TO MOVE THE CHILD WELFARE OMBUDSMAN DIVISION AND THE JUVENILE OMBUDSMAN DIVISION TO THE DEPARTMENT OF INSPECTOR GENERAL; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.

I'm Senator Tucker going to go ahead in this little wall and run House Bill 1964. Senator Stubblefield, if you'll take the chair. I need to testify for. You've got to copy the fact in 1964. Thank you. Senator Clark, if you'll recognize yourself, Alan Clark, State Senate District 7, and Mr. Chair, I'm going to ask Tiffany Wright, DCFS director to come to the table and help me with your approval. Okay. Mr. Wright, will you identify yourself for the record? Okay. Good morning. I'm Tiffany Wright. I'm the director for the Division of Children and Family Services. All right. You are recognized to present House Bill 1964. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The child welfare ombudsman comes from legislation that I ran to hopefully have someone, and I think there's two people now, who take my place at trying to get answers for families within the child welfare system or to advocate for them when things are not going right and with the system as big as ours is, if everybody is doing things right 99% of the time, there's still families and children that fall in the gap. All this does is at that time, we went around the world to try to find a place to put the ombudsman, and it varied between nobody wanting them, they didn't fit, and we did find a place. But now we have a better place under the inspector general, and we're just, all we're doing is moving the ombudsman from where it is over at UAMS to the inspector general's office, and everyone including UAMS is good with this. Be happy to take any questions. All right. Senator Tucker, you're recognized for questions. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So I know what an ombudsman does generally, but I'm not sure I know what this ombudsman specifically does. Can you just educate me on that? Go ahead. So this child welfare ombudsman takes concerns or complaints related to child maltreatment reports, placement issues, court issues, just depends on what it might be a family is experiencing, and then they gather information related to that, ask DCFS questions, and then try to mitigate any concerns. Primarily DCFS. We have a person who gets all these complaints, a central person, and they work with the local teams across the state to figure out what is going on, and then we try to evaluate systems, changes, and improvements. Okay. I take it from that explanation. It's complaints about their dealings with DCFS that they're trying to get resolved. It's not just DCFS. It's anywhere within the child welfare system. They don't have the same independence that a state senator has. Totally. So it's citizens trying to get issues resolved with anyone in the ch... Okay, thank you. All right, Senator Rice, you're recognized for question. Senator Gilmour, you're recognized for question. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Senator Clark on page... Hang on, I'm looking forward again. Here we go. Page 12. I'm just trying to make sure that this is ported language. We're not adding something new that didn't already exist. Line 15 where it says, Juvenile on buzzmen shall not have authority to colon, and then it lists one and two there. What line number? So on page 12, line 15, starting line 15. It looks like new language, but I don't know if it's just because we're porting language from one spot to another. Did you see that? I do. I'm reading it, Senator Gilmour. Yep. Looks like new language that came from the division of youth services for some reason. If Ms. Wright would like to speak to it. Yes, we're not moving just one on buzzmen. This bill moves both on buzzmen, the Juvenile Justice on Buzzmen and the Child Welfare on Buzzmen together to increase consistency and oversight. And I don't know about the Juvenile Justice on Buzzmen language, so I can't answer if that's new language or not. And Senator Gilmour, I don't know either. Well, and again, maybe it's fine. It concerns me when we're talking about on buzzmen. It looks like it has been removed on pages 2 through 6 and rewritten as you suggested might have happened. Okay. You said pages, what again? 2 through 6. 2 through 6. Okay, I'm looking. In line 33. Yep. But I'm looking for the language that specifically speaks to that on page 12. Yeah, me too. And I don't see it. Again, I don't necessarily think there's any, you know... Well, I'm not as trusting actually as you, Senator Gilmour, but this bill's supposed to be about moving the two to the Inspector General. I would just want to know if it's... Yeah, I'm trying to get the supported language. Senator Gilmour, not so much because you questioned it because you raised a question in my mind. Yeah. I'd like to pull this bill down and get somebody in here that knows preferably this morning. Okay. Thank you, Senator. All right, thank you. Okay. Next up is Representative Tosh. Representative Tosh, if you would identify yourself for the record. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm Representative Dwight Tosh, District 38. Representative Tosh, you are recognized to present House Bill 1875. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Committee members, this bill is a deal with the interlock system, but before I tell you what the bill does, let me just briefly explain what it does not do. Currently here in the state of Arkansas, if you're convicted of a DWI, then the court will give you the option. Well, they don't really give you an option. Driver's license are suspended for six months. The House Bill 1875, sorry representative talks, go ahead. Okay, thank you. Your driver's license are suspended for six months. Once your driver's license are suspended, you have the option whether to just accept that and go on and for six months not drive an automobile. However, if you choose and you want to be able to drive, then you can have an interlock system installed in your vehicle and that's the current law. We're not changing any of that. What we are changing is that six months, if you choose to have the interlock system in your vehicle for the first four months of the six months, if you attempt to start that vehicle and you go over the limit that's calibrated into that machine by the health department, there is no violations that occur. What we're changing is is in the last 60 days while that interlock system is on your vehicle during that six months for the last 60 days, if you attempt to start that vehicle and you go over the limit that's calibrated by the state of Arkansas, then that's going to count against you and then that interlock system will be extended for an additional 60 days. What we're looking for here, I did not put a criminal charge into this bill and I've been asked that question. I just didn't feel like what I was looking for here was to get these individuals back before judge and back into the court and back into the system. What I was trying to accomplish with this bill is a behavioral change and so we give them the first four months and we don't charge them or count any violations against them but after four months if they're still attempting to start that vehicle and they're over the limit what they need to be before that vehicle will start, that's a pretty good indicator that at the end of that six months we're going to have someone back on the highway drinking and driving. So we're just trying to get their attention during that last 60 days trying to set, establish a behavioral change. 