Concerning Recurring Reports Submitted To The General Assembly.
Summary
HB1459 would change how recurring reports are handled when state agencies submit them to the Arkansas General Assembly, its committees or subcommittees, or legislative officers. The bill defines a “recurring report” as one that is filed more than once and is required by statute or requested by the legislature or its officers.
Under the bill, a state agency would be required to file a recurring report only three times in the required manner. After the third submission, the agency would stop sending the report unless the receiving entity specifically asks for it again. The agency must notify the recipient after the third filing that future reports will not be sent unless requested. The bill also allows the General Assembly, its committees or subcommittees, or legislative officers to direct the agency to resume reporting at any time. The implementation section makes the change prospective, while also allowing recipients who have already been receiving a report more than three times before the effective date to opt out of continued automatic delivery.
Impact
The bill would amend Arkansas Code Title 25, Chapter 1, Subchapter 2 by adding a new section governing recurring reports to the legislature. Its practical effect is to reduce the number of automatic recurring reports state agencies must continue filing, unless the legislature or other receiving entity affirmatively requests continued submissions. This would affect state agencies that prepare periodic reports for legislative oversight and could reduce administrative workload, paper flow, and compliance burdens, while preserving legislative control over whether reports continue.
Sentiment
The available record does not include committee testimony or recorded votes, so there is no documented debate to gauge broad support or opposition. Based on the bill’s structure, the measure appears administrative and efficiency-oriented, likely intended to streamline reporting without eliminating legislative access to information. The absence of recorded controversy suggests the bill may be relatively procedural in nature, though that cannot be confirmed from the provided materials.
Contention
The main potential point of contention is the balance between reducing administrative burden and preserving legislative oversight. Supporters would likely favor limiting repetitive reporting that may no longer be useful, while opponents could worry that automatic cessation after three filings might reduce transparency or make it easier for important information to stop flowing unless someone remembers to request it. Another possible issue is whether the three-report cutoff is too rigid for reports that are useful on an ongoing basis.