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 | June 11, 2015 | Committee Room | Finance

Full MP3 Audio File

Please. Good morning. We've got one guy, one guy. Good morning. Good morning. Good morning, all right. despite what your agenda says, I'm not chairman Kelly Heistins[sp?]. I am chairman Jason Seine. Chairman Heistins had to be away so I'll take over his duties for this morning morning introducing our sergeant in arms. We've got Reggie Seals, Marvin Lee, Barry More, B. H Pal. Good morning to you all. And house pages in the finance committee today or Carly Perry from Wake County sponsored by representative Paul Stan. Tap [xx] from Bouffard county, sponsored by representative Paul Tine, Spencer Magnum from Wake county sponsored by representative John Robinson, Dillan Melvin from Blatant County sponsored by representative William Benson Memo from Orange county Part of us that represent Billy Wilistone and Jay Tolingtone from Wake county part us that represent Hostel, thank you all. first on the agenda, we will, I want to refer Senator 140 to the House finance sub committee on tax. Next up recognizing Chairman Stevens Ross to reporting bills from the House Finance Sub-Committee on annexation and de-annexation. Chairman Ross. Thank you Mr. Chairman, the house committee, sub-committee on annexation de-annexation made yesterday, and the following bills were reported favorable to the full Finance Committee, House Bill 386, house floor 411, house floor 412, house [xx] 141 Senate Doc. 218, Senate Doc. 236, and house bill 131 Thank you Mr. Chairman. First up on our agenda we'll try to help our senators that are here with us up all night preparing gifts for us like Santa Claus, we respect their lack of sleep and their effort to help us, so first up, Senate Bill 256, Durham voluntary annexations adjacent streets, Senator Mc[sp?], you're recognized.  Thanks sir and a motion to have the bill enforced by Representative Brolly. Thank you Mr. Chair, this is a very simple bill, it's a local bill, it came to us Durham city council and Durham city manager, it basically says that when there is a voluntary annexation, that you also be able to annex any elongation or streets or public write aways to voluntary annexations, so we'd appreciate your support of this local bill [xx] Representative Hamilton For mention at the appropriate time Representative Hamilton Representative Libky[sp] Representative Hamilton, this is one of the few [xx] bills that's come through this committee [xx] [xx] [xx] Indeed I will sir. Any other discussion? Representative Motion Thank you, Mr. Chairman move favor report for senator bill 256. Is that a pcs? It's not.   Okay. a favor report on house Senate bill 256 Where the motion before us seconded by Representative Hannington all those in favor of [xx] motion say I those opposed like the bill passes. Thank you Chair, members of the committee represented [xx] on the floor Next up Senate bill 682 by motion of representative [xx] we have modified some set regarding contingent orders before us recognizing the bill sponsor [xx]. Thank you Mr. Chairman and I also want to let everybody know that there was a companion bill house file 42 that was sponsored by Brolly kind of sounds like an expensive law firm to me. But, anyway what this will do is to make this my prominent the for the senses profession on the contagiancy of the profit for senses profit on local governments, we passed that back in '12, made it effective '13. It [xx] July 1st of 2015. What this to be simple make this to be more prominent, Here is the good news all this still going on  taxes accessories for what you have been doing for free pay have not heard anything from any counties or city municipalities so I really do appreciate your support. Thank you. For [xx] Butel represent yourself? Mr. Chair in 2012 I made the senate bill and never lack the sense that to start with so I am glad to see it leave. The end of discussion. Representative Brown for your motion. Thank you Mr. Chair for the senate bill 682 motion

before us, all in favor say I, I! Those in oppose say no, thank you senator appreciate your help, builders pass. As senator Dave is presenting the two bills does anyone, there he is. senator Davis if you will we have a motion before us by representative Brawley to have senate bill 141 [xx] for annexation referendum before us. Senator Davis you're recognized thank you chairman Zane and members of the committee I'm delighted to be here this morning, we did have a late night but I guess we'll have a few of those as well. The way it's annexation referendum has been modified from a bill that was passed the senate last time, and this time we're going to back a few years the jury Collin that prior to 1959 this was a common occurrence to give the people that are going to be annexed and the people that are annexing a vote on the referendum to do just that. So that's basically what this bill does, allows [xx] to be annexed into the town of Lanes Ville, Lake Junaluska initiated this, every governing body associated with Lake Junaluska has approved and asked for this My understanding is that every elected body Haward county passed resolution in favor of this annexation so I ask of your favorable report, we have members of various groups here the town manager of Winesville Mercy O'Neil is here, Jackie Ewing the executive director of Lake Junaluska Assembly is here Ron Clauser, the Chair of the Municipal Study Task Force Bill, King the past chair of the community council and trustee and Clifton Marker who was a long term resident and in additional Chip Kelly who is a Haward county attorney and for we questions we say was long time like residents so we are people I understand we also have some people and opposition to this bill here, and so I presume all are available for a comment or questions. Should you so choose. Thank you senator members of the committee is there any one wishing to speak on this bill? Representative Martin question. Thank