Registration is now open for the 2026 Fraud and Consumer Protection Summit. Click here to register.
English
French
Spanish
VietnameseRegistration is now open for the 2026 Fraud and Consumer Protection Summit. Click here to register.
Registration is now open for the 2026 Fraud and Consumer Protection Summit. Click here to register.
Registration is now open for the 2026 Fraud and Consumer Protection Summit. Click here to register.
Question: Do the provisions of Act 991 of 2025 affect A.C.A. § 14-61-111 and the election of a mayor in a city manager form of government?
Brief Response: Act 991 amended A.C.A. § 7-5-106 to require a runoff general election when no candidate for a municipal office receives a majority of the votes cast. But A.C.A. § 7-5-106 expressly provides that the term “municipal office” does not include offices of cities having a city manager form of government. Additionally, A.C.A. § 7-5-106 states that it “does not apply to election of members of the boards of directors and other officials of cities having a city manager form of government.” Thus, because the elections of city officials in cities having a city manager form of government fall outside the scope of A.C.A. § 7-5-106, Act 991 did not change the manner in which a mayoral candidate is elected in the city manager form of government, nor did it amend, repeal, or otherwise affect A.C.A. § 14-61-111. Arkansas Code § 14-61-111 continues to govern the circumstances under which a candidate for mayor in a city operating under the city manager form of government may be elected without receiving a majority of the votes cast.
Question 1: Does Act 991 change or alter the way that City Directors are elected in the City Manager form of government?
Question 2: Did Act 991 affect, amend, or even repeal Arkansas Code § 14-47-110 in any fashion?
Question 3: Are City Directors in a City Manager form of government still elected by a plurality of the vote?
Brief Response: No, Act 991 of 2025 did not change the way in which city directors are elected in the city manager form of government. Act 991 amended A.C.A. § 7-5-106 to require a runoff general election when no candidate for a municipal office receives a majority of the votes cast. But A.C.A. § 7-5-106 expressly provides that the term “municipal office” does not include offices of cities having a city manager form of government. Additionally, A.C.A. § 7-5-106 states that it “does not apply to election of members of the boards of directors and other officials of cities having a city manager form of government.” Thus, Act 991 did not change the manner in which city directors are elected, nor did it amend, repeal, or otherwise affect A.C.A. § 14-47-110. Accordingly, city directors in a city manager form of government continue to be elected by a plurality of the vote.
Question 1: To what extent may the State of Arkansas regulate the reimbursement practices of self-funded employer-sponsored health plans with respect to emergency medical services, including ground ambulance transport? Do the legal principles established in the federal decisions upholding Act 900 and Rule 128 provide a valid basis for similar state regulation aimed at ensuring fair compensation for EMS providers?
Brief Response: Arkansas may impose generally applicable rate or cost regulations affecting self-funded employer-sponsored health plans if the regulation neither targets ERISA plans exclusively nor depends on their existence to operate. The regulation also must not require plans to adopt a particular structure for benefits, such as requiring the payment of specific benefits, following state-specific rules for determining beneficiary status, or adopting a particular scheme of substantive coverage.
Question 2: Are the provisions contained in Arkansas Code Section 23-99-1802 preempted by ERISA as it pertains to self-funded employer-sponsored health plans?
Brief Response: Arkansas Code § 23-99-1802 likely does not apply to private self-funded employer-sponsored ERISA plans because the statute applies to health benefit plans issued by healthcare insurers, and a self-funded ERISA plan is not deemed an insurer under ERISA’s deemer clause.
Question 3: If they are not preempted by ERISA, what remedies, if any, are available to Arkansas EMS providers under state or federal law when self-funded employer-sponsored health plans violate Arkansas Code Section 23-99-1802?
Brief Response: Because A.C.A. § 23-99-1802 likely does not apply to private self-funded employer-sponsored ERISA plans, Arkansas EMS providers likely have no remedies under that statute against those plans.
