[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6619633,"mediaKeyId","2830531-b906e2de276b67d4b9d51ccb34e4a1dc","parentId",2830531,"title","Committee hears technical, enforcement concerns after sponsor seeks restrictions on hemp‑derived products; agencies warn bill could affect litigation","audioSeconds",1070,"startMs",1934774,"endMs",3004960,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2830531-b906e2de276b67d4b9d51ccb34e4a1dc&start=1934&end=3004","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2830531-b906e2de276b67d4b9d51ccb34e4a1dc/thumbnail_1934774.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6619633/Arkansas/Committee-hears-technical-enforcement-concerns-after-sponsor-seeks-restrictions-on-hempderived-products-agencies-warn-bill-could-affect-litigation","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6619633-407befe4ddc60d55ab81e14a401f3619/orig.mp4?Expires=1771191094&Signature=JqBqvj9QdkdutqdUgLLj0~CU7kzFNIT9-kgZfQzqJyo1nr3IoRNkRvAz3h84xi4KS6cL2Hl--NOxnuu6wRSLsJI0HctyWJjSEKj6syPPZy3amdlDopKTO-yq2N~Dhyn4sVyop6BWC~JMkCtKb4nxmI2MGbZEtaDk1ZpR5Z4Cmjs-DddXqui1lZIRF8grfUWmpNCAQgq490TXbPgcsK7PIAImSJbeRM1nlQdaCVJpF9WpmDOZmg827V1MpQiOJqW~VtzKYSdMbRa4Zoz3AoOhr9NxBJezpLQMGoeBU2P~EbghnfED0FFk27FgADoN~DhBIh~vEVIeoGkul9Kv7~wEPg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - SENATE","date","2025-03-20T10:00:00Z","article","Committee members spent more than an hour on a bill that seeks to restrict sale, packaging and testing of hemp‑derived intoxicants such as products labeled Delta‑8 or Delta‑10. The bill’s sponsor framed the measure as an attempt to limit marketing to minors and ensure product safety through testing, child‑proof packaging and age‑restricted sales in the event the state’s 2023 ban on certain products is invalidated by federal courts.

Sponsor testimony described a contingency: if federal litigation overturns the 2023 Act (Act 629), the bill would allow the state to require childproof packaging, pull products from open display, restrict sales to adults 21 and older, require manufacturing and testing standards, and ban certain synthetic cannabinoids and acetate esters. The sponsor said the aim was not to legitimize the industry but to reduce children’s access and to require ISO‑equivalent lab testing and manufacturing standards.

Officials from the Attorney General’s office, the Department of Health, and the Arkansas Tobacco Control (ATC) agency testified in opposition or to urge caution. Doorley Chandler from the Attorney General’s Office said the Attorney General continues to pursue litigation to uphold the 2023 ban and warned that the bill as drafted could \"go backwards\" by striking language the AG views as helpful in prosecutions; the office noted the 2023 statute contains trigger language and regulation options already in play while the federal case is pending.

Department of Health general counsel Laura Shue and pharmacist Shane David described chemical and testing concerns, emphasizing the difficulty of defining synthetic analogs, the presence of acetate esters that can be harmful when vaped, and the need for clear laboratory accreditation (ISO/IEC 17025 or equivalent) and cannabinoid‑profile testing. Cameron Coker, staff attorney for Arkansas Tobacco Control, said the agency’s principal concern is the reduction in maximum penalties in the draft and potential impacts on existing tobacco‑control enforcement.

Representatives of the Attorney General and regulatory agencies told the committee they are currently limited in enforcement because a preliminary injunction is in place on the 2023 measure; the Attorney General’s office said pursuing new state legislation that goes into effect immediately could moot ongoing litigation and set back enforcement rather than speed removal of products. Several senators asked whether narrower steps — banning synthetic cannabinoids or levying a higher tax — could be pursued without undermining the AG’s legal strategy.