you Mr. Chairman and I did receive a number of emails in favour in oppose to this, and one question that was raised that I'm interested in is that there is there are some a den that's impacted and who would be taking care of that and that impacted by the annexation can use speak to that. Yes the dam is not impacted by the annexation. Okay Representative Adams. I just like to hear from the opposition I would like to hear what did you get so much support I'd like to hear what the opposition is. Accomplishment I any one wishing to speak any audience that oppose or any body in the committee oppose to this, and if you oppose please press the microphone, state your name and if you represent if you are elected or representing organisation please state that as well. I'm Mike Jordan, I'm the real Michael Jordan real [xx] I represent a group called opposition to rate journal annexation by Winefull several facts as you need to know first of the 751 home only 339 will be registered to vote living full time in Alaska the other 457 . 1% cannot vote among this are life long people North Carolinian's who live else where during the year but also among those are folks like my brother Bob who is a navy commander for 21 years two tours in Vietnam, Niar Charlie Howard who also I was a navy pilot during the Korean conflict Donald Eatman[sp?] who's only brother killed during Vietnam war and this are folks who do not live here for the full time they will be disenfranchised 57.1% home owners will not be able to vote I ask you to reconsider approving this bill because it will be a terrible thing to do this folks are good citizens of the 34 homes on our street 29 of non-occupied during the year so those 29 folks were, not one is be able vote and among those 29 of 13 farmers  who live elsewhere in North Carolina. I beg you not to pass this bill, to disenfranchise this other citizens, thank you. Thanks sir.

Mr Chairman if I may respond to that. Senator you are recognized. As considerable expense there have been two different polls taken of these individuals because there so many absentee home owners, land owners in like, in Alaska and there have been two polls taken and of the of the ballots that they receive back more than 60 of these people are in favor of this annexation and also I failed to mention that Representative queen is here and he also Represents this and area and he could be available to any questions if you so chose. Thanks senator Representative Connie, Thank you Mr. Chairman and this has been before us numerous occations and in the past I've served several terms on the Joint Municipal and Corporation committee and I just have a question because I have heard a lot both sides but the ones with the opposition are referencing in our statute about an [xx] and that's the contagiousness of this property. Tell me, do the properties within [xx]  are they contiguous with the boundaries of the town of Wellsville? They're not, this is a unique situation and Mr. Chairman if I can defer to either Jacky Ling or Mercy O'Neal to answer that question with specificity. Yes sir again please state your name and who you are with for the committee. I am Mercy [xx] town manager of the town of [xx]. I believe the sergeant of arm has put a map in front of you which shows the actual boundaries, the [xx] is contiguous to satelite a in parcels to the town of Wellsville but not to the corporate boundaries is very close, they're about six properties that separate the corporate boundaries from this annexation but it does not meet the character required by the current statutes to be an [xx] to render voluntary or involuntary measure and that's why we come to the legislature. Thank you, madam. Representative Bill. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, just a comment and I get the question. I normally stay out of our local bills [xx] we obviously have a lot of phone as well on this and and it concerns me that I look like the area is annexed and the city and the county is not going to reap the benefit and they're not going to be able to in the home or if I just with the expensive dam is that appropriate to say in this case senator? Senator. My understanding is the dam recently paced in inspection that can last for some years and the [xx] could speak to that but the dam is in good shape actually the hormones wants to say annexation take place there are taxes that they are going to be paying in the town of this bill there can be no grater or even may be no less then the hormone association does they are paying and services are going to be greater Thank you senator how soon is it? Just stand up, if you would state your name, and who you're with from the committee Thank you. My name is Jack Huang, Executive Director of Lacher Alaska, the dam and the area that the lake and the area around the Lake is owned by the South Eastern Jurisdiction of the United Methodist church and regardless of Annexation or not, the dam, the lake and the area around the lake, will continue to be owned by and the responsibility for will be by the South Eastern Jurisdiction by Lacher Alaska Assembly incorporated, governed by a board of trustees, the property owners do not at the present time pay their service fees, do not go to maintain the dam, nor will that occur in the future unless the property owners chose to do so. Our deeds are restricted restrictive that do not allow for service fees that are currently collected to be applied to the maintenance of the dam. Thank you Representative Brawley do you have question? Thank you Mr. Chairman I actually had a question for the gentleman that's spoken opposition. Yes sir if you'll state your name and who you're with Mike Jordan. This is interesting, we've got the Chicago Bulls and Ewing [xx] represented here today. I'm the Bull. Sir you referenced that you represented an organisation in opposition how many home owners are members of your organisation? At least 25 - 30 I thank you Sir any other members committee wishing to speak.

