Transcript Highlights:

• , like a... ...over that threshold, it wouldn't trigger a commission review, like a re-review.
• These rules were reviewed without objection by Joint Public Health and are ready for your review.
• This is considered reviewed without objection; it's reviewed and approved. Thank you. Thank you.
• But that's considered a review.
• I personally have had negative experiences with a reviewer, which adds to my concerns that reviewers

Summary: The Administrative Rules Subcommittee reviewed a long agenda of agency rules, with most items approved without objection after brief presentations and no public comment. Early items included Department of Energy and Environment rules on landfill post-closure trust fund spending thresholds and liquefied petroleum gas standards, DFA’s electronic odometer disclosure rule, and several Department of Health rules covering ionizing radiation, mobile home and RV parks, lead-based paint, counseling board revisions, hearing instrument dispensers, athletic training, dental examiners, nursing, pharmacy, medical board, speech-language pathology and audiology, radiologic technology, massage therapy, community health workers, doula certification, and cosmetology/body art. Most of these changes were described as updates to match recent acts, federal standards, compact participation, fee adjustments, or cleanup/clarification, and the committee repeatedly approved them without objection. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on the Arkansas State Board of Nursing’s broad set of rule changes implementing multiple 2025 acts. Those changes included creating a dialysis patient care technician registry, updating contact information requirements, expanding APRN authority to delegate certain tasks, clarifying death certificate and pronouncement authority, allowing substitution of therapeutically equivalent medications, permitting purchase of compounded products, and updating certified medication assistant rules and training standards. Members asked detailed questions about the meaning of therapeutically equivalent substitutions, delegation limits, compounded products, and how often medication lists would be updated; the board said it would review rules annually and use future rulemaking as needed. The committee also approved new nursing rules for declaratory orders and the new dialysis registry. The Department of Education’s rules drew the most discussion, especially the Arkansas Children’s Educational Freedom Account Program. The department said the revisions, based on Act 920 of 2025, were intended to add guardrails, clarify eligible expenses, and streamline approvals. Changes included defining core educational expenses, limiting sports-related spending, adding an intentional misuse standard, restricting certain technology purchases and requiring extra justification over $1,000, capping carryover funds at $8,500, and creating a reconsideration process for denied expenses. Members raised concerns about oversight, appeal timelines, sports equipment, provider credentialing, and whether the rules were too restrictive; department officials said the rules were meant to protect taxpayer funds while preserving flexibility, and they noted the program had received extensive public comment. The committee also approved Education rules for scholarships, residency classification, teacher programs, accelerated learning, and graduate medical education, as well as Labor and Licensing rules on wage and hour standards, boiler rules, motor vehicle commission requirements, professional wrestling regulation, appraiser qualifications, and military recruiting incentives.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are OK with third-party reviews.
• We are OK with third-party reviews.
• Um, A third, a third party reviewer shall submit to the regulatory authority for which the reviewers
• performed the review, a written report on the reviewer's determination and the standards the reviewer
• We like the idea of third-party reviewers as long as we get to review their homework and grade their

Transcript Highlights:

• that threshold, it wouldn't trigger a commission review, like a re-review.
• These rules were reviewed without objection by Joint Public Health and are ready for your review.
• This is considered reviewed without objection. It's reviewed and approved. Thank you. Thank you.
• But that's considered a review.
• But that's considered a review.

