A searchable audio archive from the 2013-2016 legislative sessions of the North Carolina General Assembly.

searching for


Reliance on Information Posted The information presented on or through the website is made available solely for general information purposes. We do not warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of this information. Any reliance you place on such information is strictly at your own risk. We disclaim all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on such materials by you or any other visitor to the Website, or by anyone who may be informed of any of its contents. Please see our Terms of Use for more information.

House | July 11, 2013 | Chamber | Session Part 1

Full MP3 Audio File

Thousand without objection rule 12 days suspended as their objection so members and visitors in the gallery please silence all electronic devices members Im sad to report a good friend many of us passed away shortly after 9 AM this morning Mr. ?? ?? Please remember him as we say a prayer the prayer be offered by reps in the exercise members and visitors in the gallery please stand please remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance [SPEAKER CHANGES].may we pray upon heavenly father indeed we are grateful for the state to blessed us with research which sadly hear the loss of our good friend ?? ?? modern influence he had only to every one of us here this Gen. assembly were thankful for his years of service if you dedicate the state let us pray that you will be of his family and comfort fit was only you can during these difficult days all the way rejoicing in the memory is a and Lord blessed be mindful that for those who put their trust in you we have the hope of the resurrection and the gift of eternal life may we go into this session I pray that we will do our part to honor and respect laugh at you given to us thank you for all these blessings in Jesus name we pray amen. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. representative moore is recognized [SPEAKER CHANGES].mr speaker of representative was recognized for this July 10, 2013 is the examiner found the correct and I move that this approval is read[SPEAKER CHANGES]. rep. moore moves journal for july 10 is read all in favor say aye. All opposed vote no. the ayes have it the journal is approved as written written additions ?? Bapers addressed Gen. assembly of the house without ratification bills and resolutions the clerk will read[SPEAKER CHANGES]. Particular government ?? Reported neck is a act 243 right to use a hearing aid specialist under their health benefit plan · bill 360 and provide a presumption ?? in certain circumstances ? Pprecipitate back all ?? Referable by doing some distributors that a bill for 65 to sell purchase. Was this transfer user access automated sales suppression device house Bill 168 North Carolina industrial commission jurisdiction resides between 20 spastic garnered 30 house bills 296 back to just be charged for certain hunting and fishing licenses out house bill 816th bill for ?? ?? ?? ?? Out in the following bill be right up property brokers it adopts a good ?? ?? For 462 to an academic article out of Marshfield House Bill 468 developer election of the mayor and city council members of And to amend the charter the town triad. chapter bills will be noted rep. ?? Recognized important report corporate website implies that you gave Judiciary subcommittee 880 housing ?? Active ?? ?? available is mid-September able Bill and severally referred to advance committee substitute will be referred to the committee on original bill unfavorable calendar ladies and gentleman upon motion representative time from Dare County to chairs at the extended courtesies of the representiavite ??

outer banks visitor's bureau executive director, and the Chair recognizes now it may have done that a little bit early. Rep. Tine, are you there? Please stand to let us welcome you. Messages from the Senate, the clerk will read. Senate committee for Senate bill 321, a bill to entitle an act to repeal the requirement that local governments to help maintain a solid waste management plan. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Calendar 32a. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate committee substitute number 2 for House bill 418, a bill to entitle an act to authorize Buckham county to establish a cultural and recreational authority. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The chair stands corrected on 321. That's rule 36b. Calendar rule 36b. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate committee substitute for House bill 467, a bill to entitle an act requiring health care facilities that perform mammography examinations to communicate mammographic breast density information to patients and make corrections to statute involving the cancer registry. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Calendar pursuant rule 36b. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate committee substitute for House bill 510, a bill to entitle an act to provide for the foster children's bill of rights under laws pertaining control over child placing and child care. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Calendar 36b. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate committee substitute for House bill 616, a bill to entitle an act amending the secure and fair enforcement mortgage licensing act. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Calendar 36b. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate committee substitute for House bill 796, a bill to entitle an act exempting certain ?? from the North Carolina cemetery act. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Calendar 36b. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate committee substitute for House bill 802, a bill to entitle an act amending the laws relating to landlord and tenant relationships to shorten the time period required to evict a tenant. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Calendar 36b. Introduction of bills and resolutions, the clerk will read. Rules calendar operation of the House, House resolution 1019, honor the founders of Bethesda Presbyterian Church. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Calendar pursuant 32a for Monday, July 15th. Representatives Stone and Warren are recognized to send forth a committee report, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Stone and Warren, to the government committee, Senate bill 505, clarify agricultural zoning, favorable. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Calendar. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rep. Moore, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Motion pertaining to today's ??. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized for a motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, Senate bill 444, which is on the second page, UNC Cherokee language, I move that it be removed from today's calendar and calendared for Monday. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection, so ordered. Rep. Dobson, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For a point of personal privilege. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The House will come to order. The gentleman is recognized for a point of personal privilege. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker. Before we start our debate today, I know it's going to be spirited and tensions are gonna run high on both sides, so before we start that debate, I want to- Thank you Mr. Speaker. I wanted to share something that we all could be proud of. On Friday, June 21st, three Department of Transportation employees, Jason Ray, Ricky Bradley and Chris Painor were going about their normal day at work in McDowell county when they sensed that something was just not right. They smelled something burning and they saw fire and smoke coming out of an air conditioner in a nearby house. Thinking not of themselves, the three men immediately ran to try to extinguish the fire. When they realized the fire had already spread and they were not going to be able to put the fire out, they asked if anyone was still inside the home. They were told that there were still 2 people that were actually still inside the house. After being directed to the window closest to where the

occupants were at. They broke the window out of the home and helped a father and son escape from the burning house. The Marion Fire Chief stated that alter that had the men not made the decision they made, two people would have most likely lost their lives. Instead of bragging, the three men only said that they are glad that they could help the family but they do not consider themselves heroes by any means. Well, I would have disagree with them on this point. These men are heroes and because of their bravery and selfless acts two people are alive today. So as we debate the issues that sometimes divide us I hope we can remember that it's not the policies that we implement or the ideas that we put forth that make us great but it's because of selfless individuals like Jason Ray, Ricky Bradley, and Chris Painter that makes North Carolina what it is. We in McDowell County are proud of these three employees of the Department of Transportation and thank you, Mr. Speaker, for allowing me to recognize them for a minute today. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ladies and gentlemen of the House, upon motion of Representative Dobson and on behalf of all the members, the Chair is happy to extend the courtesies of the gallery to Ricky Bradley, Chris Painter, and Jason Ray. Please stand and let us welcome you. [APPLAUSE] Calendar, House Resolution 1019, the clerk will read. The Chair stands corrected, that's moved to Monday's calendar. House Bill 255, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To the [??] House of Representatives the conferees appointed to resolve the difference between Senate and the House of Representatives on House Bill 255, a bill to be entitled an act to provide that certain courses in academic created hours transfer to constituent institutions shall not be included in the calculation in credit hours for purpose of tuition. The conferees recommend the Senate and House of Representatives adopt this report. Conferees for the Senate: Senator Soucek, Chair, Senators Tillman, Barefoot, and Curtis. Conferees for the House of Representatives: Representative Glazier, Chair, Representative Holloway, Johnson, and Horn. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Jeter, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For a question of the Chair. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman may state his inquiry. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. I would respectfully request that Representative Dobson's moving words be spread across the journal.l [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman will submit the words to the clerk, so ordered. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Glazier, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For a motion and to debate the motion, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized for a motion and to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this is a conference report. This provision actually was in some dispute with the Senate, obviously, the Senate has agreed to exactly the House provision that's in the House budget and that we also agreed to on the floor and I know of no opposition and would urge adoption of the conference report which will provide immediate notice to students and parents of surcharge issues. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The question before the House is the adoption, the motion to adopt the conference report for House Bill 255. All in favor vote aye. All opposed no. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will lock the machine and record the vote, 111 having voted in the affirmative, none int he negative. The conference report has been adopted, the Senate will be so notified. House Bill 649, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To the press and the Senate, Speaker of the House of Representatives, conferees to resolve the difference between the Senate and the House of Representatives on House Bill 649, a bill to be entitled an act to make technical changes to the small employer group health coverage reform act to mitigate the effects of the Federal Affordable Care Act. The conferees recommend that the Senate and the House of Representatives adopt this report. Conferees for the Senate: Senators Hise, Chair, Senators Meredith and Jackson. Conferees for the House of Representatives: Representative Collins, Chair, Representative Stone and Moffitt. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Collins is recognized for a motion