Seeing none, do we have members of the public willing to speak? For a time not to exceeding three minutes you should state your name and the organisation you are with sir. My Name is John Davids I'm an engineer, a property owner and a resident of Lake Junaluska, and as you heard from Mike Jordan Senate Bill 141 would disenfranchise about 60% the property owners in Lake Junaluska, so I ask myself what extraordinary circumstance could there be to justify such a measure I have seen none. From my perspective with decades of experience in engineering, budgeting, finance, public administration the argument for annexation from Lake Junaluska perspective properties owners perspective extreme weak has been said there was a survey done, and without getting into the details of the survey. no inferences can be made on the community opinion after this side survey because there was an attempted senses of 100% sampling but they got 60% response rate so we can't make any inference on community opinion because it wasn't likely to a rent The Propecia brought procell and know we have two bills buddy for the last two years example, and here we are again for third bill and the perfect frank about it I think we need to have more discussion, more consensus building inside our community we are bringing in for you. I think we need open and thorough community discussion to slow [xx] the unbiased experts not anger the cloud of an annexation vote, especially one that disenfranchises 60% of the community. Time is needed for a complete review as well those exploring other options that seem to beg for consideration. There should be no hurry in this. Thank you for your time and consideration, I ask you to oppose Senate bill 141 Representative Jones Thank you Mr. Chairman, I have a question and I the bill sponsor would like to answer this or he may want to defer it to staff, but if this is a voluntary annexation, would it be possible for the majority of the property owners to partition to be voluntarily annexed. Would that be an avenue by which they could voluntarily and next That's senator I think that probably be a question for staff since there are non resident and they can't vote and again I will tell you that every attempt was made to get this peoples opinion by polling them on two different occasions and they, over 60% of the respondees were in favor on this annexation, so I don't know what else you can do unless they move they heard they can, they will they can't vote if they are not citizens [xx] wish to comment on I'm sorry [xx] two areas where I think there was some questions one is there is constitution pendent land ownership can be barrier going to the polls so it's you can't let people, let our property owners vote is that on constitution so then the other question was about of the voluntary annexation I think that [xx] was talking about that I don't think they can need it, but voluntary annexation requirement is unanimity and so they don't have that and I think they will be other requirements they couldn't meet. Thank you sir. May I follow up Mr. Chair? Follow up. Just to make sure I'm clear is there a probation by which a majority of property owners could petition to be voluntarily annexed? Mr. Chairman. Senator Again you may want to confirm this by staff my understanding is that is not so [xx]  Right, it's got to be not majority to be voluntarily annex under a general law. where are residences hailing from, now representative Ross Thank you Mr Chairman there used the bill sponsor, will this not be equivalent to any other resort community that we have in North Carolina? For example a beach community, I own a piece of property at the beach, it's a second residence, I don't get to vote there understand that because I own the property as I've said a second home. Is this not the same type thing as far as voting is concerned.

