Transcript Highlights:

• and contract management.
• A poorly run procurement can lead to a poorly managed contract, and a poorly managed contract devalues
• Negotiations and contract development should result in a contract that is clear and enforceable.
• When the procurement has been completed and the contract awarded and signed, the OIG looks at contract
• , but I think in that contract.

Committee: Senate Senate Committee on Post Audit and Oversight

Transcript Highlights:

• Item B are three service contracts for legislative review. These are out-of-state contracts.
• The first two contracts are sole-sourced by justification.
• The first two contracts are sole-sourced by justification.
• were multiple contracts.
• When does that contract expire? Are you asking? When does that contract expire?

Committee: All JOINT BUDGET COMMITTEE

Summary: The committee reviewed three DHS service contracts: a $690,000-plus sole-source contract for DCFS with Evident Change for maintenance and operation of the Child Welfare Structured Decision-Making Assessment tools; a $1.2 million contract with Sifter Solutions for a SNAP waiver compliance solution and related app; and a $156,000 contract with Samaritan Integrative Services for psychiatric services at the Southeast Arkansas Human Development Center. Staff said the Evident Change contract was needed to keep daily safety risk assessments, case planning, and reunification tools functioning, and that the vendor’s proprietary system made it sole source. Members questioned DHS about reliance on the vendor, the lack of an off-ramp, whether the state was paying more or less annually, and why the contracts were not aligned on the same cycle. DHS and the vendor said the new Evident Change contract was limited to maintenance and operations, that no additional services or employees were being added, and that the broader CQI/review contract would come up separately later. For the SNAP waiver contract, DHS explained that the waiver is intended to exclude certain unhealthy foods from SNAP purchases to improve nutritional value, and that Sifter Solutions would provide a dynamic list for retailers and an app for clients to check products by barcode. DHS said the contract is sole source because it is tied to the waiver implementation and because the vendor can provide the needed dynamic list and education features. Staff said the contract would be funded with remaining federal SNAP Nutrition Education dollars that would otherwise revert to the federal government, and that the University of Pennsylvania would conduct the evaluation at no cost. Members asked about the public benefit, future renewals, and whether the state would own the application; DHS said the two-year term was designed to match the waiver period and allow time to reassess future procurement options. Members also asked about the nutrition education component, and DHS said it is developing videos with a nutritionist on preparing budget-friendly healthy meals and plans to link them to the app and website. After discussion, no objections were raised, and the items were reported as reviewed. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> contracts the monies of those contracts contracts the monies of those contracts are<00:16:12.600
• </c> seven contracts uh the seven contracts seven contracts uh the seven contracts that<00:16:40.199>
• I will say the state general funds that are in the contract, we claim 50% of those to Family First, so
• The first one: Why is that contract just run through 2024 and everybody else run through 2026?
• The first motion I would like would be for the approval of contracts numbers 93 through 95 on the PSC

Summary: The committee first reorganized by electing Representative Hart as House co-chair and Senator Douglas as Senate co-chair by acclamation, then approved the December 10 minutes. It then took up deferred and routine contract items, beginning with a Council on Postsecondary Education item that was withdrawn after staff explained the contract had been canceled and should not have come before the committee because the granting authority, not CPE, was issuing it. The committee next reviewed a Department for Local Government contract tied to an Eastern Kentucky flood recovery housing project in Jackson. Members questioned the high per-unit cost and whether renovation was more expensive than new construction. Staff explained the cost included acquisition of an existing downtown building and needed water and sewer infrastructure upgrades, and said developable land was limited in the area. With no motion to object, the contract was allowed to move forward. The committee then considered Kentucky Transportation Cabinet professional services contracts for highway design work. Members asked about the size of the contracts and how much of the available funding is typically used; staff said the contracts are two-year agreements, that the prior cycle reached close to $2 million per contract, and that this year’s limits were reduced because less money is available in the Highway Plan. The committee also approved a PSC amendment contract for the Bridging Kentucky program after staff explained the $150 hourly loaded rate was within the normal range for consultants. Both Transportation Cabinet items were approved without objection. Finally, the committee heard a Kentucky Communications Network Authority contract for an $85,000 study of the dark fiber market. Members asked what dark fiber is, why the study was needed, whether there was coordination with the Office of Broadband Development, and whether existing service meant there was already a market. KCNA said dark fiber is unused fiber that local providers can light to deliver service, that the study was needed because the contractor said no market existed while ISPs said demand exists, and that the report would help both KCNA oversight and broadband development planning. The contract was reviewed without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• So typically that is a requirement in our contracts for Family First Prevention Services that they can
• in our contracts for family first<00:30:21.279><c> prevention</c><00:30:21.840><c> services</c><00:30
• >> So, typically within any tertiary prevention service or any Family First Prevention Service, the contract
• We thought we would get it the first time, and we applied three times. That's under this contract.
• So the contract is not the contract.