And, and to debate the motion. Thank you. [Speaker Change] Mr. Speaker, members of this house. This bill had two changes, I think they were listed probably as four changes in your conference report, but one of them is simply a wording change. Instead of saying three to one, they changed it to a ratio of 3 to one just for clarification purposes. One of the two subjects that's changes is was we wanted to give a maximum smoker premium, and that turned out to be 20% 1.2 times. We've had everything from 1.15 to 1.5 in that bill, we settled on 1.2 as the highest markup. The third change was the part about catastrophic coverage. You know, the kind of semi-self-insuring with the stop loss limit, is set at $20,000 we realized that $20,000 today won't be $20,000 15 years from now, so that's index for inflation based on the fairest medical index we could find. Which is that one that's used for this part of the country, so that, that figure will change through time. And then that necessitated we thought the fourth change which is just that the Department of Insurance will actually publish that figure each year so that people can know what that $20,000 has turned into before they buy a product that includes that. So basically the two changes are the smoker rates is now, could be as high as 1.2 times the non-smoker rate, and the provision to index the $20,000 stop loss limit. I would urge you to concur on this report. [Speaker Change] Further discussion, further debate? If not the question before the house is the motion to adopt the conference report for House bill 649. All in favor vote aye, all opposed no the clerk will open the vote. The clerk will lock the machine, record the vote. 113 having voted affirmative, one in the negative, the conference report has been adopted, the Senate will be so notified. House bill 662 the clerk will read. [Speaker Change] To the price of the tenants speak for the House of Representatives. ?? appointed to resolve the difference in the Senate and House of Representatives on House bill 662. The bill has been entitled an act to write an ?? of limited plumbing contract and licensing ?? and service back float prevention assemblies. The ?? recommend that the Senate and House of Representatives adopt this report. ?? for the Senate, Senator Gunn, Chair, Senators Merry, Barringer, and McLaurin ?? for the House of Representatives. Representatives Samuelson, Chair, Representatives Hardister, and Goodman. [Speaker Change] Representative Samuelson is recognized for a motion and to debate the motion. [Speaker Change] Thank you Mr. Chairman. Members of the House this really is a non-controversial bill. The gist of it was we was we were trying to work out a mini license between the plumbers and the irrigation contractors. And when it came back it accidently picked up the well drillers. And the well drillers did not wanna be included. So we sent it back took out the portion that might have included the well drillers. And so it’s not just something for the plumbing contractors, and the irrigation contractors. And I urge your support. [Speaker Change] Further discussion, further debate? If not the question before the house is the motion to adopt the conference report for house bill 662. All in favor vote aye, all opposed no. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will lock the machine, record the vote. 114 having voted affirmative, none in the negative the conference report for house bill 662 has been adopted. The Senate will be so notified. Senate bill 200, the clerk will read. [Speaker Change] ?? of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives ?? is ?? resolve the difference between the Senate and the House of Representatives on Senate bill 200. A bill to be entitle an act to extend the ?? local forensic science labs to obtain accreditation the conference recommends the Senate and the House of Representatives to adopt this report. ?? for the Senate, Senator Bingham, Chair, Senator Goolsby, ?? and Kinnaird ?? from the House of Representatives, Representative Stam, Chair, Representative McGrady, Brian, and Glazier. [Speaker Change] Representative Stam is recognized for a motion and to debate the motion. [Speaker Change] Mr. Speaker I move we adopt the conference report. The local forensic labs needed a little bit more time to get accredited. The Senate wanted 5 years, the House said 2 years on the theory that if you gave them 5 years they would wait to work on it until the 4th and 5th year. We compromised on 3 years and ask you to vote for it. [Speaker Change] Further discussion, further debate? If not the question before the House is the motion to adopt the conference report for Senate bill 200. All in favor vote aye, all opposed vote no. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. 113 having voted affirmative, none in the negative. The conference report for Senate bill 200 has been adopted. The Senate will be so notified.

Senate bill 81 the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Committee substitute number two for Senate bill 81, a bill to be entitled "An Act to Create the Charlotte Douglas International Airport Authority", General Assembly of North Carolina enacts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Samuelson, before you're recognized, upon motion of the member from Alamance county, Representative Dennis Riddell, the Chair's happy to extend the courtesies of the gallery to Sergeant Daniel Honeycutt of the North Carolina National Guard. Sergeant Honeycutt lives in the Charlotte area. Sergeant Honeycutt, please stand and let us welcome you. [APPLAUSE] Representative Samuelson, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ladies and gentlemen, in the interest of time today, 'cause I know we have another bill that I'm going to be presenting in a little bit, another Senate bill, I get to present Senate bills today that will be more controversial, I will cut some of the preamble. When we were in Committee, I went into the background as to how we ended up here. The very short version of the background is that the Senate filed a bill that would take the Charlotte Douglas International Airport and move it from a city-controlled asset to an authority. Their reasoning, which I would concur with, is that there's a lot of change happening with the airport, not the least of which is we're getting essentially a new airline. At the start of that, the city was not happy with it, and so when it got to the House, back several months ago, we held it up in time for the city to do a study. So they hired a consultant, did a study, came back and that consultant said at the beginning of May that the best long-term option for the success of the airport was an authority. So we thought the city would then work with us on constructing an authority. However, that was not the city's reaction, the City Council is still opposed to an authority. So over the intervening weeks, Representative Brawley and I decided to create an opportunity for the city to join us as equals in a study. So we crafted the language where they would be able to participate in a study, share the chairmanship, chair the agenda-setting, and share the vote, to consider all options for the Charlotte airport. They turned us down. So we are kind of stuck with this desire to work with the city to make sure we have the great transition to whatever will be the best success for the airport, they are not willing to participate. So we decided to go with the consultant's recommendation and move on with an authority. So what you have before you is an authority bill that, to the degree we were able, incorporates as many of the city and the consultant's concerns as possible. I would be happy to go over all of the pieces of it, and if someone asks me to, I will, but in the interests of time, I will not and simply say that we have done the best we can to make sure that the Charlotte Douglas International Airport, which is a very important economic asset for North Carolina as a whole, Charlotte and the Charlotte region and a number of other aspects of North Carolina, that it remains successful. And so I would urge your support, and I'm available to answer questions. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Represenatative Alexander, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'd like to speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman's recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Like my colleague, Representative Samuelson, I'm not going to give a long dissertation. I simply want to say that I stand on the other side of the issue. I would urge you to not vote in favor of this bill and one of the, I think, important reasons is the city of Charlotte has been a perfect steward of this airport since 1936. The consultant's study that you hear referenced did not conclude that there were any problems with the city's stewardship. Quite frankly, if you read the report carefully, you see that the consultant seems to have a preference for an authority, and pretty much concludes that that's the direction that, at some point in the future, you might want to go. Emphasize "might". And when you look at the ten airports, largest airports in the country right now, I think it's seven of them that are organized as departments of city or county government. Another

...important consideration is the fact that the city finance department values the airport at somewhere between 3.5 billion dollars and 4 billion dollars and a way of getting your mind around that is to look at what our state budget approximately is and the airport as an asset has a value of approximately 20 percent of our state budget. So we aren't talking about something small. We are talking about something that's very, very large and we're talking about something that the bill itself says that if the city is to be compensated, that compensation is to be handled by the authority that is going to be handled from revenues generated by that authority. Revenues get generated by landing fees, by parking fees, by leases, all that. Again, to make a long story very short, it is highly unlikely that an authority is going to be able to generate the kind of money to continue to do everything that is done at the airport now and pay some compensation that could be as high as a multiple of 4 billion dollars. Now, that means that ultimately, the authority, if it were to be established, will come back to this body and ask for some assistance at some point in the future. Now, the bill, of course, tries to make a distinction between the authorities that at an obligation of the state but we all know that from all the many bills that come through how entities that the state has created and sanctioned come back and asked for support. I simply want to point out that at the magnitude of the potential liability that what you will have is a request that in at of itself could have an effect on the tax rate. So a vote for this measure in affect is a vote ultimately to increase the taxes of the citizens of North Carolina for a dubious change in governance. Members, please consider what you're doing and please vote no on this bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Fisher, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To ask the bill sponsor a question and to comment on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Samuelson, does the Lady yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I yield. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The Lady yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Representative Samuelson. I know that the city of Asheville, has just recently been through the de-annexation of the property that is within the corporate limits of the city Asheville, which is the airport property. Is there anything like this anticipated with the Charlotte Douglas International Airport? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Most definitely not. [SPEAKER CHANGES] A follow up, Mister Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I yield. [SPEAKER CHANGES] If the authority is established, I know that the city of Asheville remains a partner with the FAA in their dealings with the Asheville airport. Is there...has there been any consulting with the FAA about this change in status for the Charlotte Douglas International Airport? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Not directly with them in person to my knowledge though we have looked in to how this has been handled in other areas and tried to conform. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mister Speaker, to speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The Lady is recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ladies and gentlemen and thank you Mister Speaker, ladies and gentlemen of the House, I see this as somewhat of a slippery slope for the folks living in the Charlotte regional airport...international airport area. Not unlike what has happened over this legislative session with the city of Asheville and the Asheville regional airport, I would...because of the questions that I have surrounding what is in store for Charlotte based on what happened with Asheville, I would urge the members to think this through and to vote no on this bill. Thank you.