I vote where I live, not where I own my second home and is it also not true that the property owners could also register to vote and like [xx] they chose to do so my understanding and a number of calls that I have received were people from Florida I can understand why they might want to be registered in Florida for tax purposes but you know they own the property up here in a resort area so is this not the same thing as other resort areas of North Carolina as far as voting. Senator Mr. Chairman that's my understanding, yes. I think if the property owners wanted to move there and as they're residents, then they can register to vote there, but if they're not a resident there, and like you say many people have property in Western North Carolina specificaly and they live other places specifically Florida to avoid State income tax, that's where the residence is and that's where they go Any other members of the committee wishing to speak, now would be the proper time for a motion. representative Jones. Thank you. Actually I do wish to speak. It's not on this motion, if I may Mr. Chair You're recognised Yes, sir.  I find this a very difficult issue, and I think many of us do. It has been something that's going on for quite quite a long time, and we've had a lot of emails and mails and so forth from both sides and so I'm just going to talk through my process of thought here for just a moment, and give others on the committee or the bill sponsor or others perhaps to tell me why I maybe be right or wrong. My question that I asked earlier was significant to me, because I was trying to determine was there another legitimate way, that the property owners could apply for a voluntarily Ant Annexation and apparently the answer is none unless they are unanimously in favor of that, I am very sympathetic to the argument that I hear from the opponents said, particularly the gentleman that spoke, because he's a friend of mine, he's a former constituent of mine, lived in my district. With that said, I'm also edict to the idea that we are a democratic republic, and we have made a provision by which this annexation can be determined voluntarily through a vote, as Representative Ross said, by people who choose to live there, to be residences there, and I'm sympathetic to the fact that the majority of property owners don't live there but it seems to me as I think representative Rose was saying that they made that decision and I also it sound right to me that if I'm understanding this correctly, that the leadership who I assume is elected by property owner or the board I can be corrected on that, but is in favour of this so if all that is true it seems like to me it's reasonable to allow a vote if I am wrong if it's something I have said please correct me but that's king of the process because I really come in here not knowing for sure how I would vote I wanted to here the discussion but I would be happy to hear any further discussion and argument thank you for the opportunity for me to vet my thoughts a little bit Mr. Chair, Rem Stam and then Representative Warren 2011 we had long long debates about involuntary indexation and I'm not a purist on it, their are some don at holes to be involuntary [xx] their some exceptional circumstances where seware septic tanks are failing main water line are failing but in general we adopted a policy in 2011 and the problem is not voluntary indexation because obviously this is not voluntary the problem is it does not fit our criteria for involuntary inexesation[sp?] their is a process it just doesn't work which is why the bill is perforce if their was just an extra ordinary reason for this I would vote for it but I just don't see the extra ordinary [xx] Thank you Rep. Stam, Rep. Warren I ask to speak on the bill Rep. Jones. May I pause a question to Rep. Stam. You may sir, Rep Stam if you yield. Yes. I guess my question is their is a vote on this why would it not considered a voluntary accusation in my misunderstanding

if they are having a referendum why would it not be voluntary? Rep. Stam Well you are wrong because volunteer for decades have been two types in indexations voluntary is when every property owner partitions for indexations that called voluntary, involuntary is where some or none of the people want to be annexed and there are standards that we debated at great lengths in 2011 you remember all the red shirts here that [xx] there are standards that have to be met and because it's involuntary as to some property owners so what this is doing is since it doesn't qualify for voluntary and it doesn't qualify for involuntary, there is a third way in that come to the legislature and I think I did a bill a couple of years ago of legislative annexation to NX the bridge going over 540 because it didn't qualify for volunteer or a voluntary I'm not being pure about it I'm just saying after all of the policy discussion we had in 2011 this just doesn't fit. Can I follow Mr. Chair? Yes follow up. Could I just ask the staff if they would concur with representative Sterms explanation is not being a voluntary annexation. Yes sir I think [xx] might have some comment about these two but there's, I think they saying [xx] about this bill, you're allowed to vote and then that vote would be away to not require the anonymous vote that you need under general would be an accurate statement so this is a way for this community to change that requirement. Thank you Representative [xx] Thank you Chair just for a comment and a motion in the appropriate time this is the remition of the late James and [xx] in comparison to the absentee ownership issue but our comments this bill was accompanied by almost unanimous signatures of just [xx] elected body around the affected area and it does call for a referendum so for that, because of those reasons I would have the appropriate time I can make the motion for a favorable report. If anyone else wishes