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 | May 18, 2016 | Chamber | House Session Local Government

Full MP3 Audio File

[BLANK_AUDIO] [SOUND] We'll call this meeting to order the local government, welcome everyone, our pages today, Richard Lee III from Wake County, sponsored by Representative Brian Turner, William Newholan, chatham county, Representative Gene Farmer Butterfield, Daniel Murry, Almants/g sponsored by Representative Denis Roddel. Everlyn Warner from Gaston county sponsored by Speaker Tim Moore. Sergeant of arms Young Bay, Jim Moran Joel Austin and Martha Gerderson/g. Thank you all for being here today. We get started today with representative Conrad house bill 1058. Tobaccoville Recall election. [BLANK_AUDIO] Thank Mr. Chairman Tobaccoville is a very small municipality that lies totally in the house district 74. Has a population of 2441 people out of that 1715 are registered voters. A group of citizens come to me prior to the session and asked that a provision for recall elections be added to the Tobaccoville Charter they've been a city since 1991. In this bill it states that if a partition was started that 20% of those 1700 registered voters would have to sign petition. They have a mayor, four town council member. Very very small. Is small rural community. 20% would have to sign the petition which then goes to the preside board of elections and they certify course of the signatures are valid. And that this are registered voters withing the town limits of Tobaccoville. Then once that's certified notification goes back. Back to the town council who would then if they wished for whichever particular office was called for a recall election it would have to held when their would be another election. We are already to late to get on the June should they proceed this. But it would have to be say if it was this year. There is a backstory as to why the city has asked for this, but I won't bother you with that saga unless there is a member of this committee that wants to hear about why this request has come from >> Thank you Representative Conrad. Chairman Davis/g. >> Thank you Mr. Chairman. I make a motion for a favorable report. >> We have a motion on the floor Any discussion? Representative Luebke. >> Mr. Chairman and actually representative, I would have a question as to is this something that is advocated by the city council? Do they want it themselves? Do we call elections or what's the history- >> It's advocated by the The history of this. >> Well earlier in the year the mayor wanted to present to the town council and the city a very restrictive gun ordinate. And this is a very rural community, much more restrictive than the [UNKNOWN] county ordinance. And there was a real backlash from the citizens In the community and they planned to show up at a public hearing for this. He really didn't want anyone to show up, he just kind of wanted to get a vote on it and get it through. So when he heard there was gonna be a large crowd, he went to the office and cleaned it out, and turned in his keys and called the Town attorney he just works part time with a law firm Winston/g Salem/g told him he was resigning, and called the local newspapers so what was in there. So he had already left by the time they had the town council meeting to vote on the ordinance, which was not passed. Then And at that meeting one of the town council member's also made a motion to make the mayor [UNKNOWN] the acting mayor. Unfortunately this attorney who no longer works for Tobaccoville basically stayed silent during all this. Gave them no advice on how to handle with the resignation of the mayor. Or what Or what kind of appropriate motions to make to replace him or anything. And then about a week later when they were having a budget workshop the resigned Mayor showed up early, took the Mayor's seat and grabbed the gavel bag and said he's now the mayor again. And they had no idea on how to handle the situation, so they felt Felt that having a recall election considering this very highly unusual situation might help them deal with this sort of behavior

by an elected official in the future. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> Yes, for staff. With all of this confusing activities, is the Now never the less statutes that would show what to do in the event of vacancies, how the town council would fill the vacancy. Is that not there? >> Represent Leaky, I think the issue in this particular set of facts Is whether or not the vacancy occurred. But yes sir, there are general statutes and often charter provisions that cover how to fill a vacancy but I think the underlying question here is was there really a vacancy to fill. >> Follow up. >> Yes, if I may follow up. Is there under the statutes, a time when such a recall election would occur, does it have to coincide with an already existing election, or can a special election be called at the general cost of the county, a request of the county, or is it tied in to That it has to happen when there's a minuscule election or a primary or something like that. >> Got you. >> The underlying law on special elections does permit recall elections to occur at any time but the city would have to pay for that particular election if it did not coincide with another already occuring election. Motion on the floor all in favor Aye. >> Aye. >> Any oppose? Passes. The Ayes have it. Without objection we are gonna move down to House Bill 989 we'll come back to 952. Representative Burn has a couple of other meetings to get to so we'll hear House Bill Eighty nine Red Cross charter amendments. [BLANK_AUDIO] >> Thank you. Mr. Chair,This bill is making two changes to the account charter at the request of the account council Council or towns less than 15 years old and there are just two small changes they are one of that they have made concerning their mayor programs term and then filling the vacancy, so we appreciate the committees forth. >> Representative Cliton Turn on the mic please, we'd appreciate it. >> For a motion? >> Go right ahead. >> Favor report for House Bill 989. >> We have a motion on the floor, all those in favor say aye? >> Aye. >> Any oppose? Thank you Representative Burn. House Bill Number 952 Representative Hastings So without objection we have a PCS on the floor. All right. Representative Hastings. There is an Amendment. Does everyone have that Amendment? Do we have a motion to accept the Amendment? A Motion. In Motion. Motion all those in favor of the amendment say Aye. Any oppose- >> Mr. Chairman. >> Yes. >>Would we have a chance to read the amendment or could staff explain the Amendment before we vote? >> You can. >> Having staff explain what the Amendment does would be a good Process don't you think. >> Representative Leakey the Amendment would add gas and county to the Bill. House Bill 952 actually deals with two separate provisions. The first being the ability of the shares office to be exempted from a couple of the purchasing contracting statutes when they are purchasing food supplies And food services for the detention facility and secondly with the, and this is a horrible word but disposition or disposal of serviced animals that are retired from Public Service. [BLANK_AUDIO] >>Representative Holley [INAUDIBLE] >> What about food? I have a question not about the amendment. >> The amendment's passed so go ahead >> So [BLANK_AUDIO] The amendment hasn't passed, okay. >> Amendment's already passed. [BLANK_AUDIO] I'm sorry I thought we took a vote, that's my fault. All those in favor of the amendment please say I? Any opposed. Now it has passed. Go right ahead Representative Holley. >> Thank you. I have a [INAUDIBLE] and my question is to the contract for the [INAUDIBLE] what are the unique circumstances that you wanna get out of the Under the procurement rules. Is there something unique about this that why you do not want to go by the state rules and process by purchase your food by purchasing

contracts? >> It's a local request from the sheriff for a local bill. >> It's just a request? There's no pending reason as why why you want Doesn't want to abide by the states rules and regulations? >> He's abiding by the state's rules and regulations but he's asked for a change in the law so that's why we're here. >> Okay. >> Representative Hastings, do you wanna explain the bill anymore or do you want us to take these questions? Whichever you'd like to do. >> I guess the only other things I'd like to say, there's really not been much Much controversy other than we needed to solve the [UNKNOWN] issue and I think that's been solved in the language. So it'd be unconstitutional but other than that I think its fairly non controversial. >> Representative Floyd. >> If this is an [UNKNOWN] if I may please. >> Yes. Yes. >> Did we not do a similar one last year that included [UNKNOWN]county to allow the Sherriff when possible to look for cheaper items that he can use when he's preparing the food for the inmates. And we had the same discussion last year but it allowed the Sheriff to buy produce at a much cheaper rate than going through the [UNKNOWN] process. And I don't see a problem with the Sheriff trying to save money And provide better food. [BLANK_AUDIO] >> Mr. Chair Representative Floyd is correct. This was dealt with in 2015 with respect to the Sheriff's contracts for the detention facility food and food services. On the first page of the summary kinda In the middle or down close to the middle of the page, you'll see a paragraph that starts session law 2015-158 where you can read the list of counties that currently already have this authority. [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] Representative Cleveland. >> For a