Representative Carney, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ladies and gentlemen of the House, I've spoken on this bill now twice in committee, and transportation and finance. And I think by now everybody knows that I have a, a, a long history of twenty some years married to the former assistant aviation director at the Charlotte-Douglass Airport, so I know a little bit about our airport. I rise today to say that I'm, I'm sorry about how this bill got to where it did. For all of you all that have been a part of it. I will say that when it hit in the Senate, it was a lightning rod. And when it came to the House, I am grateful to the Speaker, to the Governor, and to Representative Samuelson and Representative Brawley for trying to say, look, let's, let's take a step back and a breather. Ladies and gentlemen, we are talking about a three point five plus billion dollar enterprise in the city of Charlotte on our property. And now we're gonna say, as I said in committee yesterday, take that one and go wham, you're a regional authority in six months. I still maintain that we need that time. I was on the committee that looked at our state owned assets. We were looking at privatizing the zoo. If you could have seen the language in that bill, that proposed bill that crossed every t, dotted every I, gave directive on how that would happen, who would be involved, the employees were taken care of in that bill coming out of the state. We have not quite done that with the Charlotte Airport. We defeated that bill, by the way, for the zoo. I do maintain that it needs more time. We have three, two hundred plus employees that are hanging in the rafters on what's gonna happen to us. And I did a little check in, and these are questions that I think need to be asked, and of course I'm asking you to vote no today, to let's take a little more time, and we still have time in the interim to do that. Those questions are, how many of you know that our city of Charlotte is a self-insured program for liability? Do we, do we think that this participation is going to extend to the new authority? I don't know. It's a question that needs to be answered. And how much does a third party liability insurance going to cost this authority? Members, are we aware that airport employees are covered by the city of Charlotte, self insurance program for healthcare, and is that going to be able to carry over to a new authority? And, well, the employees have to start picking up a change. And how much is health insurance going to be, going to cost based upon, based upon an airport's riskful standing alone? I could go on and on, but the big question is how much is this authority going to cost? I do commend Representative Samuelson and Representative Brawley for the changes they did make in this bill, but I just really want you to, to just breathe a minute on this issue. I know that I'm, I've said before, I wish we had a professional mediator that could come in and take, take the time to mediate between the state and our local city council. I do want to share with you a poll that was taken on May twelfth by the Charlotte Observer. It was commissioned by them and published. Our community is in turmoil. Sixty five percent of those polled opposed an authority. Nineteen percent support an authority. Sixteen percent not sure. That was in May. We have candidates running for council and mayor and they're doing their own polls and I've been getting feedback. Those numbers have gone up and opposition to this, this authority if you will for our Charlotte Airport. I ask you to vote no today. Let us

...go back to the table. The city is continuing with our new manager and committed to look at, what they believe, is, is a good, ongoing answer. And, have they decided definitively as a council to not have an authority? Well, there's never been a full, outright vote where there's said, "Do you want us to be an authority?" There will be an, an election of a new mayor and a new city council in November. We have this interim period between now and May that we can continue. And I do believe that there's good faith effort on our Bill sponsors part to make that happen, to make it go forward in a more congenial, responsible way, that the sate and the city are working together. Should it be an authority? I think those questions need to be answered through thoughtful, long-held processes and I know that's the last thing you wanted to hear and hear today. But, I'm pleading with you. This is a local issue, but it is a huge change for an investment in this state that is an incredible asset. Three point five billion plus enterprise, nationally recognized, internationally recognized, and we're just going to say six months fruit basket turnover. Please let your calmer, sensible side prevail and vote "No" today and give us time to continue exploring this possibility. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Alexander, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Speak a second time. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman is recognized to debate the Bill a second time. [SPEAKER CHANGE] I, I just want to underline the fact that, that the Charlotte Observer Poll on May the 12th found at least sixty five percent of our citizens opposed to this measure. Sixty five percent of our citizens think that the airport government structure ought to stay the way it is. Only about nineteen percent in that poll thought that an authority made any sense. I was reminded in this debate in, in preparation of something that Abraham Lincoln jotted down in July of 1854. He was talking about justified use of governmental power. It's very brief and I want to share it with you. "The legitimate object of government is to do for a community of people whatever they need to have done but can not do at all or can not so well do for themselves in their separate and individual capacities. In all that the people can individually do as well for themselves, government ought not to interfere." The people of Charlotte in 1936 decided that they wanted to be on the cutting-edge of the development of airport facilities and aviation at a time when the state of North Carolina really didn't care too much about that. The citizens of Charlotte, in the intervening period, spent their own money to help start the development of a terminal. When you think of the Charlotte airport right now, most people don't think about the invisible economic flows, the four billion dollars. They think about physical assets. And I want you to understand that those physical assets that you see there now that are supported by the landing fees, the parking fees, the money generated at the airports, started out when the city council decided that it was going to use it's bonded, indebtedness capacity, the general obligation bonds, to start something that we've built up to where it is today. Do not use the power of government in voting for this measure to undermine the kind of initiative and positive stewardship that I have heard you, all, all of you, on both sides of the aisle, talk about in the corridors of this assembly. This is an opportunity for you to vote again for local control, for local initiative, and to stand with the people.

...of Mecklenburg County who wish to keep the airports governance as it is. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Jeter, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Uh, to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Today is the hardest day I've ever spent in this chamber for a lot of reasons. I could sit back here and politically could keep my mouth shut and that's probably the expediant thing to do. In fact, my campaign staff's probably back at home wishing I'd sit down right now. But, I read a Tweet a little bit ago that frustrated me because any decision I make is my decision alone and this issue is personal to me because the airport is in my district. I represent the Charlotte Airport in this body, I represent the people of the 92nd District and I don't know the right thing to do here. I struggle with this decision. I prayed last night over this decision as I did on upcoming votes later on today. There has been no decision that has weighed heavier on me than this one. We have billion dollars of assets. We have hundreds of employees as Representative Carney spoke about, uh, and the future of those employees. And my job as I see it is to best represent the District of 92. I got up this morning planning on voting no. I got in the building planning on voting no. I got in the room planning on voting no. Sat down in this chair today planning on voting no. And I'm getting ready to vote yes. And I'm going to explain to you all why. This is a terribly difficult decision which probably crushes me politically, but at some point we've got to come in this chamber and do what we think is right regardless of the outcome. And, in my opinion, by adding the two members of the committee that come from West Charlotte, which is my district, for the first time ever, District 92 will have 2 of 11 members represented on the authority. That does not currently exist. My job is to represent those members of that district. And we also have to keep in mind, once you get past all the hyperbole, once you get past all the talking points, once you get past the political ramifications and the policy of this, the politics of this decision and get down to the crux of the matter, there's only one thing that matter here; that is keeping that airport healthy. I don't care who runs it, but it is disingenuous to say that this state is taking over this airport. Not one person in this chamber will be on that airport authority, not one elected official. They will all be local people, and they will be majoritally appointed by local officials. I'm not on that authority. Bruce Samuelson's not on that authority. Bob Rucho's not on that authority. They're local, non-elected officials appointed by the majority of which will be appointed by live in Mecklenburg County. At some point, we have got to understand that we've got to ensure, we talk about jobs in this state. And I apologize Representative Boles, I'm not going to ring the bell, I know that's your thing. Um, we talk about jobs in this state. There's no one single more, economic driver than Charlotte-Douglas Airport. Messing with it concerns me. I agree with that. I struggle with this. There's friends of mine that are looking at me from that side of the aisle that are disappointed in me and I respect and understand that, but I've got to protect the economic interests of that airport and it is my belief and my research that we've got to ensure that the entities involved in that airport are satisfied in how that airport operates and the planing costs which is 93 cents...

[Speaker changes.] ...for ???? now, the average cost in the nation is ten dollars. The argument from the other side is "see, it works!". And I understand that and now I'm pullin' a Jeter and I'm talkin' in round about numbers again but this is important to me, it's important to my district and this isn't a bigger issue. But my job is to protect District 92. I'm not sure this is the best way but you can't let great be the enemy it could??????? And, in my opinion, after thoughtful prayer and consideration and convinced I was gonna' vote no, I, no one else, I made the decision. Me personally, without any input from anyone else. This is the right thing from District 92 and I would ask my colleagues to support it. [Speaker changes.] Representative Rodney Moore, please state your purpose. [Speaker changes.] To debate the bill. [Speaker changes.] Gentleman is recognized to debate the bill. [Speaker changes.] And, let me just say to my good friend and colleague and delegation member Mr. Jeter. Representative Jeter, I sympathize with your vexed thoughts here today but let me...I was gonna' sit down and Representative Alexander, Representative Carney had eloquently expressed what we needed to say but, as a member of this delegation...as a member of the Mecklenburg delegation, and, as a Representative not only of District 99 but of Mecklenburg County, which includes the Charlotte/Douglas Airport, I had to speak today. Let me clear up a couple of misconceptions. Representative Jeter talked about representative from the west side being from the first time...being in the governance or the advisory part of this airport and actually the way the structure is now, Representative Jeter, you have already...have a resident of the west side who is designated as a member of the current Airport Advisory Committee. Also let me talk about the governance of this airport. In the bill, you have a few slots for Mecklenburg County and ??????. You have a few slots for the counties of Lincoln, Union, and Cabbarrus. I don't know if Franklin is in there as well. No, not Franklin...which one?? Gaston and Union, absolutely! If this was a true regional airport, folks...or a true regional airport authority, then the assets in these particular counties that you wanna put as a part of the governance, decision-making team on this proposed authority would have some "skin in the game". From the beginning, this...these entities have no "skin in the game" but yet you want to give them some governance over the asset that the city of Charlotte has built up?? For the last seventy years? That's insanity! Let me tone myself down a little bit. Representative Jeter, when I woke up this morning, I knew that I was gonna' say no...I didn't have a problem...I didn't slumber or sleep...I slumbered and slept because I knew I was gonna say no! I'm still gonna say no and I ask that any forward thinking ?????? minded person in this chamber says no to this atrocious bill. Thank you. [Speaker changes.] Representative Baumgardner, please state your purpose. [Speaker changes.] To debate the bill. [Speaker changes.] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill. [Speaker changes.] Thank you, Mister Speaker. I represent the other side of the ?????? River from the airport and I feel the pain of Representative Jeter over here, believe me. This is an important issue to me too. I don't wanna go around stickin' my nose in other people's business. I don't represent Mecklenburg County. I'm just a border county but all my family and friends live in the area. I live fifteen minutes from the airport and I wanna' do what's best too...and the clincher on this whole ordeal for me was the fact that the political leaders of Mecklenburg County appointed a commission to study what they should do, they came back, gave them a recommendation and they didn't like the recommendation they got. Well, they asked for it...and they didn't get the answer they wanted...so I am....

