take some other members in the queue?
Senator Jimmy Hickey Sure, that’s fine.
Senator Ben Gilmore Thank you, sir. If you would, just get back in. All right, Senator Tucker, you’re recognized.
Education Freedom Account deliberation
Senator Clarke Tucker Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’d like to ask a few questions of ADE about the LEARNS money, if this is the appropriate time for that.
Senator Ben Gilmore It would be the appropriate time. Senator Dismang, would you get back in the queue for a– thank you. All right, Senator Dismang, do you mind if you withdraw your motion so we can hear discussion from the agency?
Senator Jonathan Dismang No, I’ll withdraw my motion, but I’d like to be first in the queue.
Senator Ben Gilmore I will put you back in, then we’ll go to Senator Hickey.
Senator Jonathan Dismang Thank you.
Senator Ben Gilmore Thank you, sir. Senator Hickey?
Senator Jimmy Hickey You mean later you’re going to come back to me?
Senator Ben Gilmore I will. We had a request for the department. Are they here to take questions? Members, I’ll remind you that we heard extensive discussion on this so I would ask that our questions be concise and brief. And if the department would recognize themselves for the record, you may proceed.
Courtney Salas Ford Good morning, Courtney Salas Ford for the department.
Darrell Smith Darrell Smith, Arkansas Department of Education.
Greg Rogers Greg Rogers, Department of Education.
Senator Ben Gilmore All right, going first to Senator Tucker for a question.
Senator Clarke Tucker Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Senator Dismang. Just a few questions. I read the newspaper that there’s about 43,000 students in Arkansas receiving EFAs this year. Can you break that down for homeschool and private school for me?
Darrell Smith Yes, sir. There’s approximately 28,000 private school students and around 17,500 home school students.
Senator Clarke Tucker Thank you. When it comes to expenses for schools, a traditional public school, a charter school, and a private school, I mean, their primary expenses are going to be facilities and personnel, right? Their expenses aren’t identical because traditional public schools have transportation and some other things that those don’t have, but if there were a Venn diagram, there would be a lot of overlap between the expenses between, if you compare traditional public schools, charter schools, and private schools.
If there were Venn Diagram for homeschool students with those three, there would be really virtually no overlap. The expenses just aren’t the same. And maybe you can educate me about that, but I’m just curious if the department has ever considered doing an analysis right now that the amount of money that a student gets from an EFA for a private school or homeschool is identical down to the penny.
And the expenses are not identical down to the penny, right? And so I’m just curious if y’all have ever considered taking a look at evaluating homeschool expenses independently, given the independent nature of the costs.
Darrell Smith We can certainly further that evaluation and that analysis, but I would say that there are a number of, I guess, overlap from a curriculum standpoint and educational supplies and instructional services that are very similar between charter schools, local public schools, and private schools, and the home school audience and market.
Senator Clarke Tucker Can you give me some examples?
Darrell Smith Number one, curriculum, and all the supplies that make up an educational environment, whether it’s a desk or whiteboards and some of the things that go into the classroom. Certainly, there is transportation cost. It’s not a bus route, but there is a cost to go from maybe provider to provider or therapy or to other things of that nature.
So there are some similarities, not exact. Certainly to your point, there are some things that are very unique to the home school population. And also to your point, I think the further analysis would be warranted.
Senator Clarke Tucker Okay, thank you. I suppose another distinction would be in a more traditional school setting, you don’t keep the white board, for example. And so that’s just another factor, I think, to look at. Just one other question. Thank you for your indulgence, Mr Chair.
I wasn’t up here the other day, but I read in the newspaper about an exchange between Senator Love and Miss Salas Ford about basically families are on the honor system to some extent when it comes to accounting of the funds. My question is to parallel that to the academic accountability. I mean, how are we measuring academic accountability for homeschool students who receive EFAs?
Darrell Smith So every student that participates in an EFA program is required to submit a norm-referenced test, a standardized test. And so every year for you to renew your application, you have to submit a test, a standardized, nationally recognized test where we can monitor performance in reading and in math. So we do track academic progress.
Senator Ben Gilmore Alright, thank you, Senator Tucker. Going to Representative Wooten again. I’ll ask that we keep these questions concise. And if they’ve already been asked, find another one, please. All right, going to you, sir.
Representative Jim Wooten First of all,I want to thank you for your assistance, Miss Ford, with the school readiness program. It accomplished a lot. First question I have is, what percentage of the additional 32 million that you’re requesting is going to parents who already are enrolled in a private school?
Darrell Smith To tell you what percentage of the 32 million is going to that, I can tell you obviously from the previous question that about two-thirds of the students that are currently participating in the program are private school students and about a third of them are home school. So I guess if we wanted to continue that proportion, I would say probably the 32 million would probably split up appropriately.
Representative Jim Wooten So, 42% of the people that are getting the money already have their children in private schools. They were already paying. Is that correct?
Courtney Salas Ford The 32 million is to account for students who are already in the program approved and participating. And so they’re all either in private school or home school. If I understand your question, I think you’re asking about students who were in private school before they joined the program.
Darrell Smith We don’t have that exact number at this time as to how many having started in the program or how many never participated in the public school. Certainly as we grab more data and we have more students in the program, we’ll be able to have a better answer to your question.
Representative Jim Wooten Follow up question to that. Do y’all still maintain that this is not going to hurt the public schools by taking $309 million out of the tax revenues of the state of Arkansas? What about the other 460,000 children that we have the responsibility in the constitution of this state to fund and to take care of?
And the last time I looked at the RSA, the amount of money for the last fiscal year and for this fiscal year were the same. And I asked the question, are we putting any more money into public education? And the answer was, well, yes, but they have to do it from funds that they already have on hand. So my question of you, if 1.5 percent, it was capped, and then we raised it to 3 percent, why would we have a cap if it wasn’t critical to public schools?
