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 26, 2014 | Chamber | Thursday proceedings

Full MP3 Audio File

Thank you. The House will come to order. Members please take your seats. Visitors please retire from the chamber. Members and visitors in the gallery, please silence all cellular phones and personal electronic devices. [SOUND] The sergeant at arms will close the doors. [PAUSE] The prayer will be offered by Representative Larry Pittman. Members and visitors in the gallery please stand and remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Please join me in a prayer for latitude. Almighty God our father, there’s no prayer I could ever offer that could equal the prayer which your son gave to us which I now return to you. Our father which art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread, and forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil. For thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Moore is recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, the journal from Wednesday June 25, 2014 has been examined and found to be correct. I move its approval as written. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Moore moves that the journal from June 25 be approved as written. All in favor say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All opposed no. The ayes have it. The journal is approved as written. Petitions, memorials, papers, address the General Assembly of the House. Ratification of bills and resolutions, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The enrolling clerk ?? Governor’s ?? Cape Hatteras ?? membership. House Bill 34C. ?? garnish members ?? granted ?? judgment. House Bill 712 an act ?? clarify ?? education ?? disabilities ?? House Bill 894 an act to improve source water protection planning. House Bill 1043 an act to clarify the statute ?? the use of ?? public construction contracts ?? secretary of state. Senate Bill 840 an act concerning ?? Senate Bill 864 an act ?? employees ?? operate motorized all terrain vehicles. Senate Bill 86?? Extra-territorial ?? Senate Bill 870 an act authorize city of Durham. House Bill 1045 an act ?? regular municipal elections the town of ?? House Bill 11?? Petitions submitted to the county by property owners. House Bill 1159 an act ?? city of Greenville ?? private ?? certain property. House Bill 1207 an act ?? charter the city of ?? allow city council to hire a city attorney and make certain technical corrections. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Did you do a courtesy over here? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Howard, Bill Brawley, Lewis and Setzer are recognized to send forward a committee report. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Howard, William Brawley, Lewis and Setzer of the finance committee Senate Bill 767 Rockingham de-annexation, favorable. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Calendar.

Senate Bill 871, Raleigh-Durham Deannexation, favorable. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Calendar. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 1056, Lake Lure Official Map/Deannexation, favorable as to Committee Substitute, unfavorable as to the original bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Committee Substitute, calendar. Original bill, unfavorable, calendar. Representative Stevens is recognized to send forth committee report. The Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stevens for the Judiciary Subcommittee C, Senate Bill 78, Law Enforcement and DA Privacy Tax Websites. Favorable to House Committee Sub Number 2, unfavorable is the House Committee Sub Number 1. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Committee Substitute Number 2, calendar for today's calendar without objection. House Committee Substitute Number 1, unfavorable, calendar. Representative Collins is recognized to send forth committee report. The Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Collins for the State Personnel Committee, Senate Bill 3, 2014 Budget, ??, Pay Raises, other changes, favorable. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection for consideration for today's calendar. So ordered. Representatives Howard, Bill Brawley, Lewis and Setzer are recognized to send forth committee report. The Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Howard, William Brawley, Lewis and Setzer for the Finance Committee, Senate Bill 105, Clarify Political Sign Ordinance Authority, favorable as to House Committee Substitute, unfavorable as to the Senate Committee Substitute. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The House Committee Substitute will be re-referred to the Committee on State Personnel if favorable, government. Senate Committee Substitute,unfavorable, calendar. Ladies and gentlemen of the House, on motion of the lady from Mecklenburg County, Representative Samuelson, the Chair is happy to extend the courtesies of the gallery to her daughter, Joy Bennett, and son-in-law, Chad Bennett, Grandson, Evan, and grandson, Mason. Welcome. Please stand. [applause] Messages from the Senate, the Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Message from the Senate, Senate Bill 846, Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 846, the bill has been entitled an Act Removing Certain Described Property from the Corporate Limits of the Town of Shallotte. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ladies and gentlemen, upon motion from the gentleman from Guilford County, Representative Brandon, the Chair is happy to extend a welcome and a courtesies of the gallery to the Smith High School Band. Please stand and let us welcome you. [applause] [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate Bill 846 was read and it will be referred to Finance. Representative Moore, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, re-referral of the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman may state his motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate Bill 871 that came in from Finance this morning needs to be removed from the calendar, referred to Rules. Rules will be taking it up during the recess at some point. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection, so ordered. Ladies and gentlemen, the Chair would like to extend a welcome and a thank you to the nurse of the day. The nurse of the day is Wendy Gaultney from Greensboro. Wendy, welcome and thank you. [applause] Calendar, Senate Bill 3, the Clerk will read.

Ladies and gentlemen, we’re going to hold off on Senate Bill 3 until the clerk is in possession of the bill. It’s being processed. [PAUSE] We’ll go back to the top of the calendar. House Bill 1155, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 1155 bill ?? enact adding certain described property to ?? village of Pinehurst and authorize ?? special assessments to meet the cost of construction of the storm water management system to serve the property added. General Assembly of North Carolina enacts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Boles, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill, please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This is a request from the home owners and village council of Pinehurst for annexation. I have a memorandum of understanding with the assessments, signed by the property owners. Also we had public hearings in February which I attended and I have a legal description connecting the proposed annexation with the village. And I ask for your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate. If not, the question before the House is the passage of House Bill 1155 on its second roll call reading. All in favor vote aye. All opposed vote no. The clerk will open the vote. [PAUSE] The clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. 113 having voted in the affirmative and 2 in the negative. House Bill 1155 has passed its second roll call reading and remains on the calendar. House Bill 1245. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Committee Substitute for House Bill 1245, ?? certain described property to the corporate limits of the town of Pleasant Garden and at the request of the property owner and the town ?? remove ?? from the corporate limits of the town of ?? General Assembly of North Carolina enacts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hardister, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is a local bill. It has two provisions. It authorizes a voluntary annexation in the town of Pleasant Garden. It also authorizes a de-annexation in the town of Watha. The towns and the delegations are in favor of this bill. There’s no opposition. I’d appreciate your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate. If not, the question before the House is the passage of the House Committee Substitute for House Bill 1245 on its second roll call reading. All in favor vote aye. All opposed vote no. The clerk will open the vote. [PAUSE] The clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. 114 having voted in the affirmative, 1 in the negative. The House Committee Substitute to House Bill 1245 has passed its second roll call reading and remains on the calendar. Ladies and gentlemen, we are now going to move back to Senate Bill 3. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 3, a bill entitled an act to award compensation increases to teachers, state employees and retirees to modify the base budget appropriations for current operations of state departments, institutions, and agencies and for other purposes. General Assembly of North Carolina enacts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Dollar, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members of the House. Senate Bill, the proposed House Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 3, as we discussed in committee yesterday, is a bill that fulfills this General Assembly’s top priorities. When we came to this General Assembly this year, we came with the intention to increase teacher compensation

...which, except for one year, had been frozen for some five years. We had intended to address salaries with respect to our state employees and we made additional commitments. We made a commitment to begin a two-year process of raising starting teacher salary to no less than $35,000 anywhere in the state. To that end, this bill is a bill that addresses those top priorities. It says that here in the General Assembly we can make sure that we, with or budget that is already in place, we have a two-year budget that is in place, for the biennium, we can and will fund or top priorities. And let me just hit the highlights of this bill for you. The bill contains a 5% increase for educators as was contained in the previous version of the budget offered by the House. A 1.44% COLA increase, a $1,000 flat salary increase plus benefits for state employees. It includes the Yellow Ribbon program for community colleges and the UNC system for eligible military veterans and their dependents. It includes money that is much needed to address the coal ash issue, which that bill we expect to have in the House's hands and to be addressed. This bill also provides $134 million for Medicaid Risk Reserve should that be needed for the upcoming biennium. It addresses technical, more than technical issue, but it addresses the issue that's been raised with the respect to Opportunities Scholarships funding $11.8 million as was in the budget the other week. We adjust the Masters degree salary supplements, restoring that. It was another issue that was well discussed prior to this convening in the General Assembly. We've also made adjustments to the school grading system, which everyone agrees is critically important to our schools. Clarifies the changes to teacher tenure. It gets us moving forward on our career pathways which, as you all know, is a collaboration between the Governor, the House, the Senate and educators and education administrators all across this state who met just yesterday confirming their enthusiasm for moving forward to modernize North Carolina's compensation system for teachers, which I believe everyone shares that goal. Mr. Speaker and members of the House, this budget makes other technical changes which are prescribed and necessary for the second year of the budget. It does not do other things. There's certainly plenty that many would wish, but this is what is necessary. This is what fulfills our promise. As we mentioned yesterday, there are no additional lottery provisions in this budget. This is based on the revised consensus forecast for those monies and of course those monies are allocated for education. Mr. Speaker and members of the House, I would commend this bill to you as a fulfillment of the top priorities of this General Assembly and as a fulfillment of our commitment to education in this state at all levels. I would be pleased to answer any questions. I would appreciate your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Goodman, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Representative Dollar. Teachers and state employees have been waiting for some certainty on pay and compensation issues for a long time now and I think it's time for us to give them that certainty. We can nitpick, we can argue about funding streams and all those things, but it's time for some action. They've been waiting for it so I recommend that we vote yes on this budget. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Larry Hall, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. They have a saying that we all get there sometime, and I’m glad to see that finally leadership has decided that teachers and state employees all are important enough now to try to have some way to give them some reasonable, supportable pay raises. I’m glad that some folks finally got the message and stopped gambling on the lottery and decided we need to find another way to pay for the future of this state, which rests in the hands of our teachers and our state employees. So I’m glad that folks have finally come around, but we haven’t gone far enough. This proposed spending plan – and it’s not a budget, it’s a spending plan, and we know it lays on top of the cuts that are going to be coming in the second year of the budget anyway, but the one thing it does is gives some emphasis and some incremental progress toward finding a real solution and a real way to pay for these teacher and state employee raises, and so that is the one good thing about this spending plan, and again, I wouldn’t refer to it as a budget. It’s a short-term, limited spending plan. The numbers still indicate that it’s going to be an unbalanced budget that we’re promoting in this spending plan, and the numbers will still have to be verified. I’m particularly disappointed that once again we’ve run a spending plan out that we didn’t give proper time for members to vet, for our citizens to vet, for interested organizations to vet, and help us come up with a better idea, a more sustainable idea, and maybe recover some of our credibility on these issues. There are major discrepancies on how we’re going to pay for this. They’re still out there. They may not be as great as they were when we were trying to speculate and bet on the lottery to pay for it, but those concerns are still out it. We had our proposed budget out on this floor before and you all were here. Some people drank the Kool-Aid and voted for it knowing that the information in it wasn’t correct, and hopefully we’re trying to trust this time a broke clock is right twice a day, so we’ll hope it’s that time, that to some extent some of the information in here is correct that would support these pay raises, but we know there is a continuing dispute and we know that it hasn’t been resolved, and we’re putting this plan forward creating hopes, and so we hope that this is a step toward actually finding real revenue to support real compensation increase and benefits increase for our state employees and for our teachers. We’ve created a false emergency. July 1st is not an emergency. The world’s not going to come to an end, we do continuing resolutions all the time, so the idea that July 1st is an emergency, it’s not an emergency. It’s not an emergency, and we shouldn’t treat the business of the people of North Carolina as “it’s an emergency because we say it’s an emergency”. The emergency is the future of our teachers, the future of our children who they’re going to usher in to be our leaders of tomorrow and run this state. That’s the emergency. The emergency is not us being out of here on July 1st or 2nd. We pass continuing resolutions, as I said, all the time. Now we have the opportunity to do some things in addition to propose this spending plan. Yes, if we have an emphasis on teacher raises and state employee raises, but there’s some questions that we need to ask as we go forward. First of all, we need to go ahead and have a continuing resolution so we can get the conference committees together, get the public involved and have a real budget. This plan that we’re putting forward, this spending plan, assumes, as I said, Medicaid projections that are in complete dispute. I’d ask some of you, and those that have corporate knowledge, when was the last time that Medicaid came in on the low end? When was the last time we didn’t have to contribute for shortfalls? Why is there such a big difference between State Budget Office and what our fiscal staff says the numbers should be? And then finally, why were we kept in the dark until the last minute about these differences? As I said, with all that in mind, the one thing that this…