Summary: The Government Contracts Committee met with a quorum and approved the July 8 minutes. It then deferred several items from the July agenda, including a Kentucky Education Television contract because the vendor was not yet registered with the Secretary of State, and a University of Louisville contract at the university’s request. The committee also deferred a behavioral health memorandum of agreement and later a Department of Community Based Services contract after questions were raised about the scope of services and the need for additional information. The most extensive discussion involved the Seven Counties Services contract with the Department for Behavioral Health, Developmental, and Intellectual Disabilities. Committee members questioned why the state continues to contract with Seven Counties despite its bankruptcy and pension-related liabilities, how the funding split was determined, whether the services are statutorily required, and whether the state or another provider could deliver the services more efficiently. Agency representatives said Seven Counties is the sole provider of core community mental health services in its region, serves about 24,500 people, and that service needs and acuity remain high even as the number served has declined. A cabinet attorney said the bankruptcy dispute is ongoing and involves roughly $20 million in contested retirement contributions, though members suggested the amount may be higher. Members also raised broader concerns about whether local governments, especially Metro Louisville, should contribute more toward services tied to social determinants of health, and whether the contract includes services beyond what statute requires. The committee requested additional information on the contract scope and possible offsets or recovery of unfunded liabilities, and then voted to defer the Seven Counties contract to the next meeting. The committee also heard a separate DCBS presentation on the Youth Villages Intercept program, where staff explained it was selected because it is an approved evidence-based Family First prevention service, provides intensive in-home and foster care stabilization services, and is headquartered in Tennessee but operates across Kentucky; members asked for clarification on Medicaid billing and additional funding needs.

Transcript Highlights:

• number is just the first year.
• Across all the contracts.
• Is that a proposed contract, or is that contract already in existence? You'd have to ask staff.
• Is it—does staff know if the contract is already in existence, or is that a proposed contract?
• It shows to be a one-time contract. It is not repeat funding. It's a one-time contract.

Committee: All ARKANSAS LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL (ALC)

Summary: The meeting began with a prayer, approval of the prior minutes, and a February 2026 revenue report from Carlos Silva of the Bureau of Legislative Research. He reported gross revenues of $5.36 billion and net collections of $4.5 billion, both above the prior year, and said the updated forecast showed a larger expected surplus than before. Members asked about declines in some tax categories, natural gas severance fees, and possible effects of inflation and international conflict; Silva generally attributed the changes to timing issues, prior tax cuts, refund activity, and price fluctuations, and said he could not speculate on future impacts. The committee then heard and adopted several subcommittee reports, including the Executive Committee, Administrative Rules, Claims Review, Game and Fish State Police, Higher Education, Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Hospital/Medicaid/Developmental Disabilities, Occupational Licensing Review, State Insurance Programs Oversight, and APER filings. Most reports were approved without objection. One budget classification transfer for the Commissioner of State Lands was reviewed and failed. The review report also led to discussion of several contracts, including DHS staffing contracts and a Department of Education security contract, with some items held or separated for individual votes. A major portion of the meeting focused on DHS and state staffing contracts for the Human Development Centers, Arkansas State Hospital, and related facilities. DHS officials said the contracts were on track against seven-year projections, but members expressed concern about heavy reliance on contract labor, vacancy rates, and the need to move workers onto state payrolls. Officials said they were preparing a recruitment and retention plan and described staffing levels, vacancies, and turnover. Members also questioned contract projections and federal-state funding matches, and several urged faster action to reduce contract labor costs. The committee also discussed a Department of Commerce reduction-in-force affecting the Division of Services for the Blind and Employment and Training. Secretary Hugh McDonald said the cuts were driven by funding shortfalls, over-obligation of funds, and federal issues, and that 27 positions would be permanently eliminated while furloughed employees would be recalled. Members raised concerns about service impacts, board appointments, and the division’s fiscal management. The meeting ended after the personnel report was adopted and APER was filed as reviewed, followed by adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, first up, Representative. G.
• is a contract.
• For this contract, I don't know if they do beyond this contract, but for this contract, they're acting
• So they're following the state's contracting process through the contract that we have.
• a contract.