Courtney Salas Ford I will say that we ensure that all students in Arkansas are able to choose the best educational setting for them. These funds are not coming from the public school fund. We are not physically taking any money out of the public school fund and giving it into the EFA program.
This legislature, this General Assembly sets the adequacy amount. They set what amount is appropriate for a public school to receive to educate students. That has been fully funded. That’s always fully funded. As far as I know, you all have not decreased that amount or set that amount based on what’s going into the EFA program.
So to say that we’re stealing or taking away or costing public schools, I would disagree with that. We are funding the program for EFAs separate from public schools and we’re doing that based on the law as written, which right now is open to all students at the equal amount. And that is your decision whether to put that money in there. Yes, we came and we requested it and we appreciate that because we want to continue this program.
We want to make sure that all parents and students have the choice for their student that they feel is best, but it’s not taking money from public schools. You all fully fund the public adequacy fund, the public school fund that goes to public schools that you all have determined is the amount that they need.
So if students leave because they have a choice, that’s not something we’ve done. We’ve offered them a choice because we feel they should be able to make that choice for their students. But that’s not us costing the public school money.
Representative Jim Wooten But the problem is, how do you address the federal court demand of adequacy, which says we’re not putting enough money into public education?
Courtney Salas Ford My recollection of Lakeview, if that’s what you’re talking about, is not that it wasn’t enough money. It’s that it was an equal and adequate system. And again, they put that responsibility back on the General Assembly to say, what does it take for an adequate educational system to be equal across the state?
You all go through the adequacy process and set that amount. You all do that every two years, and as far as my experience, increase that every two years. This last fiscal session, it was increased by almost 5%. You all determine the adequacy amount and what it takes, which meets that federal court obligation. The state having a separate system that offers educational freedom accounts for other students doesn’t take away from that.
Senator Ben Gilmore All right, Representative Wooten. I’ve got others in the queue if you don’t mind, sir.
Representative Jim Wooten Thank you. I have a motion at the appropriate time.
Senator Ben Gilmore I think we’re going to have multiple motions. So if you’ll hang on to that, sir, I’ll recognize you at the proper time. All right. Going to Senator Davis, you’re recognized for a question. Members, just so you know, I will go back to Senator Dismang for his motion and then a substitute by Senator Hickey. And then whatever other motion or member needs to be recognized for that motion. So, Senator Davis, you’re recognized.
Senator Breanne Davis Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’m just going to go over a set of facts that I have based on data I’ve pulled. And my question at the end will be, is this accurate? So from my understanding, when we look all the way back to 2005, the highest percentage pre-LEARNS that we have committed per pupil for public school for funding is 2.37%. That’s the largest increase pre-LEARNS that we had made to the adequacy fund for students.
Since LEARNS in 2023– first of all, LEARNS put over $250 million into public schools, which is the largest investment in public schools that our state has made in recent history in the last couple of decades. And in 2023 we increased adequacy by 3.22%, which, from my understanding, is the largest percentage increase that we have given since 2005. And for these next two years in adequacy, we’ve given 2.48% each year, which is still larger than the largest percentage increase pre-LEARNS.
And what that 2.48% does over two years is protect schools. If schools lost 2.5% of their students every year, just 2.5% saw a decrease, the percentage increase that we’re giving them per pupil at the 2.48% means that even though they would have a declining enrollment of 2.50%, they would see no loss in funding. They would not see a drop in the money that they get from the state for their budget to fund their schools.
So when we talk about what we’re doing to protect public schools, to ensure that they’re funded adequately, we are doing the work to do that. And in the last three years, we have put historic investment of funds into public schools to ensure that even if they’re losing students, they are not going to see a drop in funding to ensure that, though they’re educating fewer students, they still have money to make the decisions because we have a funding formula, not a spending formula.
So school boards and superintendents at home in their local communities can make the decisions that they need to make to ensure that students are educated in the manner that best fits the community in the school district that they have. That is my understanding, though we continue to see Arkansas trend nationally, increasing administration, paying six-figure salaries instead of maybe hiring more teachers or reading interventionists to make sure that kids can read by the time they’re done with third grade.
But again, we allow them to make those local decisions to determine how they’re going to educate kids. So maybe we need to ask some questions of our local school districts and school boards and superintendents about the decisions they’re making while they only have less than 35% of kids that are reading by third grade.
And when you look at 10th grade scores, you see that that same 35% of kids are the ones that can read. No progress is made. No catching up is made. We need to be asking questions of those public school districts, what they’re doing, what changes they’re making with the money we are sending them. Though they may be educating less students because they may have an enrollment drop, they are still getting the same amount of funds.
And we need to ask about the changes they’re making to ensure those kids are leaving their schools reading at grade level so that they can go get a job or go to college or do whatever they want to do when they graduate from a public school. So we, from my understanding, are doing the work to fund our public schools at historic rates never seen in the state of Arkansas except for the last three years. We are doing that work. That’s my understanding from these numbers. Would you agree?
Courtney Salas Ford 100%.
Senator Ben Gilmore Thank you, Senator Davis. I think that rivals the question asked by Senator Johnson, which had the record for the longest question in Peer this week. So we’ve got quite a few people in the queue. I’m going to go first to Representative Collins. You’re recognized.
Representative Andrew Collins Thank you, Mr. Chair. So to that point from Senator Davis, it sounds like what she was saying, and I guess I would also ask, do you agree, is that with this increase in adequacy, that is an increase just to stay flat. That’s an increase to stay level because you’re losing students from the public school system due to the EFA.
Therefore, this historic increase in adequacy per pupil, as she said many times, keeps them at about the same level. And so you do all this additional funding for a pupil. Because you have fewer students in the school, the school gets roughly about the same amount of money. Of course, it’s not perfect, but it’s to backfill what’s being lost because of what we’re doing here with the vouchers.