motion. >> [BLANK_AUDIO] Sustained one second. [BLANK_AUDIO] hold that Representative Cleveland Representative Warren. >> Just a question for staff too. Didn't we just pass a bill in the House within the week about disposition of animals. >> Yes, Representative Warren. I believe that was House Bill 1009. And it was I believe it was on the House floor calendar For yesterday and it has been re-referred to this committee. >> Thank you. >> Representative Fisher. >> That was my question. Thank you. >> Representative Setzer. >> Send forward an amendment. Yes, and it's a simple amendment all it will do is add Catawba County to the list of counties that sheriff's office may purchase from local entities. >> Any other questions while we wait for this amendment? >> Mr. Chair. >> Representative Floyd. >> Just to add in one word and I think we can allow the staff [INAUDIBLE] to insert the proper county. >> We've got to get it signed. Just do a couple of little deals here. >> Inquiry of the Chair, Mr. Chairman. >> Yes, sir. >> Is the revenue sets always this much trouble? >> No not always. Just once in a while. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> [LAUGH] It's usually somebody at this area that's trouble. You three right here, not Representative Holly/g but the three gentlemen sitting right here. [LAUGH] Yes you,yes, yes [LAUGH] And this crowd over here we have to wake them up. >> [LAUGH] >> [LAUGH] >> [INAUDIBLE] >> That's right. You all stay asleep that'll be fine. >> [INAUDIBLE] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] And I apologize to the committee. [INAUDIBLE] [LAUGH]

[BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] We're waiting to get this amendment enforced but I think Representative Hastings may be banned from this committee going forward, I'm not sure. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> Yeah see, [LAUGH] >> I've just been banned from my home so [LAUGH] >> Mr. Chairman, to extradite time, I withdraw the amendment, and I'll just do it on the floor. >> Okay, we've got it. We've got it. >> Withdraw that withdrawal. [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] Mr. Chairman, I move approval of the amendment We have a motion for approval of the amendment that adds Catawba County. Any discussion? The amendment is before us. All those in favor say aye. >> Aye. >> Any opposed? >> Mr. Chairman. >> Yes. >> I move approval of House Bill 952 As amended, favorable to the PCS as amended, unfavorable to the- >> Mr. Chair? >> Rolling to a new PCS. >> That's what I meant. >> Yes, sir >> We have a motion on the floor now Representative Floyd. >> I hate to debate my distinguished colleague from the great state of [UNKNOWN] Mecklenburg, but I believe Representative Cleveland had started that effort. >> Mr. Chair, I would be happy to withdraw my motion to the honorable Representative Cleveland as long as Representative Floyd will acknowledge that I'm from Huntersville and Charlotte. >> [LAUGH] >> Oh man. You guys are something this morning. Representative Cleveland Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Recommend approval of the committee substitute for House Bill 952 as amended and rolled into a new committee substitute. >> With the amendments rolled in? We have a motion on the floor. All those in favor say aye? >>Aye. >> Any opposed? One opposed. The ayes have it. It passes. Thank you, Representative Hastings. Now get out of here. >> Thank you, sir and the committee for allowing me to survive that. >> [LAUGH] >> Alright we have a before us House Bill 1023. Chairman Davis. [BLANK_AUDIO] >> Thank you, Mr. chairman. During the interim between last year's long session and this year's short session, I was a member of the Legislative Research Commission, and I was appointed to chair a committee along with Senator Trudy Wade from the Senate, Concerning municipal service districts in order to look at the legislation that we presently had and see if there might be any tweaks or that we might be able to make concerning the process of having a municipal service district. And in doing so, the committee voted on various changes, and I'd like to go to the changes with you now, and that is what's before you in this bill. One of the main changes that this allows is when under the former legislation, when you wanted to do a municipal service district, a city would do that on its own motion and would proceed with a resolution which only required one meeting. What this does is it changes it so that yes, the city can on its own proceed with a municipal service district, but instead of one hearing, there're gonna be two hearings. Since there are gonna be two hearings is now an ordinance Rather than a resolution because a resolution requires the one hearing. The genesis behind having the two hearings was to allow more input from the citizens of the affected by this district.