Transcript Highlights:

• traditional</c> The first contract of traditional The first contract of traditional retail,<00:30:02.000
• Talk about the Millan contract first.
• Talk about the Millan contract first.
• Talk about the Millan contract first.
• Talk about the Millan contract first.

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and first approved the minutes from its May 13 meeting. Members then reviewed a deferred contract with the Kentucky Board of Pharmacy for the Kentucky Pharmacist Recovery Network (KYPRN), a program that provides monitoring and support for pharmacists and pharmacy interns with substance abuse or mental health issues. Board representatives explained that the contract is a long-running arrangement, renewed periodically, with an option for two additional two-year renewals. Senators asked about the program’s structure, participation trends, follow-up, and consequences for noncompliance. The board said enrollment has remained fairly consistent at about 52 participants, with roughly 500 participants over the life of the program, weekly and monthly check-ins during the five-year typical enrollment period, and possible additional sanctions if participants fail to meet obligations. The committee then approved the contract. The committee next considered a group of economic development contracts, including items from the Cabinet for Economic Development. Secretary Jeff Null and general counsel Matt Wingate testified about contracts tied to regional innovation and entrepreneurship hubs. Members focused on the large differences in funding between regions and pressed for more support for rural and eastern Kentucky. Null said the cabinet is working on a more tailored, non-one-size-fits-all approach, including possible changes to capital support, build-to-suit options, and additional resources for rural areas. He said the hubs have helped 193 startups over the last two years and helped attract nearly $350 million in private capital, and he agreed to provide a written report by hub district on startup viability. The committee approved the economic development contracts. The Kentucky Lottery Corporation then presented its contracts with vendor IGT for retail and internet sales systems. Lottery officials said the contracts are mission-critical, cover both the traditional retail system and iLottery, and are structured as a percentage of sales so no payment is made until revenue is earned. They described planned equipment upgrades, including refreshed terminals, new ticket checkers, cashless vending and bill acceptors, and connected-play features that would link retail and online wallets. Officials said keeping the same vendor reduces the risk of business disruption and that the arrangement has already produced cost savings. They also said the lottery continues to see year-over-year growth and expects to meet its annual contribution target of $360 million for scholarships and grants. The committee approved the lottery contract after discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• I want to make sure how much is this contract for?”
• underlying contract, is that correct?”
• So if the written contract has the one point of...
• So it sounds like to me that that's the difference right here than whenever we first started this contract
• I will say the initial contract term, the first three years, we were able to hold for a 1.4% increase

Committee: All ALC-STATE INSURANCE PROGRAMS OVERSIGHT SUBCOMMITTEE

Transcript Highlights:

• And that is my first part question.
• So we've estimated that in the first year it would increase by about $54 for that first award and then
• There aren't public votes to enter into contracts or renew contracts, even of very significant value,
• When these contracts are being negotiated, I think it... ...when these contracts are being negotiated
• million contracts, okay?