Spending plan, and again, I won’t call it a budget, but it certainly lays on top of the budget. The one thing it does do is show some emphasis and understanding of the importance of teacher pay raises and state-employee benefits and pay raises being done. That is the one thing here that is of primary importance. And with that in mind I’m going to support Senate Bill 3. This spending plan. This band-aid, but it is a band-aid. And my fear is when it has to be ripped off, and people don’t want to take responsibility for it. So, we’re going to support this spending plan, but you’re going to be held accountable to fulfill the promise of it and bring the public into the debate. We talked about having an open process. Let’s open it up now. You've got this spending plan. You've got a proposed budget. You've got a conference committee. So, let’s open it up. Let’s let the public in. Let’s go ahead and pass a continuing resolution so we can’t say we didn't have time to do it right. We’ll you've got time. You've got the power. Pass the spending plan. Then, pass a continuing resolution. Then, open that process up, and let us have a valid budget for the people of North Carolina. Let’s don’t create these false deadlines. Let’s don’t create these fake numbers. Let’s do it right. You have the power. You have the ultimate power. Let’s do the right thing for the people of North Carolina. I’m going to support this bill. I hope you’ll support the people of North Carolina, especially our teachers and the future of this state. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Speaker Tillis has recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mister Speaker. Ladies and gentlemen, I’d like to do something a little bit different today. Why don’t we just dispense with the rhetoric, particularly if you’re planning on voting for the bill, and recognize that we are just here to fulfill a promise. A promise we made back in January, or February, but it is really a promise that began four years ago when we came in and solved the deficit, started getting on the right fiscal footing, said that we could do what we all want to do. Let’s not play games and pretend that we, some of us suddenly start to care about teachers. I've cared about teachers every year that I volunteered in public school when my children went to school, up to including being a PTA president just eight years ago. We care about teachers. What worries me about the comments from the gentleman from Durham is there are teachers listening to this right now, and they’ll watch it on TV tonight. And it’s sending a message that maybe this is temporary. It’s not temporary. It’s fiscally sound, and it’s sustainable. It’s taken the politics out of this piece of the budget, and the gentleman needs to stand corrected on one matter. We've got a two year budget. There’s no need for a continuing resolution. We could go home today, and we've got a budget that the governor will be responsible for managing. This is about providing certainty and doing the right thing for these teachers, and I dispute the argument that we can wait because while we wait, we have seventy-five hundred teacher assistants wondering if they have a job. Really? We want to let them wait? We have principals and superintendents trying to plan the school opening plan, that’s only eight weeks from now. Really? We want to wait? I hope you’ll support this budget measure that sets us on the right path, does the right things for teacher, and I hope all the members of this chamber will join us in support of this bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate. If not, the question before the House is the adoption of the House committee substitute to Senate Bill 3 on its second reading. Those in favor will vote aye. Those opposed will vote no. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will allot the machine record the vote. One hundred and seventeen having voted in the affirmative and none in the negative. The Senate committee- House will come to order. Senate Bill 3, the House committee substitute Senate Bill 3 has passed its second reading and will, without objection, be read a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] General Assembly of North Carolina, next. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate. If not, the question before the House is the adoption of the House committee substitute to Senate Bill 3 on its third reading. Those in favor will say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Those opposed will say no. The ayes have it, and House committee substitute to Senate Bill 3 has passed its third reading and will be returned to the Senate.

We now return to the top of the calendar. House bill 1033, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Committee substitute #2 for House bill 1033, a bill to entitle an act to authorize a county to impose a special assessment for repair of a dam. General assembly of North Carolina enacts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rep. Goodman, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'll just say what I said in finance yesterday. I know you're all tired about hearing this dam bill, but the reason it had to come back was we found out at the 11th hour that you couldnt do it as a local bill, so it just changes the word from "Richmond" county to "A" county. So that's the only thing that changes, it passed unanimously last week. I ask for your support again, thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? If not, the question before the House is the passage of the House committee substitute number 2 for House bill 1033 on its second reading. All in favor vote "aye", all opposed vote "no", the clerk will open the vote. The clerk will let the machine record the vote: 115, having voted in the affirmative, and 1 in the negative. The house committee #2 to house bill 1033 has passed its second role call reading and remains on the calendar. Rep. Hurley that will give you some time to whip the vote. Senate bill 793 the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House committee substitute for Senate bill 793, a bill to entitle an act to provide that a teacher employed by a charter school may serve as a nonvoting member of the board of directors of a charter school, to ammend the date by which the State Board of Education shall make decisions on charter school applications to provide priority of enrollment for children of members of the board of directors of a charter schools, beyond the [??] to make charter schools subject to the requirements of open meeting public records law, to allow charter schools to ask for additional records regarding the transfer of per people chair of the local current expense fund, to shorten the time period of payment of delinquent funds, to clarify the bidding process for the assumption of charter schools, and to direct the state board of education to develop a fast track approval process. General Assembly of North Carolina enacts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rep. Hardister, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, you may recall we discussed this bill on Tuesday. As the title indicates, it modifies laws pertaining to public schools. It received a unanimous vote in the Senate, discussion in the House has been more interesting as a result of ammendments that were brought forward, and as you could see on your dashboard, there's more ammendments being brought forward today which means the fun will continue. And Mr. Speaker, I've also asked that staff be with us on the floor in case there's technical questions that need to be help with. I think it's a good bill, I hope you'll support it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? Rep. Brandon, please state your purpose? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I have an ammendment, if it's an appropriate time for that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman would like to be recognized to send forth his ammendment, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This is ammendment ARQ74 v3: Rep. Brandon moves to ammend the bill on page 1, line 6 by inserting after the phrase "applications" the following: [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate his ammendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I appreciate that. This is a very simple ammendment, In light of the ammendment with Rep. Stam I tried to bring able to bring the definition a little bit more closer to reality and so I tried to accomodate that and so now we do have a clear definition that we have used in other examples including our [??] bill that we are able to deal with the same exact situation in charter schools. Why do we need the ammendment? Some people have asked me, staff said that public schools are not allowed to do this, and charter schools should not be allowed to do it also. But the reason why we need this ammendment is for the same reasons as why I stood on this floor and I supported clarifications for students that are christians that have their right to pray in their schools because some times even though it is clear in the law, that you have rights but you also have people that are in the school system and you have people in this country, in ths state that did not quite understand the law or try to bend the law to their particular point of

And so it is incumbent upon this body that we make clarifications so people will not say because "you are a homosexual, or because you are anything other than that then you cannot attend this school" because that is unlawful, it is unconstitutional, and it's un-American. And it is also something that we should clarify in this body, that we stand behind. That it does not matter who you are, that if you are a child of this state, that we will educate you and you have the responsiblity to educate them, regardless of their color, creed, and of course, we have to include sexual identification. I know it's a hard topic. I know people would rather for us to not talk about it. But I will let you know that you guys already do this. When I got here, I was amazed at the amount of respect that I received. No one treated me differently because I was different. Everybody in this building treated me with the utmost respect. We worked together on bills, we talked to each other like colleagues, we pass bills together, we ate and drank together, we did all of these things together and nobody wondered, "What's Rep. Brandon's sexuality?" because it didn't matter. And I promise you, that the same respect that you gave me is the same respect that our children and our teachers will give to any student in any public place that we have. Discuss what we do. But in this body, it is incumbent upon us to make sure that we make those protections. I stand up on this floor for the last four years and fall for kids, poor and minority kids, to have equal opportunity and equal access. Not because I'm black, but because I'm an American and it's the right thing to do. I stood up on this floor and fight for Christian students to have the right to pray in school. Not because I'm a Christian, but because I'm an American, and it's the right thing to do. I will fight for Skip Stam, who is a friend of mine. And I have much respect for. And even though some of the stuff he says is a little uncomfortable, and at sometimes they might hurt someone's feelings, it's never an excuse for me not to fight to my death to make sure that he has every right to say it. Not because I'm a legislator, but because I'm an American. And that's the right thing to do. And you have the responsiblity, as an American, regardless of homosexuality's a little uncomfortable, and it might not be something we like. I still have all the priviledges thereof. I am entitled to everything that you're entitled to. Not because I'm black, Not because I'm a democrat, and not because I'm gay, but because I'm an American. And it's just as simple as that. It does not matter. So this ammendment is an American ammendment. And that's what I want you to look it as, not- we're accepting things, we're given exceptionalism, but we're simply saying that every child in this state is entitiled to all the privileges thereof, as any child in any other state and any other child here. Not because of anything other than they're just an American. And that's what we do. Those stars and stripes are for everybody. It's not just for your cause, the Constitution is not just for what you want to fight it for, the beautiful thing about it, it's for every single person. Whether we like it or not. Whether I like Skip Stam's comments or not, doesn't matter. He has the right to say it. Whether you like the fact that I'm homosexual or not, does not matter. I have the right to be here. Because I'm an American. I urge all of my colleagues to please, please vote for this ammendment. Lets send a clear statement to the state of North Carolina that if you're a child in this state, you are also an American and you are entitled to all the privileges thereof. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rep. Lewis, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker I'd like to speak on the ammendment and and then offer a motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the ammendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker. I want to thank the gentleman from Guildford for the very eloquent and heartfelt speech that he just shared with us. And he's right. Public schools, public charter schools, which is what these are, are for all people. They are free and open schools.