So with all this additional money per pupil, keeping things more or less flat, you end up plugging more money per people about the same overall, and then you have few students graduating or being educated by the school. That’s the idea between the two parallel systems that we’re paying twice.
We’re paying for the per pupil adequacy at a higher rate, roughly the same amount overall. And then we’re paying separately, EFAs, this $32 million is an additional investment in that. That’s why it’s so much more expensive. That’s why its such a budget buster. Would you agree? I assume you wouldn’t, but would you agree?
Courtney Salas Ford I would not. And I’ll say I don’t want to mischaracterize anything that Senator Davis said. But I think she was saying that at a minimum they are held even because of the increase in foundation funding each year that does account for more things. Things are more expensive every year we go along. Things get more expensive.
And she was saying they get more per student. And so even if they lose students, we provide declining enrollment funding and we provide other sources of additional funding to ensure that. But if schools are growing, they definitely are getting more money each year because they get growth funding. They get all sorts of additional other pots of money that are not in the EFA program.
The EFA amount is about 90% of foundation funding. Public schools get full foundation funding plus categoricals plus federal funding. They get more, almost probably twice per student, what is in the FFA program. And so now I do not agree that that keeps it flat. I agree that you all determine what the adequate amount is to educate students in public schools, and we ensure that they have that amount of money to educate those kids.
Representative Andrew Collins Thank you. And even without talking about unmet need in the overall public school system, which we could talk about and I think is pretty clearly documented, can you tell me, you said that if their enrollment is increasing, then they’re getting more money. Overall, is the public school enrollment increasing in Arkansas or decreasing?
Courtney Salas Ford I believe there was a decrease. I’m not sure of that amount. Do you have the numbers? Yeah, there was a decrease overall in the public school enrollment this year.
Representative Andrew Collins Okay. Thank you.
Senator Ben Gilmore Okay, Representative Wooten, is this a question or is this motion? OK, one question, sir. You’re recognized
Representative Jim Wooten My question of you is this. And I want to make it perfectly clear to all the private schools that I am not against private schools. I’d love to drive a Cadillac. I’d love to drive a Cadillac, but I can’t because I can’t afford one. So I drive a GMC truck, alright?
Senator Davis was critical of the public schools. I hadn’t heard a word of criticism regarding the private schools and their admission goals that they set and established through their board of directors of each private school. Is it not a fact that the private school pick and choose who they want to be enrolled in their schools? Is that a fact?
Courtney Salas Ford I cannot say that that’s a fact for every private school. Many of them do have admissions criteria but I can’t say that every private school out there picks and chooses.
Senator Ben Gilmore Representative, one follow-up to that. You’re recognized.
Representative Jim Wooten Okay, does that not impact their performance relative to comparing it to this public schools?
Courtney Salas Ford It depends on the students that–.
Representative Jim Wooten Well, you don’t want to say it for a fact, because it’s contrary to what the governor says.
Courtney Salas Ford No, it’s not a fact.
Representative Jim Wooten And I know where Senator Davis is coming from, and I know where Senator Bart Hester and the others present, but I’m telling you, we are hurting public schools when we take $309 million for private schools. And Arizona is already up to $600 million and they started out below that. And it may be a billion dollars now. And I made this forecast at the time that the bill was passed and introduced–.
Senator Ben Gilmore Representative, I’m going to ask you to find an end.
Representative Jim Wooten Let me finish up. I made the projection then that the money set aside by this body was not adequate to address what we were attempting to do. And I know this is public policy in the nation today, but I’m telling you, there’s a difference between a private school and a public school and who they permit to come in to their school, the private schools. So there is a difference, a distinct difference. Public schools have to take all who come, all who live in their district and rightfully so.
Courtney Salas Ford Not all. Those who live in their district who they then assign based on where those students live.
Representative Johnny Rye That’s your definition.
Senator Ben Gilmore All right. All right, I have others in the queue. I’m ending this. Thank you, representative. All right Senator Davis, one question.
Senator Breanne Davis Well, I’d like a point of personal privilege to respond to Representative Wooten.
Senator Ben Gilmore Granted, granted.
Senator Breanne Davis Thank you very much. So I would argue, Representative Wooten, that we’re not hurting public schools. We are helping kids. We are giving kids and families a choice to decide where and how they want their child to be educated so that that child meets their learning potential. My point is that we’re talking about funds so that families and students can make that decision.
We’re not talking about failing public schools. I drive by one every day coming into Little Rock that is a failing school, and they have some of the nicest facilities I’ve ever seen. And we need to be asking questions. I’m not trying to be critical of all public schools. My point is that we should be asking questions of superintendents and of school boards, particularly of those that are failing, about what they are doing different, what changes they are making to ensure that they’re not failing the students in their four walls. That’s my point.
They continue to not raise reading scores, to let kids fail, to pass them on, and not make changes. They continue to hire administration at a crazy pace that way outpaces the number of students that are in the classroom. But the number of teachers they’re hiring compared to student teacher ratio remains flat. And that’s a problem. Those are the questions that we need to be asking of public schools when we look at literacy scores and math scores. That’s what I’m saying.
We’re not hurting public schools by funding this program that we voted for, by the way, that fulfills the intent of the law to carry out a program that we overwhelmingly voted to pass. We are giving families and students freedom and a choice to decide how they want to be educated to meet their learning potential. And I think it’s fair for us to ask questions– not critical of us– but fair of us to ask questions to superintendents and school board members across our state about what changes they’re making to ensure that when kids walk out their door in 12th grade that they can read and get a job and be successful in life. And those are the questions I wish we were asking more of in here instead of pounding on a program that we overwhelmingly voted to approve and said that we would fund.