As you well know, when you schedule something for one particular meeting people might not be able to come that wanted to have a say. They may not know the fact that the meeting is even taking place. So this allows that safety valve for more of public input. The way the procedure would go is at the first hearing there would be a public hearing, and if the majority, simple majority, votes to proceed with the service district, it would then go to the second hearing. If at the first hearing after the public hearing has been conducted, if the majority votes no, then it's over and it's gone. Another change is if more definitive, which I was very much in favor of for transparency purposes is for an accounting to be done. I thought it was very important for anybody that's in the municipal service district at the end of the year to know whats the money been spent on, to make sure that it's being done properly and being spent for the purpose for which the district was created. Another change up front was normally when would go in and have a public hearing any individual citizen would able to come in and say okay, I don't like this municipal service district. I don't think we ought to have one. And of course, the city and can take that into consideration. What this new legislation does also allows an individual to go in and say okay, if you vote municipal service district in that's fine, but I individually want to be excluded. And it gives that person the right to argue that on the front end before the final vote is taken. In the legislation, you can read there is a standard that the city must meet in its to justify municipal service district being done, well that citizen that doesn't want to be part of it has that same burden to show why it doesn't apply to them. So it just treats everybody the same. Also what this new legislation does, it allows some one on the back end. In other words, after a municipal service district is in place, the city does have the right to terminate that district. But what this legislation will allow is that an individual can petition the city to allow them to withdraw after the municipal district has been formed, and once again, it's that same burden that they Would have in the front end that they would have on the back end. But once again, just allowing the individual an access to question whether or not they should be allowed to continue in. The city council when they vote on any of this, the language is that the city council may. Nothing in this Requires the same leaders is still in the distress of the city where to allow someone to come in to the municipal service district or to get out. Also there is one other thing and I cannot remember what it was. But in conclusion I'll just say that by doing this I think what it does is that it gives the municipal service district procedure, more transparency or accountability and also allows people to have more involvement not only on the front end but the back end I'll be happy to answer. So any questions if you may have. >> Representative Warren first on the list. >> Thank you Mr Chair I Represent Davis I like your bill I support the bill but I have a couple of questions just for clarification and you touched on them pretty good regarding the person asking for exclusion. From the district, how does that work if they are asked for it and then deserve vote on that or they have to appear for twice or do you detail that for me. >> Sure I'm sorry if did not make that clear and thank you for the question. What would happen for instance I would also, if I may add in that vein, it also add the ability for a group of citizens that may want to have a municipal service to be able to come in as a group to petition the city to go forward with the procedure. Once again another avenue of involvement of the citizens that live in the city. So it's doesn't just have to wait to do it all the same, but to answer your question any motion Representative Warren to either be added to or taken away from would require a hearing before the senate, and there'll be proper notice given, they would call me and then have to start their reasons certainly we need to deliberate on and then they would need to vote on it once again by a simple majority. We you say, you say city council. >> That's cuz I'm thinking of Welmington/g whatever municipality i doing. >> Okay follow up. >> Follow up. >> It says on the bill that in fact bear with me let me find that

page. It's on page two, line 36 through 39. Says if the city council finds that the tracker [UNKNOWN] is not needed for services dadada. It says that it may exclude the track. So it still gives him the option. But if its a request and the city finds . That is a valid request. Would that not be shall? >> No. We thoroughly discussed this when we had this in the committee and it was determined that may should be the appropriate language rather than shall. It should still be left up to the discretion of the municipality. Follow up again Sir? >> Follow up.>> Thank you. So If I request to be out of it, and I present valid reason, and the city agrees its a valid reason, they still have the option to say well you got a good point but you're still in it? >> That's correct. You'll still be in the I would say bailey wig. Okay. Follow up? >> Follow up. Could you just help me out with this. I don't mean to badger the point, but I'ma badger it [LAUGH]. Could you tell me what would be the valid reasoning behind not obliging the request to be excluded if the city agrees? Maybe staff can help you out with that. I just need to know what would be the reasoning behind it. >> That would be a very simple answer and thank you for the question. That would be under the determination of the municipality. I can't tell you why the municipality may not want to do it if the individual citizen has met the standard that they must meet in order to qualify to be withdrawn. That would be their individual decision. Going down the list representative Jitter. >> For a motion [BLANK_AUDIO] >> Hold it just for a minute [INAUDIBLE] >> Representative Brown. >> Thank you mr. chairman. Um my first question is District is that part of this municipal service district, can that also be known as one? >> You can have different types of districts. For instance one of the things I thought was very important when we had our committee meeting was to for the committee to have input from various districts. So for instance the city of Riley who has an urban area revitalization district and a downtown revitalization district came and spoke, he