Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Local Government topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Senate committee advances bills on rural grant matches, rental application fees, school filing times and election ordinance filings

2436629 · February 27, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Senate City, County & Local Affairs Committee advanced four bills affecting rural grant matching rules, local regulation of rental application fees, a unified school board filing time, and a requirement that cities file ordinances changing election methods with county clerks. All measures passed the committee by voice vote.

The City, County & Local Affairs Committee — Senate advanced four bills at a committee meeting (date not specified) that would: allow donated labor to count as matching contributions for a rural community grant program; clarify that local governments may not regulate rental application fees or deposits; set a single filing time for school board candidate filings; and require cities that change from at-large to ward-based elections to file the ordinance with the county clerk.

The measures drew brief technical questions from committee members and agency staff before passing on voice votes. Sponsors and agency representatives said the changes are intended to remove administrative barriers for small communities, reduce confusion about local authority, and improve election administration.

The most substantive debate concerned the rural community grant program amendment. Jay Quinley, director of legislative affairs for the Department of Commerce, said the existing program administered by the Arkansas Economic Development Commission allows rural communities to request up to $15,000 per project with an expected match. "Arkansas law currently requires that the match had, had to be made with either real or personal property. This is a barrier to rural communities that might not have sufficient liquid assets or land to meet the match requirements," Quinley said. He said the bill would permit donated time, labor and equipment to be counted as in-kind matching contributions, and cited fiscal-year 2024 awards totaling $604,878.21 to 61 communities. Quinley listed examples of funded work including ballfields, community centers, walking tracks, park equipment, pavilions, picnic tables, library shelving and fire station upgrades. Committee members asked how donated labor would be valued; Quinley said the program would verify values similarly to how it verifies real property, using appraisals, industry norms and comparable bids.

Another bill, introduced by Senator Joshua Bryant (Senate District 32), was described as clarifying existing state law that local governments may not regulate rental application fees or deposits. "Senate Bill 91 just adds clarity to existing section of code that local governments cannot regulate the application fees or deposits for landlords or property owners," Bryant said. Committee members asked about practical concerns such as fees charged for background checks and whether applicants can be placed on wait lists without being charged repeatedly; Bryant and questioners discussed deceptive trade practice enforcement as the remedy when fees are charged for services that do not exist.

Senator Kroll (Senate District 3) presented legislation standardizing the filing time for school board candidates after county clerks and school associations reported inconsistent opening times during filing periods. Committee members sought and received clarification about date-language in the draft that references January 1, 2026, and the sponsor said he would confirm that the effective dates read correctly before floor consideration.

A final bill described by Wayland Cooper, legal counsel for the State Board of Election Commissioners, would require cities that adopt ordinances changing from at-large to ward or mixed election methods to file those ordinances with the county clerk so county election officials can prepare ballots correctly. "The default, if they don't elect one or the other, the default is at large," Cooper said, and the bill aims to ensure the process change is on the county record.

Votes at a glance

- Rural community grant match amendment (sponsor: introduced at request of Senator Irvin; agency presentation by Jay Quinley, Department of Commerce): Passed by voice vote; no roll-call tally recorded. Key points: allows donated labor/equipment to count as in-kind match; program awards cited for FY24 $604,878.21 to 61 communities; maximum request amount described as $15,000 per project.

- Senate Bill 91 (sponsor: Senator Joshua Bryant, SD 32): Passed by voice vote; no roll-call tally recorded. Key points: clarifies that local governments cannot regulate rental application fees or deposits; cited related statute on security deposits (see Authorities).

- School board filing-time unification (sponsor: Senator Kroll, SD 3): Passed by voice vote; no roll-call tally recorded. Key points: sets a consistent filing opening time across counties; sponsors will verify date language referencing 2026 for clarity.

- Ordinance-filing for election method changes (presented by Wayland Cooper, legal counsel, State Board of Election Commissioners; sponsor request credited to Senator Hammer and presented by Senator Hester): Passed by voice vote; no roll-call tally recorded. Key points: requires cities that adopt ward or mixed-member systems to file the ordinance with the county clerk so county election officials can set ballots correctly.

Committee procedure and context

Committee members asked technical questions on valuation of donated labor, enforcement options for deceptive application-fee practices, and the drafting of effective-date language. No formal roll-call votes were recorded in the transcript; sponsors and staff described the bills as technical fixes or clarifications. The transcript records sponsors asking for passage and committee chairs calling voice votes. Several speakers thanked the committee and closed their presentations.

What was not decided or remains unspecified

The transcript does not record floor numbers, bill file numbers for every measure (some bill numbers were spoken but were not clearly recorded in the transcript), nor any roll-call vote tallies. Sponsors indicated they would review and potentially amend drafting details (for example, the effective-date language in the school-board filing bill) before floor consideration.