Summary: The Senate Education Committee heard several bills related to school nutrition, campus safety, college financial aid, and UC contracting ethics. SB 1058 by Senator McNerney would remove price as the primary factor in school nutrition procurement grants, allowing districts more flexibility to prioritize quality, local sourcing, cultural responsiveness, and healthier meals. Supporters from school nutrition and education groups said it would help districts better serve students and local farmers without increasing state costs. After questions about vendor selection and safeguards against favoritism, the bill was moved do pass and later approved 7-0. SB 1140 by Senator Ashby, sponsored by the California Federation of Teachers, would require school safety plans to address access control during construction, maintenance, and repair projects. Supporters said the bill closes a gap that can leave gates or doors unsecured and could help prevent unauthorized access to campuses. There was no opposition, and the committee approved the bill unanimously. SB 959 was also taken up on consent and passed. SB 1006 by Senator Padilla would raise the Cal Grant B Access Award and tie future increases to inflation using the California Consumer Price Index. Supporters said the current award has lost most of its value and does not cover basic needs like housing, food, transportation, and books, affecting hundreds of thousands of students. Members discussed the fiscal impact and the need to keep aid aligned with rising costs; the bill was moved forward and later approved 7-0. SB 1141 by Senator Wahab would bar UC contracts with businesses that pay UC executives or where executives serve in paid roles, aiming to prevent conflicts of interest. UC and the Chamber of Commerce opposed the bill as too broad and potentially disruptive to operations, while supporters argued existing rules are insufficient because many contracting decisions happen outside public view. After extended debate over recusal, transparency, and the scope of the restrictions, the committee passed the bill 4-2 and then finalized all bills on the agenda before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• I mean, I think, as I mentioned, first of all, contracts involve spending money.
• >> Well, first of all, um addressing the contract of our service provider, um we believe that we do have
• addressing the &gt;&gt; Well, first of all, um addressing the contract<00:42:13.680><c> of</c><00:42:
• Your vendor contract current contract.
• </c> believe is the current contract. believe is the current contract.

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes from its May 21 and June 10 meetings, then heard testimony from the Kentucky Office of the Attorney General on the effect of HB 314 on the Kentucky Communications Network Authority (KCNA) board. The Attorney General’s representative said HB 314 changed KCNA’s structure and staffing, but did not alter the statutory duties of the board, which still include developing and implementing strategic plans, providing policy direction, monitoring results, and approving fiscal planning. He argued the board is not merely advisory, has operational and budget authority, and that actions taken outside board approval could be ultra vires and without effect. He also noted the board historically approved settlements and contracts, including matters involving Open Fiber, and said the removal of the executive director position reduced direct personnel control but did not eliminate the board’s broader oversight. The committee then heard from representatives of Kentucky Managed Technical Services/LTS, who described a dispute over the Kentucky Wired network refresh and service-provider transition. They said the project agreement required a market test and acceptance of a proposal for both the network refresh and service-provider role, but that their proposals were rejected and the refresh work was later treated by the parties as a change order issue. They said some equipment worth about $3 million had been delivered, transferred, and paid for, while roughly $7 million in additional equipment was canceled by LTS but reportedly shipped to a KCNA warehouse and not paid for. They also said no refresh installation work has been performed, that they continue providing network maintenance to avoid service disruption, but believe the contract has expired and that there is no current agreement for ongoing service-provider work. Committee members asked whether actions taken without board approval would be invalid, whether the board could alter or terminate contractor arrangements, whether the bond disclosures suggesting a successful contract extension were accurate, and what equipment had been purchased or remained in storage. LTS representatives said they would follow up with the committee on the financial delta between the contracted rate and the month-to-month billing they say has been in effect since the contract expired, and on an inventory of in-service equipment and end-of-life dates. They said they want a commercial resolution, but if no resolution is reached soon they may pursue the formal contractual dispute process, and identified September 1 as their stated target date for resolving the matter and completing the refresh.

Transcript Highlights:

• contract is that correct?
• When does that contract end? It will end in December of this year. So why do we need two contracts?
• When does that contract end? It will end in December of this year. So why do we need two contracts?
• So it sounds like to me that that's the difference right here than whenever we first started this contract
• I will say the initial contract term, the first three years, we were able to hold for a 1.4% increase