to speak I think that would be the appropriate time anyone else wishing to speak? Members of the committee Representative Jordan. I guess I'm sorry I had to drag this out as the issue of the General sanitary district been brought up at all? I guess that will be a question for maybe this bill's sponsor or? Senator Davis. Yes not his morning but I think Mr. Uing[sp? Could address that either Mr. Uing[sp?] or I would like to ask about that Okay. The question that was asked wasn't [xx] Mr. Chair and [xx] the chair of the municipal study task force is here and he can address that question Mr. [xx] if you state your name and wait for the committee and you have the forward for three minutes. [xx] lives in [xx] Alaska Mr. Chair and members of the finance committee. Early on we had four different options we could look at and one of the options included the lake Alaska senatorial district plus the town of Weinsville just taking over the pipes and the water and as we went forward we weren't thinking in terms of whether annexation was the way to go or not we were thinking in term of what's the best for the future of lake University and because Senator [xx] is pass through same as [xx] and we reviewed that option we made a motion earlier on that they didn't qualify for further study and we had a unanimous decision from the task force not to consider that further Thanks Sir representative Jordan So what was the reason for not continue with it? For one thing if we buy water from Weinsville they're the source of the water and if you're look at the next 100 years and you think water might be a problem in California it might be a problem among the places like well and we wanted to go the source of he water and not go to organisation that is a purchase from Weinsville just like we are and so we have another pass through instead of going to source.  Thanks Sir from the public that has not spoken,

I will recognize you to give everyone a chance before we move forward. Good morning, my name is Welt Logan for property owners for 25 years at the lake where residents Florida were here now that I'm retired, there's a soccer judge. We're here approximately five months out of the year. Just a couple of points. The ultimate leadership of the lake is not elected it's called the trustees and we talk about non residents, the majority of the voting members of the trustees do not own property at Lake Junaluska. With regard to the [xx] District, that option was never really studied, never went to the [xx] District and said would you look at us, can you handle us. This is a district that handles a hospital, a school, a shopping center, and my wife and I feel they can handle our water and sewer. It's a big out field, very large district. One other thing on funding the [xx] jurisdiction was here in rally in 2009 before the Supreme Court arguing that poll ability to assess the property owners. That's found at 363 North Carolina 590 or 683 South Eastern second 366. They have the equivalent to taxing authority for some limited areas. They want to hold land to the ability to tax us by way of assessment so we would be paying city taxes and be subject to paying assessments for things that we would be paying the city of [xx] like security if we going to still have that, and the thing about the lake and the dam it's not included. That's $400, 000 a year I'm and more concern is property owners we might be looked to will fund that expenditure, and there is a road over the bridge so I guess the town will be in judge of the roads but not to the dam under the road nor do they have any responsibility for the upkeep of the dam worthy 400, 000. For the like, so we were to urge that the bill they have voted on unfavorably is there any questions? Thank you. Mr Chairman I'm sure if I may, You may yes sir.  I'll like you to call on Mr Yu Wing I'm sure that he can response to those concerns.  If you have please state your name for the committee you are recognized for a time not to exceed three minutes. Jack Yowen executive director of want to clarify a couple of things one of which is the responsibility of the board of trustees. Mr. Login is absolutely correct that the board of trustees representing the south eastern jurisdiction of the United Methodist Church and they are from across the southeast the board of trustees, the executive committee of the board of trustees have taken a formal motion to state that they will not impose any additional service fee after annexation would take place without the recommendation of then Lake Junaluska community council, what's called the Junaluska assembly community council that is an elected body and therefore the board has identified despite the fact that they have the authoritry is identified in the restrictive governance they have said that they will not exalt any authority over accessing fees after annexation unless the community council chooses to do so the road over the dam will continue to be part of the dam and not the responsibility of the town of the town of Winsward. Thank you senator, representative John. The question Mr ullline. Mr Ulline if you could. Mr Ulline I don see any resolution are the only thing for this community council can you address that. It is the community council secretary is there, the general assembly community council. The said so one signature in the first