Senator Ben Gilmore Thank you, Senator. Senator Petty, for what purpose?
Senator Jim Petty Question.
Senator Ben Gilmore OK, you’re recognized.
Senator Jim Petty Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to ask a question, but I want to push back just a little bit on what Representative Wooten said from personal experience. He made the statement that he felt like maybe going to private school might affect their success or otherwise in terms of their grades and so forth. And I’m just kind of speculating there. But wouldn’t it also be the same situation, for example, in my situation?
I have a family member that was struggling in public school, and they took her out, put her in homeschool for a few years, and then she went back into public school and was successful from that point on. Would she not have been causing the success or failure of the public school by virtue of the number of students not at grade level or math level or reading level or whatever the same way as those that are coming out of public school to private school might affect on the top end? You’re looking at me like maybe I didn’t clarify that question.
Courtney Salas Ford Yeah, I’m not sure exactly if I’m going to answer this correctly. But I would say that school districts are required to educate all of the students that they have, whether that’s 5 or 500. If a student leaving affects the education of the other students in that school, I’m not sure why that would.
Like you said, parents should be able to make that best choice for their student. If they’re not being successful in the local public school, maybe it’s another public school, maybe it’s a private school, maybe it is home school. The school is still responsible for educating all of the students there, and one student leaving or five students leaving should not impact that school district.
Senator Jim Petty I agree. And just to kind of clarify because that was kind of a wordy question. In a simple, not real, example, if we had two students in a public school and one of them was not reading at grade level and she left, and the other one was, then they would be reading at 100% grade level as opposed to 50% at grade level.
Courtney Salas Ford Yes, obviously, their scores are going to reflect the students that they have. And so if a student is struggling, that’s going to reflect in their grade. If a student is successful, that’s going to reflect in their grade. If the students who are struggling leave, then yes, that could make it look like the school is more successful than they would be with that student there.
Senator Ben Gilmore Thank you, members. For the sake of time, I’m going back to Senator Dismang, who I think had another commitment, to make the motion. There’ll be a substitute, I presume, by Senator Hickey, and then we’ll have further discussion. Senator Dismang, you’re recognized.
Senator Jonathan Dismang Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move for adoption of the report, including the review of Item G2 in its original form.
Senator Ben Gilmore All right, I have a motion and a second. I’m going to Senator Hickey. You’re recognized.
Senator Jimmy Hickey Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a substitute motion.
Senator Ben Gilmore Let’s hear your substitute, sir.
Senator Jimmy Hickey Okay, that motion is to review Item C1 separately and adopt the remainder of the report. And I would like to have discussion on it.
Senator Ben Gilmore All right, so we have a substitute motion. Do we have a second? All right. We have a second. Let’s hear discussion. Who wants to be recognized? Then you’re recognized.
Substitute motion to vote separately (Hickey)
Senator Jimmy Hickey Members, I understand that the easy part may just be to lump this into the report. It may be easy for some of you who really want to kind of ride the fence on it because it’s a very controversial subject. From my standpoint here, we’ve got members in here that you’ve already heard from.
They feel like that it affects their public schools. That’s their right to feel that way. Their constituents feel that. There are other members in here that know that an amount of approximately of a third of a billion a year annually, that it does have to affect the amount of tax cuts that we can do, which is also a big priority for a large part of this body. And for however you feel and from what you’ve seen, the structure of this is not correct. I understand that parents and individuals want another option for education.
But the thing is, as we’ve seen some of the items in the way that it’s structured, again, that it is ripe for fraud and other things. So there needs to be a lot of work done on that part. So again, I would ask that you allow us that want to vote this separately to do so. It’s been very controversial, been in the court systems. You vote how you want, and then you go back to your constituents and prove that up. But I’d like to vote it separately.
Senator Ben Gilmore Thank you, Senator. Representative Wooten, do you have discussion on the substitute motion?
Representative Jim Wooten Yes, I do, but I want personal privilege to respond to Senator Davis.
Senator Ben Gilmore I will allow it briefly. Thank you, sir.
Substitute to Substitute to deny funding: Wooten
Representative Jim Wooten You speak in favor of public schools, and then you criticize them, talking about putting it back on the superintendents and the school boards. And then you criticize the superintendents for the salaries that they make. Then you criticize schools for not turning out people reading at grade level. And then you talk about how good private schools are.
And I have no criticism of private schools, but I’m telling you, there’s a lot more to this than a school board and a superintendent can solve. It starts with the governor’s office. And I do not agree with the way that it’s set up. And I agree with Senator Hickey. It’s ripe for fraud. And this is what you get when you unfetter. They’re not fettered out to make the responsibility and the expenditures that they’ve made in the homeschools.
And I’m not against homeschooling. And I’m not against private schools. I want to make that perfectly clear. But we’re a poor state, and we can’t afford situations and circumstances where money is misused by those who participate in a state program. We won’t tolerate that in a public agency, and we won’t or shouldn’t tolerate that in private schools.
And the Department of Education has done everything they can to delay the implementation of the rules that would apply. And then there’s been an outpouring of support from home schools and from private schools relative to not imposing the rules and regulations on the money that goes. We have to answer. You make the point, Senator Davis, that public schools have to respond. And we’re doing the best that we can.
And I say we, because my constituents love their public school system. They’re in favor of the school board and the superintendents in the area that I represent. And I take it as a personal affront when you sit there and criticize the public schools. It’s totally uncalled for. And it’s unrealistic to expect us to take every person who comes to the door. I don’t care what the department says.
Every person that comes to the door is accepted in a public school and have to be and rightfully so. But that’s not the same situation in private schools. Now my motion is to take the $32 million out for investigation and further look into from the fraud standpoint and then also from the fact that we have a cap set at 3% of the schools.
