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.

Senate | June 26, 2013 | Committee Room | Education

Full MP3 Audio File

Good morning. I'd like to call this meeting to order, so let's go ahead and take our seats if we could. Let me begin by introducing our sergeants at arms. We have Billy Fritscher, Steve Wilson, Ashley Mitkins, Ed Kessler, and Hal Roach. Steve Wilson will be in the back of the room if anyone would like to, anyone from the public would like to speak on any of these bills, please sign up with him. We're limiting it to two people for and against on a bill and two minutes, but if you have an interest please get with Steve Wilson. He'll be in the back momentarily. We want to thank our pages who are working feverishly right now, so just continue to do your job as I announce you. We've got Michael Walker from Senator Hartsell, Jacob Dubois from Senator Apodaca, Jacob Fuqua from Senator Apodaca, Mackenzie Armies from Senator Brock, A.J. Smith, Senator Hartsell, Taylor Dozier from Senator Brock, and Ashley King from Senator Brown. Thank you for, not only for your service, but the work you're doing as we speak. We do have three bills before us, and we are actually gonna go in reverse numerical order on these, so we're going from bottom to top, highest number first. And that would bring us, that would start us with Brass to Class, and we do have a PCS for that, so if I could have a motion to adopt a PCS, so moved by Senator Stein, all in favor say aye. Opposed no. The ayes have it, and we have a PCS before us. We have Representative Murry, I believe, to come up here, and if you could, and we already discussed this, if you could just let us know the changes and updates to this. Appreciate it, thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you mister Chairman. The, the substance of change to the proposed committee substitute is that we've renamed the legislation after a, after corporal, corporal Pruitt Rainey. He was killed in action on July 13, 2008 in the battle of Wanat, Afghanistan. And he wanted to be a physical education teacher. He wanted to be a PE teacher. And that's what this bill is about, is to help our well trained and competent servicemen get into the classroom so they can take that excellent training and expertise and help teach our children in school. Substantively, additionally, the it, it provides some student teaching stipends for, for members of the armed forces to be able to enter into a new career in teaching, and it reduces the license and requirements for military veterans who are pursuing a teacher or school administrator license. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Murry, we have, do we have some questions or are people looking for a favorable report? Senator Daniel you have a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you mister Chairman. I guess for Representative Murry I just wondered, did you have to come up with the title that rhymed so you could get it past the House? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well, whatever helps, whatever helps. But this passed, I believe unanimously, and I don't think it was because of the rhyme. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And Senator Jenkins is, was making a motion to a favorable report but if we have any questions before that, I'll entertain them. Senator Davis? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mister Chair, thank you, and to the members, I just wanna let you know this, I believe is a terrific bill. It's, in many ways a reflection of my own, of my own career path, having served in the air force and then going into education, and I think many others, and I just think this is an outstanding bill and also glad to see a, also a former air force academy person standing in with all these west point people today. So I do ask everyone for your support on this bill today. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I would say this has been a collaboration with the Department of Public Instruction. Doug Taggert and Rachel have been extremely helpful. The North Carolina Chamber of Commerce has been interested in this legislation as well as the Association of Educators and the, the Professional Educator Association as well. So it's been a very collaborative effort, and I appreciate all those involved. And Representative Whitmire has been an excellent resource for me. I'm not a military guy, but he's told me, I've learned more about military certifications through Representative Whitmire than I thought I'd ever learn as a House member. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well thank you. We do have a motion for a favorable report. Any further questions? Seeing none, this is a motion for a favorable to the PCS, unfavorable to the original bill. And all in favor say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Opposed no. And the ayes have it, and the motion passes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you members of the committee. Thank you Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Curtis, okay? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Wonderful, Senator Curtis will head on down to the Senate floor. The next bill before us we've got is 269, Children Disabilities. We have Representative Jones. Now we do have a PCS