35 states have already adopted this legislation. We passed it out of the judiciary on the house in with all yes votes, it passed the house floor with all yes votes and this bill is supported by the National Traffic Safety Council. Mad testified for this bill during the house judiciary. It's supported by the district courts, by the circuit courts, by all law enforcement officers. Each agency here in the state is just no known. Opposition to this bill and I truly believe this is a good bill, a bill that we need to try to like said change the behavior and keep people from driving under the influence of alcohol and with that Mr. Chair I'd be happy to take any questions. Representative Tosh, it sounds like you have struck about as good a balance as I've seen a bill coming through here this session. Questions from the committee? The we have some folks to testify for and against. We will start with the against. Nope, wrong bill. We've only got one to speak for. Don't kill the bill. OK, Teresa Brewer, blue, I'm sorry. You'll identify yourself for the record. Yes, I'm Teresa Belu. I'm representing mothers against drunk driving as I'm a volunteer and on the regional board working on policy. And I certainly don't want to do anything to kill the bill or the fine job that that representative Tosh who I knew first is Captain Tosh with the Arkansas State Police. I would just say this to you all. Remember this? I go to the doctor. I'm old and now they give me three words to remember. So here's a word I'd like you to remember and it is. Well, it's two words, 12 million when I first came to work with mothers against drunk driving. My first day on the job, I was told that in two days we had a press event with the attorney general and there was a lot of work to be done. And so I hit the ground running and while I was up here in the rotunda of my first press conference, we were working on lowering the AC from point one to point eight. And I asked a legislator what their position was. And he said to me, it's never enough for you people. And I remember saying to him, if it's never enough, it's because it's always too many, especially when it's preventable. We have researched. There's all kinds of things we could say, but we know that compliance based interlock already implemented in other states reduces recidivism. And remember that number 12 million? The industry reports 12 million times someone got behind the wheel of the car, tried to start it, and they were over the limit. So those are 12 million trips that didn't happen. We know that 36 people every day die in impaired driving prevention crashes. This is a tool that we need. The legislature, you all have been great to give us strong DWI rules through the years. This is something that we can do to add to our effectiveness. So I would appreciate your support for this. Appreciate Representative Tosh and all the hard work. This is a bipartisan issue. We can all get on board for this. It looks like y'all have done excellent work that is a great catch. That if you are, if the device is having to keep you from stopping the car in that last two months, you still have a problem and continue it for another two months and another two months without criminal charges. I think you couldn't have cut the balance, made it any closer to what it ought to be. So we'll commend you. Any questions for the witness from committee, Senator Stollfield? Yes, ma'am. Ms. Brewer, I was going to vote for this bill until you said you knew Representative Tosh. So. Well, politics makes for a strange bad feeling. That's a true stuff. OK. For the record, I have never been a bed fellow with Representative Tosh. That's just, I'm going to stop talking now. Now I'm really glad you came to the table. Julie, noted. Sometime ask me about how Representative Tosh saved my life one time. I'm not asking anything about Representative Tosh ever again. OK. That's a great bill. He's turning off my mic. Any other questions from committee for this witness? Hearing none, then we appreciate you being here, Ms. Blue. Representative Tosh, would you like to close? Would you close for your bill? Mr. Chairman, thank you. And I appreciate. Thank you for being here. And I appreciate a good vote. And I'm close with my bill. Do pass from Senator Ross. Second from Senator Stubblefield. Any discussion? Hearing none. All for the motion signify by saying aye. All opposed? Of all the legislation, we passed this session from Republicans who came saying we had too many laws. This is one of the most worthy ones, in my opinion, Representative Tosh. Your bill has passed. Thank you. That means a lot, Tosh. OK, I saw two senators enter the room. I only see one now, and he's leaving. Do you have a Senate bill? That was your bill. I take all my compliments back. I take all my compliments back. Back to the committee. Oh, Senator Hester, do you have a Senate bill? No. Not yet? OK. You have a House bill? OK. Senator Tucker, what? Senate Resolution 65. OK. Where will we find the resolution? Senator Tucker, would you identify yourself for the record? Clark Tucker, Senator District 14. Senate Resolution 65 has an amendment. Senator Tucker, would you like to explain the amendment? It just clarifies a couple of facts mentioned in the resolution and makes them more accurate. OK. Motion to adopt the amendment? Yeah, move to adopt. Motion from Senator Tucker. Second from Senator Stubblefield. Any discussion? Hearing none, all for the motion to signify by saying aye. All opposed? Motion carried. Senate Resolution 65 is amended. Senator Tucker, you are recognized to present Senate Resolution 65.