Committee: All ALC-STATE INSURANCE PROGRAMS OVERSIGHT SUBCOMMITTEE

Summary: The State Insurance Programs Oversight Subcommittee met on June 17 and reviewed a series of Employee Benefits Division and Office of Property Risk items. The committee approved formulary changes for March and April that favored lower-cost generics, removed some new-to-market drugs from coverage pending more evidence, and made maintenance changes to migraine and diabetes medications. Members also approved a cell and gene therapy policy that would route those therapies through prior authorization rather than automatic coverage; officials said the process should not delay urgent cases and that no current members would be affected. The committee then reviewed a UAMS pharmacy benefit consultant contract amendment, but after extended discussion about the written scope and dollar amounts, the motion was approved with the understanding that any use of optional services would return to the committee for further review. The committee also reviewed the U.S. Able Mutual/Blue Advantage third-party administration contract and the CompSack employee assistance program contract, which officials said would reduce per-member costs and add services. The subcommittee approved proposed 2027 rates for state employees and public employees, with a 9.8% increase for state employees and a 4.9% increase for public school employees. Officials also reported that the UnitedHealthcare rebid was in its final negotiation stage and would return in August, with medical and pharmacy coverage split as previously recommended. In response to questions, the director said the division was considering broader preventive-care offerings, including weight-loss drug coverage, but would proceed cautiously and with strong utilization controls and holistic support if such a program were adopted. On the property risk side, the committee reviewed permanent rules making prior temporary rules permanent, a contingency-fee subrogation contract, and renewals for claims management, actuarial services, and investment management. Members raised concerns about Sedgwick’s claim-adjustment timeliness and communication with school districts after severe weather events; officials said performance guarantees and communication expectations had been strengthened, but the renewal was kept at three years for continuity. Finally, the committee approved 2026-27 captive insurance program rates, which included no change to minimum deductibles, a 10% overall rate reduction, and bucketed rate changes by entity type. Officials said the captive program was working as intended, with improved actuarial support and claims experience, and the meeting adjourned after the approvals.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have one contract.
• And this is the first contract we'll have.
• I mean our first contract in place.
• </c> them the contract in the first place. them the contract in the first place.
• </c> mess in the first place. mess in the first place.

Transcript Highlights:

• towards these contracts.
• the contracts if necessary.
• Obviously, you want your own contract with your ability to get out of that contract.
• or contract for Mutualink.
• Are you planning to incorporate these contracting best practices into your contract renewal?

Committee: Joint Joint Legislative Audit Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• So we've estimated that in the first year it would increase by about $54 for that first award and then
• So we've estimated that in the first year it would increase by about $54 for that first award and then
• When these contracts are being negotiated, I think it... ...when these contracts are being negotiated
• The contracts are renewed, even $30 to $50 million contracts. ...are renewed, even $30 million to $50
• million contracts, okay?

Committee: Senate Education

Summary: The Senate Education Committee heard several bills focused on school nutrition, campus safety, college affordability, and UC contracting ethics. SB 1058 by Senator McNerney would remove price as the primary factor in school nutrition procurement, allowing districts more flexibility to prioritize meal quality, cultural appropriateness, local sourcing, and sustainability. Support came from school nutrition officials, education agencies, and school business groups; there was no opposition. Members raised questions about vendor selection and safeguards against favoritism, and the bill was ultimately moved forward on a due pass motion. SB 1140 by Senator Ashby, sponsored by the California Federation of Teachers, would require school safety plans to address access control during construction, maintenance, and repair projects by limiting unattended entry points such as open doors and gates. Supporters included Brady Campaign, Moms Demand Action, school employees, labor groups, and Prism. Members discussed how the bill would apply to both new construction and ongoing maintenance, and the measure advanced on a due pass motion. SB 959 was taken up on consent and also moved forward. SB 1006 by Senator Padilla would raise the Cal Grant B Access Award to a new minimum and tie future increases to inflation, with related supplemental awards for student parents and former foster youth also indexed. Support came from higher education advocates, CSU, student groups, and public advocacy organizations, with testimony from a Sac State student describing housing, transportation, and food insecurity. Members generally supported the bill, though questions were raised about fiscal impact; the author estimated about $21 million in first-year costs. The bill passed the committee on a due pass motion. SB 1141 by Senator Wahab would bar businesses from contracting with the University of California if a UC executive is paid by, or has been paid by, that business within the prior year, aiming to address conflicts of interest in UC contracting. AFSCME and UC workers supported the bill, citing examples of executives serving on corporate boards while their institutions contract with those companies. UC and business groups opposed it, arguing it was overly broad, could capture ordinary dividends or unpaid advisory roles, and could disrupt essential contracts and operations. After extensive debate over existing conflict-of-interest laws and whether the bill would create practical problems, the committee approved SB 1141 on a 4-3 vote and then reported the remaining bills out 7-0 as calls were lifted, concluding the agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• No, this is an initial contract, the first time. Yes.
• No, this is a initial contract,<00:26:09.679><c> the</c><00:26:09.840><c> first</c><00:26:10.000><c>
• </c><00:26:11.120><c> Um,</c> contract, the first time. Yes. Um, contract, the first time. Yes.
• Um, this is not the first time we've discussed these contracts.
• Um, this is not the first time we've discussed these contracts.