guess i need a motion for adopted pcs. Senator newton all in favor aye, opposed no, the ayes have it and the pcs is before us. Rpresentative Jones your recognized to explain this. [SPEAKER CHANGES] mrs chairman, members of the commitee i stand fbefore you again and i know that we have discussed this bill before but just as a way of reminder this is the children with disabilities scholarship grants bill. It is current law that the general assembly passed two years ago that children with disabilities may recieve tax credits, or families with children with disabilities will recieve educational tax credits up to 3000 dollars per semester for tuition and special education and related services for each eligible dependent child who is a resident of north carolina and so forth. What this bill would do would be to basically change that to a scholarship grant so what it really does is extend this oppurtunity to the poor citizens if you will. Those that dont necessarily pay that amount of money in taxes, would still be able to recieve the scholorship grants, that is the gist of the change, its pretty simple, and i would be happy to stand for any questions, i think qwe have other bill sponsors on the way, including representative Stan who is probably more able to explain than i am, but we will give it our best, and there may be some others that wish to speack mr chairman but i will be happy to stand for any questions. [SPEAKER CHANGES] great thank you representative Jones, do we have any questions or comments from members. I do have a motion for a favorable report, but what we will do is do some quesitons so we will hold that. Senator Portman please [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes thank you mr chairman, when we havd the discussion, i had been asked by some of my constituents to try to deteermine how many possible studentys will be served about this, is this a limit, can this be a limited number of students that recieve these grants. Just based onj the age, the number of years that a student could attend under this grant. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Senator if i may [SPEAKER CHANGES]The bill does not limit to the number of people that reciece it but they would have to be eligible under current law basically, but i would be happy to defer that to staff [SPEAKER CHANGES]Follow up [SPEAKER CHANGES]Yes go ahead [SPEAKER CHANGES]What is the total amount of funding for these grants, scholarships? [SPEAKER CHANGES]It would be 6,000 dollars in a year, up to 3,000 dollars per semester, up to 6,000 dollars per year [SPEAKER CHANGES] Chris Norstrom do you have any information regaurding that question that you could add? [SPEAKER CHANGES]Sure Chris Norstrom from fiscal research. Senator parmen given your question the number of students who woulkd be limited by the dollars available so there is i believe aproximately 3 million available for the first round for when they convert to scholarships, so the number of scholarships would be liumited based on the 3 million dollars available that first year. [SPEAKER CHANGES]If i could just add one thing , that dollar amount is designed so as to keep the size of the program consistent with what we have seen within the tax credit program created by hoiuse bill 344 in 2011, the 3 million is not meant to be an expansion of the program,. its just meant ot be a continuation of the program as it currently exists. Just switching from a tax credit to a scholarship [SPEAKER CHANGES]Thank you do you have a followup [SPEAKER CHANGES]Yes and this may be for staff. So your saying the funding amount is 3 million dollars. I think the concern from my constituent was that if a student starts is currently in sixth grade and this grant followed him through high school and till they are 21, that would be a way that other students couldnt get in if say we had a number of students that continued on these grants. Each year, the same students will be eligible to recieve the grant, is that correct? as long as they are in school [SPEAKER CHANGES]If they recievd the year the prior year, assuming they meet the other eligibility criteria, they could continue the grant. Ofcourse the general assembly could always.