And my point being in the motion that I make to extract this $32 million out is the fact that the public schools are being denied access to 309 million. And I don’t care how you cut it. And I was director of DFA for several years.
And I’m telling you, any money we take out and divert away from the public schools is going to impact. And we’ve had 8% inflation and nothing in the budget has ever reflected that. Nothing in the school money and allocation. So that’s my motion, to extract the 32 million out, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Ben Gilmore All right, representative, really quick. And for our students in the audience, congratulations, you’re getting to watch parliamentary procedure in action. So, representative, you just made a substitute to a substitute. No more substitute motions are allowed at this time. So I’m going to ask you to restate your substitute, and then I’m going to ask if there is a second for that substitute. So would you restate that?
Representative Jim Wooten My motion is that we extract the $32 million out in A1 and again in C1.
Senator Ben Gilmore Okay, do we have a second? Let’s hear your point of order.
Representative Howard Beaty Is the representative still under personal privilege or is he now back in the regular meeting?
Senator Ben Gilmore When he made his motion, it became a live motion.
Representative Howard Beaty All right, thank you.
Senator Ben Gilmore Thank you. Do we have a second for the substitute to the substitute? We have a second to the substitute. We are now open for discussion on the substitute to the substitute. You’re recognized, Senator Irvin.
Senator Missy Irvin Could we just get a clarification between what the two motions are? Because they seem to be the same, but I think one, I think Senator Hickey’s– correct me if I’m wrong– Senator Hickey’s motion was to just have a separate vote on those items. Is that correct? But Senate Representative Wooten’s motion was to hold?
Senator Ben Gilmore That’s correct, Senator, and they are different. Therefore, they are substitute motions. So I would say that we’re about to take up a vote on Representative Wooten’s substitute to the substitute, which would then revert back to the initial motion. So it goes back to the, sorry, it goes back to Senator Hickey. Any discussion on this substitute? Representative Rose.
Representative Ryan Rose Thank you. With regards to the substitute substitute by Representative Wooten, I’ll be voting no on that substitute motion. My belief is that we need to stop characterizing children and families who are making the best education decisions for themselves in a negative light.
Providing options for students and families to be in the best educational setting for them is a good thing for Arkansans. It’s a good thing for families. It’s a good thing for kids. And for us to characterize it as a bad thing, I think is a mistake. And so I’ll be voting no on this and I encourage you to do the same. Thank you.
Senator Ben Gilmore All right, Representative Beaty. You’re recognized for discussion.
Representative Howard Beaty Thank you, Mr. Chair. I sit here and I guess a little scripture pops in mind. Proverbs 26: 4-5. If you’re familiar with that, you know what that scripture is. My point is I’ll be voting against the substitute substitute because I think when we passed LEARNS, there was adequate discussion.
And this is nothing, maybe you’ve got a little buyer’s remorse because the price tag’s going to be a little high. But we owe it to the folks after we pass that legislation and we promised these EFAs and we promised the parental control to our parents to educate students. I just wish we could have as much of a lively discussion in this body about the outcomes that our students face in public education as we do about the spending of a dollar.
So I’m more concerned about the outcome for those students. And I know my colleagues are as well. This buyer’s remorse, I’m not going to relitigate something here that this body passed overwhelmingly just because the price is going to be a little high. So I’ll be voting no on the substitute substitute, and I encourage my colleagues to do the same.
Senator Ben Gilmore Thank you, Representative. Senator Dismang, is this discussion on the substitute? Okay, so we’re going to Representative Collins. You’re recognized for discussion on the substitute to the substitute.
Representative Andrew Collins And just real briefly, I don’t think we should look past the cost here. The cost is really the thing we’re talking about. This is 32 million additional dollars into this. This is a money pit. And with any welfare program, once you start, it’s very hard to put that genie back in the bottle and roll it back.
And that’s exactly what this is. The more we spend, the harder it’s going to be to ever cut in the future. So, we can hold the line now or we can throw more money at it. But if we throw more money at it, we’re not going to get a chance to roll that back very easily. So I’m a yes on this motion.
Senator Ben Gilmore All right, thank you. Senator Flowers, you’re recognized for discussion on the substitute to substitute.
Senator Stephanie Flowers Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’m in support of the substitute to the substitute. And I’ll try to briefly explain why. You know, in my district, we’ve had many schools, districts that have not just one time been under state control, but many times. And we’ve lost some school districts after state control. They’ve been consolidated to schools that have been under state control, which has never made any sense to me.
But my point one is that the Department of Education seems to have a pretty good track record of failing public schools in the beginning. And you can go back, look at the history of Arkansas, even with the Constitution providing for certain types of schools and how they should be provided, to whom they should be provided, and the funding that goes with it that’s set by the legislature.
And I just want to say, after this year serving on the Education Committee on the Senate side and becoming a little bit more familiar with issues and problems that are not just in my district, but all over the state of Arkansas, you can see little pockets of districts that are having some significant issues financially, such as transportation costs. When I discovered in the Education Committee this past year that some school districts were getting some type of enhanced transportation funding for having to drive busses to and fro a certain distance, then you go to other districts that are driving even further, like the district we went up to since the end of the session– forgot the name of that place. Judsonia or somewhere near there. They’re having problems.
I think it’s White County School District having problems getting funding. They’re spending money that they are not appropriated for by the legislature for this transportation cost of their students getting to and from schools and then all the activities that go with school districts and the events of school districts. My issue is this. Had another superintendent talk about resources for students that are underperforming. And what are we doing with that? We’re not giving funding for persons who are assisting with individuals that might have disabilities or just mentors and that kind of thing.
Then I have issues with the types of programs recommended even by the Department of Education for school districts that are having problems with the student achievement. It’s an unbalanced, it’s an unfair system as I see it in looking back over the history of Arkansas and how they dealt with schools, particularly school districts in my district.