Committee members agreed to hear additional agency testimony and to allow the sponsor to revise the bill. The sponsor ultimately pulled the measure from consideration at the hearing to redraft provisions in consultation with agencies and stakeholders; no vote was taken.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - SENATE - Mar 20, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","A Senate bill to regulate hemp‑derived intoxicants such as products marketed as Delta‑8 and Delta‑10 drew technical testimony from the Attorney General’s office, the Department of Health and tobacco control regulators, who warned the draft could undermine ongoing litigation and raised testing and enforcement concerns.","taxTitle","AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - SENATE, Senate, Committees, Legislative, Arkansas","taxId",21184,"location","Arkansas","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6619638,"Committee debates accountability and continuing‑education changes in county fair funding bill",1506,261413,1768341,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2830531-b906e2de276b67d4b9d51ccb34e4a1dc&start=261&end=1768","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2830531-b906e2de276b67d4b9d51ccb34e4a1dc/thumbnail_261413.jpg","/articles/6619638/Arkansas/Committee-debates-accountability-and-continuingeducation-changes-in-county-fair-funding-bill","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6619638-acdf569408b03805b135eec254b5d02c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771191094&Signature=VVQOh5cUSAXqDecVh4wFNn3n2Exp90jN9JKLkb74kkJvK0GFop3lHLk979WF2L4zj7tLYl8WoeGccRNwMcRiFSKdO86RIFMKRAaMDVPgpq~nTFtzUEkWc0QYNZjs7Df2XVmSNbRoEt-RMzQ9JH0vayEFR-hvBHuVeyPxSuLUSdW4rAP-uXR9NgQuk~PM0seb~frefD5kcfKgY6TzGyFwo1icBrj1UvNCi7tUyh~DKN9wL75dKtiGh~bgHHwUJVxM5xIa~Afkq-Njy7I4heBMpV6oCLu2082~7D5AlMx0BpUiMdd4vSmQ2He4DIl8mVLFUnVUom3wphoAn-H09oIhhQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate Bill 400, presented to the Senate Agriculture, Forestry & Economic Development Committee by Sen. Missy Irvin, would add a short set of accountability and transparency requirements for entities receiving state funds for county and district fairs. Irvin described the bill as a relatively small set of requirements — a financial statement, an annual plan and a certificate of good standing — intended to ensure tax dollars are tied to nonprofit organizations and to create a local review step when county facilities or county funds are used.

Under the bill, a county extension agent would serve ex officio on county fair boards, exhibitors could choose one district fair to participate in, and fairs that use county facilities or county funds for livestock shows would submit documentation to the quorum court for review before filing with the Department of Agriculture. The sponsor said the intent is simple local accountability, not to create an administrative grant application process.

Testimony drew sustained opposition from representatives of the Arkansas Fair Managers Association and several county fair boards, who focused on the bill’s removal of a continuing-education requirement that had been used as an eligibility condition for some fair funding. Andrea Vogue, on the Arkansas Fair Managers Association Board of Directors and Sharp County Fair, said continuing education has helped small, rural fairs recover and expand exhibitor participation; she urged the committee not to accept the bill if it eliminates education requirements. Karen Vaughn of Pike County described seminars and conferences that yield practical training and scholarships for young people involved in agriculture.

White County Fair Board president Clayton Edwards told the committee his board is a self-funded 501(c)(3) that receives minimal county support in kind and expressed concern that requiring quorum-court approval before the Department of Agriculture review could obstruct access to legislative audit and complicate operations for fairs that do not routinely receive county funds.

Irvin responded to concerns by offering to remove the word \"approve\" so the quorum court would review rather than approve plans; she said she would accept a written amendment that also addresses continuing-education language. Committee members and witnesses discussed how legislative audit would obtain access to records if local review were required. Irvin repeatedly emphasized the bill’s aim: taxpayer dollars should support education for exhibitors, especially youth, and local extension agents and the Department of Agriculture would continue to provide expertise.

Committee discussion lasted through public testimony. Multiple fair managers asked the lawmakers to retain continuing-education requirements or to ensure funding could not be used to pay for ineligible activities. Senate committee members asked clarifying questions about who pays for continuing-education attendance and whether dues and registration might be restructured.