...with that, this amendment is not, normally I would point out where there's subject matter not so important that Representative Brandon just pointed out, I would point out to the body that this changes the title which means the vote on this bill can't be heard today. But the issues that he discussed are actually more important than that. And in a moment, I intend to offer an amendment consistent with state law to address the concerns that the gentleman sends forward. Mr.Speaker, for a motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to state his motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, I move that amendment six to lie upon the table. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Lewis has moved that amendment six be laid on the table and it has been properly seconded by Representative Cleveland. Therefore, the question before the House is the motion to lay amendment six on the table. Those in favor will vote aye, those opposed will vote no. The Clerk will open the vote. Clerk will let the machine record the vote. Sixty-four having voted in the affirmative and 52 in the negative. The motion passes. We are back on the bill. Representative Lewis, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Send forward an amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to send forth an amendment. The Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Lewis moves to amend the bill. This is amendment 8TC-153V1. Representative Lewis moves to amend the bill on page 2, lines 31 to 32 by rewriting those lines to read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Lewis is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker and thank you, ladies and gentlemen of the House. The amendment that you have before you is consistent with language that this Chamber has debated and discussed and passed in this session. It makes clear that our public charter schools are public schools. That they are free and open and accessible for all people and I would urge your support of the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Glazier, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To see if Representative Lewis would yield for a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Lewis, do you yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] He yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, very much, Mr. President. Thank you, Representative Lewis. I guess first question, the categories listed in 42 USC 2000D, can you recite to us what those are? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative, thank you for that inquiry. I had anticipated it and was in the process of trying to pull it up on the screen. I can't do it off the top of my head. My memory is just not that good. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up, please? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Gentleman yield? He yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Representative Lewis. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think before we vote on your amendment, and in that sense as I'm asking asking it be temporarily displaced until we know what we're voting on and what categories are in that statute and what categories are not. And specifically, whether the categories that Representative Brandon's amendment listed are in Section 2000D. I haven't had a chance to pull it up, either. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, I will take that as a request from a colleague and I would ask the Chair if we could temporarily displace this amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection, we will temporarily displace amendment seven. Representative Jeter, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Send forth an amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Gentleman's recognized to send forth an amendment. The Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This was amendment ARQ-71V1, Representative Jeter moves to amend the bill on page 3, line 28 by rewriting that line to read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Jeter, you're recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Currently, there are 12 items that are public information for charter school requests of teachers. What my amendment does is leaves 11 of them in place and removes one. The one that it removes is the name of the teacher. I will tell you why I think this motion, this amendment is valuable and necessary. Charter school teachers are not state employees. Charter school teachers do not get to participate in the state pension plan. Charter school teachers do not have tenure and charter school teachers do get paid on merit pay...

in competition within their school system. Very different than how we pay teachers in the traditional public school system. Therefore, you create a very hostile environment when you have to release names and salaries for every teacher. When somebody can be teaching third grade and the other person can be teaching third grade, been there the same long times, have the exact same degrees, making very different amounts of money based on what the principal believes is the quality of their work. The question is, I'm trying...The argument I've heard is that I'm trying to make it so it's harder to find out what we're doing with public money. Let me tell you why I think that argument is folly. There are twelve items. The only thing I'm taking away is names. If you go to any charter school with a Freedom of Information Act Request, you still get the age of the individual, the date of their employment, their contract terms, their current position, their title, their current salary, when they got an increase and decrease in pay, where their demotions and transfers were, what the general description of their each promotion for, what they teach, where they're currently assigned and if they've had any disciplinary actions by the local board. It gives you all the information that we as a public need to know to make sure our tax dollars are being used effectively. All it does is eliminate the potential of creating hostile work environments for people that aren't state employees, that don't get to participate in the state pension plan, who don't have tenure, and who do get paid based on a merit based system. I would strongly encourage your support for the amendment. Speaker Changes: Members without objection, Rule 12 B is suspended so that Representative Cotham can finish her bojangles. [laughter] So ordered. Representative Hardister, please state your purpose. Speaker Changes: Debate the amendment. Speaker Changes: The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. Speaker Changes: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I think this is an excellent amendment for the reasons described by Representative Jeter. I appreciate him bringing this forward and I hope you'll support it. Speaker Changes: Representative Jones, please state your purpose. Speaker Changes: To see if Representative Jeter would yield to a question. Speaker Changes: Representative Jeter, do you yield? Speaker Changes: Absolutely. Speaker Changes: He yields. Speaker Changes: Thank you, Representative Jeter. I want to join my colleague for congratulating you for this amendment. I think it's an excellent amendment and I intend to support it. My question to you is, do you think, based on all the other categories that you mentioned, does your amendment go far enough? I mean, the other categories...If all those categories are made public, is it still obvious...I can't remember every one that you mentioned. One was age and so forth. Would it still be obvious to the other employees there who that is? Is all that information absolutely necessary? Speaker Changes: I think that's a compelling argument, Representative Jones. I don't disagree with you. That being said, my goal was to try to get the amendment passed without releasing the name. Certainly, I agree with you. The reality is if somebody really wanted to do some digging this does not prohibit them from finding out that information. All it does is make it so if you get a sweeping request from media outlets, you're not going to see everyone who's at that school's name and salary listed. Obviously, if a co-worker wants to go through those, you probably don't eliminate that, although it's going to make them do a lot more effort than most are willing to do. Speaker Changes: Gentleman yield to one more question? Speaker Changes: Gentleman yield? Speaker Changes: He yields. Speaker Changes: Again, I think it's an excellent amendment. I intend to support it. I suppose time is of the essence here. I think under normal circumstances I might ask if you'd want to object to third reading and see if there was further work that might make it even better. However, I do support your amendment, and I assume you probably would prefer not to do that. Speaker Changes: I believe this is third reading. The other thing I would say, Representative Jones, is that I am happy, should I have the privilege of being reelected in November, to work with you. I think you can make a compelling argument that teachers in traditional public schools should have the same right. The public has a right to know the individuals like to code by job, by description, what they make. I'm not sure that the public should know...be able to print even tradition public school's names. As we get in a long session, my hope is that we'll look at that as well. Speaker Changes: Representative Hastings, please state your purpose. Speaker Changes: To see if Representative Jeter would yield to a question. Speaker Changes: Representative Jeter, do you yield?

...I would yield all day. [SPEAKER CHANGES] He yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Jeter, this is a ?? question I would really rather not have to deal with it here on the floor, but back in February of 2019, I had come under personal attack for supporting charter schools and as I researched the charter school law that was passed when the Democrats controlled the state Senate, I asked our staff a question regarding the status of charter employees. What they wrote back was the employees of charter schools shall be deemed employees of the local school administrative unit for purposes of providing certain state funded employee benefits including membership in the teachers and state employees retirement system. Then they went on to tell me that the decision whether to participate in the state retirement system is in the discretion of the charter school board of directors. I was just wondering if you were aware of that? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Couple things, Representative Hastings, I think you referenced the date 2019, so I appreciate your foresight. [SPEAKER CHANGES] February 19. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All I know is that my understanding in talking with the charter schools I've spoken with is that they are clearly by definition not state employees. My understand is that they do not get to participate therefore in the state pension plan. That's my understanding. Of course, as many people in this room know always reserve the right to be wrong. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Does the gentlemen yield for a follow up? Representative Jeter, do you yield for a follow up? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Absolutely. [SPEAKER CHANGES] He yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I got a swim meet tonight, so keep talking. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And I'm not trying to be difficult here... [SPEAKER CHANGES] I appreciate that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Now, at this point I'm confused so I need to ask, would it not be prudent for us to just go ahead and displace this and get this clarified because the staff is generally pretty good on these issues? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I have no intention of displacing the amendment, its third reading. I have been advised by staff that certain members can elect in under certain conditions into the state pension plan. I go back to my point. They are not state employees and even traditional public school teachers, if you really want to know my druthers, I don't believe they should have their name forcibly announced, either, because I don't think it serves a public good as long as you allow that job description and the pay amount to be released, which is what we're really looking for to protect the public dollars. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Whitmire, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I pose a question to the amendment's sponsor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Jeter, do you yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] As I said, I have a swim meet at 6:30, my least favorite thing in the world to do, so I'll answer your questions all afternoon. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I think that was a yes. Representative Whitmire? [SPEAKER CHANGES] All right, thank you. If my memory serves me fairly well, last year we passed a few local bills about educators from charter schools being included in the retirement system. How would that effect that? It may be a little bit redundant with Representative Hastings question but I think it's a worthy question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The end of the day, not to say we're getting a little bit off track and I appreciate the question. The purpose I have is these are not state employees, they don't have tenure and they have merit pay at almost all of these charter schools. I'm sure there's some that don't, but most of them do. When you allow their name and salary to be blanketly published by newspaper outlets or whatever, with no consideration of what that means, to me does not serve a public purpose and all it does is it possibly create a hostile work environment. I would argue that the pension aspect is less critical to what this amendment is trying to do. The reality is we are going to publish all the information that is necessary for the public to ensure that these dollars are being used in an appropriate and legal fashion. No one is suggestion we're not. All we're saying is that teachers names shouldn't have to be published for ridicule. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Insko, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To ask the bill's sponsor a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Jeter, do you yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Absolutely. [SPEAKER CHANGES] He yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Jeter, you're changing a statute in 115C which applies to our public schools.