And then the other day, I think it was last night or the night before, I’m looking at the news and see the Commissioner of Education on television talking about two-thirds of third graders in the state of Arkansas can’t read on grade level. But then I’m thinking about just a few weeks ago, or a month ago, what school districts are on the F list, on the failing list? And could all of the two thirds, could two thirds of the student population in Arkansas just be in my district with the schools that are failing? And these are predominantly minority districts. Something’s wrong here.
I know that in my district, since I’ve been in the legislature for a long time, since 2005, there’s always a big issue with failing students in these certain districts that happen to be majority minority districts. I got a problem with that. But when I heard the commissioner’s response the other day on television about two-thirds of the kids can’t read in the third grade at grade level, they can’t be all in my district, so they gotta be other places in Arkansas.
And across the state as I’ve traveled, I’ve met students, teachers. And it can’t be so that all of them that are failing, not meeting performance standards, are just these minority school districts. Where’s the money to bring in more teachers that are qualified? We made a raise in LEARNS for all the teachers to be at a certain minimum salary. But when you got districts that have high poverty, you get, for lack of a better phrase, blacklisted because you’re from a minority community.
I’ve even had my constituents tell me some legislators talk about some of the areas of my district and ask the constituent, why do you live there? Well, I live there because I know the potential of my district and the potential of all children, and we’re not treating them fairly. And you want to run them all into a home school or private school, that’s all well and fine. But the tax dollars shouldn’t have to be paying for it. And that’s why I’m supporting the motion.
Senator Ben Gilmore Thank you, Senator.
Senator Stephanie Flowers Substitute to the substitute.
Senator Ben Gilmore To the substitute. Thank you, senator. You get it. I appreciate it. All right, going to Senator Blake Johnson. You’re recognized for discussion. And I hope it’s brief, senator.
Senator Blake Johnson Thank you, Chairman. I will not be supporting the substitute of the substitute. There’s been allegations of fraud and abuse of public funds. I’ve sat multiple times on the Education Committee in the Senate, and I’ve sat on the Educational Institution Audit Committee. And that’s not allegations.
Those abuses of public funds happen every meeting on a list in that committee of fraud and abuse with our public funds in our public schools. This is a brand-new program. Arkansas is spending more on education, private home, and public than it ever has. And I’m tired of being 48th or 49th in education. And we’ve done work in dyslexia whenever I was on that. We are putting money to literacy coaches.
And the children of Arkansas in the future with this program and our public that we’re responsible for in the Constitution are going to be educated better than they ever have been in the state of Arkansas. And it’s just now beginning. And we’ve set aside these funds. And we need to support this system because it’s about the kids. It’s not about an institution of public education. It’s about education of the students of the state of Arkansas. Thank you, Chairman.
Senator Ben Gilmore Alright, thank you, Senator. Senator Dotson you are the last one in the queue and I will not take any more after you. You’re recognized.
Senator Jim Dotson Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want, before we vote, wanted to clarify something that this is my understanding of it. These funds in this allocation, as I understand it, are for fully funding this school year’s funds. So if you choose not to support the program, I understand.
I mean, there’s been a lot of debate back and forth about that. If you want to run a bill in the next legislative session to abolish it, I will hear that in Education Committee most likely. I won’t support it, but I will have that argument, that debate, that policy debate. What we’re talking about here is funding existing promises that we have made to the students of Arkansas.
We’re not talking about public schools. We’re not talking about private schools. We’re not talking about home schools. We’re talking about students. The way the allocation of funds goes out the door, the department sends out the allocation in four quarterly installments. If the total funding for this school year is a little over 300 million, this represents about 10%.
So what we’re talking about, and I don’t know how the department will try to figure this out if we don’t fully fund these accounts, but we’re talking about that final quarterly installment for these funds, maybe going across the board, a 10% of the total promise that this legislative body made to these students when we said, sign up for this program, we’ll fund these accounts for you to be able to pay for tuition, pay for books, pay curriculum, pay for all the things that are necessary for the education of that student.
So a vote against this is hurting students. It’s not funding public schools. It’s not defunding public schools. There’s not one penny less or more that a public school will receive based off this vote. If we do not fully fund this, this will damage the educational ability, the ability of parents to fund their students’ education for the remainder of this school year. Let’s have the debate next year on whether or not you want to fund the program.
We’ll talk about funding it in the fiscal session fully for the next year. But for this particular vote and this appropriation, I would encourage you to vote for the appropriation when we get to it and against this substitute to that substitute. That’s all I have to say. Thank you.
Senator Ben Gilmore All right, thank you, Senator. So, we’re to the voting portion of the substitute to the substitute made by Representative Wooten. I will ask all in favor, say aye. Any opposed? No’s clearly have it. Thank you, Representative Wooten. Going back to Senator Hickey, you’re recognized.
Senator Jimmy Hickey Yes, sir, just a clarification on my motion. My motion is merely to vote it separately, but I do want to make one clarification. During the Peer Subcommittee, there is a review item that we did not review. Senator Dismang was including that in his report, which is G2 as it relates to the agricultural funds. My motion would be also to include that review. So in other words, we would be adopting everything in the report, including that review item on the agriculture, which was not. But just pulling out and voting the EFA funds separately.
Senator Ben Gilmore Thank you, Senator. And I think that was clear to the chair. And thank you for clarifying to the members. All right. So we already have a motion and second on this substitute to Senator Dismang’s original motion. Are there any discussion? Is there any discussion on this motion? All right, seeing none, all in favor, say aye. Any opposed? No’s have it. Back to Senator Dismang. Restate your motion, sir.
Senator Jonathan Dismang Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move for adoption of the report, including review of item G2 in its original form.
Senator Ben Gilmore I have a motion and I have a second. Discussion on the motion? I see Representative Bentley. You’re recognized.
