To Amend The Arkansas Financial Education Commission.
Summary
SB373 amends the Arkansas Financial Education Commission statute. The bill reduces the commission’s board of directors from nine members to eight by removing one of the previously listed board seats and updating the membership categories accordingly. It also revises the meeting requirement so the board must meet at least twice each year, specifying one spring meeting and one fall meeting, both at the call of the chair.
The measure is a narrow governance change rather than a substantive rewrite of the commission’s mission. It affects Arkansas Code § 6-1-703, which governs the structure and operations of the Arkansas Financial Education Commission, including the composition of its board and the frequency of its meetings. The practical effect is to streamline board membership while preserving representation from key state financial and education officials, the banking sector, credit unions, and members with financial backgrounds appointed by the Treasurer of State.
Impact
SB373 amends Arkansas Code § 6-1-703, changing the statutory makeup and meeting schedule of the Arkansas Financial Education Commission’s board of directors. The bill reduces the board from nine to eight members, adjusts the enumerated appointive categories, and requires at least two meetings per year in spring and fall. These changes affect the Treasurer of State, the Department of Education, the Securities Commissioner, the Bank Commissioner, the Arkansas Bankers Association, credit union representation, and at-large financial background members.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill was noncontroversial and broadly supported. On third reading, SB373 passed the Senate 32-0, indicating unanimous approval among those voting. No committee transcript or recorded debate is available in the provided materials, but the lack of opposition and the unanimous floor vote suggest general agreement with the administrative cleanup and board restructuring.
Contention
No specific points of contention are reflected in the provided record. Because there are no committee transcripts, any debate over the reduction in board size, the revised membership categories, or the meeting schedule is not documented here. The only potentially sensitive issue apparent from the text is the elimination of one board seat and the resulting adjustment in representation, but the unanimous vote indicates that any such concern did not generate visible opposition.