supporting this bill, and I urge the rest of you to do the same. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rep. Robert Brawley, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To ask Rep. Samuelson a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rep. Samuelson, does the lady yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I yield. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rep. Samuelson, in Iredell county we very much appreciate the impact the airport has had on our economic development. One of my question is, it appears, we've talked about the 93 cent per passenger rate, that's great because it was operated by a city who had no profit motive. If we move to the regional authority, what assurance do we have that the profit motive won't override the economic benefits to the community? [SPEAKER CHANGES] That's an interesting question, but it's a bodied politic much like a city would be. It's not a for-profit entity, we're not turning it into a private for-profit corporation. This is still an entity with the same sort of political constraints that a city and county would have, so there is no profit motive. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Does the lady yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I yield. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rep. Samuelson, I respectfully have a different view, in that if it's a regional authority responsible for operating that- [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rep. Brawley, if the gentleman wishes to answer a question, he must do so, otherwise he must be recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay. Question. Do you not think the regional authority running the airport will also have a motive to make as much money as they can? [SPEAKER CHANGES] No sir I don't, because their goal is to keep the airport profitable- er, productive, and the way they do that is keeping the costs down. There is no incentive for a profit because no one gets paid, there are no dividends to pay, there are no stockholders, shareholders, or anything of that who would get a profit were there one. There's no way for them to retain the funds if they were to have a profit of that sort, they also will be making reports to all of the counties surrounding them on a regular basis of what they're doing with their money, this is transparent in the way any sort of city budget would be done. There's no way to have a profit or do anything with it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill? [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman will be recognized, in turn, to debate the bill. Rep. Bill Brawley, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker and members of the House. We get involved in structures of things all the time. For example, small towns will have a commissioner form of government. The town of Matthews had elected commissioners, one of them ran the street department, one of them ran the police department. When you reach a 10,000 population, North Carolina law requires that you abandon the commissioner form of government and go to Mayor/Manager form of government. Although we kept the name commissioners, we no longer acted as a town commission, we acted as a town city council. We had a weak mayor and a strong manager, the same way that the city of Charlotte does. The state is not just a johnny-come-lately to the airport question. When the airport was first established, it was actually the general assembly of North Carolina that allowed the city of Charlotte and other cities to establish aeronautical facilities. It was a new technology, and in the same way that we built roads we encouraged that. There have been state grants to that airport through its entire life including recently, the construction of an inter-modal facility on that property. State money is involved, and if you refer to House bill 817 in the state tier of funding, regional airports, excuse me, airports with a certain number of flights and international flights are included for funding at the statewide tier, the district tier, and the divisional tier. That includes 4 airports, Wilmington-Greensboro, the Triad airport, the Raleigh-Durham airport, and Charlotte-Douglas international airport. The other three of which are all managed by authorities. At Charlotte-Douglas, the hub is the asset. The fact that US Air flies over 700 flights a day. Into an airport where 80% of the passengers transfer within the airport and never leave the grounds. Only 20% are are what are called origination and termination passengers. That means most of the people that are paying the fees from the airport aren't from anywhere

close to Douglas, far from all of Central North Carolina. When my daughter flies to Florida, she drives down from Hendersonville, parks at the Douglas and catches a plane. When Representative Moffitt and I went on a trip to Turkey last year, Representative Moffitt parked his car in Charlotte and flew from there, because there was not sufficient service in Asheville. It is a regional asset and a regional engine. It is the 6th busiest airport in the world by planes. It is the 27th busiest in the world by passengers. There is a difference of 30 percent between the number of people per plane in Charlotte verses Atlanta. A lower fee is necessary because the fixed cost of an airplane are the highest, and the profit margins and the air traffic in the United States today are razor thin. The US airline industry averages $0.37 in profit per passenger, per flight. So a few cents, a few dollars and a landing fee can make a huge difference. Especially if your planes are flying with 30 percent fewer passengers than in a larger airport with a lot of origination and termination. And the reason that number is particularly important is that flights into and out of an airport that are originating and terminating from the starting city, that’s going to be a single flight that is a higher fare. We often hear complaints that direct flight fares from Charlotte are higher, and you would hear people go to Greensboro and fly from Greensboro and change planes in Charlotte. That is because if you're changing planes when you leave from Greensboro, you can change planes in Charlotte, in Raleigh, in Greenville-Spartanburg, in Washington National, in Atlanta, it doesn't matter to you. You've got two flights regardless. And that also means that for 80 percent of the people that fly through Charlotte Douglas, they don't care that it's Charlotte Douglas. The airline cares, and only the airline cares. And it is the nurturing of Charlotte Douglas' operation as a hub that is at stake here. The biggest, quiet player in this are the airlines. If the airlines were afraid of a Regional Authority, and they came up here, would they have said, would they have not said that this is terrible, we hate it; don't do it? I've not heard anyone say that. The political leaders don't like it, and I understand. We have to make the decision that is in the best interest of the entire state of North Carolina. We need to preserve that hub. Granted, Matthews has no representation on the Charlotte Airport Authority, although, when he was mayor, Pat McCrory wanted to expand representation on the Airport Authority outside the city and outside the county because he realized it had become a regional economic engine. As the only International Airport of any size in this area, and a huge number of companies are in the Greater Charlotte area for no other reason than they can go out and catch one flight to Germany, to France, to Brazil. There is no way we could justify that kind of international air traffic just on the population of Charlotte. Can New York operate an International Airport at a profit? Yes, but they've got as many people in their city as we have in our entire state. And that airport lives and dies as much on originating and terminating flights as it does on transfers. Los Angeles is the same way. We're not New York, we're not Los Angeles. We're Charlotte, in North Carolina. We've been creative, but we're hitting way above our weight class, and we need to make sure we ensure the long term health of that hub operation. To preserve an economic engine that most of us have no idea how much it has added to the economic growth of the state. Is this difficult? Yes. Is this unpleasant? Yes. Most of the best decisions we make are the hardest. This is one. I'm asking you to move to the future

[0:00:00.0] …And vote for this bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Alexander please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized two times to debate the bill the gentleman is out of order Senator Samuelson please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Members we have heard a lot about this local issue so I make my comments brief, first I will correct the couple of things one the authority will have no ability to levy at tax so the comments made that by doing this somehow another there will be taxes on people they don’t have the authority to levy at tax, all of their expenses will be paid through revenues at the airport. Second, there is been the question of why did we include the other counties? We included the other counties because while we talk about the regional input it really isn’t international airport, the ones most directly impacted are regional neighbors. So, we felt like it was appropriate and based on models from other authorities we look at that and felt that it makes sense to add them in there. And the front page of the ___[01:01] observe today there is this allegation that I will address that we were did the way that we did the counties are joining us so that our authority could go in and bother airports that is not the intent, the intent was it’s a regional airport there maybe times when we need cooperation of our adjoining counties and we are enabling them to do that, we are looking at that language that it needs to be changed and make sure it’s clear that’s not our intent to use the money of the airport of Charlotte to buy other airports, we will have that fix before the third reading on Thursday but we don’t think that’s a problem but I wanna to address it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] That would be Monday Representative Samuelson. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Correct Monday I’m sorry but the final thing I wanna to say was the bit about how we got here and why we are doing at this way? Our Representative Carney was kind enough to acknowledge that we have worked hard to try to work with the City Council we actually did have a mediator that’s kind of quite but that didn’t seem to work either. The fact is that as I have gotten more and more into this bill the more I have learned about the number of times that the idea of an airport authority has been brought up and has been brought up and mentioned the City Council members for years and no action was ever taken. So, people who are interested in the authority that were getting no movement, no interest from City Council some of them came to the state and said, “We can’t seen to get anywhere, we have been trying for years in various ways, will you all take a look at it?” I would still prefer to have the city work with us on this but they have turned this down. So, at this point we are listing to the people of Mecklenburg County that if come to us and said, “We think this is a good idea, we have listened to the consultant who thinks it’s a good idea.” So, right now we ask you to support us and what we still believe is a good idea, thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Recognized Larry Hall please state your purpose? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To ask Representative Alexander a question and speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hall to the extent that your question is not the fact allow Representative Alexander to debate the third time, the Chair will allow a question and will make a judgment based on the content of the question and the members response. Representative Alexander does the gentleman yells? [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman yells. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman yells. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker, Representative Alexander you mentioned I believe in your remarks that there had been a survey or a poll taken of the preference of citizens on whether or not this commission should be created. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Could you tell us what the results of that work? [SPEAKER CHANGES] 65% oppose the authority, 19% supported the authority and 16% are were unsure as to which direction it should go. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Does the gentleman yell? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Then gentleman yells. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Did you know of any other polls that have been taken regarding the public’s preference on this issue? [SPEAKER CHANGES] There are other polls that have been taken but I have not been released to the general public and it is my understanding that they follow the generally what's been found in the observer poll that the citizens of Mecklenburg are not in favor of this move. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker to speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker and ladies and gentlemen we are in a situation we have been in before and off course you know regarding what is happened recently in Durham when their challenge was made about getting involved in local governance, we have heard in nothing to the contrary that 65% of those folks who were polled under whatever conditions which could have answered whichever way under the poll indicate… [0:04:59.8] [End of file…]