Central Water / Perry County land purchase
Representative Mary Bentley Thank you chairman. This is a quick question for Senator Dismang. I had asked for that review and Senator Breanne Davis asked for it. We had that motion. I have not had any response from anyone on why we’re not able to pull that. So I would like you to explain to me why they cannot pull Perry County out from there since no one contacted me and let me know why we can’t pull Perry county out. I’d ask, since I can’t bring the department up here, do you or anyone on here have an explanation of why they did not, could not?
Senator Ben Gilmore Okay, Senator Dismang, I also have Representative Eubanks who may also be able to help answer that question. But I’ll go to you first.
Senator Jonathan Dismang Yeah, I mean, I was not part of that discussion. My understanding was that you were, so I can’t answer that question.
Senator Ben Gilmore Okay, I’m going to go to Representative Eubanks for discussion. You’re recognized.
Representative Jon Eubanks Thank you, Mr. Chair. These legacy federal grants are very competitive. And I think it’s my understanding that there was only 10 in the whole country that were awarded. And they score these different grants. And it is my understanding when the department went to the Department of Ag that the portion that is in Perry County is actually, the reason it was scored so well is it connects that trail. I can’t recall the name of the trail, but it connects the trail. And that’s why this particular grant was scored so high. So by taking that portion out, it would diminish the opportunity to qualify for this grant.
Representative Mary Bentley I would just like one quick follow up. And I appreciate that response. I’ll just say that, just be looking for future legislation to make sure any future grants like this that the Department of Agriculture does reach out to every county that’s involved in this and that the Quorum Court and the local people are at least able to be aware of the situation and have some input on it.
Because this is the fourth grant out of Perry County. And the only reason that we heard it here is because they didn’t have enough appropriation in the Department Of Agriculture’s fund to go through without us being involved. I think it’s very important. This committee is very important.
So I just would state that I’ll make sure that we pass some legislation to make sure that we are more involved in the future as are the local governments. So thank you, Chairman, I appreciate that.
Senator Ben Gilmore Thank you, representative. I have no more people in the queue for discussion. So I will call for a vote. All in favor on the motion to review, or to accept the report rather, say aye. Any opposed? Ayes have it. All right. Thank you. That was fun and informative. I hope you students enjoyed that. Moving along to F12 the Review report. I think we have Senator Johnson ready to give that. You’re recognized, Senator Johnson.
Review Report
Senator Blake Johnson Thank you, Chairman. Review Subcommittee met on Tuesday and reviewed the method of finance, one alternative delivery method construction project, discretionary grants, and services grants, and received regular monthly reports and one emergency action report. Mr. Chair, I move the adoption of this report, including a review of the methods of finance, alternative delivery method construction projects, procurement, discretionary grants, and contracts as presented.
Senator Ben Gilmore All right, I have a motion. Do I have a second? I have a second. Senator Tucker, you are recognized for discussion.
Senator Clarke Tucker Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’d just like to ask DFA a couple questions on the BDO contract, if I can.
Senator Ben Gilmore All right, Senator, we’re in the discussion portion of this.
Senator Clarke Tucker I lit up as soon as I could.
Senator Ben Gilmore Well, I understand it was in the middle of a motion being made. I will ask Senator Johnson if he would so wish to pull his motion, and then I will bring them up. But Senator Tucker, I’ll ask that we be very brief since we spent so much time on the previous.
Senator Blake Johnson I will pull my motion so Senator Tucker–
Senator Ben Gilmore All right, I will come to you first. Senator Tucker, who would you like at the table?
Senator Clarke Tucker Just whoever knows the most about the BDO contract.
Senator Ben Gilmore It looks like we have Secretary Hudson. And if you would, sir, recognize yourself for the record and you may proceed and answer the questions from Senator Tucker.
Jim Hudson Good morning, Committee. Jim Hudson, Secretary DFA. Good morning, Senator.
Senator Clarke Tucker Good morning, Secretary Hudson. Thank you. And thank you, Mr. Chair. I’ll be brief. I was out of town at Review the other day, but this is such an important thing. I think it would be beneficial for the membership to hear the answer to my question anyway. Can you just kind of explain what their plan is? And I just never heard if the money that came down from the feds, if it’s earmarked for particular programs or if we’re going to have discretion over how it’s distributed. I just kind want to know the general plan for what this group is going to do and how that money is going to be distributed in the state.
Jim Hudson Well, those are actually really two different things. You know, the HORN or BDO contract is really administering the program. It is to be the program management office for the Rural Health Transformation Program itself. And so they’ll stand up the program, they’ll establish websites, they’ll have grant submission systems for people who are applying for the grants. They will run it on a day-to-day basis, just outsourcing all the administration to them.
Senator Clarke Tucker I’m sorry. I thought you were finished. Who’s going to make the decision about where the grants go?
Jim Hudson Ultimately, the funding will have to be consistent with the application that is submitted by the state of Arkansas. It will go through an appropriation process. It will come here for the funds to be appropriated. We’ll explain to you the method for how we’re going to distribute it. You’ll give us appropriation. There’ll be a group really within DFA, DHS, Department of Health, who will review those applications and ultimately make the funding decisions.
Senator Clarke Tucker That’s very helpful. So generally speaking, I mean, I think the most important thing that you said is that the way the money will be spent has to be consistent with what was in the application. And so when it came back, did it say X percent goes to this program or not, or basically just you have to be consistent with the manner in which you applied?
Jim Hudson We have to release the money consistent with what our plan is, yes.
Senator Clarke Tucker All right. Thanks. That’s all I got. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Senator Ben Gilmore Thank you, Senator Tucker. Senator Johnson, coming back to you for your motion.
Senator Blake Johnson Want me to say all that again?