Differences between charter schools and public schools and you just mentioned one. And that is the pay, the charter schools don’t follow the pay schedule like they do in the public schools. So if there were some women teachers for example who thought that they were not getting equal pay for equal work, and they would not be able, they might be able to find all the salary schedules but would they be able to find, would they be able to find who that was? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I would argue that name is not always gender identifiable. So if your name was Robin. It could be a guy or a girl. All I’m suggesting is name is being excluded. There are eleven other identifiers under 115C-320. And you know, I would imagine that if you’re getting into those types of things, if you saw discrepancies there’s things you could look at. To answer your question, at no point in these 12 items as I see them is gender referenced at all. And I don’t think name in and of itself addresses your issue because there are plenty of names that could be male or female. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Does the gentleman yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Certainly. [SPEAKER CHANGES] He yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well, I’m not suggesting that the public would sort of randomly look at charter school salaries and try to identify that. What I’m suggesting is that usually unequal pay for equal work comes from people who work inside the system. And they know everyone already. But if you didn’t, if you weren’t able to identify, if you thought there was a colleague that you knew who they were, or if all the women were being paid less. Or if all the men were being paid less. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I think that’s an excellent question Representative Insko. I think under that scenario, you could identify because you’re going to have to give the age of the employee, you’re going to have to give the date they were hired, where they teach, and what they teach. So you’re a coworker, you would basically have that knowledge. My guess is if somebody wanted to know, if we all were paid on merit and somebody said we need to know a 40 year old man that got elected in 2012 that sits on the back row, that’s kind of a smart aleck all the time, I’m willing to bet everybody in here knows that’s me. So I think there’s plenty of qualifiers for that. What I’m trying to prohibit is the blanket publication of the names. I don’t, I believe this data would allow a coworker to figure out if they were being unfairly compensated, based on anything that would be prohibited by law. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Brawley, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Speak on the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker. Ladies and gentlemen, I was here when we sent up the legislation for charter schools and supported it. But the more money, the more tax dollars charter schools get or receive, the more I think they should come under the same regulations as public schools. And I will be opposing the amendment unless we’re going to do the same thing for public schools. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Cunningham, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To ask the bill sponsor a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Jeter, do you yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Sure. [SPEAKER CHANGES] He yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Jeter, thank you. Do you know what the percentage of females are educators in the state of North Carolina? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I would imagine it’s more than 50% but I’m surely guessing. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Does the lady, [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Jeter, do you yield? He yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Do you know how long it took Lily Ledbetter to get a settlement for being discriminated for, for over 20 years? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Based on your question I’m going to say the answer is more than 20 years. [SPEAKER CHANGES] That’s correct. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Does the lady have an additional question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I’m going to give him the answer for a follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, point of order. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stevens, please state your, [SOUND] the House will come to order. Representative Stevens, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Are these questions germane to this amendment at all? [SPEAKER CHANGES] We’ll determine that when the lady asks her next question, if the lady is planning to ask Representative Jeter another question, is that the case? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, it is. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Jeter, do you yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Do we know why it was that Lily Ledbetter did not receive equal pay? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I was in middle school. I don’t know. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you.

Representative Bryan, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Speak to the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman's recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I won't speak long to belabor it, but I think Representative Jeter's right. It's a good amendment. I think with respect to all these claims that parties could make, just like in private businesses, people bring discrimination claims all the time and that information, I think, can be discovered. I think that's really a non-issue. I think more significantly to Representative Jeter's point and maybe to Representative Jones point, we ought to consider broadening this as we move towards a system where we allow more variance in pay to protect more of this information generally across the board. I think it's a good amendment and I hope you'll support it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? If not, the question before the House is the adoption of amendment eight, Representative Jeter's amendment, on the third reading of the House Committee Substitute to Senate Bill 793. Those in favor will vote aye, those opposed will vote no. The Clerk will open the vote. All members wishing to record please do so. The Clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. Sixty-five having voted in the affirmative and 48 in the negative. The amendment passes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stam, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I have an amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to send forth an amendment. The Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This is amendment ARQ-75V3, Representative Stam moves to amend the bill on page 4, lines 33 and 34, by inserting between those lines the following. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman's recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Members of the House, Mr. Speaker, this one is purely technical. There was a mistake yesterday and cited the Chapter 115 instead of 115C. The sponsor supports it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? If not, the question before the House is the adoption of amendment nine to the House Committee Substitute to Senate Bill 793. Those in favor will vote aye, those opposed will vote no. The Clerk will open the vote. The Clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. One hundred and twelve having voted in the affirmative and three in the negative, the amendment passes. Representative Lewis, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, may I send forth amendment ARQ-76, version 1? [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to send forth amendment. The Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This is ARQ-76V1, Representative Lewis moves to amend A5 on page 1, lines 9 through 27, by deleting those lines and substituting the following. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Gentleman's recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday the 24th, I asked this House and the House was kind enough to pass an amendment to this bill that allowed charter schools to expand. There were a couple of concerns that were raised, in part by the gentleman from Cumberland and the lady from Guilford. What this amendment does is tighten the language on the amendment that we have already passed and what it does, I don't want to read if word for word, but often times that the best way to explain it. It says that a charter school may expand one year provided that it meets certain qualification. The first is that the charter school, as you all know, charter schools are public schools and they're subject to the same regiment of in the course and whatnot, testing that our traditional public schools are. This would say that the academic outcomes or the test scores would have to be at least comparable, which means at least as high as the traditional K through 12 schools within the county. If they were not, then there ability to expand...

Would not exist. B, it would require that the charter school has provided a financially sound audit showing that they are able to withstand the ??? that the charter school has shown that it is in compliance with state law, federal law, the school’s own bylaws or the provisions that were set forth in the charter as it was originally granted by the state board of education. Further, we go on to say that, and I apologize I don’t seem to have the actual version in front of me, at the request from the gentleman from Cumberland we also added language which begins at the bottom of page 1 and continues into page 2 that says the state board under exceptional circumstances, which is a very borad term, but that they could also deny or veto the right to add the one grade level. I would ask your support, I think does do what my intent was which is to allow a school that is performing well to grow but it also establishes some very measurable performance standards which show that it is educating kids at least as well as the traditional K-12 schools are within the county. It’s financially strong enough to do so, which I think is something that the lady from Guilford had inquired about, and it still provides one extra safety valve in case the state board is aware of a concern that maybe we didn’t address in this bill so I would respectfully ask for your support of this amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Reives please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you Mr. Speaker, and I’m just asking on the last vote on Representative Stam’s amendment if I could be recorded as voting yes. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Without objection the gentleman will have his vote changed and recorded as yes. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Alright. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Adams please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you. I’d like to ask Representative Lewis a question. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Lewis does the gentleman yield? [SPEAKER CHANGE] Yes sir. [SPEAKER CHANGE] He yields. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you Representative Lewis. I had a concern the other day about moving from one grade to the other that would allow the school to move from, for example, elementary to middle school, middle school to high school, but I don’t see that this amendment corrects that. If it does can you tell me, you mentioned that you thought it did but I don’t see it. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Well thank you for that inquiry, Representative. The amendment does not address that specific concern, it just says that the school will be measured based on being able to perform or that the students in that school are able to perform at least as well as the students in traditional K-12 schools. If that condition is met, along with the condition of financial stability of the school, along with the safety valve, if you will, that if the state board is aware of some concern that they can prevent the expansion, but your point is well taken in that there are K-5 and then 6-8 and then 9-12, I’m very aware of that. This amendment would allow an expansion from the K-5 into the 6th grade. I am convinced that if a school is performing as it is supposed to, if the parents and the students who have chosen to go to that school are pleased with the results and want to continue to advance that they should have the chance to do so. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Follow up Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Does the gentleman yield? [SPEAKER CHANGE] Yes Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGE] He yields. [SPEAKER CHANGE] So even if the charter that’s been developed for that school allows that school to operate through the fifth grade, if the parents are pleased when that child gets to fifth grade and wants that child to remain, that can automatically happen? Is that what you’re saying here? [SPEAKER CHANGE] No ma'am, what it’s saying is..

that a charter school may prepare to add a grade for the next academic school year. That it can do anything it needs to do to prepare to do that. Let's use, let's say so that we can be on the subject that you're asking about, let's say that a charter exists for fifth grade, and the school wishes to add sixth grade. If the school can do whatever it needs to do to logistically to prepare to do that and then still would be subject to a veto if you will if their standardized testing that's required of all public schools if they do not meet those goals, if they're not financially sound enough to do so, and or if the state board determines that there's some cause to not allow them to expand. [SPEAKER CHANGE] May I just speak briefly on that?[SPEAKER CHANGE]The lady is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen, I had a concern the last time this issue was before us. I appreciate the gentlemans the changes he's made to accommodate some of the concerns but the concern that I had is still there. I think this is just perhaps another way to continue expanding these schools. I think if we're going to do that we need to do it in the right way. But I also have some concerns even as a grandparent now because my children are out of public school. But I just believe that if the school has been authorized to operate K-5, 6-8 then that's what needs to happen. Until it goes through a process where it's reviewed and there's another application for a different kind of school. But based on what this amendment says that doesn't have to happen. If you're pleased as a parent and the child is in the fifth grade and that school can then expand to the sixth grade and who knows it will go to the seventh and eighth. Before we know it there'll be another school. I don't that that's the intent of the bill this amendment but it seems that's what will happen. I think that we're headed the wrong way on this. Someone mentioned that were putting people our administrators and teachers to the same standards in public schools but we're really not if you just look at the last amendment that just passed out of here. But I don't support the amendment. I think it's setting a bad presidence, and I'm going to vote against it. [SPEAKER CHANGE] House will come to order. Representative Glazier please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGE] To debate the amendment Mr. Speaker.[SPEAKER CHANGE] Gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you Mr. Speaker and I shared and still share a lot of the concerns that representative Adams had but I want to first tell you why I'm going to vote for this amendment today. We did a lot of work last night and a lot of work this morning up until a few minutes ago on this amendment and I think it actually answers most of the questions. So let me go through my reasoning and if people disagree I'd sure like to hear it. So this does expand or allow the expansion by one grade of a charter school that currently offers let's say K-5 to 6 but unlike representative Lewis's amendment yesterday which did not have criteria on it he has three criteria on this bill which I think were crucial but it's the fourth provision I want to talk about that's even more. So it does require now that the charter school could only do that if it's academic outcomes were comparable to the local school unit. Second no financial audit problems. Which is obviously an issue when you're expanding. Third they have to be in compliance fully with state law, federal law, it's own bylaws and the provisions set forth in the charter granted by the state board. So there can't be any problems with any of that that exist. Even with that if you look at line 31 at the bottom and then the beginning of the next page, if the state board finds all of that but still and this gets to representative Adams point, but still finds there a circumstances which would justify denial of the charter, for example: they're unprepared with curriculum, they're unprepared