They opposed the creation of a commission, at least by us. Now, there's no question the airport operates efficiently. It operates effectively. We've had no one say that there's a problem with the operation of this airport. Quite frankly, there hasn't been adequate accolades given to the city of Charlotte for operating it so well at such a reduced cost and providing such a great impact on the region that has helped the region grow. As you look at the bill, and I hope you will take time to read the bill before you vote, or before you vote on third at least. And I know some people are confused. And a lot of times when we do analysis of issues, when we don't have guiding principles when we go into the analysis, we can get confused. We can be for it before we're against it. We can be against it before we're for it. But if we don't have any principles of analysis, we may have that problem, So, when we look at, do we favor local control? Do we favor a taking? Well if you don't favor a taking, then we are taking this airport from the city of Charlotte. There's no dispute who initiated it. There's no dispute who has managed it these 70 years. There's no dispute of this efficiency and effectiveness. There's no dispute of this impact on the region. So why did we decide to be Big Brother and say "We're going to take your airport, that you invested in, that you created, that you have run so successfully all these years, and decide that we now know how to do it better for you."? Where did that idea come from? Well when we asked the people do they want it, they said, 65% said no. We don't need your help, we got this. We've been handling it for 70 years. We think we can carry it on. We understand what the people want. I heard someone make a reference about "Don't let great be the enemy of the good." Well, don't let good be the enemy of the great. They're doing a good job, maybe a great job. We don't know what would happen going in the future regarding this airport authority that folks need to create. The question of compensation, and I heard a comment of it since we're talking about a taking from a local entity, the question is "What is the value of this airport? And how does it get restored to the city of Charlotte?" Well I think if you read section seven on page eight, you'll see some reference to how this compensation is supposedly going to be created. But keep in mind that there's some foggy language in there that indicates there's going to be compensation. There's going to be compensation for acquisition of airport property. Doesn't really describe what that would constitute, what that would mean, doesn't prescribe any schedule upon which this compensation should be restored to the city of Charlotte. So, they're not made whole on any schedule. There's no formula to put in place to make ensure that they will be made whole. And obviously, there is an existing dispute at this time. In the history of this resolution to this matter, the city of Charlotte also made an effort to reach out and have legislators involved. And now, what we end up with is an "us against them" situation versus the will of 65% of the people polled. If we, as the legislature, big brother in this case, think we know what's best for Charlotte, the city council, which was elected solely by the citizens of Charlotte, think they know what's best in administering their airport, that they've administered for 70 years successfully. Who is to say who should convene these negotiations? I think there's still an opportunity for us and the city of Charlotte to go ahead, meet, and resolve this issue in the best interests of the citizens of Charlotte. It does not have to be the state legislature versus the citizens of Charlotte. We're the big bad brother, and we're going to come in and tell you what you're going to do with your asset, despite the 65% who say they don't need our help in this. They can get it resolved. So, I hope you'll vote against this. Give this parties an opportunity to get together and do what's in the best interests of the citizens of Charlotte. Take some time to listen to the citizens of Charlotte, the 65% who say they don't want this forced upon them. So I hope you'll consider that. I hope you'll read the bill that leads before we get on final reading. And one other item I do want to make sure is clear. The great service this airport provides in giving the citizens employment opportunities and contract opportunities...

...as well is not provide for and guaranteed in this bill. So we don't know exactly what's going to happen with the great initiative Charlotte has to involve small businesses, women-owned businesses, minority businesses, etc. in the operations in the operations of the airport and the contracting. It's not provided for in this bill except for whatever minimal the Federal government would require. Charlotte has been a leader in this area, and I would hope you would also insure that those issues are addressed going forward. So those folks who benefited can continue to participate. They made this airport great. And I hope you'll keep them in your consideration. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Speaker Changes: Representative Rodney Moore, please state your purpose. Speaker Changes: To speak on the bill. Speaker Changes: The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill a second time. Speaker Changes: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just wanted to clear up some misconceptions, some things that were left out in this conversation. We talked about the economic impact on the region of the regional economic impact of the Charlotte Douglas Airport, which is 12 billion dollars. 12 million dollar economic impact. This particular piece of paper is something that the independent consultant Mr. Oliver Wineman found that Charlotte had a spectacularly successful in most regards including its low cost, high end service quality, and prudent financial management. The consultant also found that the Charlotte Airport is the most unlikely candidate for a change in governant than any of its peers. So it's one of the best city-run airports in the nation. The consultant found there was no need to change the governant structure. I ask you, one again, to defeat this bill. Let's go back to the table with the city council and if we decide, as the City Council and as the delegation and others, that if the is the right structure, let's do that. But not at this particular time and not in this particular manner. Thank you. Speaker Changes: Representative Bill Brawley, please state your purpose. Speaker Changes: To speak a second time, sir. Speaker Changes: The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill a second time. Speaker Changes: I've enjoyed listening to the debate on polls. Perhaps the gentleman would look at the poll results for Voter ID and change their position on that. Actually that's a broader based poll than just Mecklenburg County. I'm poking a little fun because actually this actually comes up to a question that I was asked when I ran for the seat in 2010. I was asked how I was going to poll the members of my district on different questions, and I said, "I'm not. I'm going to run. I'm going to tell you what my values are, I'm going to tell you what my priorities are. I'm going to tell you how I make decisions, and then I'm going to come to Raleigh and I'm going to do the scholarship that I need to do to make decisions and I will tell you what my positions are and why I think I'm right and give you the chance to argue with me. But I'm not going to be able to call up everybody in District 103 and say, "What do you think I ought to do?" The reason that you sent me as your representative as to do the due diligence that you would do if you had the time to come to Raleigh and sit down and do it. And I'm acting as your agent and I owe you the duty of my best diligence and my best judgement, not follow polls, but follow the facts, follow my intelligence. I would ask you to do what is right for North Carolina in this case. Thank you. Speaker Changes: Further discussion, further debate? If not, the question before the House is the passage of the House Committee Substitute Number 2, to Senate Bill 81. All in favor vote aye. All opposed vote no. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. 72 having voted in the affirmative and 42 in the negative. The House Committee Substitute Number 2 to Senate Bill 81 has passed it's second reading and will remain on the calendar. Representatives Howard, Lewis and Setzer recognize the sent forth committee report. The clerk will read. Speaker Changes: Representatives Howard, Lewis and Setzer for...

of these community hospital by 6955 spiders and timing stations naval power house built ended the masters in the access and label, ?? say the 0.3¢ savings for administration claims made for one , Sybil Robinson mining robot I'm john wooden trestle statement as a substitute one counter-online tiles and widening of the national women's friend asked the state was house besides the innovative ways of saving points as the house may substitute is why so little downtime and resolve it was placed on the ?? and 29. Times an hour savings at the bottom and saves and building contractors football projecting EPS of the people from the assembly and resale once it does is 1/4 investigation of organized criminal activity subsidy that I made it out. The fact that section instance, reducing as many as a sign of war are awaiting them as it's been a friend sent copies want to copy of a space and offer two times in outline view of the contact to event procedure center, cost and a preseason top of it to be predictable and halftime sing about the important things in certain circumstances the operation of its 7000 is about the show for operations and some of our chances at all times. As many copies last message news racks and Stevens junior restaurants form for inflation , and will be placed on the dow never had enough time and one-percent-729 shares at a newsstand occurrences of gallery folio, a Colombian only that North Carolina State university is the Representative Georgette Wilson they were due on the sale of smile time others instead of flying in placer and one visit, and shares activist and received at the sands event was a volunteer in the nighttime army Airborne staff operations be seen it fail to see it as CEO classical priced within the place a ?? day; also if ?? single live report late ?? house base of using the ball over a building final and acting CNN and time counties and cities have to use special session of the press critical infrastructure needs to rival products whoppers is lighter and a person of the house civil and rile you think it would be an important thing is the tremendous amount of DSS of the sample behind time for an appeal and not necessary and are trained on reaching out and drive them out in the nation's banks changes that will protect the interests of the partisan or invest in the times are projects and set the scene of the all address system is using a special assessment program, intersections that have arisen as 31 to better manage the fact, I'm considered he's home, this program designed me exactly it stands today for 29120 thirds innings into a 25-same time ??...........

to a survey of three senators similar water as is the data from acting our exit of the rest of the data down as coordinated the hottest maker of last week at: to expect us now by Israel question concerns about this a lot of things out Representative Howard stringer are so we're finding that he's not one reason has changed back rations and have now after some time as the exchanges have long been issued, and possession for the time I'll get no question before the house is the best of the house base at the presidio 183 on a second reading some insight to pass the time of his investment or whether ?? ?? (SPEAKER CHANGES) who was the report that 100 fly to anybody in the apartment and one of a ?? house base at the presidio one of the masses in reading and will remain without said all 1448 house base of years of uptime or didn't buy that the recent resignation reporting the prosecution also has to put a broader audience and its war is able for handouts and didn't ask for some time is lower house and garden by the press for so long to get stronger dolls Johnson all products for one purpose is that and other acts and acting as to date no doubt has port of Aden-speaker had this problems for this bill yesterday Nis house to the sometime in all directions sand and I have already on and off the stage is the best time at the age for an hour of all from 60 to 65 on and I haven't action and in that all of the law of the tax force that began operations in understand it has forced to pay for the lead into the weekend in contacting the jazz time share the concerns of the next house for they'll have supported and others time in Wilson for one purpose is done by reviews and last hop and Riley, database and for the net only residents have won some and the page 11 for the 1960 and substituting 625084130060 and substituted 65 down like escorted either have to figure out the front as time goes back to the regional bell viewer of the largest 886650 8011 for being here I live in overall the previous white with these people 60 years of age and also how to provide for your eighth in wartime happened on today is real and reasons that he did make it 651 is the sixth time at all for your call eight-hour call recall and Sunday on dry Laos and grace is active software that interviewed by: Greg sat out with the one one purpose as the acting president for the past and women, Stephen time with the dumbest 14 date to meet today in Lebanon and treatment one of his time as follows: Wilson with the move from one and three months ago and permanent staff and Friday night on the net is not an asp is the document in one CNN and the senate bill 140 cities fight the adoption of the timeline, as events warrant for women ?? ?? has done for offer only person for his house to ?? who won a seat ?? ?? …….