spoke in favor of this legislation. The city of Henderson ville that has a historic revitalization district came and it explained about that at how operation is sense i their city and spoke in favor of the legislation. And then also from Pandol shores came and talked about beach erosion control district and explained about that and spoke in favor of the legislate. So I try to get as many different districts to have input in this so the committee would understand what all different types of district there are and how they felt about it. >> Follow up. >> Well a couple of years ago, one of my cities decided to establish a historic district and there were quite a few people in that so called district who had great objections to being a part of it. Is Ms. Churchills back there? Is she not? >> Yes, Ma'am. >> I tried to work with her on a bill that would except, let these people, let them have an option whether, whether to join it or not if they were currently you know a resident. And I was told that, that bill couldn't be constitutional, there was no way to make that bill constitutional. So I don't really understand how this bill is what it is.Because you've got exceptions. You're saying people that people can be grand fathered in or grand fathered out?Is that what not you're saying. >> No ma'am what I'm saying is that on the front end when the issue of a particular proposed municipal service district is heard by the municipality. Anybody can come to the public hearing and speak against that district being implemented.In addition we set out on this legislation,we'll go one step further.I could go and say you know what?I don't want you to do the district. But if you do, I am living in there and I don't wanna be a part of just me, myself and I and city could entertain that. Allow in other doing the whole me [INAUDIBLE] Ted Davies's case we're gonna exclude him. They would have that authority. They also have the right that on the back end once the district has created. They can come in at any time and say, okay for these reasons this is why I don't think I should be required to stay here any longer and the city may allow that. >> Representative Ross. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mike can add a little bit of clarity, but first I just wanted to

thank Representative Davis on the work that he's done on this bill and the tremendous amount of work that he's done with it senate. He's really done a lot of work into this and he's really come up with a good Bill. First of all I mean this is the first district and his third district to like comparing apples to oranges, they are two different things and you know some of the service district and I've dealt with this, we had in Burlington we had additions and we had the lesions. Is specifically a downtown this would really only affect larger cities or bigger towns. Municipal service district typically include businesses within an area, within a downtown and the municipal service district is for extra services that businesses require be in a downtown area for example in the City of Burlington there has to be extra measures that had to be taken to collect trash in the downtown area and it's an extra cost involved and so for that reason the downtown area falls into what we call a municipal service district, this really is. This doesn't affect and for a long times individual views but this is really businesses within a geographical area and it's for the extra services that are required for the downtown area, it's a good bill and I support it. Representative Jade has already beaten to the punch on the motion so again thank you Representative Davis. >> Representative Luky, you are next on the list sir. >> Representative Davis I can tell you we've worked really hard on this and my question I think it's just the logical, for me it's a logical question of, if the city council votes to establish a municipal service history, how is it that I cannot [INAUDIBLE] You can't do that say if the. >> [INAUDIBLE] condition. >> Hester says we are going to have a special tax for public schools. Decisions hand coming this early how many kids in public schools I wanna exempt from this tax, so what's the logic here that we have the systems extraordinary to me that you pass something and then individuals can just say I don't wanna be affected by these ordinents/g. >> For the question, the rationale behind doing this, [UNKNOWN] for me and the discussions that we had during the committee meetings, I was trying to make it the public more successful into the process, that's why once again, on the upfront a city can do it [UNKNOWN] or a group can come and say, hey, we want one of those things and proceed with it just like I thought it was important that if I can come in and say I'm against the whole district, then I'll be able to [UNKNOWN] be able to say you know what, if you go ahead and implement [UNKNOWN] then I want you to consider just me. [UNKNOWN] and not only does it allow it on the front end, it allows it on the back. [BLANK_AUDIO] >> Representative Fischer. >> Thank you Mr. Chairman. My question is. Or just let me see if I'm understanding this. If a municipality wanted to say have a municipal service district. Then a group of people could come to a public hearing and say we don't like it, we don't want it. But then the city council could still say well we are going to do it anyway and the only remedy for those folks who didn't want it would be to opt out. But then the city could say no you can't opt out. Well we'll consider it but no you can't. so then the only remedy left is to, in an election, vote the city council out. Is that what I'm hearing hear? >> I'm not suggesting anything about voting the city council out. What I'm simply saying the procedure. Actually this increases the procedure for an individual to have input. Once again, an individual decision to have. The citizen has input on the front end to come in and say I don't want you to do the district at all. Or they can come in and they can also say but if you gonna do the district then I want you to consider just allowing me to not be in. And they have that right to do it on the front end and they can also come in after the fact. Things can change. Once the purpose for which the serve this district is designed for, it may not benefit them. But at least allows the benefit and accessibility to be able to come in on back end and request for that to be done. >> Just a short follow up. >> Follow up. >> I had wanted to know if you had any input from the municipalities on this and I also wanted to say that I tend to think that this