appeared with staff. They're not ready to go to a sixth grade. They may still deny the application. And on top of which Representative Lewis has put in a very narrow sunset for this so that we'll see how it goes for the next year. And it ought of also give incentive to the state board to fill in the blank in this area with their appropriate rules and regulations so we will not see this come back and that will be in the rules. I think we have effectively given the state board the ability to deny any application for a charter that's not ready, isn't compliant, has any financial problems, or otherwise isn't making the grade. That may be all we can ask for. I think, although it's a little round about, I think we do give it exactly the concern that Representative Adams had. I am going to, for that reason, vote for the amendment. Speaker Changes: Mr. Speaker? Speaker Changes: Representative Adams, please state your purpose. Speaker Changes: I'd like to ask Representative Glazier a question. Speaker Changes: Representative Glazier, do you yield? Speaker Changes: Yes, ma'am. Speaker Changes: Representative Glazier, yes it does give the board certain authority. Does the board have authority, based on what's in this amendment, to deny a school that's currently operating at a particular level to move into another type of school? Speaker Changes: Representative Adams, I believe it does, and that's the only reason I'm voting for the amendment because I share your concern. We added in, specifically to get at that issue, if the state board believes that that school is not ready; that is: they haven't put all the effort in preparing to move from fifth to sixth; they haven't shown them that they have the faculty, the curriculum; all the things that you and I talked about yesterday or two days ago on this bill, then that to me would be, that seems exactly what exceptional circumstances are and they can deny the expansion. Now, it would depend, obviously, on the state board exercising good discretion and control. We have to assume in good faith that they'll do that. They've been pretty good about limiting charters so far when they're not ready to proceed. And again, I hope they'll fill the gap with some rules but the answer, short answer to your question is I believe this amendment does allow them to deny a charter moving to another level if they are not ready to do that. Speaker Changes: Representative Insko, please state your purpose. Speaker Changes: I'd like to ask the bill sponsor a question. Speaker Changes: The amendment sponsor a question? Speaker Changes: Yes. Speaker Changes: Representative Lewis, do you yield? Speaker Changes: Excuse me? Speaker Changes: Yes, Sir. Speaker Changes: He yields. Speaker Changes: Thank you. Representative Lewis, I agree with the last discussion that's come up. My question is, when a school has been approved as K through five that's going through this process does the current language here shall be in compliance with state law, federal law, school's on bylaws provisions. Would it require that school also to complete the requirements as if they were going to become a middle school? Speaker Changes: Yes, ma'am. Speaker Changes: Thank you. Speaker Changes: Representative Wilkins, please state your purpose. Speaker Changes: Must speak of the exchange between Representatives Adams and Glazier answered my question. Thank you. Speaker Changes: Further discussion? Further debate? If not, the question before the House is the adoption of Amendment Ten, Representative Lewis's amendment to the House Committee Substitute to Senate Bill 793. Those in favor will vote aye. Those opposed will vote no. The clerk will open the vote. Speaker Changes: [clears throat] [pause] Speaker Changes: Clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. 108 having voted in the affirmative and six in the negative, the amendment has passed. Further discussion? Further debate? [pause] Representative Glazier, did you have an amendment to send forth? Speaker Changes: Mr. Speaker, we're still...if we could, temporarily, displace the bill. We're still working on last minute language, if that would be all right?

...without objection, will temporarily displace the same bill 793. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Moore, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We referral the bill, the gentleman is recognized stated as referral. Send Bill 388 Short tail bedding law right of entry. It presently is in the House Committee on Agriculture. Move it be removed from the Committee of Ag referred to the Committee on Rules. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection. [SPEAKER CHANGES] So ordered. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Special messages from the Senate, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Special messaged from the Senate. The State Committee substitute for House Bill 1220, the Bill’s been titled Act to create an intractable epilepsy alternative treatment pilot study program and registry for the scientific investigation of safe efficacy of hemp extract treatment for the intractable epilepsy. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Members without objection, this bill will be added to today’s calendar. Is there objection? If not, so ordered. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 1220, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate Committee substitute for House Bill 1220, the bill’s been titled an act to create an intractable epilepsy alternative treatment pilot study program and registry for the scientific investigation of the safety efficacy of hemp extract treatment for the intractable epilepsy. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Members, the family for that bill is in the building, but they’re not here yet, so without objection, we’re going to temporarily displace that to allow them...give them time to get here. Without objection we’ll temporarily displace House Bill 1220, we’ll come back to that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] So order. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This time we’ll move back to the calendar that you have on your desk and we’ll move to House joint resolution 1232. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Joint Resolution 1232 A joint resolution authorizing the legislative research commission to study whether to exempt sales of gold and silver coins produced by the United States Mint from sales tax. House’s law, Senate concurring. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Samuelson, will you simply state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To the debate the bill...resolution [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady’s recognized to debate the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Members, this is really...I hope you take a minute to read it, it’s a resolution about the history of gold in North Carolina and minting it. We now tax these coins that were minted in North Carolina and in the U. S. and what we’re doing is authorizing a study to determine whether or not we should keep taxing coins that were made here, so I urge your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion or debate? Representative Leubke, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] See if Representative Samuelson would yield for questioning. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Samuelson do you yield. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I yield. [SPEAKER CHANGES] She yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Representative Samuelson. I understand this is just a study, but my question is, does this...if your bill were successful, does it not run contrary to every attempt we've had over the last couple of years, to close sales tax exemptions? [SPEAKER CHANGES] That’s one reason why it’s a study. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Speaker on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Gentlemen’s recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I am delighted that Representative Samuelson see the wisdom of studying this rather than trying to push it into legislation, thank you very much. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? If not the question for the House is the adoption of the House Committee substitute to the House Joint Resolution 1232 on its second reading. Those in favor will vote aye, those opposed will vote no. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will lock the machine to record the vote. 103 having voted in the affirmative… [SPEAKER CHANGES] ...of graduate medical positions for North Carolina.

..Carolina allopathic and osteopathic medical school graduates, which also involved North Carolina next. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Representative Lewis is recognized for a motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Mr. Speaker, I would move that Senate Bill 85 be removed from today's calendar and be re-calendared to Monday, June 30th. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection so ordered. Members, we are going to move back to the Senate Bill 793 Representative Glazier, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I believe that Representative Ramsey will be running an amendment that is my consent amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Ramsey, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Mr. Speaker, send forth an amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Gentlemen, it is recognized to send forth an amendment. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Amendment 18C-154V5: Representative Ramsey moves to amend the bill on page 2, lines 31 and 32 by rewriting those lines to read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This amendment will make it clear that our charter schools are just like our public schools, that we are not going to discriminate based on any category protected by our United States Constitution,including the Equal Protection Clause, where under Federal law it applies to our states. I think there is some consensus on this, and I would ask that the body support this amendment, and if you have any questions, I would be glad to try to answer those. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Glazier, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak to the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker, thank you, Representative Ramsey. I agree with this amendment. Now, I will say that it doesn't do it in exactly the language that I would wish, or that Representative Brandon had articulated and enumerated, and that Representative Fisher had enumerated yesterday. But I think it does what we want morally and legally constitutionally the law to be, which is the recognition that no child should be discriminated against in a charter school, which is a public school, for any reason, based on their status, or who they are, and I think that, when you look at the categories protected by the Constitution and Federal law, that I think this achieves that in a way that perhaps sends a good message from everybody in this House about what we believe are the rights of children in public schools, in charter schools. I commend Representative Ramsey on this and urge adoption of the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Brandon, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Speaking on the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] One of the things I love about this place is the way people come together to be able to make sure that we're doing the right thing. I'd like to thank Representative Ramsey and Representative Lewis for wanting to do the right thing and giving us the opportunity to do that. I do accept this amendment. The bigger problem that we have is that this is the best way to address it. The bigger problem that we have in the state of North Carolina that I hope as I leave this body, that you deal with when I leave, is that you still have a whole group of your citizens that are treated as second class citizens. There are no protections, really, except for federal law and statutes, for the LGBT community. I am not going to rehash all of that, but I want you to know that, regardless of how you feel about the situation, we still are Americans, and like I've said before, are still entitled to all the privileges thereof. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hardister, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this seems like a good amendment to me, and I urge you to support it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Fisher, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak to the amendment, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and gentlemen of the house, while I appreciate the efforts that Representative Ramsey has made, along with others here on our side of the aisle, I still am disappointed in the House. The reason is that we know, if we read literature about discrimination practices, the more that you are able to delineate those populations of folks that are bullied or harassed, the better the chances are that they will not be bullied or harassed. If your language is