record the vote...one hundred and twelve having voted in the affirmative and none in the negative, the amendment is adopted. We are now back on the bill. Further discussion, further debate on the bill in it's third reading. If not, the question before the House is the adoption of Senate Bill 140 on its third reading. [??Submittees] in favor of the adoption of the bill will vote aye. Those opposed will vote no. The clerk will open the vote. We'll wait on you, Representative Brawley. The Clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. One hundred and eleven having voted in the affirmative, and one in the negative, the bill passes on its third reading. It is ordered and engrossed, and will be returned to the Senate. Senate Bill 386, the Clerk will read. [Speaker Changes] House Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 386, a bill entitled "An Act to Provide Representation of Swine Interests on the Board of Agriculture." General Assembly of North Carolina enacts. [Speaker Changes] To what purpose does the gentleman from Duplin, Representative Dixon rise? [Speaker Changes] Debate the Bill. [Speaker Changes] The gentleman has the floor to debate the Bill. [Speaker Changes] Mister Speaker, members of the House. We had a very good vote yesterday. Today I would encourage your yes vote today. Thank you. [Speaker Changes] Further discussion, further debate. If not, the question before the House is the adoption of Senate Bill 386 on its third reading. [??Submittees]in favor of the adoption of the bill will vote aye, those opposed will vote no. The clerk will open the vote. The Clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. One hundred and eleven having voted in the affirmative and none in the negative, Senate Bill 386 passes on its third reading and will be engrossed and returned to the Senate. House Bill 607, the Clerk will read. [Speaker Changes] Committee Substitute for House Bill 607, a Bill "To [??] Enact All Rise of Joint Legislated Elections Oversight Committee to Study Whether to Require The Use of Paper Ballots In All Elections In North Carolina And To Prohibit The State Board Of Elections Or Any County From Purchasing a Voting System That Does Not Produce A Paper Ballot Until August 15, 2014." General Assembly of North Carolina enacts. [Speaker Changes] For what purpose does the gentleman from Rockingham, Representative Jones rise? [Speaker Changes] To debate the Bill. [Speaker Changes] The gentleman has the floor to debate the Bill. [Speaker Changes] Thank you, Mister Speaker. Ladies and gentlemen, this is a study bill. This issue was discussed in the Elections Committee. This would authorize a study of whether our state should require the use of paper ballots. There are at least nineteen states in the country that use only paper ballots. I will tell you that there are at least thirty organizations, meaning from both the left and the right and all points in between, nonpartisan, bipartisan, that believe that we should do this. There are logistical concerns. There are some of our counties that use different types of machines that do not require paper ballots and so there would be some cost in the long run as far as replacing those machines if and when we decide to do that. So we believe that it would be best to be put into a study in the interim, and come back with the idea of whether this is a good policy that we should pursue. I would ask for your vote on this Bill. [Speaker Changes] For what purpose the lady from Mecklenburg, Representative Cunningham rise? [Speaker Changes] Thank you, Mister Speaker. I'd like to be recorded on the Senate Bill 386 as voting yes. Thank you. [Speaker Changes] The lady will be noted as having voted yes on Senate Bill 386. For what purpose does the gentleman from Brunswick, Representative Iler rise? [Speaker Changes] To debate the Bill. [Speaker Changes] The gentleman has the floor to debate the Bill. [Speaker Changes] Thank you, Mister Speaker. As y'all in Elections Committee know, I had very grave concerns about going to paper ballots right away. I can't support this study and I can't support this bill. Thank you. [Speaker Changes] For what purpose does the lady from Carteret, Representative McElraft rise? [Speaker Changes] To debate the Bill. [Speaker Changes] The lady has the floor to debate the Bill. [Speaker Changes] Thank you, Mister Speaker. Members, I don't know if you remember about ten years ago when the embarrassment of my county, Carteret County, where we had touchscreen voting machines and we lost votes because of those machines. We went to paper ballots immediately after that and have had successful elections. With that, people feel a lot more comfortable, and I tell you that these machines can mess up. The touchscreen machines can mess up, as we witnessed. It was a horrible thing for us to go through. We had to go back and get affidavits from people, some of the elections were on hold because of this, so this is a wonderful idea to have paper ballots and I'm glad we're studying...

i hope you support it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose the gentleman from Person, Rep. Wilkinson arise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To ask Rep. Jones a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Does Rep. Jones yield to the gentleman from person? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir, I yield. [SPEAKER CHANGES] He yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker. Thank you Rep. Jones. The title is a bit confusing. I think the sections are self-explanatory but I want to see if we can match up the title with that. The first part before you get to the "and" is a study, but the second part following the "and" is a decree. Is that correct? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? If not, the question before the House is the passage of House bill 607 on its second reading. So many as favor the passage of House bill 607 will vote "aye", those opposed will vote no, the clerk will open the vote. The clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. 99 having voted in the affirmative and 12 in the negative, the House committee substitute for House bill 607 passes on its second reading and will, without objection, be read a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] General Assembly of North Carolina enacts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? If not, the question of the House is the passage of House committee substitute for House bill 607 on its third reading. So many as favor the passage of the bill will say "aye". [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Those opposed will say no. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] In the opinion of the Chair, the "aye"s have it. The "aye"s do have it, and the House committee substitute for House bill 607 passes on its third reading and will be sent to the Senate. Members, Senate bill 112 which is the next bill at the request of the bill sponsor Rep. Moffitt, or the handler of the bill, is going to be moved to the bottom of today's calendar. Senate bill 344, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate bill 344, a bill to be entitle an act for the issuance of title by the Division of Motor Vehicles to an out of state vehicle that are 35 model years old or older if the license and theft bureau of the Division of Motor Vehicles fails to complete an inspection and verification of the vehicle's identification number within 15 days of receiving a request for inspection and verification. General Assembly of North Carolina enacts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Forsyth does the gentleman Rep. Hanes rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, a request to be counted as voting "yes" on SB 607? HB 607. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman will be recorded as voting "yes" on the, that would have been the second reading of House bill 607? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] That will be noted. For what purpose does the gentleman from Mecklinburg, Rep. Brawley rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To explain the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker. This basically relates to antique automobiles sold at the collector shows that are coming in from out of state. There has been some serious delays with people being able to get North Carolina titles, and the purpose of the bill is to move things forward in a more expeditious manner. There are several hundred of these that are done, or several thousand, a few thousand, that are done every year. But a comment made by many of the collectors is they know more about the antique automobiles than the inspectors from DMV so they would ask that we worry less about them not knowing what they're buying and more about letting them title it and be able to own it in North Carolina. I would appreciate support for the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Person, Rep. Wilkins rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Speak on the bill Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I totally agree with everything Rep. Brawley had to say with one minor exception. And that is that these sales do not take place solely at shows, they can take place among individuals. I live in a border county, we border with Virginia, and so we experience these out of state sales with some frequency. A friend of mine who is quite a collector spent 18 months working on it before he could obtain title, so Senator

He does understand the problem. He's been through this before and heard this story. [Speaker changes] Further discussion, further debate. If not, the question for the House is the passage of Senate bill 344 on its second reading. So many as favor the passage of the bill will vote 'Aye'. Those opposed will vote 'No'. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. 113 having voted in the affirmative and 1 in the negative, Senate bill 144 passes on its second reading, and will, without objection, be read a third time. [Speaker changes] The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts [Speaker changes] Further discussion, further debate. If not, the question for the House is the passage of Senate bill 344 on its third reading. So many as favor the passage of the bill will say 'Aye'. Those opposed will say 'No'. The 'Ayes' have it and Senate bill 344 passes on its third reading and will be enrolled and sent to the Governor. Members, Senate bill 353 is the next bill on the calendar. That's the one that's expected to have lengthy debate. We're gonna move it to the next to last bill on the calendar. Senate bill 407. The clerk will read. [Speaker changes] Committee set to for Senate bill 407, a bill that been ??? to enact to require the Division of Motor Vehicles to implement a state-wide electronic lien system to process the notification of release of security interests and certificate of title data. The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts. [Speaker changes] For what purpose does the gentleman from Mecklenburg, Representative Jeter rise? [Speaker changes] To debate the bill [Speaker changes] The gentleman has the floor to debate the bill [speaker changes] This bill is a Senate bill that is a companion to House bill 621, which I am the primary sponsor of. This bill has been well-vetted and well-discussed and well-debated over the past, basically over the length of the session. It now has what I believe is unanimous support by all parties, and I'm going to ask for your favorable vote. [Speaker changes] Further discussion, further debate. If not, the question before the House is the passage of the Senate Committee substitute to Senate bill 407 on its second reading. So many as favor the passage will vote 'Aye'. Those opposed will vote 'no'. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. 111 having voted in the affirmative and none in the negative, Senate bill 407 passes on its second reading and will, without objection, be read a third time. [Speaker changes] The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts [Speaker changes] For what purpose does the gentleman from Guilford, Senator Brandon rise [Speaker changes] Sorry Mr. Chairman, but I would like to be recorded as voting 'Aye' on Senate bill 407. [Speaker changes] The gentleman will be recorded as having voted 'Aye' on the second reading for Senate bill 407. Further discussion, further debate. If not, the question before the House is the passage of Senate bill 407 on its third reading. So many as favor its passage will say 'Aye'. Those opposed will say 'No'. The Ayes have it. Senate bill 407 passes on its third reading. It will be enrolled and sent to the Governor. Members, Senate bill 444 was already moved to Monday night. The next bill is Senate bill 455. The clerk will read . [Speaker changes] Committee substitute for Senate bill 455, the bill is been trying to enact to increase the penalties for violation of the seed law. The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts. [Speaker changes] For what purpose does the gentleman from Johnston, Representative Langdon rise? [speaker changes] To debate the bill [Speaker changes] The gentleman has the floor to debate the bill [speaker changes] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Folks, this is a companion bill for House bill 369, which passed the House 115 to 1. The reason we're hearing this bill - my bill is locked up in the Senate somewhere. I do know where it's at, but anyway. They're not moving it, and this is a Department of Ag bill and we need to move it, and I appreciate your vote. [Speaker changes] For what purpose does the gentleman from Lee, Representative Stone rise? [speaker changes] To send forth an amendment [speaker changes] The gentleman may send forth his amendment. The clerk will read [speaker changes] Representative Stone moves to suspend the bill on page 1, line 22 by rewriting the line to read, [speaker changes] The gentleman from Lee has the floor to debate the amendment [speaker changes] Thank you Mr. Speaker. Ladies and Gentlemen, this amendment, all it does is exempt the small retailers and small stores. I've talked to the Department of Agriculture. I've talked to the retailers, and everyone's in agreement with this amendment. [speaker changes] Further discussion, further debate on the amendment offered by Representative Stone. If not, the question before the House is the passage of Amendment 1 sent forth by Representative Stone. So many as favor the passage of the amendment will vote 'Aye'. Those opposed