Summary: The Government Contract Committee met with a quorum, observed a moment of silence for Representative McCool after the death of his sister, and approved the April 14 minutes. The committee then reviewed a large agenda of contracts and amendments, beginning with a deferred Office of the Controller procurement involving broker services. Members questioned why a contract that had previously been handled for about $300,000 annually was now priced at about $1 million, and why the procurement was limited to one year. Office of the Controller staff said the prior vendor had held the work for more than 20 years, the work had previously been treated as not practical to bid, and the new RFP was intended to increase competition. They said the technical evaluation was scored before cost was considered, that past performance was not scored because it was seen as unreliable, and that AON received the highest technical score despite not being the lowest bidder. After discussion, the committee voted to take no action and let the contract proceed to the Finance Cabinet, with members noting continuing concerns about the pricing and process. The committee next considered a DCBS memorandum of agreement amendment for language services. DCBS representatives said the additional funding did not come from a new cut elsewhere, but from reduced spending on interpreter services because commonly used forms had been translated into other languages, freeing up funds for the contract. The committee approved the item unanimously. The final major item discussed was an initial contract for the Board of Hairdressers and Cosmetologists for legal services. Board staff said the board had been without a permanent general counsel since March 2024 and had relied on special and conflict counsel because of unusually heavy litigation, including 11 active cases, plus broader disciplinary and licensing changes tied to recent legislation and an oversight report. They said the contract was a not-to-exceed amount funded entirely by agency fees and that the board was currently running a surplus. Senator Thomas urged support, citing prior legislation and oversight findings about problems at the board and saying the contract was needed to help the board address ongoing litigation and corrective work. The committee approved the contract and then approved the remaining agenda items without objection, sending them forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the first item there, the MCOs, that's three contracts versus the Medicaid Management Information
• So the first item there, the MCOs, that's three contracts versus the Medicaid Management Information
• So the first item there, the MCOs, that's three contracts versus the Medicaid Management Information
• So the first item there, the MCOs, that's three contracts versus the Medicaid Management Information
• <c> this</c> this contract, this contract, and this this contract, this contract, and this contract.<

Summary: The committee met after recess to hear a Department of Health and Human Services overview of its contract structure, with CFO Nathan White explaining that DHS currently has 969 active agreements spanning service contracts, grants, data-sharing agreements, use-of-premises agreements, and MOUs. He said contracts are budgeted across multiple class lines and accounting units, often braided with federal funds, which makes the system complex; he also noted that the department’s top spending list was limited to 18 items rather than 20 and included both individual contracts and grouped regional/provider contracts. White emphasized that many contracts support direct services to residents, while others support departmental operations such as software support and staffing. Commissioner Hardy said the listed contracts are essential to serving vulnerable populations and supporting required administrative infrastructure, and she stressed that the department tries to work with providers and families rather than impose changes on them. In response to questions about area agencies and developmental disability services, DHS officials said the agencies’ duties are spelled out in contract and statute, including family support services, billing-related functions, and services tied to the state’s community-based system; they said some billing duties have already been moved outside the contract. They also explained that the department rejected a previously discussed two-tier waiver concept after stakeholder feedback in October 2023 and instead shifted to rate-based work, including CIS assessments, to better align payment with individual need. Members also raised concerns about possible waste, sole-source contracting, and subcontracting. Hardy said she had not seen specific evidence of waste beyond a whistleblower call mentioned by a member, but acknowledged that inefficient execution can occur in government and said the department is trying to improve management. On procurement, she said sole-source contracts require her approval and that competitive procurement is the default when possible. White added that subcontracting is allowed only with written state permission under the standard P-37 terms, and subcontractors must meet the same obligations as the prime contractor. No votes or formal actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• First, is this a first-time contract with this particular law firm, correct?
• Um, we issued a preliminary contract; our first contract was actually for specific services, and the
• gt; First this is a first time contract with &gt;&gt; First this is a first time contract with this<00
• </c><00:14:39.560><c> contract</c><00:14:40.360><c> was</c> a preliminary our first contract was a preliminary
• Are these things that you didn't know when you first submitted the contract?