is good in terms of urging citizen participation in the process but I would like to know if the league has weighed in on this at all. >> The representatives for the League I believe that the lady is here today. They were present during the meeting . I talked with them and she is here, Mr. Chairman I'm I allowed to speak? >> Representative Fairclaw. >> Thank you Mr. Chairman. I too wanna thank you for the work you have done on this. I actually think that you have generated a system which will cause the public to be much more interested and involved in what's going on in their town or their city. Yes it puts a little more burden on a council to perhaps have to consider things twice or whatever But that's not bad either. Often times every citizen I think, goes in and asks for something and they say no we can't do that, the door slams and that's the end of it. I think what you have here and I agree with Representative Ross, and he's saying this is a move in a good direction because but it does put a little extra work on the council. But I think in that the end the citizen is recognized greatly in this process and that's what we ought to be doing. I commend you. >> Thank you. >> Representative Floyd. >> The last time our delegation met with our city council, there were some concerns about the ordinance, but when I look at it, I don't see a lot of problems because now we're dealing with the ordinance instead of a revolutions. And then we're dealing with two meetings instead of one meeting. And also a lot of times, these special districts require additional law enforcement officers because of the type of service that they provide. So I think that it gives the citizen two opportunities to voice their concern as it relates to participating in this municipal district. I think it's a good bill and I commend you for the work that you have done. >> Thank you. >> Representative brown. >> I guess I'm not getting this bill right, I'm sorry, can we not as citizens address the city council anyway I mean I don't understand how this expands the right to citizens. The government still holds the power, they can say aye or nay [UNKNOWN] with whatever group, singular/g, in a group, come to them. I don't understand how this increases our money to protest government actions. >> Well, for instance right now there is no avenue for [UNKNOWN] to be able to come in and say that we will like to have them. Any [UNKNOWN] will have to wait and see if [UNKNOWN] During the committee process and the meetings we had I made the comment that well, in my opinion anybody that came in to argue against the implementation of a service district, which they can do now, could also ask that they not be included but and the discussion came up where well maybe that so it has nothing that says so since nothing says that people may not realize they have the right to do that. So after [UNKNOWN] and then it'll be evidently clear to everyone that yes, you do have that right if you so choose to use it [UNKNOWN] All right the Representative with the league would like to speak identify yourself and you have one minute. [BLANK_AUDIO] >> Thank you Mr. Chair and committee my name is [UNKNOWN] I'm the legislative council of the [UNKNOWN] we appreciate representative Davis and Senator Wade for a thorough interim committee process and discussion of this issue, we believe that the procedures that have been put in place in this bill are good, their increase in transparency as a god local government, good government kind of bill and we do support it, we urge you to support it as well, thank you. >> Thank you. Representative [UNKNOWN] >> As we're rapidly approaching floor session, I move approval of house bill 1023. >> We have a motion on the floor, any more discussions? All right motion is before us, all those in favor say aye, aye,

any oppose? It passes unanimously. House bill 1083 chairman Davis Representative Hamilton representative Catlin. >> Thank you. Um this particular bill is a local bill. Myself, representative Hamilton who is here, Catlin and all the primary sponsors on it I will tell you that there's also a similar bill, an identical bill being introduced in the senate with our local delegation being Senator Michael Lee, Senator Bill Rabin also supported this so you have full support from all the local delegation. And what it really centers around is language that is presently in effect that deals with a proposed ordinance being submitted to the city council by a petition of the people who live in Wilmington. The confusion that we have right now is that the way that the legislation is worded, it says if I petition accompanying the proposed ordinance is assigned by electors of the city equal in number to 25% of the votes cast at the last proceeding. And [BLANK_AUDIO] at the last regular municipal election and the confusion arose there is for instance, if you have a mayor, we have a mayor and six people, so if a particular city election of a mayor and three other councilmen [UNKNOWN] and I go in as an individual voter and vote, but I'm one voter but I've got four votes. So is it fair when you say the amount votes cast, that's not a true reflection on the number of votes casts. But once again an uptake situation everyone vote you have as they cast four votes. It doesn't give a true reflection, so in order to try to come up a more constant figure that you could base that 25% to determine the numbers of voters that we need to sign the petition, this what this does is change that to say 25% of the total number of registered voters receding within the city of Wemilton at the time of the last regular municipal election. I realize that the number of registered voters can change from one election to another. But that is far less fluctuation as about number of voters casts. As you know if an election is doing. Presidential cycle you have much more people coming out to vote than others. A lot of the outcome of what you have as far as voter participation can depend on who's running. You know what is the issue all about? >> Mr. Chair? >> Representative Warren. >> Can I have a recognition for motion please? >> [LAUGH] >> Yes. >> I make a motion we favorable report on House Bill number 1083? >> No referral. >>Motion on the floor. Any more discussion? All those in favor say aye? >> Aye. >> Any opposed? Bill passes unanimously. >> Thank you Mr. Chairman. Thank you members of the committee. >> This committee is adjourned. [SOUND] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO]