NFIB/Arkansas 2006 Agenda
The 85th General Assembly of Arkansas adjourned sine die May 13, 2005. Although the General Assembly does not convene again until January 2007, please stay tuned to NFIB.com for special committee studies, hearings and events that affect your small business in Arkansas.
If and when a special session is called, NFIB.com will keep you up-to-date on any activity that impacts your small business in Arkansas.
Minimum Wage
Issue Overview: Arkansas' minimum wage went from $4.75 to $5.15 on Oct. 1, 1997, and is the same as the federal minimum. Efforts to raise the minimum wage are underway in Congress and in several other states.
NFIB Position: Opposed. The marketplace, not the government, should determine the level of wages and prices charged by businesses. Just because the rate of inflation rises does not mean that a small business' earnings increase. If Arkansas has a higher minimum wage than surrounding states, it could make the state less competitive in attracting new businesses. A minimum wage is a beginning wage and many minimum wage jobs are part-time positions. As workers become more proficient on the job and add to an employer's productivity, they generally receive pay increases.
Issue Status: A group calling itself "Give Arkansas a Raise Now" has filed a proposed state constitutional amendment with the attorney general's office. Their proposal would raise the state's $5.15 minimum to $6.15.
Other provisions of the proposed constitutional amendment would:
- Require annual increases linked to the Consumer Price Index.
- Expand the number of workers covered by the wage law.
- Permit lawsuits "in any court of competent jurisdiction" for alleged non-compliance with the minimum-wage law.
- Allow state inspections of employer records.
If the attorney general accepts the wording of the proposed text, supporters must get 80,570 registered voters to sign petitions in order to place the amendment on the November general election ballot.
What to Do: Do not sign the petitions to place the issue on the November ballot, and urge friends and family not to sign the petitions. Decline to sign petitions because the market place determines wages and business costs.
Eminent Domain
Issue Overview: On July 23, 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling condoning the right of local governments to seize private property for public use in the name of "economic development." Though eminent domain was traditionally intended to be used solely for public use, for example, taking land for a school or roads or a park, some states have used the court ruling to take land or property for larger development projects, such as shopping malls. The court ruled that it was up to individual states to define public domain.
NFIB Position: Opposed. In the aftermath of the U.S. Supreme Court decision there is nothing to stop local government from seizing a small business to build a larger development to bring in more tax revenue. Small-business owners should not have to fear that the government might seize their property in the name of economic development. Arkansas must clearly define public use to avoid abuses occurring in other states. They argue that state law is too vague on eminent domain issues because there is no clear definition of "public use."
Issue Status: The attorney general has concluded that new statutory language is unnecessary. The AG's opinion said that defining public use too stringently could make it too difficult for municipalities to use their eminent domain power for legitimate public purposes. NFIB specifically will request that the legislature in 2007 further define the terms "blighted area" and "public use," to prevent municipalities from using these terms to acquire land for recreational or economic development purposes.
What to Do: Talk with state legislators and candidates during the election cycle and beyond.
What to Say: Property owners, especially small businesses, need the protection of legislation from unfair taking by municipalities for recreational or economic development purposes.