At the close of testimony, Sen. Irvin said she might offer or accept an amendment to change the quorum-court language from “approve” to “review” and acknowledged concerns about continuing-education removal. The transcript records that the sponsor said she would evaluate committee sentiment on the continuing-education provision and later indicated she would pull the bill down rather than move forward with a change she did not support. The committee did not take a final passage vote during the hearing; the bill is being held for further work.","Senate Bill 400 would require county fair organizations that receive public funds or use county facilities to submit a financial statement, plan and certificate of good standing; the measure prompted extended testimony and opposition focused on removal of a continuing‑education requirement for fair managers.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6619643,"Committee approves amendment and passes bill clarifying sale of raw milk products",228,30681,258891,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2830531-b906e2de276b67d4b9d51ccb34e4a1dc&start=30&end=258","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2830531-b906e2de276b67d4b9d51ccb34e4a1dc/thumbnail_30681.jpg","/articles/6619643/Arkansas/Committee-approves-amendment-and-passes-bill-clarifying-sale-of-raw-milk-products","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6619643-5d5291b45f7205a60e5b7d1a8ce88437/orig.mp4?Expires=1771191094&Signature=aac4tsSGborJB8-pkk04embS~KQX87ANfBxedyU5rxYu3OMI7Yz8knrPxCmPgcrrXHeOYNieSHejutNyzWn7IzGBdhHPX-Zjc05xmU~LhPglS0knPLfz~QQgX-33E5oSlOWDJ9bbYdK0USPRK0QEBMJYDB7rXp6m6t-Z~03NOd94FXsaJTfnRWhDfBXk5GiJjLYoE4~Ws1aGCBcGEb-cxREBPmOUk4HxUECpjsmse~Z0TG-NH1m9ZAx7FKXpw9G2~Wj0D6FhsDlnVfq3ZPH2bJc9Sp7RvQI-ok3ovFydTjeGJl~llF46hI70zt26A4xhg6kjMvAziz6KTQlB0dHSxg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Agriculture, Forestry & Economic Development Committee on May 20 considered S.B. 464, a bill that clarifies which products made from raw milk may be sold and where they may be offered. Sponsor Allen Clark, introduced the measure and the committee approved an amendment adding an emergency clause, then passed the bill by voice vote.

S.B. 464 defines “raw milk products” to include items that use raw milk or raw cream as an ingredient, listing butter, buttermilk, cheese, cottage cheese, kefir, yogurt, colostrum and “other derivative products.” The bill also adds \"natural food stores\" to the locations authorized to sell those products and reduces the size of the required consumer notice from two feet by four feet to 18 inches by 24 inches.

Senator Allen Clark, the bill sponsor, said the measure is primarily about cheese and that the changes are intended to give consumers more access. \"This just allows people who want to buy these products to buy them,\" Clark said during his closing remarks, later noting the bill’s supporters compared the public-health risk of raw milk to other everyday risks.

The committee adopted an amendment described by staff as adding an emergency clause. The amendment was approved by voice vote; a subsequent motion to pass the bill also passed by voice vote. The committee record shows the measures passed on voice votes; no roll-call tally was read into the transcript.

The bill text places retail and signage requirements in statute and expands the list of retail locations that may sell raw-milk–derived items. The emergency amendment adopted at the meeting was presented to the committee as a simple emergency clause; committee members asked no substantive questions about policy while voting on the amendment.

The bill will proceed according to Senate rules. The committee record does not include a roll-call vote count in the transcript excerpts and does not state whether the sponsor intends additional amendments on the floor.","The Senate Agriculture, Forestry & Economic Development Committee approved an amendment adding an emergency clause and passed S.B. 464, which defines \"raw milk products,\" adds natural food stores as permitted sellers and reduces required sign size for vendors.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6619628,"Heated committee debate over oil‑and‑gas royalty bill; legal counsel warns of contract‑clause risk",4729,5507600,10236625,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2830531-b906e2de276b67d4b9d51ccb34e4a1dc&start=5507&end=10236","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2830531-b906e2de276b67d4b9d51ccb34e4a1dc/thumbnail_5507600.jpg","/articles/6619628/Arkansas/Heated-committee-debate-over-oilandgas-royalty-bill-legal-counsel-warns-of-contractclause-risk","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6619628-b9957c6785d816c9c700e326cb42d695/orig.mp4?Expires=1771191094&Signature=TCRVjIvAcgPURED4vkAkU7M7XHv6gM7Dhu8tJH-jy1pSgQCKes8BmdUG9raSFyS6-cX7Mmjf88~J1wqBBgPEX-XcXeJOtFdVCe~D9YoUx0~h~nVSdE61lYiam4EGmjJ9fd~dvI0Cx02IACNR7H6QcNkBE1oOg6XxjNx~x3cZK1NmbG86Vf9pD0YKaoOEb9kaMXt6ulaZVoiWCTUqOqhXojF3BryROuvVRoXrgUQNcpCBBGsH9y~LVxbTJ6AcZCLW95k9Ad~-ScRYEXEbpOF4GkTIv1RTTTIiKju9cpLgJnSFjcqenjN0rb41DBheisERm4MTjxI6qTq~~sfn2Nh5PQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","House Bill 1656 (filed in the House and presented in the Senate committee) drew extensive public testimony and legal argument after Representative Beck and Sen. Brianne Davis described the bill as a compromise to protect royalty owners and require clearer accounting for deductions taken against royalty payments.

The sponsor said the measure would clarify industry practices for post‑production costs, require transparency so royalty owners can reconcile payment statements to their leases, and codify a court decision that limited allowable deductions for administratively imposed (integrated) leases. Representative Beck said the goal is straightforward: \"the leases should be followed the way they're written, and there should be transparency in the leases to make sure that a mineral interest owner...would know exactly what was being charged.\"

Opponents — including Stevens Production Company and outside counsel for producers — told the committee the bill risks impairing existing contract rights and could discourage drilling investment. Attorney Alan Perkins, outside counsel for several producers and a long‑time oil‑and‑gas lawyer, said the statute that governs production‑unit royalties (Ark. Code Ann. § 15‑72‑305) was in place long before the Fayetteville Shale play and that the statute's net‑proceeds provisions are already part of almost every lease; he argued that later legislation that targets a single geographic play or class of leases risks violating the state and federal contracts clauses and the Arkansas constitutional prohibition on special or local laws.

Attorneys and drafters on both sides debated the federal‑court and state‑court rulings that have reached different conclusions in different cases: the Arkansas oil and gas commission’s order involving integrated, commission‑approved leases was upheld in state court, while several federal cases involving private leases have favored producers’ interpretation. Nathan Morgan, an attorney who helped draft the bill, said the legislation seeks to settle ambiguity by defining \"net proceeds\" and protecting landowners whose negotiated leases prohibit deductions.

Royalty owners and local officials provided personal testimony. Van Buren County Judge Dale James and dozens of royalty owners described receiving statements that list unspecified deductions and urged clearer breakdowns so owners could verify compliance with negotiated lease terms. Several landowners presented sample royalty statements that they said show post‑production deductions inconsistent with contract language.

The Arkansas Bar Association and industry groups formally opposed the bill in committee testimony, citing potential legal and business impacts. Producers emphasized the importance of severance tax revenue tied to drilling activity and warned the committee that disturbing established commercial practices and contract interpretations would chill investment. Following robust testimony from both sides and legal counsel, the sponsor asked to withdraw the bill from consideration to allow additional work; a motion to pass the bill lacked a second and no vote was taken.

Committee members asked for additional legal briefs and for parties to provide sample leases and royalty statements that demonstrate disputed deductions. The bill was not advanced; the sponsor said he would work with stakeholders and may reintroduce a revised measure later.","House Bill 1656, introduced as a transparency and lease‑honor bill to define net proceeds and limit post‑production deductions, drew divided testimony from royalty owners and producers and legal counsel who said the measure may impair contracts and face constitutional challenge.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee hears technical, enforcement concerns after sponsor seeks restrictions on hemp‑derived products; agencies warn bill could affect litigation

Committee debates accountability and continuing‑education changes in county fair funding bill

Committee approves amendment and passes bill clarifying sale of raw milk products

Heated committee debate over oil‑and‑gas royalty bill; legal counsel warns of contract‑clause risk