page is the entire community council.  Mr Ulline if you would.  That is collect the chair of the community council signed on behalf of the community counts of it. The minutes of the community counsel will reflect unanimous report for this. The approval, by the board of trustees to pursue in an exertion with the town of Wanesful came only after, a recommendation through the Community Council from the Municipal Study Task Force. And the community council unanimously recommended that in March of 2013. Representative one, for your motion. Thank you Sir, I make for a favorable report for senate bill 141. Those who oppose, all those in favor [xx] further say I, I!. Those oppose like say no and I'm sure that the yes have it and the bill passes thank you senator, next possible if we have one more for you to send a bill 218, by motion of, representative Bowling senate bill 218 before us that simply can urge bill senate like sessions. Senator Davis. Thank you Mr. Chairman, I doubt whether anybody has got any email on this one this started out as a Frankling annexation on the dress that part of it about 35 years ago, highway 441, US 441, was expanded to a five lane, going south of Franklin, and from a two lane, and during that time it wiped out, a subdivision, and so recently, they were looking at giving permit for developer to put some property. I mean to service station, as part of that property, and they determined that they were running several annexation laws. There are 12 property owners in this sub-division or what's left of it, they didn't even know that it was still a sub-division. And two of the property owners have been allocated that 10, 000 helps sign that they were on the table of the senate session that tells us that something that at time and Frankline asked for so that is the Frankline's point. The multi-party states that there is one property ownership in adjacent to the time of multy if you would like to be DNS he is going to trying this for some use the time just agree that I think we would like to hear from senator Jubidy Anex I should they that part was provided later and by senator of Pelmentand the one property owner in subdivision and I understand wants to be Jay ston wants to be an extend Webson bill subdivision do not and so I know of no opposition to any of these. Thank you senator, anyone wishing to speak? Representative sterm. As in most react I have say this they hear fabrication of the meal [xx] yeah, I goes in this room I'm an office committee. So of all the the kids in fav well may be this individual has some problem with children, I don't know any how it has to speak seeing that the motion will be in order. The motion from Representative Brawley for a favor on Senate bill 218, all in favor vote by saying aye, aye. Those opposed  no, so the bill has passed, congratulations thank you sir, the subject committee, next two bills will take up on behalf of Representative Luis, Representative Browley will present chair believe this will not be to controversial we'll dispatch this so we move on with our business house bill 411, turn around the deannexation  before us. Thank you Mr Chairman, senator Davis is going to be a tough act to follow. This committee has once again proved one of my favorite axioms that the difference between reality and fiction is that fiction has to make sense. House Bill 411 is a deannexation of a 150 acres from the town of Angier it is sponsored by purpose of manner by Representative Luis and Representative Salmon. Representative Salmon was here but he does need to attend to his duties and the appropriations committee there is no known opposition Mr Chairman I would like to move for a favorable report to House Bill 411 the motion anyone else wishes to speak, seeing none the motion before us, all in favor [**] I I Those who oppose like sign and the bill passes. Mr. Chairman I would like

move that the proposed committee substitute for house bill 412, an act to at certain properties to the city of Dunnebier forest Thank you sir. The bill is proposed, house bill 412 It's annexation of approximately 10.5 acres in to the city of Dunn there is no known opposition. Mr. Chairman I would like to move a favorable report to the PCS, unfavorable to the original bill. We have a motion any others wishing to discuss the bill, Representative Stam May I assume that no opposition means that the property owner wants it I believe you can assume that sir. It's my understanding that there was no known opposition and I'm sure the property owner would be screaming if he were or she were unwilling to be annexed. The association speak, motion is before us. All those in favor signify by saying aye, aye those who oppose like sign and the bill passes. Thank Mr. Chairman.  Thank you sir. Representative Zachary.  Alright.  Alright well the motion by representative Zachary  that we have house bill 386, Hopemills, Spring lake satellite annexation before us. Sir you're recognized.  Thank very much Mr. Chairman, members of the committee this does not involve any property. If you've read the bill somewhere in the bill it's fairly straight forward. The question I will answer is why do they need this because of past satellite annexations the town of Hopemill we got sort of this patchwork of things going on and are looking to the future particularly down to an intersection of Hopemill's road and 195 where the there's an intersection, and this will help them in the future when planning to economically develop that. Likewise up in the Northern end of the county, Spring Lake borders Fort there's been a lot of economic development up there, so this will help them to plan for the future in a much more coherent way and ask for your support. Thank you sir, anyone wishing to speak on the bill? seeing none we have the motion before us by representative Joker, all those in favor seen by saying aye  Aye, those oppose like same, and the bill passes,  congratulations. it appears, Representative Goodman, Representative Goodman will be presenting this is house bill 247 by the motion Representative Goodman the bill is before us you're recognized sir than you Mr. Chairman, members of the community. This bill is a bill that would authorize Hope County to levy one half sales tax for local option for school construction and renovation. There will be a referendum before this can be done Hoke County is one of the fastest growing if not the fastest growing county in the state, and they just are out of classroom space. So this is something that they have have to do in some way, and I ask for your support. I do have someone here from Hope County that represents the school board if there are any questions can you represent the government. Any members of the conduition[sp?] speak, represent [xx] I thought they already had that authority passed about six years ago to increase the sales tax with the [xx].  I think they are they've used that authority. We'd have to refer to staff on that.  Do we have staff on this?  Staff, anyone wish to comment? Representative Stam, if you're referring to the local options sales tax under article 46 that can be used in school construction, Hoke County has not levied at 2%, their local tax. Rep. Stam. Why is this bill I believe because we're asking for a half cent. Half instead of a quarter? any other questions for the bill sponsor? Rep. Jones. Just a brief question and thank you, Mr. Chair. Is the entire delegation in favor This bill. They are the delegations in favor of it. There were unanimous resolutions by the board of commissioners and the school board as well Rep. Carney. For a motion at the proper time.  I believe now would be the proper time I move for a favorable report for House Bill 247.  Motion is before us. Rep. Stam?  One more question. Sure.  It's probably for staff will this allow him to do house sit plus the one quarter or is it limited to a half cent in this bill. We first starve Mr. Chairman Starve the right answer Sure now this will allow to them levy the half turn in addition to all the other local options local failed taxes so it if you looked at the bill summary if County was to levy all of the local options help taxes that are available to it, and it

could have a local rate of 3%.  Representative Stam local bill that incur the spot off but I guess if they do it in the quarter, they would be up there with [xx] No Representative Roy Actually they would be half percent above Monteburg County and A bill quarter of percent about dome, and ange[sp?] cunny could be the highest local tax credits Could I restrict giving the question? [xx] if your intent is to get [xx]  would you be amidable[sp?] to making clear that this is not in addition to the quarter [xx] That's not given? [xx] Representative Stam I will like to make that amendment either here or o the floor and it's not that I like people in [xx] county it's not that I care about Hoke county I just don't want to set a precedent so I'd like to make that amendment and I live it up to the chair whether to wait a minute have it prepared or up for the floor. Representative Stan if you don't mind let's save that for the floor if the bill sponsor if agreeable let's just do it on the floor so [xx] that would be fine. That would be fun OK great we have a motion Representative Connie. Thank you Mr Chairman a question of the bill sponsor you said that this is I have made the motion and I'm going to support it but you said this is is for school. Is this for a specific school? Representative Goodman It is there is more than one school involved its for several projects within school system Hoke county they don't have enough desks for students and this is gong to expand the high school and I believe there's some middle school renovation to be done as well but it is specific for school renovation and construction and follow up. Follow up So if the end of those are those if those are specified projects at the end of the completion of those projects will this tax go away? [xx] projects are paid off if they will go away Thank you, any other reason to speak should be probably better and I understand, thank you for being a great vote to pass Poland to the floor Representative Connie has made the motion before us all those in favor signify by saying aye, aye  those opposed like same so the aye's have it the bill passes congratulations. Thank you Mr Chair members of the committee thank you. Last on our agendas house bill 131 Representative Presnell Representative Brady read the motion TSC before us recognizing the bill sponsor with the personnel. Thank you Mr. Chairman yes the PCS just changes the effective date and I'm good get that. This is marginally the store over them and one mayor. I'm sure all of you got the paper that was dated 2015 and it is not arrived copy of the former undermanned that could not get this bill passing 2012 our Representative [xx] and just never get around to, it an eight foot wide road no [xx] no turn around 14 pieces of property in the 11 homes and how many ask to design home [xx] agreement up to the town try get the turn around but to a concrete well and I'm just asking that we go ahead and do extend because the services to start there thank you Representative Personnel, any question for the bill sponsor? Representative Luke. Thank you Mr. Chairman the Personnel I got a lot of there other see through the email from the town council and it oppose this is the annexation and merely discussion directly with the council a bout this I have. No Personnel. I have not but the home man has did go the new undermanned and this paper we had was in 2012, but they know the rises in 2015 so that it did not get doen before and now the board has changed, and they're opposing it. Representative Lincoln. Thank you Representative Presnell. Mr. Chairman is anyone from town here ot have a comment. Does anyone from the town in the audicnec that would like to speak. yes If you get the microphone there, and state your name for the committee. Thank you Mr. Chairman, I'm on the president of this small community, Road Maintenance Group, 11 houses, total of