[0:00:00.0] …Big if it’s not. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stevens… [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady has recognized to state order. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I don’t that she has only an amendment that she certainly discussing bulling which is not what this amendment or anything else. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Representative Steven. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And make sure if you will continue on your debate but can ___[00:20] the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Certainly, I appreciate Representative Stevens placing this for us but what I would like to say is that even though we are making some effort along these lines I think that this house can do better and I would hope that in the future we would, thank you Mr. Chairman and ladies and gentlemen. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? If not the question for the house is the adoption of amendment 11 to the House Committee Substitute to Senate Bill 793. Those in favor will vote aye, those oppose will vote no, the clerk will open the vote. The clerk will lock the machine and record the vote, 115 having voted affirmative and 9 in the negative the amendment 11 is passed. Representative Louis please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Floor motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to state his motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker I knew that what has shown is the dashboard as amendment 7, amendment ATC-153 send forward by Representative Louis to lie upon the table. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Recognized Louis that’s your own amendment? You can displace that if you would like rather than lay on the table. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I will withdraw it at the speaker’s urge and I was just trying to get Representative Hall support on something that I did this year. [Laughter] [SPEAKER CHANGES] Nice try. So, without objection Representative Louis amendment will be withdrawn. Further discussion or debate on the bill, if not, the question for the house is the adoption of the House Committee Substitute to Senate Bill 793 on it’s third reading, those in favor will vote aye, those oppose will vote no, the clerk will open the vote. The clerk will lock the machine and record the vote, 97 having voted in the affirmative and 18 in the negative, the House Committee Substitute Senate Bill 793 is passed his third reading. And we will be in goes to return to the Senate and goes to return to the Senate, at this time we will move back to the House Bill 1220, the temporarily displaced Representative ___[03:15] is recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To state for the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized to state her motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I would prefer that someone else change here to make this motion today and that’s Representative ____[03:30] who was unfortunately unable to attend but in her place I would ask that the house concur with the Senate on House Bill 1220, I would like to debate if I may? [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized to debate a motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker, the Senate agreed with the House Bill we sent over is 1220, all they ask is that we add East Carolina University as one of our teaching universities to the list of those institutions that will be taking up clinical trials on the CDB oil extract and I ask for your support on concurrence, thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate on the motion? If not, the question before the house is the a motion to concur to the Senate Committee Substitute to House Bill 1220, those in favor will vote aye, those oppose will vote no, the clerk will open the vote. The clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. 112 having voted in the affirmative and one in the negative, the motion to concur to Senate Bill…The Senate Committee Substitute to House Bill 1220 has passed and… [0:04:59.8] [End of file…]

...engrossed and enrolled and sent to the Governor. House Bill, excuse me, Senate Bill 78, the Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Committee Substitute to Senate Bill 78, a bill entitled an Act to Require Cities and Counties to Remove Personal Information From Records Available on the Internet Websites Maintained by Counties and Cities When Requested by Certain Law Enforcement Personal, Prosecutors and Additional Officers. General Assembly of North Carolina enacts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Malone, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Debate the bill, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman's recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, and good afternoon to everybody. Senate Bill 78 is a very simple bill. All our bills are simple. What this basically does it says that any, and I'm going to read them off for you if you don't the bill in front of you, that any of these individuals can go to their cities or counties and ask for their information, their personal information, to be taken down from their websites, such as tax information. For instance, right now you could very well go to mine or somebody else's tax information on the Wake County website and you will see my information. You will be actually able to go ahead and take a look at a map and get yourself directions as to how to get to my home. This is a threat assessment and it's an issue for a lot of different people, or raises the threat assessment is what I should say. If you're a federal, state or local law enforcement official, an officer, beg your pardon, this covers you. Criminal magistrates, assistant district attorneys, prosecutors employed by the State Attorney General, there are about 10 of them in that office. U.S. attorneys or assistant U.S. attorneys, and federal judges. The reason why federal judges are on there is because they're appointed. There are no elected officials on here. We are not creating a two-tier system for anybody. Now the reason why I brought this bill forward was because, and many of you will remember this, and we talked about this in committee, there was an incident in Wake Forest, a gentleman was kidnapped. He was a father of an ADA here in Wake County. And that's what highlighted the situation. I'm going to acknowledge right away that that particular situation would not be remedied by this bill, but that ADA, the woman who's father was kidnapped and brought down to Atlanta, did come to the committee and spoke very highly of the bill. She understands, as did several others who also came and spoke on behalf of it, that it is not a perfect bill, but it is a good step going forward in protecting our policemen, protecting anyone involved in the judicial system that falls under this criteria that we're stating here. That's what we're trying to do. We're trying to make them a little bit more safe. Once upon a time there was no internet and a threat assessment, always high, is now a little bit higher. We want to scale it back. Now I understand that there are problems with the bill, not necessarily in the bill but in the situation that they face. You can't necessarily if you're, well you can if you are a committed individual, if you're involved in crime, you can find these people if you want to. You can go to a Google and buy a subscription and find an address or something like that, but there are a lot of people out there who make threats. They go online, they find it and then they go look for the guy. A lot of them won't do that anymore so it will lower the threat assessment, they'll make them feel more safe and they're happier with the situation. There's a lot of associations that agree with this. There a few that don't. I will go ahead and point out that the press association kind of said, "Well, we'd like to be able to take a look at the internet." But, you know, they didn't say much more than that. The realtors, I offered them an opportunity to amend the bill if they so chose, they could not come to a consensus and so they do not have an amendment. As Representative Jeter said earlier, I will opine that if I am lucky enough to get re-elected in November and they want to come back and discuss the issue, I'm happy to revisit it. What we're trying to do here is make them a little more safe and I think it's a good bill. I commend it to you. Answer any questions. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stam, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman's recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I am sorry, members, to have to ask you to vote no on this bill. I think over the last three years, actually the last four or five years, we have done a real good job of not passing our problems...

On down, financial problems, down to the cities and counties. This particular bill suffers from several defects, but the first is it will cost our counties millions of dollars. We don’t have a fiscal note because it’s not a state cost, but it will have, it will require the Register of Deeds of every county to completely change the way they present information. It will cost law enforcement people lots of money because when they want, if they take advantage of this because if they want their title search, the person searching the title will have physically go to the courthouse to do it instead of doing it online as they do today and which is much more efficient. It is a solution in search of a problem, and I can give different solutions to law enforcement officers who want an anonymity. There’s a much simpler way. Representative Wells could form an LLC forum and be the manager, and they could get their name and address completely off the public land records and tax records. But this idea that you can have two different sets of records electronically, one at the courthouse and two online is just completely unworkable. I would ask you to defeat the bill and think of another solution to the problem. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stevens, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I’d like to speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mister Speaker. Members of the House, I, too, oppose this for somewhat different reasons than Representative Stam. I do know it’s a problem for real estate attorneys. It’s, also, going to be a problem for banks who go in to try to determine certain credibilities and things that they only do online. These people, in essence, will become non-existent to them, but the second thing is actually the instant that facilitated this is something we’ve got to think about. When they can’t find Chris Malone, law enforcement officer on there, they may as well show up at Chris Malone Joe average citizen’s house and come after his family because we do know that people frequently have the common names. In the situation he’s talking about, they couldn't find the prosecutor. They went with someone with the same last name. It was her father that became the victim here. So, if we’re really trying to help that situation, we’d be removing a whole lot of people, and the question is where do you stop? And when do they become public again? If you’re a law enforcement officer now but in five years you’re not there, do we continue off the system forever? What about your wife? What about the children? What about when the children get old enough to get married, get out on their own? Where do we stop taking people off? When the bill came up as committee chair, I received several calls from other people who wanted to have their name removed from the public records that were not necessarily elected officials either. Do we take off the social workers who are working with abused and neglected children? Do we take off the divorce attorneys who people don’t always like? Do we take off school teachers who are getting threatened? Do we take off legislative staff? And I did have a request from a former legislative staff member that he’d like to have his names taken off, too. Thought it was a good idea. It is not the best solution to the problem that we have, and it’s certainly not going to be workable. So, I’m asking you to vote against this bill. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Grier Martin, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To see if the gentleman from Wake, Representative Malone, would yield to a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Malone, do you yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I do. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. He yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Representative Malone. Just a question for you. On page one line twenty of the bill, this would include federal judges in your bill, and my question is would that term include a federal magistrate judge who were appointed a separate measure from, a separate way from federal district and appellate court judges? They’re not confirmed by the Senate. I just wanted to make sure that federal magistrate judges would be included in that line. [SPEAKER CHANGES] My answer would be yes. We did not specify, but yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] A follow-up Mr. Chair? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Does the gentleman ?? to an additional question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, he ??. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And just to confirm that is your intent in this bill to include federal magistrate judges? [SPEAKER CHANGES] That’s my intent. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Ramsey, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Inquiry of the bill sponsor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Malone, do you yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I do. [SPEAKER CHANGES] He yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Malone, it says that county, I guess on line twenty-two, that the county must remove that information. Is there

remedy if the county for some reason administratively fails to do that, or does the county have any liability for that? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I was asked that question. I beg your pardon. Yes, I was asked that question, and the answer is no. We do a lot of things. A lot of unfunded mandates so you can't very well you know, hit a county with a misdemeanor or something like that. So the answer is no. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Moore please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Mr. Speaker, members, this, this bill.. we heard this bill in the judiciary committee and, I want you to know Representative Malone worked, worked very hard on this bill. And I don't ?? ... and I've been in and out of the chamber, so I'm not sure if he told you the story of what actually inspired this, or what actually happened; where you had the agent who was kidnapped, the father of the assistant DA was kidnapped, she came to the committee and spoke. This bill has been endorsed by district attorney's, the, the US Attorney's, all three US Attorney's have joined in support of this bill. And, while it does not completely fix the problem, it is a step in that direction. It is, it is something that if it passes here today, it will go to the senate, and probably will need to be tweaked a over there. But, I think Representative Malone did the right thing in not just waiting to do this in the long session, and acting on it now. Because of, what happened. What's happening right now is that we have folks in our, in our prisons, who have... who are kingpins I guess you'd say, particularly with some of the gangs, some of the drug groups, and they're getting access... there's a whole nother issue about access to cell phones, or having access to cell phones. They're, they're able to conduct their business... they're able to do a lot of things. And this isn't just theory. You actually had the father of an assistant DA who was kidnapped, and, but for really good work by law enforcement probably would be dead today. And this is not, I mean this is a real thing. I know there are those who say "well should you add more people to this list, should you do this, should you do that?" The difference with prosecutors, and the reason to include this the way it is right now is; It's not theory what might happen, what possibly would happen, but what has already happened. And this, I would submit to you, is a responsible way to try to deal with it. I think even Representative Malone would acknowledge it's not going to totally fix it. If somebody wants to find out where somebody lives, they still can. But it makes it more difficult. They would at least have to go to the courthouse, or they have to use some private source. There's gonna... remember the people who gonna want to track somebody down to commit this kind of crime, they're not going to leave a fingerprint, if you will, while they're trying to locate them. So, I would encourage you to.. the body let's vote for this, let's vote for this bill today, let's get it to the senate. If it needs some more, if it needs more work, we can keep working on it. If it comes to the point where it gets to the senate where it can't be worked on and fixed there, then, then so be it. But, I would hate to see this bill die in the house, and not have a chance for us to do something in this session, because folks, it's not just theory, these are facts, these are problems that are happening, and I would urge the body's support of the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] ?? ?? to read in a committee report, briefly. Representative, Representative Dollar, Burr, Holloway, Johnson, and McElraft are recognized to send forth the committee report the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives' Dollar, Burr, Holloway, Johnson and McElraft for the appropriations committee. Senate bill 594. ?? ?? ?? ?? number two. Unfavorable is the house committee substitute number one. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Unfavorable calendar house committee substitute number one. calendar house committee substitute number two today without objection. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Objection. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Objection having been raised, Representative Moore you're recognized for motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman I move that the bill which was just read in be added to today's calendar, and would ask to be heard on it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Gentleman is recognized to debate his motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. This is the bill that was approved in the appropriations committee this morning, and is, is time sensitive also. We are aware that we are in the hopeful final days or weeks of session, and this bill needs to go back to the, needs to go back to the senate, should members wish to debate the bill, they'll be able to do that. But I would ask that the bill be added to today's calendar for a consideration. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Jackson please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the gentleman's motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker. Ladies and gentlemen, I objected to addition to today's