Summary: The Administrative Rules Subcommittee met to review a long agenda of agency rule changes, beginning with housekeeping on the order of business and then taking up rules from multiple state agencies. Early items included Department of Energy and Environment rules on landfill post-closure trust fund spending thresholds and liquefied petroleum gas standards, DFA’s odometer disclosure rule allowing electronic signatures and disclosures, and several Department of Health rules covering ionizing radiation, mobile home and recreational parks, lead-based paint, counseling licensure, hearing instrument dispensers, athletic training, dental specialties and compacts, nursing, pharmacy, physician assistants, medical compacts, speech-language pathology and audiology, radiologic technology, massage therapy, community health workers, doula certification, and cosmetology/body art. Most of these were described as technical updates, conformity with recent acts, federal standards, or compact participation, and nearly all were approved without objection after brief questions and, in many cases, no public comment. The committee also reviewed Department of Labor and Licensing rules on minimum wage/independent contractor standards, boiler rules, motor vehicle commission requirements for ATV/LSV dealers, professional wrestling regulation, appraiser qualifications, and military recruiting and retention programs. Testimony generally emphasized that the rules implemented recent legislation, updated fees or licensing standards, or streamlined existing processes. Members asked a few questions about fee structures, the rationale for regulating professional wrestling, and how the National Guard’s public-private partnership and incentive programs would work; the department said the recruiting incentives would be funded from existing appropriations and were intended to improve retention and force strength. These rules were also approved without objection. The most extensive discussion came on the Department of Education’s Arkansas Children’s Educational Freedom Account Program rule. The department said the revisions, based on Act 920 of 2025, were intended to add guardrails, clarify allowable expenses, and speed approval of core educational purchases. Changes included defining core educational expenses, limiting certain sports-related spending, adding an intentional misuse standard, restricting phone purchases except for disability-related needs, setting a $1,000 threshold for additional review of technology purchases, capping carryover funds at $8,500, and creating a reconsideration process for denied expenses. Members raised concerns about safeguards, appeals, sports equipment, provider credentialing, rural vendor access, and whether the department would be flexible or overly restrictive. The department said it would review every request, provide written explanations for denials, allow appeals up to the State Board, and refer suspected fraud to prosecutors if necessary. After hearing from 13 members of the public, the committee continued to discuss the rule, but the transcript ends before any final vote on the EFA rule is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Review Subcommittee met on Tuesday and reviewed proposed procurement law rule changes from the Office
• The review subcommittee met on Tuesday when reviewed proposed procurement law rule changes from the Office
• It's a request to review investment summaries. We'll need a motion to file as reviewed. Motion.
• We'll need a motion to file as reviewed.
• motion to file as reviewed.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We have maternal mortality review.
• We've really haven't had robust fetal mortality review, but take those out of child death review, do
• have mortality reviews that you already have mortality reviews that you conduct<00:18:50.400> at<
• > child death review, do a standalone child death review, do a standalone morbidity<00:19:37.200>
• three main mortality review committees. three main mortality review committees.

Keywords: Public Health and Welfare - Room 216, 17 February, 2026; 2:00 PM, 925, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and considered three House bills. House Bill 515, described as a measure allowing radiologist assistants to discuss preliminary findings with physicians after a test, was presented as identical to an earlier bill and passed on a title sufficient, do pass motion without debate. House Bill 1637 would create a fetal and infant mortality review panel under the Department of Health to align state law with federal requirements and mirror existing maternal mortality review work. The bill prompted extended questioning about broad exemptions from the Open Meetings and Public Records Acts, with Senator Blunt and others expressing concern that the language was too broad and could shield records beyond individual patient privacy. Dr. Edney of the Department of Health testified that the protections were needed so hospitals and providers would share sensitive information for performance improvement and mortality review work, and that final reports would still be issued. After the debate, Senator Blunt moved to lay House Bill 1637 on the table subject to call, and the motion passed. The committee then took up House Bill 814, which would raise fees for inspections and investigations of food establishments and wastewater systems; it was described as a Department of Health measure supported by the regulated entities because they want inspections. The bill was characterized as maintaining an arm’s-length relationship between regulators and regulated parties, and it passed on a title sufficient, do pass motion. The chair closed by noting the committee had completed its agenda and would not meet the next day.

Transcript Highlights:

• that threshold, it wouldn't trigger a commission review, like a re-review.
• These rules were reviewed without objection by Joint Public Health and are ready for your review.
• Gilmore members any questions all right see none this is considered reviewed without objection it's reviewed
• There was some concern about subjectivity in review, and so we have asked, About subjectivity in review
• But that's considered a review.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• want to review it.
• The Review Subcommittee met on Tuesday and reviewed proposed procurement law rule changes from the Office
• The review subcommittee met on Tuesday when reviewed proposed procurement law rule changes from the Office
• It's a request to review investment summaries. We'll need a motion to file as reviewed.
• motion to file as reviewed.