due to expand the program AM after the senate and to question, to recommend them E time I am a vital national league of knowledge the demand for six Elmo year, the judge and compare that with a proven calls to police allege a good time to builders and secondly many of the two from my family and goal lead a normal regulating, but for 18 years old, makes data 20 times a week rejected a call to help too, for the extra call for the two years led the two mighty dollar and 12 knowledge of the idea of what that meant that the event of the body half the time of the two there really of this bill goes back say if you would be here if the bill were defeated back, and why bill that the weekend to continue the good new plan, remember a mother and F lee for special needs kids they need continuity of time, the delicate one ?? (SPEAKER CHANGES) the and judge had this courtroom fed, and if the two argued for Della families , if you work too well expand a program but that back bencher that question does not take your bubble on this deal of your time let the part of the question that is N and as the orthodox Maltby (SPEAKER CHANGES) it's like if the time we have the back for a lot of money to capture a lot would respectfully, given that this woman in the league ballot and Lange the back an additional to all the time of two and a lich board that twellman 15, Lange and could take well to the lame and bob Weir, and we'll pull off, like blanket and the channel two and half the delegates from the fellowship of time to call for the trouble of my if you do that than life, and then leveraging them in the public polls and phone and time and 12th game that's right in mind that but not every school that the case could block of Martin two that Mclemore time where a nation that would phase of the mainframe from the average intelligence two could not warned that from the kitchen layout that they cannot tolerate for the man fleeing their regular trash from the week off the Mecklenburg the fate of $30,000 two of them that they cannot let this get well they got the better times dollar ship that $9000 bail able to get there from him by the time where they could have classes of Lille Mortgage or less fixed my belt and life itself and 1/2-way they can afford the way they could afford not the time as the Medicare and they left a good deal of harm than good fit your home and then calls malice is to the fifth element will be playing the public good for two decades ago, ballpark allege that holiday had led the fight back to be a little the phone and 1/2 cup record locking, 11 (SPEAKER CHANGES) , the EU's and that builders A expenditures telephone 2800010060 dollars, up to local expenditures abruptly I'm making $100 a day that they can pay a thing could buy you a question them for the time I get a look and I am 2:00 PM, under the legal battle about the accountability in the documentation the clout to college and cannot D IND: V. Atwood said, will you buy you a lot that can probably a publicly about a decade at UAA about that, it back when, if they have to have BLAF education time that the climbing two KM, that would require that they could play a PF that is not carrying a bag of the flames in the underlying law bit, time that Hal today have a life that, it got too many two DFPAA Condit AM today with that we have given me a ??............

To get it after they document it. [Speaker Change] ?? [Speaker Change] But my third question would be. If it came to be that there was some misrepresentation fraud, something where it was not the person actually didn't do what they were supposed to do. Do we have a way to get the money back? [Speaker Change] The change. May I answer? [Speaker Change] Yes please. [Speaker Change] The change is that instead of Department of Revenue treating it as a matter of tax fraud, it's a matter of SEAA which is a long standing state education assistance authority. Then I don't know for what it's a right word, but approving receipts and proof and if you look on page 2 lines 44 to 47 of the bill. If a parent fails to cooperate with verification efforts they should revoke the award. Now that's for the income eligibility and if they don't produce proper documentation of the expenses, they just don't give em the money [Speaker Change] Follow up. [Speaker Change] Follow up. [Speaker Change] What if the documentation is later found to be somehow inadequate, fraudulent? [Speaker Change] The state would have a claim against that parent for the amount of, just like all other fraudulent activity. [Speaker Change] OK, one other follow up. [Speaker Change] One thing I wanna be careful about though is we have a bill before us and we're not talking about existing law we wanna make sure we keep on topic as ?? to the bill before us. And we're starting to go towards important things, but things that are current law, and that may not be appropriate here. So let's be careful on that. [Speaker Change] Well I was trying to set the stage for that by explaining Mr. Chair just by way of standing up for myself. I was trying to set the stage by explaining what I knew about the current law and trying to get a clarity on how the new law compares. So I was asking about the new law, the current bill before. [Speaker Change] OK let's go ahead. [Speaker Change] ?? law not the old law. I was only using that as a reference point. [Speaker Change] Let's go ahead with your question. [Speaker Change] My final question in this new arrangement. Is there any standard of accountability for the provider, whoever is providing these services? Is there any monitoring of that? Do they have to meet any kind of improvement goals? Is there any requirement that we have, that the state be assured that these services are at least comparable or accomplishing the goals for the child? [Speaker Change] No different than current law. And that would be of course if they're not providing the proper education for their child then you have truancy laws, you have abuse and neglect laws. What the bill does is not change any of that. What the bill does 99% of what it does is take a program that is only available to parents who pay income tax and make it available to parents who don't pay income tax. It's expanding Senator Bryant the existing program to the children of the poor, that's what