14 members to specifically respond to Representative's question, Evergreen heights has attempted cooperation with the town of Maggie in 2008, before annexation, and we demonstrated that there was no turnaround, in 2010 the town conceded that there was no turnaround In 2011-2012 we had other meetings with the town concerning how high up the road they might be able to get some of their service trucks and then the town voted three to two that the Dannex upper portion of the community but they never acted on it. In 2014 I personally met with the Town Manager and the service manager to determine if there was something we could do. Build us a sub-standard turnaround, do something. They annexed  the property, they didn't is the road, the road is totally our responsibility we pay for taxes and if we want for services we can put tens of thousand of dollar into that road to make it work. So we've tried to work with the town, they've stiff-armed us I believe in truth they can back the truck up for the first three houses and they can pick up three garbage cans but they can't get the rest of the road so we are looking for, we looking for deannexation because we got all the services that we needed from the county, the only thing different that now is gonna provide for us his trash and private pickup and we cannot do that because of the rain and quite frankly we have  a number of kids  on the road now and gone from the playing board to skip forwarding and it took wide long age some both sides we should not be backing up record of trouble of any sign, around these groups and we keep nose on we put signs up, it's just not safe. And I have a whole other list of things to talk about but I think I've spent enough time. We tried to work with them, their idea is to pay the taxes required. Thank you Sir. Representative Waddell. Thank you Mr. Chair, I just wanted to ask a question the gentleman just was speaking if it would be OK to Mr. Chair. Sir if you would please press the mic again and state your name. Yes Sir. thank you sir for responding to my question. My question is, you mentioned that the town did not annex the road is that correct? That is correct. Follow up? Follow up. Was there a specific reason when they added this property that they were not going to annex to road or they disclosed to you folks? Yes sir, they have. They have determined that the road is substandard, does not DOT dual lane wide, two lane wide, with a certain amount of substrata. The road actually don't even have a rider way was just laid down across the boundary lines of properties. Thank you sir, Representative Jones thank you Mr. Chair for a motion at the appropriate time. Yes sir, Representative Ross. Thank you Mr. Chairman, I have a question for the bill sponsor, I'm looking at this sort of like a number of different condo communities that were built back in my city that to kind of sprout out over several streets, and I know in my community when condo communities have been, there are a number of them that have been built that, where the builder or the developer does not build a road that state standards and I know my city doesn't take heavy trucks onto those roads, but they've made accommodation as well like putting large trash receptacle the land of the area to accommodate and these issues that come up before for us where I want my specter at the door and that kind of things, but there are circumstances I know where cities just physically can not get into a property and frankly probably shouldn't as the road is going to crumble underneath the track, but my question is left two questions one has the city made any effort to put any kind of trash pick up system or receptical when the law depends on something for the neighbourhood.  Yes they we are going to put it at the bottom of the hill this is the road that goes very curvy and straight up and ends at the gate. They are going to put it up

at the bottom of the hill in a curve and private property and they told the home owners it would cost them about $8, 000. Thank you and then. Follow up. Follow up.  Second question is has the county commissioner way down on this at all?  Yes I have not received any information from the county commissioners at all.  Follow up.  Follow up. If they would be taking all additional services this comes out of the city I think they probably should have some opinion on it but Mr. Helpas, would you That's hard What's your name for the committee?   The Green Heights concerning the services of we would go back to the way there was when we were county where everybody takes their trash to the county dump just like we do right now except for the three houses at the bottom of the road that do get picked up. Concerning a major trash at the bottom of the valley unfortunately this is Maggie valley and if have trust substicle on round 276 on a Sunday as the campus were leaving you are suddenly filled up the town in the Maggie valley has problems right now with the stressful was a long soccer road because as I have said on the Monday morning the got all this garbage damped on next to them in the mountains, substicle like  that cause the bear to came down and the vomits to that is what has happened at what in so called gap and they have signed just don't damp extra property be careful when you are dumping it just be careful there might bear inside it is not a valuable alternative for that mountain in the community thank you Representative Lokie. Thank you Mr. Chair since we have received that letter from the town I wonder if you know is there's anyone from the town council who has come here to speak and if so we can hear from them.   Is there anyone from the town council in the audience that would like to speak None that I'm aware of' Senator thank you. Thank you. Yes sir. Representative John  if no one else wish to speak I'll recognize the free motion.  Thank you Mr. Chair, I move for a favor of a report to the committee committee state two for house bill 131 and favorable to the original.  We have the motion before us and those in favor say aah and those in opposing like saying an am sure the aah have it the aah to have it and the bill passes and nothing before us we adjourn the senate thank you very much