Summary: The meeting began with a quorum call, prayer, and approval of the previous minutes. Members then adopted a resolution honoring Lori McDonald of the Department of Human Services for nearly 28 years of state service, with remarks praising her legislative work, constituent services, leadership, and emergency response roles. McDonald thanked the committee, and the Senate also presented her with a citation, flag, and commemorative coin. The committee received the May 2026 revenue report, which showed gross adjusted collections of $7.76 billion year-to-date, up 4.4% from the prior year, and a projected surplus of $585.8 million. The executive subcommittee report was adopted, covering emergency rules for DHS and the Department of Education, school district waiver requests, committee fund allocations, cancellation of the July ALC meeting, and authorization for subcommittees to meet in July on urgent matters. The administrative rules report was also adopted after members noted that most rules were approved, with a few pulled by agencies or held. Members then heard a lengthy exchange on the Arkansas Education Department’s ClassWallet contract and delays in expense review for education savings account payments. Department officials said they were meeting regularly with ClassWallet, enforcing contract standards, keeping some reviews in-house, and adding staff and technology improvements to speed processing while maintaining oversight. The committee also adopted reports from Game and Fish and State Police, Hospital/Medicaid/Developmental Disabilities, Lottery Oversight, Occupational Licensing Review, Peer Review, Review, State Insurance Programs Oversight, and Personnel, including a Department of Commerce reallocation tied to a broader shared-services realignment. Under review of communications, members filed several retirement system investment items as reviewed, approved rural community grant funding, gave favorable advice for state park additions, approved special maintenance funding for state parks, and filed Office of State Technology service-rate changes as reviewed. The meeting concluded with no new business and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Peer Review Subcommittee met on Tuesday, June 16th.
• The Review Subcommittee met on Tuesday and reviewed proposed procurement law rule changes from the Office
• The review subcommittee met on Tuesday when reviewed proposed procurement law rule changes from the Office
• It's a request to review investment summaries. We'll need a motion to file as reviewed. Motion.
• motion to file as reviewed.

Summary: The Arkansas Legislative Council met and first adopted the previous meeting minutes, then honored Lori McDonald of the Department of Human Services for nearly 28 years of state service. Members read a resolution recognizing her legislative, constituent, and leadership work at DHS, and the council adopted it unanimously. McDonald thanked members for their support, and the Senate also presented her with a citation, a flag flown over the Capitol, and a commemorative coin. The council then received the May 2026 revenue report, which showed gross adjusted collections of $7.76 billion year-to-date, up 4.4% from the prior year, and net available for distribution of $6.36 billion. The Bureau of Legislative Research noted collections were running above last year and that the updated forecast reflected a surplus. The Executive Subcommittee report was adopted after members were told it had approved captive insurance premiums and deductibles, a claims administration contract, emergency DHS rules, waiver requests, committee fund allocations, and the cancellation of the regular July ALC meeting in favor of only meeting for urgent matters. Several subcommittee reports were then adopted, including Administrative Rules, Game and Fish and State Police, Hospital/Medicaid/Developmental Disabilities, Lottery Oversight, Occupational Licensing Review, Peer Review, Review, State Insurance Programs Oversight, and Personnel. During the Administrative Rules discussion, members questioned the Department of Education about delays and vendor performance under the ClassWallet contract; department officials said they were meeting regularly with the vendor, keeping expense review in-house, and would consider other options if needed. In Personnel, the Department of Commerce clarified that a reallocation request was part of a broader departmental realignment and shared services move, not the Arkansas Workforce Connection waiver. The council also reviewed and took action on several communications, including filing retirement system investment summaries as reviewed, approving rural community grant funding, giving favorable advice for state park acquisitions/expansion, approving special maintenance funding for state parks, and filing proposed Office of State Technology service rates as reviewed before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• provider that is requesting the review. provider that is requesting the review.
• when the review is complete.
• review or not. review or not.
• judicial review. judicial review. Senator<00:54:42.200> Cronk.
• . review. review.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• get to work on the technical review get to work on the technical review which<00:14:50.839> is
• <00:15:28.600> uh decision triggering judicial review uh decision triggering judicial review
• However, if that application is flagged for additional review, applicants face extended time for review
• environmental review environmental review processes<00:46:32.119> so<00:46:32.440> just
• review until the environmental<00:54:40.160> review<00:54:40.680> is<00:54:41.240>

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Finance for your review today.
• Jessica Patterson, stating that she and her staff have reviewed all the contracts presented for review
• There are seven for your review today.
• Seeing none, take a motion to review. Motion to review, second by Representative Ferguson.
• So we reviewed 24 contracts.” “I would say.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They go through investigator review, supervisor review, manager review, and legal review.
• They go through investigator review, supervisor review, manager review, and legal review.
• They go through investigator review, supervisor review, manager review, and legal review.
• They go through investigator review, supervisor review, manager review, and legal review.
• They go through investigator review, supervisor review, manager review, and legal review.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The delays are in a review.
• The delays are in a review.
• the insurance, Approve them and know who is going on the list so we can review the insurance, review
• While the third-party plan review company reviews electrical, plumbing, energy code, and mechanical,
• and site development plan review.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Summary: The committee met to monitor implementation of several housing-related bills from the 89th session, with the chair emphasizing Texas’s housing shortage and the need to review land-use laws. For House Bill 24, witnesses from the Texas Public Policy Foundation, Reason Foundation, a church-affordable housing project, Habitat for Humanity, developers, and housing advocates said the bill’s higher protest threshold and simpler council override had reduced procedural barriers to rezoning, helped projects move forward, and supported lower rents and more multifamily development. Public testimony largely praised HB 24 as working as intended, and the chair noted it had passed the committee 6-1, the House 83-56, and the Senate unanimously. The committee then heard testimony on Senate Bill 1567, which preempted certain municipal occupancy limits based on unrelated-adult restrictions. Supporters, including Texas Public Policy Foundation, Texas Realtors, Texans for Housing, and Texas A&M student leaders, said the law improved clarity, reduced arbitrary local limits, and helped students and property owners use existing housing more efficiently. Opponents from College Station and Bryan-College Station neighborhood groups argued the law has encouraged investor purchases, tear-downs, and “stealth dorms,” displaced working-class residents, and harmed family homeownership. The chair noted SB 1567 had passed the committee 5-1, the House 101-19, and the Senate 30-1. The committee also reviewed Senate Bill 15, which reduced minimum lot sizes in covered jurisdictions. Ed Pinto of AEI said the law had already led to thousands of new small lots and lower-cost starter homes, while recommending expansion to more counties and broader application to attached housing. Other witnesses from builders, Pew, and housing advocates said smaller lots can increase affordability, but some cities, such as College Station and Grand Prairie, were adding local standards that could blunt the bill’s effect. City representatives from El Paso described how they implemented the law by reducing lot sizes and widths, while urging broader applicability to more of the city. The chair said SB 15 had passed the committee 7-0, the House 86-43, and the Senate 24-7. Finally, the committee began hearing testimony on Senate Bill 840, a by-right multifamily redevelopment measure. City officials from Garland and Plano described how they had updated local standards to comply while preserving design and setback rules, and said the bill could help redevelop built-out commercial corridors and add housing without expanding city footprints. The transcript ended as the committee continued taking testimony on SB 840.

Transcript Highlights:

• directly with the building code review directly with the building code review board,<00:04:43.040
• for inspections or plan review, right? for inspections or plan review, right?
• Now, um this turns into an review.
• inspections but not document review. inspections but not document review.
• official’s review.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Review subcommittee to come to order. Co-chair, you got anything?
• And we're reviewing it now. Yes, sir.
• Jessica Patterson, stating that her staff and she have reviewed all the contracts presented for review
• There are seven for your review today.
• Seeing none, take a motion to review. Motion to review. Motion to review.