…vote no. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. One hundred and nine having voted in the affirmative and none in the negative, the Stone Amendment is adopted. We’re now back on the bill. Further discussion, further debate? If not the question before the House is the passage of Senate Bill 455, on its second reading. Submittiants favoring the passage of the bill favor vote aye, those opposed will vote no. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. One hundred and eight having voted in the affirmative, and one in the negative, Senate Bill 455 passes its second reading and will, without objection, be read a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] General Assembly of North Carolina enacts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? If not the question before the House is the passage of Senate Bill 455, on its third reading. Submittiants favoring the passage of the bill will say aye, those opposed will say no. The ayes have it. And Senate Bill 455 passes its third reading and will be returned to the Senate for concurrence. Members, Senate Bill 501 is a bill that the Chair was going to handle. That bill will be removed from today’s calendar and calendared for Monday night. Senate Bill 553, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES]House Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 553, a bill to be entitled an act to establish grievance and appeal procedures for local management entity/managed care organization Medicaid enrollees. The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts: [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Wake, Representative Dollar rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members of the House. This bill is very similar to House Bill 320, which the House passed back in May. I believe it was 114 to nothing. What this bill does is, as the title indicates, it puts some additional clarification and regulation and structure to the appeals that patients and residents have that are dealing with the local LME/MCOs in the area of mental health, developmental disabilities and substance abuse. We think this is a consensus bill. It’s very similar to what we passed in the House. I’ll be happy to answer any questions. I appreciate your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? If not the question before the House is the passage of the House Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 553, on its second reading. Submittiants favoring the passage of the bill will vote aye, those opposed will vote no. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. One hundred and fourteen having voted in the affirmative, and none in the negative, Senate Bill 553 passes its second reading and will, without objection, be read a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? If not the question before the House is the passage of Senate Bill 553, on its third reading. Submittiants favoring the passage of the bill will say aye, those opposed will say no. The ayes have it. And Senate Bill 553 passes its third reading and will be returned to the Senate. Senate Bill 636, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Committee Substitute number 2 for Senate Bill 636, a bill to be entitled an act to amend the boating safety act by increasing the fines and otherwise amending the penalty and other provisions of that act. The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative John Bell, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman’s recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ladies and gentlemen, members of the House, this bill has three parts. I’ll cover the first part and the Representative Faircloth and Representative McGrady will follow up with the rest of it. On the first part of this bill is recommended by the law enforcement division of the Wildlife Resources Commission. This bill moves 22 class 3 misdemeanors in Chapter 75A, the Boating Safety Act. It makes them infractions. Instead of the $25 fine plus the $180 court cost, you would only have to pay the $50 fine, no court costs, and have no criminal record. You could contest the citation and go to court, where if you’re found guilty you…

who pay the fines plus the court costs. It also increases the fines and the penalties on seven existing hunting violations and creates new violations with regard to taking of deer from posted land and the taking of elk illegally, which has just been introduced to our state. Lastly, it increases the fine for operating while intoxicated for boating violations to a minimum of $250. Currently there is no minimum fine associated with this violation. And I ask for your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate. If not, the question before the House is the passage of the House Committee Substitute Number 2 to Senate Bill 636 on its second reading. All in favor vote aye. All opposed vote no. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will let the machine record the vote. One hundred nine having voted in the affirmative and two in the negative, the House Committee Substitute Number 2 to Senate Bill 636 has passed its second reading. And without objection, will be read a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] General Assembly of North Carolina enacts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stam, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To offer an amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to ?? the amendment. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stam moves to amend the bill on page 7, lines 18 through 22, by rewriting these lines to read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Mr. Speaker, members of the House, the second reading went by so fast I forgot my amendment there. But here it is. On the last part of the bill, you voted, the last part of the bill you voted on three times before has been sent to the Senate in 2009, 2011, and earlier in 2013, and they apparently have not had the opportunity to look at it. And so this is getting it back to them. And the amendment--I'm thinking that probably the reason they haven't passed it yet is because we had not perfected the definition of public utilities, and some of the utilities came to me yesterday and asked for this amendment. It's just modernizing--instead of telegraphs and telephones, which is so 20th century, it's communications facilities. And adding in distribution of natural gas, which is the big thing. So I ask for agreement on the amendment. And if it passes, I would ask Representative McGrady perhaps to explain that part, if he wants to. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative McGrady, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This is a good amendment. I will explain the part that Representative Stam has suggested I explain after we adopt the amendment. But this is in no way inconsistent with the legislation that we previously passed, really is clarifying. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Dollar, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I wish to be recorded as voting aye on second reading on Senate Bill 636. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman will be recorded as having voted aye. Further discussion, further debate on the amendment. If not, the question before the House is the passage of the amendment supported by Representative Stam for the House Committee Substitute Number 2 of Senate Bill 636. All in favor vote aye. All opposed vote no. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will let the machine record the vote. One hundred and thirteen having voted in the affirmative and one in the negative, the amendment passes. We're now back on the bill as amended. Further discussion, further debate. Representative McGrady, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill as amended. [SPEAKER CHANGES] As requested by Representative Stam, I just wanted to make it clear to everyone that the eminent domain bill that has passed the House on several different occasions is in this bill now that passed last time by a vote of 110 to 8. It's Part 3, pages 6, line36, through part, page 7, line 40. Nothing has changed other than the few words that were just the subject of an amendment. There's nothing else there. This is another case where we just haven't been able to get any bill moved more, and no explanation as to why it's not moving. So we're trying to provide a little bit of an oomph. And I appreciate the Speaker's--how quickly you've moved through this. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate. If not, the question before the House is the passage of the House Committee Substitute Number 2 to Senate Bill 636, as amended, on its third reading. All in favor vote aye. All opposed vote no. The clerk will open the vote.

chimes and times you are a similar 100 not added 14 as the citizen of using the season as existence Nazarene going resident of the sun Mr. Person there is a way station purpose-personnel setting the times until 636 MB one of the only person in the history of person sell replace major purpose of record as well as a separate for silent about the job of reporting yes supported the pro sales exceeded a partly ?? same house extent of the contacted the formal model of time to sections 13241624 on Federal funding bill Johnson of all products president of the center of this city, and does recognize and updating the state house when the system of these is the last time the site, three , in essence it was formed as his of a CD-rom as AT&T to allow a style of them, administrations, the head was the best way to transportation corridor, all is not in compliance with Federal law is houses now, since we revised channel $18.00 a share exciting opportunity and others become into compliance and once but twice made one job as causes is a serious in one of the time his position of the hottest letter personable its PlayStation purpose, and Maria De Janeiro become as a separate, Hyundai luxury and refresh along as we go back to have that no one does these ?? ?? ?? person well as we added a son coming to our ?? placement agent, escorted the size of your browser's ?? ?? ?? person frozen in saying I consider time display at the end of the then-sales of the deposit is the data that it will lease time -life issues that one of Montana's of this me a lot of time and they are investors in the body of all the only public, when the white collar, instead when a 78, curly-haired, someone who does the city was required to the latest his base of the efforts and it has more on selected wines is the height timelines, to relate season, the answer DDI made the role does not imply that the impoundment utilization ordeal of insulation and mandatory minimum sentence require did not say all major crime-you-more than happy to be one of 81, the plate, and the deposit dated November the drive-letter day Unch 20 of interstate-hire ?? ??..................

