The Joint Budget Committee – Claims on Thursday affirmed three requests to reissue outdated warrants and approved referral of a $900,000 settlement in a personal-injury claim against the Arkansas Department of Transportation.

The committee affirmed reissuance requests for SHI International Corp. (claim no. 242046) for $18,672.56 payable from the Administrative Office of the Courts; Cox Portfolio Holdings Inc. (claim no. 71) for $19,917 payable from the Department of Finance and Administration corporate income tax division; and Excel Fitness (claim no. 250553) for $19,000 payable from the Department of Finance and Administration sales and use tax section. "Item B1 is claim number 242046, SHI International Corp versus Administrative Office of the Courts," read staff member Miss Johnson when presenting the first reissuance request. Each item was allowed by the claims commission and referred for review and placement on an appropriation bill, and members voiced no questions before motions to affirm carried.

The meeting's most significant action came on item C1: claim number 240158, Sterling Dodson v. Arkansas Department of Transportation (ARDOT). According to the presentation, the claimant alleged that debris kicked up by ARDOT mowing struck him in the face, "knocked out his left eyeball, leaving him with multiple fractures to his orbital socket and total permanent loss of vision in his left eye." ARDOT did not dispute liability and the parties reached a full-and-final settlement in the amount of $900,000. The claims commission entered an order approving the settlement and referred the award for review and placement on an appropriation bill.

Representative Wooten, who asked questions during the item, said his research "classified the expenses for loss of an eye ... between 180 to 300,000," and asked whether the larger settlement amount reflected additional medical costs or other damages. A staff member, identified in the transcript as Miss Urby, replied, "The commission was not privy to the settlement discussions between the parties. How they came to the 900,000 is not in my file. My understanding is the 900,000 is to represent all damages associated with this incident and to release ARDOT from any future claims for other damages."

Committee members also confirmed that the claimant was not an ARDOT employee and that the operator of the mowing equipment "was an ARDOT employee, I believe," according to staff responses recorded in the transcript. After questions, members moved to affirm the claims commission's approval; the motion carried and the settlement was referred for appropriation review.

Votes at a glance

- SHI International Corp. (claim no. 242046): request to reissue outdated warrant for $18,672.56 payable from the Administrative Office of the Courts — affirmed and referred for appropriation.
- Cox Portfolio Holdings Inc. (claim no. 71): request to reissue outdated warrant for $19,917 payable from the Department of Finance and Administration (corporate income tax division) — affirmed and referred for appropriation.
- Excel Fitness (claim no. 250553): request to reissue outdated warrant for $19,000 payable from the Department of Finance and Administration (sales and use tax section) — affirmed and referred for appropriation.
- Sterling Dodson v. Arkansas Department of Transportation (claim no. 240158): parties agreed to a $900,000 full-and-final settlement for injuries alleged from debris kicked up during ARDOT mowing operations; claims commission approved and referred award for placement on an appropriation bill — affirmed and referred for appropriation.

Why this matters: The committee's referrals move settlement payouts into the legislative appropriation process, which determines whether state funds will be released to satisfy these claims. The ARDOT settlement is the largest item the committee addressed and will require appropriation action before the claimant can be paid.

The committee adjourned after affirming the items and referring the settlement and reissuances for appropriation review; no additional details about the settlement breakdown or the claims commission's internal settlement negotiations were provided during the meeting.