Summary: The review subcommittee met to consider a supplemental agenda, methods of finance, an alternative delivery project, discretionary grants, and a large slate of construction, out-of-state, and in-state contracts. The supplemental item was a $2.6 million out-of-state contract with Tyler Technologies for a mobile app that would let citizens access state services through a single sign-on, initially for DFA vehicle and licensing services, with possible expansion to other agencies. Members also reviewed five methods of finance, including University of Arkansas projects for roof and cooling tower replacements, a new $100 million academic classroom building at U of A Fayetteville, a police department renovation at UA Fort Smith, and a boiler/chiller replacement at Hope-Texarkana. Questions focused on project timing, why some items were being reviewed after work had begun, and the high estimated cost of the Fayetteville classroom building; DFA explained that projects under $250,000 are not reviewed and that the larger project was still in design and would later seek a guaranteed maximum price. The committee also reviewed two DHS discretionary grants: one for targeted youth advocacy in southwest Arkansas and another adding $582,000 for family-centered treatment training and implementation. In the services contract section, members discussed construction-related contracts, including an ASMSA electrical scope increase tied to three-phase power requirements and the U of A Fayetteville architect contract for the classroom building. Out-of-state contracts included major items such as ACT Education’s $17 million amendment to provide required pre-ACT testing for 9th and 10th graders, a $12.5 million DFA contract for rural health transformation grant management, DHS’s $16.5 million EBT services contract with updated chip-card and fraud-prevention features, and ADH’s special procurement for the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey. The committee also reviewed U of A system consulting contracts for financial advisory and sponsorship strategy work, with university officials saying the outside expertise was needed for specialized planning and revenue-generation efforts. In-state contracts covered corrections reentry services, nursing board investigations, foster care and child welfare services, DHS office janitorial work, emergency management radio system expansion, veterans’ home nursing staffing, and UAMS grants consulting. A lengthy exchange centered on the Department of Corrections’ reentry housing contract, with members pressing officials about vacant beds and urging fuller use of the program, while corrections staff said placements depend on screening and eligibility. Another discussion addressed the balance between out-of-state and in-state contracting, with a member noting the large dollar volume going to out-of-state vendors and asking whether Arkansas vendors receive any preference; State Procurement said current law does not allow an in-state preference. The committee approved the supplemental agenda, the methods of finance, the alternative delivery project, the discretionary grants, and the contract lists, and then received routine reports and an emergency action report before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:13:36.480> because necessary to have that review because necessary to have that review
• :38.519> take<00:13:38.800> place that review would still take place that review would
• municipality um and they're reviewing municipality um and they're reviewing what<00:14:58.639>
• review processes.
• , not local government review.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Community reviewers.
• reviewers.
• I know that I've got community review reviewers.
• The teams review it.
• for four grants in our review. for four grants in our review.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Our audit work is subject to a rigorous multi-level review.
• These reviews also serve as the peer reviews for those offices.
• These reviews also serve as the peer reviews for those offices.
• notably fire district reviews.
• We actually have QA reviewers that do that work for us.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Auditing Committee met to receive annual overviews of its oversight responsibilities and the work of the Auditor General and OPAGA. Committee staff reviewed the committee’s authority over state and local governments, enforcement of audit-report filing requirements, repeated audit findings, Transparency Florida reporting, and lobbying compensation audits. Auditor General Cheryl Norman described her office’s independence, audit standards, quality control, and major audit areas, including the state’s annual financial and single audits, school district and university audits, operational and performance audits, and attestation work. She also noted staffing shortages, recruitment efforts, and a request for carry-forward funds to study salaries. Members asked about whether audits can quantify recoverable dollars, how school district spending comparisons are handled, and how to raise concerns about DCF-related audits or a local city audit that has been pending for years. Norman said her office can quantify findings when possible, sometimes compares costs across districts in operational audits, and that members can bring specific concerns to the appropriate deputy auditor general or the committee. She also explained that citizen or local-government audit requests may require payment of audit costs. OPAGA Coordinator Kara Collins-Gomez outlined OPAGA’s role as a legislative research unit that conducts studies directed by law, the presiding officers, or the committee, and described its policy areas, methodologies, contract monitoring, and recurring statutory reports. Deputy Auditor General Matthew Tracy explained how to read operational audit reports, including findings, criteria, condition, cause, effect, recommendations, and management responses. Deputy Auditor General Greg Senators explained financial audit reports, including audit opinions, required supplementary information, internal control and compliance findings, federal program compliance, and management letters. The meeting concluded with thanks to the presenters and a motion to adjourn, which passed without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• The department's previous approach to QA reviews was to review a sample of cases and use the results
• Intend to review?
• different review sample size.
• They've redone the way they are reviewing cases and closely mirrored what the quality control review
• With the quality assurance reviews, they are able to review those cases and get with...

Transcript Highlights:

• I am here to offer testimony on H. 2298, facilitating site plan review.
• I am here to offer testimony on H. 2298, facilitating site plan review.
• or timelines to review projects.
• So yes, to the site plan review, please support.
• We also support YIMBY and site plan review.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Housing held a hybrid hearing on zoning, Chapter 40B, and related housing bills. Much of the testimony focused on the “Yes in My Backyard” bill (H. 1572/S. 962), which would expand by-right development of missing middle housing, reduce barriers such as minimum lot sizes and parking mandates, and support duplexes, triplexes, and other small-scale housing. Supporters included housing advocates, developers, local officials, and municipal leaders from places like Cambridge, Salem, and Braintree, who argued that state action is needed because local zoning often blocks needed housing and that the bill would help create more affordable, neighborhood-compatible homes. Several witnesses also backed a companion “Yes in God’s Backyard” bill (H. 2347), which would allow faith-based institutions to build housing on their property by right, with testimony emphasizing the potential for new units, added municipal tax revenue, and partnerships between religious organizations and housing developers. The committee also heard testimony on Senate Bill 1021 to modernize Chapter 40R incentives. Senator Pavel Payano and others said the program’s payments have not kept pace with inflation since 2004 and should be increased to better encourage smart-growth zoning near transit and town centers. Another major topic was H. 2298 on site plan review, which would codify and standardize the process in state law. Rep. Kristin Kassner and witnesses from MAPC and NAIOP said current site plan review practices vary widely across the state, creating confusion, delays, and litigation, while a uniform framework would give municipalities clearer tools to review by-right projects without undermining local oversight. The hearing also included testimony on Chapter 40B reform, including S. 1005 and H. 1537. One witness supported further review of 40B and stronger regional planning, while another backed a proposal to allow certain pre-2010 40B condominium owners to sell at market value under a framework that would recapture some of the subsidy benefits. Committee members asked several questions about local zoning changes, housing goals by county, and how the proposed bills would affect communities. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chairs indicated that written testimony would be welcomed for technical details and additional comments.