this bill does. There's a couple other minor technical changes, but that's what the bill does. [Speaker Change] Senator Stein and then Senator Panger. [Speaker Change] Thank you Mr. Chair. I thought we just heard from staff that there's actually no expansion. And it's the same number of children served this year. [Speaker Change] They're now in the pool that they can qualify. [Speaker Change] Follow-up. [Speaker Change] As Senator Parmon noted if you're in 6th grade, you get in 7th grade, and you get it in 8th grade. So the only way to achieve what you said is to dramatically expand the amount of money that's put behind this and that is not in this bill. [Speaker Change] Representative Stein. [Speaker Change] It doesn't require dramatic expansion it just puts them on a equal footing with the others. [Speaker Change] Senator Barringer. [Speaker Change] Thank you Mr. Chair. I'd like to ask a tax question. I'm trying to understand the interplay and perhaps I've oversimplified in my own mind. I wanna just make sure I understand. The interplay between the current tax credit and this scholarship grant they're mutually exclusive, you get one or the other. And then is there any income for example, if you were a high income earner already getting the credits, and the next year you decide you'd rather do the application. Could you go in that way? Or how do they interplay? [Speaker Change] Yeah you don't have an option for the current year’s tax credits and then the next year it's scholarships. But there are, and this is why there's some additional money required for the bill for the first couple years. There are people who qualify for the tax credit but had to have a carry forward for their credit because they just didn’t', they had income but not enough income. So essentially part of the

cost of this bill is paying for the program in prior years, but the program in prior years saved money, but your just getting some of the cost in this year [change speaker] follow up one [change speaker] follow up [change speaker] so what your saying is that they'll all be put in the same pool going forward, so that it would be the folks, the haves, and the ones who are in need will all be in the poool together [change speaker] and this is really important also, because of change in federal tax law, the fiscal cliff, ya'll remember that bill, reduced the ammount of credits that special needs parents could get for this kind of education. So this is partially making for that change in federal tax law, I know your a tax expert so you may be familiar with that [change speaker] senator brownch you have a question? [change speaker] thank you mr chairman, representative stam, im trying to work some numbers on 3 million it looks like, at roughly 6000 a year, thats 500 kids if you do the math i guess you could say and im trying to figure out, and I know that could vary, I understand that, but I would think theres going to be a lot more than 500 kids that may want to take advantage of this, i'm just trying to think, how do you pick and choose, how are you going to decide who gets it and who doesnt? [change speaker] excellent question, the average in the prior years has been about 2500 per child, now the ones that go to private schools, presumably for the full year will take the full 6000, but this particular program was also available to homeschool kids, and in a lot of cases they will not get the full 6000, because they don't get it for the homeschool, they only get it for the actual services obtained, the educational services that their reinbursed for, so many cases they get 1000, 2000, 3000, 4000 and not the full ammount, but to answer your question, I hope we spend 100000000 on it ten years from now if it works, I have never gotten, I've never passed a program to representative jones and he'll testify we've never had a program we got so many postive love letters from parents, but also complaining hate letters from parents who didn't qualify, because they didn't have the right income limitation or for some other reason. This is making a real difference in the lives of children who need it. [change speaker] Senator, just a follow up real quick mr chairman [change speaker] yes follow up [change speaker] I guess thats the concern I have, I think families are going to really take advantage of this, I think a lot of families, I think what you'll find is once a family gets on, you're not going to get them off, I think they are going to love the program, so expanding the program I think will be a true program, as it becomes a budget item, i think thats the issue im trying to get my arms around, how are you going to do that? [change speaker] representative jones? [change speaker] mr chairman, if I could just speak to that, I look at this to, i really think this is a win, win, win situation, we've pointed out and the big win quite honestly is for the student and for their families, but this is a win for the taxpayers and its a win for the public schools, because the 6000 dollars is less than we're paying now per student in the public school system and certainly its a win for taxpayers. When representative stans says "I hope this goes to 100,000,000", I don't think he should take that to mean that I hope we're adding this much more to the budget, I think thats going to be saving taxpayers money in the long run, and its going to save the public schools money, because they are not going to be having paying the expenses that they currently pay for that student, that is right now in the public schools, I think thats an important fiscal net for ya'll to appreciate. [change speaker] chairman [change speaker] yes, senator tillman [change speaker] a lot of works been done on this, and a lot of folks think this is a good idea, and I don't see it costing additional dollars if we're giving them less than it costs the state to educate this child, I make a motion for favorable report [change speaker] so we have a motion for a favorable report, but i did have two questions and a member of the public, so if we could ask questions briefly, because we do have another bill and then we'll move to the public and go to a vote [change speaker] thank you mr chair, I do have two and they arent about the total cost, I just want a clarification on one and I have another one. You mention that the tax credit is based on income, but this would be regardless of income, is that right? Clarify in terms of that [change speaker] thats right, but the tax credit is an opposite income eligibility