Bring mandatory minimum sentence of not less than five days imprisonment or thirty days community service for second offenders. And not less than ten days of imprisonment or sixty days community service for third or subsequent offenders. Once it passes, this bill is in place this bill will eliminate these exceptions and bring us into the minimum; Minimum, compliance levels for [??] 21 federal highway funding. I believe I'm available for any questions, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate, Representative Speciale, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To ask Representative Torbett a question [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Torbett, does the gentleman yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] It'd be an honor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] So am I to understand that we're passing a piece of legislation because we're being extorted by the federal government, who has no authority over our roads? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Actually no. We're simply accepting the carrot with a very short and soft stick. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Does the gentleman yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] What is ? How much is that carrot? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Eight Million Dollars. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Michaux please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'd like to gentleman a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Torbett, does the gentleman yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] It'd be a privilege. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Torbett, I'm looking at this bill, It's a Senate bill, What committee was it referred to in the House? Can you tell me? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I cannot, I would have to go back to the screen to be able to bring that forward to you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, can I speak on the bill? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I think it was actually, hang on one second, Excuse me, I think it was either Transportation or Appropriations, one... [SPEAKER CHANGES] The, Representative Michaux, does the gentleman know the answer to the question over there? [SPEAKER CHANGES] No sir, I don't. [SPEAKER CHANGES] If I can yield to Representative Brawley, I believe he has... [SPEAKER CHANGES] If the gentleman will yield the chair just understands that often times when attorneys ask questions they know the answers so I just wanted to be sure. But it went to Judiciary B and then to Government. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Judiciary B? [SPEAKER CHANGES] That is the information provided to me by the clerk. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? If not, the question before the house is the passage of Senate Bill 659 on its second reading. All in favor vote aye, all opposed vote no. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will lock machine, record the vote. 106 have voted in the affirmative, 6 in the negative. Senate bill 659 is passed it's second reading and without objection will be read a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] General Assembly of North Carolina enacts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Fisher please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I would like to be recorded as voting no on senate bill 636 please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady will be recorded as voting no on [SPEAKER CHANGES] Second and third readings [SPEAKER CHANGES] Second and third reading. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you sir [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Alexander, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'd like to be recorded as voting no on 636. [SPEAKER CHANGES] both readings [SPEAKER CHANGES] yes [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Rodney Moore, please state your purpose [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, I'd like to change my vote on 636 to no on both readings [SPEAKER CHANGES] Gentleman is recorded as voting no. Mr. Carney please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'd like to be recorded as voting no on 636 both readings. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady will be recorded as voting no and the chair will acknowledge that seeing a trend here the chair is glad Representative Carney got there before we get to a point that vote change could change the outcome. Because that's not allowed by rule. Representative Cunningham please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chair, I'd like to be cast as voting no. Thank you [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady will state the bill [SPEAKER CHANGES] 636 Thank you [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady will be recorded as voting no Representative Adams please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] thank you mr. speaker, I'd like to vote of no on 636 please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Both readings The lady will be recorded voting no

Senate Bill 112 the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Committee Substitute Number 2 for Senate Bill 112. The bills been entitled an act to improve and streamline the regulatory process in order to stimulate job creation to eliminate unnecessary regulation and to make various other statutory changes. General Assembly North Carolinian Act [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ladies and gentlemen, the Chair has just been advised by the bill sponsor that they require a bit more time for preparation of an amendment so we will temporarily displace that. House Bill 26 the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate Committee Substitute for House Bill 26 the bill’s been titled an act to strengthen the laws protecting against the theft of vehicles for disassembling and resellable parts ?? law enforcement in the investigation or of organized criminal activity associated with the theft of vehicles. General Assembly North Carolinian Act. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Moore, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Permission to speak for the motion and to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentlemen is recognized for a motion and to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, House Bill 26, I move that the House concur and would simply point out to members, this is the bill that we passed unanimously that increases the penalty on vehicle metal theft. It was inspired by a situation where a family from Cleveland county was driving over to Charlotte. The car broke down, it was towed off and crushed before they could recover it. It requires an online access system, try to keep this from happening in the future and to strengthen that protection. This has been worked out by folks in the industry, with law enforcement and all the other parties. The change in the Senate was technical in nature and I would urge the House to concur. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate. If not, the question before the House is the motion to concur in the Senate Committee Substitute to House Bill 26. All in favor vote aye, all opposed vote no. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will let the machine record the vote. 111 having voted in the affirmative, none in the negative. The House has concurred on the Senate Committee Substitute to House Bill 26. The bill will be enrolled and sent to the Governor. Ladies and gentlemen, Senate Bill 659 is properly before us, we left it as we were re-recording some votes. It’s back before us. Further discussion, further debate on third reading? If not, the question before the House is the passage of Senate Bill 659 on its third readng. All in favor vote aye, all in favor will say aye, all in favor say no. All in favor say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All opposed, say no. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it. Senate Bill 659 has passed its third reading. The bill will be enrolled and sent to the Governor. Special messages from the Senate. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker has ordered that a message be sent to the House of Representatives with the information that Senate adopts a report of the conferees on House Bill 255 the bill is entitled an act to provide the circuit courts enact to ?? hours ?? institutions shall not be included in declaration of, calculation of credit hours when the appropriate actions has been taken by both chambers the bill will be ordered enrolled respectively Sarah Lang, principal clerk. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Noted. The bill is ordered enrolled and sent to the Governor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker has ordered that a message be sent to the House of Representatives with the information that Senate adopts a report of the conferees on House Bill 649, the bill’s entitled an act to make technical changes to the small employer group health coverage reform act, when the appropriate actions have been taken by both chambers the bill will be ordered enrolled. Respectively, Sarah Lang, Principal Clerk. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Noted. The bill is ordered enrolled and sent to the Governor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker has ordered that a message be sent to the House of Representatives with the information that the Senate adopts a report of the conferees for House Bill 662 the bill’s been titled, an act to providing for insurance of a limited plumbing contract to license to small in-service, back flow

Prevention assemblies when the appropriate actions have been taken by both chambers the bill will be ordered in roll, respectfully Sarah Lang Principal Clerk. [Speaker Change]Noted. The bill will be ordered and rolled and sent to the Governor. [Speaker Change]Mr. Speaker has ordered that it must be sent to the House of Representatives with the information that the Senate adopts the report of the convenes for Senate bill 200, a bill to be entitled, "An act to extend the time for local forensic science labs to obtain accreditation." When the appropriate action has been taken by both Chambers,the bill will be ordered and rolled, respectfully Sarah Lang Principal Clerk. [Speaker Change]Noted. The bill is ordered and rolled and sent to the Governor. Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, we're about to begin the debate on the last bill that will be on he calendar today. If the house will come to order, and the visitors in the gallery will also come to order, or I should say, pay attention. This debate, by prior agreement with the Minority Caucus, will be limited to three hours. Two of those hours will be allocated to the Minority Caucus for debate. One hour for the Majority. The Chair expects the tradition of the House to carry the debate on in a respectful professional manner, pursuant to the rules. The rules to be enforced strictly by the chair. With respect to the gallery, this is very important, any disruptions, this is effectively a warning, any disruptions, from any side of the gallery, will result in the immediate clearing of that side of the gallery. Along with any non credentialed press and the rear of the gallery. The Chair understands that this is an emotional issue and there are deeply held beliefs on both sides. But the Chair also asks that the gallery respects this institution and the process that we are trying to proceed through today. [Change Speaker]Mr. Speaker. [Change Speaker]Representative Balaz, please state your purpose. [Change Speaker]I have an inquiry for the Chair. [Change Speaker]The gentleman may state his inquiry. [Change Speaker]How will proposed amendments be treated time wise. Will all of the time on the amendments be allocated to the side that makes the amendments? [Change Speaker]No, it's the opinion of the chair that as amendments come they will be taken up and we will deal with that as an allocation beyond the three hour, agreed to, debate. Are their any other discussions of inquiry of the Chair, before we begin the debate? [Change Speaker]Mr. Chair. [Change Speaker]And ladies and gentlemen, the Chair does stand corrected. We do have to displace the one bill, Senate bill 112. So we will come to that, back to that at the end of the calendar. Representative Floyd, please state your purpose. [Change Speaker]An inquiry of the Chair. [Change Speaker]The gentleman may please state his inquiry. [Change Speaker]I understand that we are going to have a three hour debate. [Change Speaker]That is correct sir, by the request of your caucus. [Change Speaker]Mr. Speaker, in respect of all, of both sides, could we get a three minute recess prior to the debate starting for after three hours and following up with representatives, just mentioned that there's an amendment that may be longer than three hours. [Change Speaker]Representative Floyd you had me at three minutes. We will take a brief recess before we begin the debate. Representative Lucas, please state your purpose. [Change Speaker]An inquiry of the Chair. [Change Speaker]The gentleman may please state his inquiry. [Change Speaker]Thank you Mr. Speaker. Am I to understand that if one person is out of line in the gallery, that negates the entire side of the [Change Speaker]That is correct sir. [Change Speaker]Thank you sir. [Change Speaker]And I should, I should stipulate that the clearing of the gallery would only be limited to legislative staff and government employees with an official government id may remain. But all others will be asked to leave the gallery. [Change Speaker]Representative Moore, please state your purpose. [Change Speaker]Mr. Speaker we need to do a modification to a bill referral please. [Change Speaker]The gentleman may state his motion [Change Speaker]It's in the bill 229, short title, "Ocean Island Beach Sea Turtle Sanctuary." The bill is in government, it has a serialized referral environment as the speaker's announced. The committees are going to be shut down after this week. The bill is in government, I would ask that the serialized referral to the environment be sickened. [Change Speaker]With out objection. So ordered. Ladies and Gentlemen we will, we will read in the bill and begin the debate on Senate bill 353, promptly at 1:20. The House is in recess until 1:20.