Summary: The committee first approved the March 10 minutes and then moved through a large agenda of contract reviews, including a deferred Kentucky Transportation Cabinet item tied to Louisville bridge tolling and RiverLink. Transportation officials explained that the contract was part of a bi-state arrangement with Indiana: Indiana Finance Authority held the main contract with HNTB, while Kentucky needed a mirror contract to pay its 50% share under the bi-state management agreement. Members questioned why the work was treated as effectively no-bid, how much input Kentucky had in vendor selection, RiverLink’s collection performance, and when tolls might end. Transportation said Kentucky had equal representation in selection, HNTB served as a toll services advisor, collections and customer service had improved, and tolls are expected to remain until debt obligations are paid off in 2058. Several members criticized the company’s past performance and voted no as a statement of concern, but the contract still moved forward. The committee then deferred a Kentucky State University item because the vendor was not registered with the Secretary of State. It also approved the overall agenda and contract review lists. A Board of Optometric Examiners contract drew significant discussion: board representatives said they had previously relied on the Public Protection Cabinet for legal services, but that office lacked staff and advised them to seek outside counsel. Some members argued the committee could not approve a contract that appeared to conflict with statute, while others said the board should not be left without legal counsel and that the Attorney General should be brought in to resolve the issue. The committee ultimately voted to defer the optometric contract for one month and requested the Attorney General appear at the next meeting. Finally, the committee reviewed an Administrative Office of the Courts amendment for the Court of Appeals building project. Staff explained that the General Assembly had authorized the project, the design contract had already gone through multiple approved phases, and the current item was only an administrative correction to a prior modification amount. Members approved the amendment, with one member noting appreciation that the project costs had been reduced when an error was found.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we've estimated that in the first year it would increase by about $54 for that first award and then
• So we've estimated that in the first year it would increase by about $54 for that first award and then
• When these contracts are being negotiated, I think it... ...when these contracts are being negotiated
• The contracts are renewed, even $30 to $50 million contracts. ...are renewed, even $30 to $50 million
• contracts, okay?

Committee: Senate Education

Transcript Highlights:

• Kabud for the first question.
• Kabud for the first question.
• Kabud for the first question.
• Kabud for the first question.
• . having more contract offer options and having more contract offer options and contract<01:09:30.239

Committee: Senate Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• Item B are three service contracts for legislative review. These are out-of-state contracts.
• The first two contracts are sole-sourced by justification.
• It used to all be under one contract. Now it’s under two contracts.
• “Mine’s actually on a different contract. I don’t have anything for this contract.
• So the other contract, this one is for maintenance. What’s the other contract for?”

Committee: All JOINT BUDGET COMMITTEE

Summary: The committee reviewed three DHS out-of-state service contracts: a $690,000-plus sole-source contract for DCFS with Evident Change for maintenance and operation of the Child Welfare Structured Decision-Making practice hub; a $1.2 million sole-source contract for County Operations with Sifter Solutions to support a SNAP waiver compliance solution; and a $156,000 contract for Developmental Disabilities with Samaritan Integrative Services for psychiatric services at the Southeast Arkansas Human Development Center. The chair and staff explained the contracts and noted that the Evident Change and Sifter contracts were sole-source due to the proprietary nature of the systems or services involved. Most of the discussion focused on the Evident Change contract. Members questioned DCFS about long-term dependence on the vendor, the lack of a competitive bid, the absence of a clear off-ramp, and whether the state was paying more overall as the work was split into multiple contracts. DCFS said the contract before the committee was only for maintenance and operations of a web-based platform used daily for safety assessments and case planning, while a separate Evident Change contract covers case reviews, CQI work, and data management. The vendor said it was continuing to reduce its role and had begun off-ramp discussions, but members remained concerned that the state was too reliant on the vendor. Staff said the contract had to be approved by May 31 or the system could be turned off. The committee also discussed the Sifter Solutions contract, which supports Arkansas’s SNAP waiver pilot by providing a dynamic list of excluded products and a consumer app that scans barcodes and provides nutrition information. DHS said the waiver is intended to improve the nutritional value of SNAP benefits, that the contract is funded with remaining federal SNAP Nutrition Education dollars that would otherwise be returned, and that the University of Pennsylvania will conduct the evaluation at no cost. Members asked about the benefit to Arkansas, whether the app would include nutrition and budgeting information, and whether the state would own the application or need future renewals. DHS said the two-year term was intentionally aligned with the waiver period and that future procurement options could change. After discussion, the committee noted the items as reviewed and adjourned without objections or votes recorded in the transcript.