Senator Ben Gilmore If you would, since it was withdrawn.
Senator Blake Johnson Review Subcommittee met on Tuesday and reviewed the methods of finance, one alternative delivery method of construction project, discretionary grants, and services contracts and received regular monthly reports and one emergency action report. Mr. Chair, I move the adoption of this report, including a review of methods of finance, alternative delivery methods construction project, procurement, discretionary grants and contracts as presented.
Senator Ben Gilmore Thank you, Senator. I have a motion. Do I have a second? I have a second. Any discussion on the motion? Seeing none, all in favor, say aye. Any opposed? Ayes have it. Thank you. Moving on to item 13. Senator Petty. You are recognized.
Insurance Report
Senator Jim Petty Thank you, Mr. Chair. The State Insurance Program’s Oversight Subcommittee met on Wednesday. The subcommittee reviewed the Office of Property Risk RFQ for financial auditing services. I move for adoption of this lengthy report.
Senator Ben Gilmore Thank you, sir. I have a motion. I have a second. Any discussion. Seeing none, all in favor, say aye. Any opposed? Ayes have it. Moving on to item 14. Senator Davis, if you would, you’re recognized.
Senator Breanne Davis Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Personnel Subcommittee met on Wednesday, January 14, and approved the requests listed in the report as items 1, 2, and 3. The committee also reviewed the listed reports. Happy to answer any questions and move to adopt the report at the proper time.
Senator Ben Gilmore Thank you, Senator. I have a motion. I have a second. Any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor, say aye. Any opposed? Ayes have it. OK, we are now moving to item H. And under item H we have item number 1.
And a motion to file as reviewed the Arkansas Public Employees Retirement System request to review investment summaries. I entertain a motion. I have a motion. Do I have a second? Senator Hammer, is there a discussion on this? Okay, all right, so I have motion, I have second. No discussion. All in favor, say aye. Any opposed? Ayes have it. All right, moving down to item number 3, we have a presentation of a report. Senator Hammer, is this the one that you have questions on?
Senator Kim Hammer Yes, sir. Yes, just a couple of quick ones if you don’t mind for the department.
Senator Ben Gilmore Okay, with that, will the department, please come to the table? And again, I would ask that we move expeditiously and be brief.
Senator Kim Hammer Insurance.
Senator Ben Gilmore And they’re at the table. If you would recognize yourself for the record, you may proceed with answering whatever questions Senator Hammer has.
Daniel Holland Good morning. Daniel Holland, Insurance Department.
Jimmy Harris Jimmy Harris, Insurance Commissioner, AID.
PBM Update
Senator Kim Hammer On Act 350, the payment for timely payment was 714 days and then there would be a 12% interest payment that would be due if it wasn’t paid, 30 days if it’s paper. Have you all collected any interest payments from any late charges that you’ve been able to substantiate through your investigation?
Daniel Holland No, not at this point. That’s the rule draft that we’re working on. That’s a pretty specific kind of statute, and I think a lot of the PBMs and the pharmacies, frankly, are waiting on the rule draft. But now we haven’t collected any of that.
Senator Kim Hammer What’s the time frame on the rule draft that you’re going to get it before us?
Daniel Holland We should have our final draft done, I would say, within the month of January. And then at that point, it will be up for review.
Senator Kim Hammer So this month you ought to have it out to where it could be in front of Rules in February?
Daniel Holland Yeah, I think so. Yes, sir.
Senator Kim Hammer And then the second thing, Rule 128, just a quick snapshot where you are on it, just real quick.
Daniel Holland I guess we’ve got the next round of reporting coming in March. We’re going to look at that specifically for those deficient plans that we’ve discussed, see if there was any upward movement there. And then that’s going to give us kind of a final idea, now that everybody knows what’s happening with Rule 28 and the corrective action plans have been done. So hopefully we see some better numbers and less deficient plants than we did last time, but we’ll find out in March.
Senator Kim Hammer So you think February will show some real movement on the department’s position on getting this moving? Because it’s been out there for about 16 months. I know we’ve been waiting on reports and everything. But do you think it’d be fair to say next month when you come in front of us you’re going to be able to have enough data to make a significant move on enforcing it?
Daniel Holland Probably not next month. I would say the following month.
Senator Kim Hammer So March? We could bet on March?
Daniel Holland We’ll get the data in on March the 1st. We will have to review it, categorize it, figure out how many plans are deficient below NADAC. A conservative estimate probably, results of the March reports. We’d probably be able to give that in April.
Senator Kim Hammer We’ll offline. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Senator Ben Gilmore Thank you, Senator. Thank you, gentlemen.
Jimmy Harris I want to follow up real quick– I’m sorry– on the rule question. That’s going to have to go to through BLR to get that approval. So it’s probably not going to be this month. It’s got to go through the approval processes before it comes before you for approval.
Senator Ben Gilmore Thank you, gentlemen. All right, seeing no other discussion, we’re going to take a vote. All in favor of accepting this report– well, actually we don’t need it. It’s a presentation, so we’re going to move right along to item 3B.
I do have a motion to approve the Arkansas Economic Development Commission Rural Services Block Grant funding. Any discussion? Any questions? I’ll take a motion. I have motion. Do I have a second? I have a second. I see no discussion on this. All in favor, say aye. Any opposed? Ayes have it.
Going on down to item number 5, Division of Environmental Quality. I’ll entertain a motion to file as reviewed. I have a motion. Do I have a second? I have a second. Any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor, say aye? Any opposed? Ayes have it.
Moving on to item number 8B, Division of Parks. I’ll entertain a motion to file as reviewed. I have a motion. Do I have a second? I have a second. Any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor, say aye. Any opposed? Ayes have it. Members, I appreciate that. I think that brings us to the end of the meeting. Thank you very much. Have a good weekend. We’re adjourned.