did it for a weirdo, that get your mail to your fill of this decade of the program available for people that the claim that income eligibility and you have been here two years ago to know why that happened when did you or your time and that of the most out of hand, but that the attack and Bangladesh would be available only got to think of that that he can I tell them how well you have them from all the time of death, but then, all you can be a billionaire get the later years that if you have special needs Daly that the bill in the law. (SPEAKER CHANGES) The court has had to hang out here that I'm a happy-of-a lot like she actually you could help but the plane and Canada looking and all of that AP said that that required to turn the time without getting that neither fair to good that end, the public Dole plan to sell a lot of help that end of the fan and a good week, the poll that should that happen immediately channel, if happening turned out they can delegate from the plant corn, the platform that the method that happened to that the fed by the time I ever had the upper hand, and that a black and white happen, and the other employer requirement to know they can delegate the magic that happened you play for the two had time to plant a pole, backed up with good deal of that and that quickly of the edge of the best argument that hall and the death but after that? Include the appropriate help of one because I'm the confusion with college football and often produce two budget would like to discuss of London school of communication-10 to have the time and that's the key to encrypt hype that it could lot of time and to achieve that, that's not believe that you have to give up that day at halftime in the time to actively that ago that internally to fill that if the competition, which had back in the opinion of time thinking about the game and I said, you could have a whole question of activity stand trial at the lane that makes two and one of the fifties that claim maladies that can be that that part of activity will be K, FPAA park AM, K believe that the weapon that could land for the A , lake and after that, and to provide the information that the kind that got to the FDA A too high and claiming that does that kind of hoping that left the transitional provision have that there's not time, (SPEAKER CHANGES) shake your grandfather to end the party got it, and the party needs to them as great time for the given the left lane that could be a party backup from that time that the fed, even if the cliff that a good that they would be bad enough that they have to be left in the information to the verification anything that would not allow they would request that the time that they can have them into the public about-to-hand again and let conventions, the new chairman of the bible and they got back into play with bill of Italy the bill, basically and the car tax credit to the time college grad court bailiff it gets the end of the fact that they know I'm David Beltran feature the bill, let that fool the people willing to take part program is the only time if of difficult to plan for that will recommend that have been programmed to get the way the form of tax reform it but not the place of the more combative aria motion to do a little more time to open the GOP bill by the page and fed-up questions and then having a tough year that the question I just love to hear , and that, if this NAFTA and the 6 to 40-page to the children with special needs that column ??.....

exempt or exceeds current law. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stam [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well, as I said, 99% of the bill is what is explained. There is a couple of changes. One change is that they only have to be in the…remember the published school is a gatekeeper to give the I.E.P. Under current law, they have to be in public school a year to get the I.E.P., under this bill, a semester. So that is a slight change. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All right, thank you very much, we do have a motion for a favorable part, this is favorable for PCS unfavorable to the original bill. All in favor say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Opposed No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The ayes have it, and the motion passes. Thank you very much for your time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All right. And, Senator Tillman will carry that on the floor. And final one before say is House Bill 250. We read…a motion for a PCS do we have a motion? I do from Senator Newton. All in favor aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Opposed no. The ayes have it. The PCS is before us and Representative Hardister, you are recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee. House Bill 250. This bill, there's two sections to the bill. And if you don't mind I'll briefly discover the two sections, I'll make this as brief as possible. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Cook do you have a- [SPEAKER CHANGES] I have an amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] OK. Why don't we go over the bill and then we'll offer that amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman. I'll make this very brief. Essentially section one just gives charter schools more flexibility in how they conduct enrollment procedures. Section two allows charter schools more flexibility in how they expand grade levels. And Section one basically we're expanding the definition of siblings to include half and step siblings and so this way whenever a sibling applies to a charter school their half and step siblings can apply together, get into the charter school through the lottery, but only if the siblings live in the same household. We're allowing charter schools to give enrollment priority to the children of all full time employees, but these children cannot exceed 10% of the school's enrollment. And we're also allowing enrollment priority for a student who leaves a charter school for a period of less than two years but only if they leave to study in a state special academic program which is defined in the bill. Or if they child leaves the school as a result of their parents having to relocate due to vocational opportunity. As I said, Section two essentially just gives charter schools more flexibility in how they expand grade levels and that's laid out very clearly in the bill summary if you have it in front of you. With that, Mr. Chairman, I'd be glad to take questions and I do know that Senator Cook has an amendment to send forth. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, let's, has the amendment been passed out. It's being finalized and being passed out. Senator Cook, you are recognized to explain the amendment. Let's handle that first. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'd like to let the bill's sponsor explain it if he would. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir. Representative Hardister. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Senator Cook. Mr. Chairman, essentially, this amendment, this was brought to me from one of my colleagues in the house, Representative Dennis Riddell who is here today. And, what this pertains to is when a child goes into a charter school and their surname sibling which we're actually expanding the definition of that in of siblings and how they enter charter schools in this bill, but essentially what this does is if the children are years apart, like say they're 10 or 12 years apart the siblings are, and older sibling attends a charter school, completes the highest grade level, and has been at that school for at least four years then the younger sibling, who would not be enrolled at that school at the same time, would be given priority enrollment to enter that school. That's essentially what it does and I do know that Senator Wade is going to run this amendment for me this morning. She couldn't be here. So I appreciate Senator Cook allowing me to send out that forward and I'd be glad to answer any questions. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Tillman does give a motion for a favorable report. Do we have any questions? We have Senator Clark. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, a clarification on this amendment. Are we basically creating alumni status? That if you have an alumni of the school, their family gets in? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hardister? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman -

I don’t see it that way. I will trust the wisdom of the committee. Again I think that the situation, Senator, is if you have children who are close to the same age and they were being in school at the same time then that’s one situation where the children can be together as a household but sometimes parents have children that are years apart where they would not be in school at the same time. To me it seems sensible to allow them to have...but the way the bill is written, the elder sibling would have to complete the highest grade and be there for at least four years so to me it’s sensible to… [SPEAKER CHANGES] Clarification or follow-up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow-up [SPEAKER CHANGES] So we’re basically saying there isn’t a sibling enrolled at that time. Is that correct? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I’m sorry could you restate the question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Are you saying that for the consideration of a younger sibling who actually doesn’t have a sibling enrolled at the school? [SPEAKER CHANGES] That’s correct. The siblings would not be enrolled at the same time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chair? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes Senator Stein. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thanks. I understand the siblings at the same time because you are driving. You have to take your kid to one school then if you take the one kid to one school and then you inconvenience the other child and the parent by having to shuffle to multiple schools but charter school slots are filled by lottery and it’s something that everybody should have an equal chance to attend and if the inconvenience part is no longer a factor because the original child is out of the school then it really is an alumni provision and I don’t know that we should be giving entitlement to families because they got lucky once that they should have an advantage over somebody else who might want to get luck five years later. I just don’t think that it’s fair and consistent with the purposes of the charter schools. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hardister. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman. Senator I understand that concern. Again, I can see this both ways but personally, I think that it’s a good amendment that will just allow those parents to put their child through the same school that way the education can be uniform. Gives parents a little more flexibility and, if I’m not mistaken, I may ask staff to clarify for me but this does not require charter schools do this, it just gives them the flexibility to the board of directors to choose whether or not they want to do it this way. Is that correct? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Staff would you comment on it? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Staff affirms that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay. Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator do you have a question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman. Just a brief comment. I would say that we have really come a long way when we have reached a point where Senator Stein acknowledges that it is a lucky family who is able to escape the traditional public school and go to a charter school. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We have that in 49 counties. [SPEAKER CHANGES] [laughs] [SPEAKER CHANGES] I would like just one brief comment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Stein. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I always been in favor of giving parents the choice and I don’t think that escaping public school is quite the right characterization. If somebody wants to apply, they should have an equal shot to it and my point earlier is that it should be an open shot to everybody and so that if somebody wants to do it, it shouldn’t be about transportation and food and all that, as Senator Tillman remembers. What we’re doing is we’re just giving an advantage to somebody because they got lucky once and that just doesn’t seem right to me. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes Senator Tillman? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I want to see how Senator Stein votes on these charter bills when they come to the floor and see how big of a supporter he is or he is not and I’ll be noting that as I always do his votes. They’re interesting to me. Secondly, how in the world many could this be talking about? Families now don’t have more than two or three kids. Normally they’re not 16 or 18 kids and how many are going to complete four years? We’re talking about a very miniscule number and it’s very sort of a harmless bill. I think we ought to vote it one way or the other and see what happens. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Alright. We do have a motion before us. All in favor of the motion to put in the amendment say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye [SPEAKER CHANGES] Opposed no. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No [SPEAKER CHANGES] I’ll say the ayes have it. Thank you. We have a motion before us for a favorable report to the bill. Any questions regarding that? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Who PCS… [SPEAKER CHANGES] I’m sorry [SPEAKER CHANGES] …as amended, in favorable to the written. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Absolutely. Any further questions? We do have members of the public who we’d like to hear from. I see nothing from members. I will first have Leon Winter, if you’ll step up please, identify yourself and you have…

Two minutes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Good morning, I'm Leanne Winner with the North Carolina School Boards Association. I had not planned to speak on this bill today until the PCS came out. We had no issue with the bill as it came over from the House, but we do have some issues beginning on line 47 of page three of the bill, which is the part that allows the charter schools to grow without going back to the state board of education, and specifically we have concerns about little three I, there doesn't seem to be a four, and then on page four, five, and six. What this would do is it would allow charter schools to expand their grades without going back to the state board of education for approval. This could have a vast and profound impact on your small and mid-sized districts. This is, this immediately would probably have effect in Pamlico County where an application to grow their grade spanned for High School for their charter school at a Arapahoe was denied this year. It is in court right now. I know that the representative of the office of charter schools, Joel Medley, is here if there are questions about that, but that was denied specifically because of the profound impact it would have on the LEA. They were gonna have to shut down their high school if that was approved. So we would ask that those three parts be removed from this bill, and then we would have no objection to the bill. I'd be happy to answer any questions, mister Chairman, if there are any. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Great thank you Ms. Leanne. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mister Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Tillman? [SPEAKER CHANGES] We want to thank Leanne Winner, she's always up on these issues. However, if you believe in choice, if you believe in the marketplace, if you believe that the kids will go the place that meets their needs, then the parents will take them the place that meets their needs, some school systems are gonna be adversely affected. Yes, in poor, rural, small school systems they will be elected. Why would a charter set up in those districts? It's very simple. They set up there because they know that they can offer something that the parents need and want for their children. That's why we have choice. That's why I think that section of the bill is okay, and I don't think they have to go back for approval. I think that the market will determine whether those public schools or the charter schools survive. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. We do have another member of the public. Please identify yourself. Two minutes, please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you mister Chairman. Debbie Clary with the North Carolina Alliance for Public Charter Schools, and I'm also the chairperson of a charter board in Cleveland County for Pinnacle Classical Academy. Senator Tillman just stole my comments there, so that shortened them quite a bit Senator, but we do support this section of the bill because it is a cumbersome process as you come back, and what you're really doing is you're serving your families as they've reached the sixth grade, and you have a K through sixth charter school, then you need to have your child at that charter school and you need to expand to that seventh grade and the seventh and eighth grade. And it is a very cumbersome process to come back to do that expansion if your initial charter was only for the K through sixth, or a K through four, for example. And I think many of the charters applying now are learning to, as mine did, to apply for K through twelve to begin with. But some of the older charters are caught up in this, so basically it's trying to catch up some of the older charters that need to keep their children and keep continuity with those families. Thank you mister Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Do we have any further member, comments from the members. Seeing none, we do have a favorable report to the PCS as amended, enrolled into a new PCS, unfavorable to the original bill, favorable to the new PCS. All in favor say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Opposed no. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The ayes have it and the motion passes and thank you for your time. The meeting is adjourned. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you mister Chairman, members of the committee.