simply because- last night when I went to bed the bill was 9 pages long, I tried my best to see the new one, it was handed out about 10:40 in appropriations, this is when I first got to see that we'd added twenty-something pages. I think I know what it says, but I'd like the opportunity to read it and research it and make sure that it's identical to what passed the House. I think that's a reasonable request and I now ask you to vote against the gentleman's motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate on the motion? If not, the question for the House is the motion to add Senate bill 594 to today's calendar. Those in favor will vote "aye", those in favor will vote "no". The clerk will open the vote. Clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. 69 having voted in the affirmative and 46 in the negative, the motion passes and Senate bill 594 will be added to today's calendar. The chair is about to ratify the following bills, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] [??] clerk posts the following bill to be ratified for presentation to the governor is Senate bill 58, and act to make corrections to secession law 2014-17, [??] clerk posts the following bill to be ratified for presentation to the governor, House bill 1220, an act to create intractable epilepsy alternatives to treatment, pilot stated program, and register for scientific investigation of safety and efficacy of hemp extract, treatment for intractable epilepsy. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rep. Michaux, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] When're you getting back on the other bill we were discussing, I got a- [SPEAKER CHANGES] We're back on the bill and you're- [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rep. Malone's bill, is that the one we're back on? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir. We're still on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay, good. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'd like to ask him a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rep. Malone, do you yield? To the gentleman's question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I do. [SPEAKER CHANGES] He yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rep. Malone, I'm looking at the bill and I'm sure that some of us in here would like to be added to this bill, and probably a few other folks out there, particularly a lot of folks in [??]. Why is it limited to just these folks and not others who might be susceptible to these types of situations? [SPEAKER CHANGES] The answer's real simple: We need to stop somewheres, and we stopped and accepted it there. Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rep. Malone, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Due to some question- to make a motion, if you would, I'd like to withdraw this from today's calendar, recalendar it on Monday, discuss some of these issues that have come up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection, the House Committee substute for Senate bill 78 will be postponed until Monday. Is there objection? If not, so ordered. Rep. Tine, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'd like to be recognized as voting "aye" on Senate bill 793 please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection, the gentleman will be recorded as voting "aye" on 793. Messages from the Senate: The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate Committe substitute for House bill 267, a bill to entitle an act to ammend laws governing captive insurance companies and risk retention groups as recommended by the Dept. of insurance. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection, calendar? [SPEAKER CHANGES] [??] [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there objection? If not, so ordered. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, what was that number again? [SPEAKER CHANGES] It was House bill 267. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate committee substitute for House bill 379, a bill to entitle an act authorizing North Carolina veterinary medical board to ammend the boards laws pertaining to licensure fees and licensure reinstatement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection, it will be added to today's calendar. Is there objection?

If not, so ordered. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate Committee Substitute number 2 for House Bill 1034, a bill to be entitled ‘An Act to Amend the Laws Related to Local Firefighters Relief Funds, the Statewide Firefighters Relief Fund and the Rescue Squad Workers Relief Fund, Workers Compensation for Firefighters and Rescue Squad, Workers Supplemental Pensions for Firefighters and Rescue Squad Workers, the Volunteer Fire Department Fund and Volunteer Rescue EM Fund’ is recommended by the Joint Legislative Program Evaluation Oversight Committee. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection, it will be added to today’s calendar. House Bill 1080. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Warren, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Inquiry to the Chair, please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman may state his inquiry. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Could you please tell the body approximately how many more bills you’re going to intend to add to today’s calendar? [SPEAKER CHANGES] There’s one additional bill that will be added to today’s calendar. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And sir, if I may follow-up, how many does that give us at this point? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Five bills. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 1080, a bill to be entitled ‘An Act Removing Certain Described Property From the Corporate Limits of the Town of Watha’. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Calendar. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 1218, a bill to be entitled ‘An Act Amending the Charter of the City of Monroe to Remove the Provision Authorizing the City Manager to Have Direct Supervisory Authority over the City Attorney’. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection – [SPEAKER CHANGES] Objection. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Objection having been raised, that bill will just be placed on calendar; not calendar for today. House Bill 267, the Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate Committee Substitute for House Bill 267, a bill to be entitled ‘An Act to Amend Laws Governing Captive Insurance Companies and Risk Retention Groups’, as recommended by the Department of Insurance. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You need to recognize me. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Moore, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I believe House Bill 1080 was just read in. Motion. Motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman’s recognized to state his motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I move the bill be referred to the Committee on Finance. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection so ordered. Representative Collins is recognized for a motion and then to debate his motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I move that we concur with the ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman moves we concur. You’re recognized to debate your motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, this is just amendments to a captive insurance agency bill that passed both the House and Senate, I think unanimously in both houses last year. Happy to report that since we passed that bill, we’ve had I believe it’s… and I didn’t realize this was going to be put on the calendar today, so I’m just taking it from memory. I think it’s eight cap… maybe it’s five. It was either five or eight captive agencies that have already opened up in North Carolina. We’ve already got about 500 thousand dollars in revenue from those. These amendments are pretty simple and designed to make us a little bit more competitive with the laws of the captive insurance companies that surround us. We assume I think with good… pretty conservatively that our captives will be up to about 25 by the end of this year and the revenue will be over a million and a half dollars. If you remember, captive insurance companies are basically insurance companies that are formed by companies to insure their own risk primarily, and sometimes some of their subsidiaries. It’s something that I don’t know of anybody who’s against. The Department of Insurance actually helped craft this bill, and so I know of no opposition and would ask you to support it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? If not, the question before the House is the motion to concur to the Senate Committee Substitute to House Bill 267. Those in favor will vote aye. Those opposed will vote no. The Clerk will open the vote. The clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. 112 having voted in the affirmative and none in the negative, the motion to concur to Senate Committee Substitute to House Bill 267 has passed and will be…

...enrolled and sent to the Governor. House Bill 379, the Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate Committee Substitute for House Bill 379, a bill entitled an Act Authorizing the North Carolina Veterinary Medical Board to Amend the Board's Laws Pertaining to Licensure fees and License Reimbursement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Faircloth, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized for a motion and then to debate his motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Move to concur with the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All right. The gentleman has the floor to debate to his motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This comes over from the Senate. It empowers the Veterinary Medical Board to amend some of their fees. It's within their power to do that but this does set a ceiling on some of those fees. It has the support of the veterinarians and support of the board. I ask for you to support the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? If not, the question before the House is the motion to concur on the Senate Committee Substitute to House Bill 379. Those in favor will vote I, those opposed will vote no. The Clerk will open the vote. Representative Brandon, do you wish to be recorded on this vote? Representative Brandon? Representative Brandon, would you like to be recorded on this vote? The Clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. One hundred and eight having voted in the affirmative and three in the negative, the motion to concur to Senate Committee Substitute to House Bill 379 has passed and will be enrolled and sent to the Governor. House Bill 1034, the Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate Committee Substitute Number 2 for House Bill 1034, a bill entitled an Act to Amend Laws Related to Local Firefighters Relief Funds, the State-Wide Firefighters Relief Fund, Rescue Squad Workers Relief Fund and Workers Compensation for Firefighters and Rescue Squad Workers, Supplemental Pensions for Firefighters and Rescue Squad Workers, and the Volunteer Fire Department Fund, and Volunteer Rescue EMS Fund, as recommended by the Joint Legislative Program Evaluation Oversight Committee. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Howard, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For a motion, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized to state her motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would move that we do concur. Members of the House, if you remember a couple of weeks ago we had this bill and when I debated and explained it to you that this has been a 19-year ongoing situation of trying to clarify the monies for the various volunteer firemen and the VAS grant programs. The bill passed with a really good vote over here. We sent it over to the Senate and they treasurer's office asked for a very simple amendment changing a date from July 1 to October 1. Also, the second change was at the request of Nevin fire chief, there was a repeal of the local act. I would ask that we do concur and that you vote yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Boles, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Be excused from vote pursuant to 24.1A. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Noted. Further discussion, further debate? If not, the question before the house... [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Saine, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Please be excused for the same purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman will be excused from voting. Question before the House is the motion to concur on Senate Committee Substitute Number 2 to House Bill 1034. Those in favor will vote aye, those opposed will vote no. The Clerk will open the vote. The Clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. One hundred and twelve having voted in...

The affirmative and known in the negative, the motion to concur to Senate committee subsitute number two to house bill ten thirty four has passed. The bill will be enrolled and sent to the govenor.Represenative Moore, please state your purpose. [Speaker Change] For an announcement. [Speaker Change] Gentlemens recognized to state his announcement. [Speaker Change] Mr. Chairman, the committee rules count and operations house is going to need to meet to take up three matters for recess and I believe the state personal committee is also going to need to take up a matter with the intention that the bills be reported back in when we come back. So that being said, the rules committee will meet five minutes after recess for what I believe will be a very short meeting and then I'll defer so Representative Collins can make an announcement and then I'll come back to make a motion. Rules will meet in twelve twenty eight. [Speaker Change] State personal committee will meet immediately following...as soon as we recess right here by this. [Speaker Change] Representative Moore, please state your purpose. [Speaker Change] Mr. Chairman, move that the house stand in recess subject to ratification of bills, messages from the Senate, committee reports, conference reports, re-referral of bills and resolutions, appointment of comforees, introduction of bills and resolutions, to reconvene at 2:05 pm. [Speaker Change] Members of the House will stand in recess until 2:05 pm subject to the stipulations stated by Representative Moore. House is now in recess. [Speaker Change] House will come back to order. [Speaker Change] Mr. Speaker? [Speaker Change] What purpose does the gentlemen from Cumberland Representative Floyd rise? [Speaker Change] Mr. Speaker, could you give us some assistance on the plan educated for next week, if you could go further out we would appreciate that. [Speaker Change] I can tell you that session on Monday night at this point is for seven pm. As far as the session time is the remainder of the day, I'll need to consult with the Speaker and advise that I assume its a normal schedule but obviously we have a budget process so I think some defers will be given to the Appropriations Chairman on what he needs for the comforees. [Speaker Change] Mr. Speaker? [Speaker Change] What purpose does the gentleman from Rockingham Representative Jones rise? [Speaker Change] Could you give us some direction regarding the schedule today? [Speaker Change] We could. It is the Chair's intention that we will adjourn the session at, as close to three pm as possible. We are looking at...we're about to take up Senate Bill five ninety four, in fact lets go ahead and call that Senate Bill five ninety four corporee. [Speaker Change] House committee substitute number two for Senate bill five ninety four. Bill will be titled in an act to remove for prohibitions on carrying concealed hand gun, firearms by certain department public safety employees to increase the penalty for carrying a concealed firearm, to increase the penalty for giving or selling a cellphone to an inmate and to make possession of the cell phone by the inmate to amend the offense. [Speaker Change] The reading court can stand down on reading the full title. Gentlemen from Stanly, Representative Burr is recognized to debate the bill. [Speaker Change] ??? North Carolina ??. [Speaker Change] Thank you Mr. Chairman. This is a bill we had this morning in appropriations. Many of the provisions that are in here you've seen in multiple committees including appropriations as was mentioned this morning. Its been in judiciary c, its been in other bills as well including the Senate had several of these items in their budget and we found that it was important that they be run through a judiciary committee so that is happening with enough of the provisions including the ones that address the cell phone increasing the penalties for having a cell phone in a prison and over the past few months you've seen some real life situations that are..that have come up and a number of those provisions are really touched on in here from the cell phone provision that seeks to address the concerns and the needs with the A.D.A's family and the issue here in Wake County to what I mentioned this morning about whats happening down in Lanesborough this week with the F.B.I. and the S.B.I. and the highway patrol being down there and the need to make sure correction officers in the...

[0:00:00.0] …And we are seeing our prisons are protected and then obviously one of the new provisions, just two provisions that were included in the bill, one in the PCS this morning and that’s the transfer the SPI to ahead and that was in both the house and the Senate budget and this is an effort to make sure that is one item we know is eventually going to be included in a final budget but it’s important to make sure that our own enforcement agency here are SPIs able to focus on the jobs and we don’t wanna get this transition started so they can consolidate their offices and also as another provision that touches on really a critical matter in the state and something that came up this week was really the issue and Harnett County this week that came up with the sex crimes issues that have been addressed in this bill includes the provisions and that were also in the budget to authorize the State Bureau of Investigation to expand their unit that’s out targeting individuals predators online and that are going after at young people in the state children in the state that’s included and also at the request of the Department of Justice provisions to make sure that the State Crime Lab, several positions they wanna to make sure were transferred out of the SPI and left into the Department of Justice and in the crime lab that was included at their request and the provision that adds in the electronic testimony for the crime lab folks so that they can try to help and find ways to be more efficient and timely and make sure they are able to do their job with the resources they have available and that came out of our house select committee on judicial efficiency. I’m certainly happy to answer any additional questions that members may have but I know there is one amendment from Representative Bolls that he has and we will certainly stand for any questions, thank you Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Collins has recognized to send forward a committee report on behalf of the committee on state personnel the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Collins state personnel the Senate Bill 105, Political Science add accounts to SHP favorable and referred to government. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Forward the committee on government. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Members the Senate Bill 612, Regulatory Reform Act…Regulatory Relief, Senate Bill 612 this is not the one we have been dealing with this presently and the Regulatory Reform Committee Chair moves and will be removed from Regulatory Reform and refer to the committee on government. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose from gentleman from New Hanover Representative Davis arise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] [Inaudible] [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you and I would Representative Berg running this bill I went back to my office to get my file on it. Just to let you know little history, Representative Berg I started this bill with just a cell phone and it grew from there and there we accepted more and more amendments to it, ___[03:28] to request various Senators and Representatives, I would just like to reiterate what Representative Berg said, there is a lot of good things in this bill I hope you will support it and I hope you will vote for it, thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose the gentleman from Moore, Representative Bolls arise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To send forward the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to send forward the amendment, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This is amendment ARK-120B3, Representative Bolls moves to amend the bill on page 25 line 41 by inserting the following. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman from Moore has the floor to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman, what those days that gives the ABC Law Enforcement and the ABC Board officers another tool box for perpetual and ongoing problems that local ABC establishments, I was with a LE officer, ___[04:41] and Fed Bill and I was with him and I was ___ that we are still able to off course stay in business and they will get their ABC license even though it was been a year long undercover investigation and it was kind of… [0:04:59.9] [End of file…]

...they still were able to keep their ABC license. What this does is that it will suspend the license for 30 days and it gives them time for the ABC commission to come back and have a probable cause hearing whether to suspend or revoke the establishment's license and also, but it still continues the business can operate just suspends their ABC permit licenses. It would be no different from someone stopped, as another privilege that we have in this state is driving license. If you're caught with DUI, your license is suspended for a certain period of time but then they were given back until you appear before a court. Thank you, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate on the amendment? If not, the question before the House is the passage of amendment one offered by Representative Boles. Subcommittee has favor passage of the amendment will vote aye, those opposed will vote no. The Clerk will open the vote. The clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. One hundred and eight having voted in the affirmative and three in the negative, the amendment is adopted. For what purpose the gentleman from Wake, Representative Jackson rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Send forth an amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to send forth an amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This is amendment AMD-83V5. Representative Jackson moves to amend the bill on page 1, lines 17 and 18, by deleting. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and gentlemen, this is an amendment that is similar in nature to the one that was laid upon the table when we were debating the budget. It would delete the provision of this bill directing the SBI transfer from the AG's office to the Department of Public Safety. As you know, we've already passed that in the budget, there's no need to do that again. This was a last minute change. I assume that the language is the same as it was before but I couldn't take the ?? and had a chance to read the entire 2-some pages. What I will tell you is that I did read the fiscal note and the fiscal note that's listed on this bill doesn't include any costs for this transfer. In the budget we showed $1 million savings directed the Department of Public Safety to save $1 million by completing this transfer. That language I know is, I don't believe is in this bill. I think this is inappropriate to be in this bill. This bill's got a lot of good things. Senator Davis mentioned those. I mean Representative Davis mentioned those and I'd love to be able to vote for this bill but I'd also like for you to consider at least having an up or down vote on my amendment. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the lady from Wilson, Representative Farmer-Butterfield rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I wanted to vote yes on the Boles amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Did the lady, was the lady recorded as a no vote? The lady will be recorded as having voted aye. For what purpose does the gentleman from Haywood, Representative Queen rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To put the transfer of the SBI in this bill I just rise to oppose that, so I think this is a good amendment. I have never thought that it was a wise thing for this body to disenfranchise the voters of North Carolina who elected the attorney general as the chief law enforcement officer with the full authority that he has to investigate, including the office of the SBI, to stand for the citizens against public corruption of elected officials as one of his prime responsibilities. Less than two weeks ago, there was article on the SBI investigating public corruption issues and of members leadership and members of this body, the General Assembly and others. And now we're going to transfer the SBI from the attorney general to an appointed position that legislative leaders appoint, the Governor, underlying appointees. It's just sort of, we're putting the fox in the hen house. We need an independent, publicly elected, publicly accountable to the people attorney general. The idea that this is not political is just beyond the pale. It is nothing but partisan politics for the gubernatorial race, so I am really...

A:…encourage you to vote for this amendment and leave the SBI independent in the internal general offices where it belongs and where the people have selected (??) to manages that office. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: What purpose does the gentleman from Stanly? representative Burr rises. R.BURR: Speak on the amendment CHAIRMAN: Gentleman has the floor to debate the amendment R.BURR: Thank you Mr. Chairman. We’ve seen this amendment now in different forms. I believe at least four times on the floor and is been defeated four time on the floor. This language here concerning the state borough investigations, I believe mates the SBI truly and independent agency where you wont have a someone nominated by the governor and confirmed by the general assembly for an eight years term. And the insolvency set off that person is that they can perform their duties without fear of being fire by an elected official during the time they are serving. To say that the SBI being under the terning(?) general is not political, I think is just a very interesting statement because he too is elected a state wide and runs at parkinson (?)tickets as many others. This gives the ability to make sure that there is not only one person getting the control of what happens with the director of the SBI and having that person be at will and puts him in a place where these agencies can actually perform their duties and look out for the state of North Carolina and fight corruption and other crime that are under their jurisdiction. So I will respectfully ask to the members to vote again this amendment. CHAIRMAN: For what purpose is the gentleman from Cumberland? Representative Glazier rises R. GlAZIER: To speak to the amendment CHAIRMAN: Gentleman has the floor to debate the amendment R. GlAZIER: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I rise and I wouldn’t normally do that on this amendment because I think we have sort of discussed this policy and decisions have been made as representative Burr said, several times. But I want to rise to make this point. About three hour ago, I think, we, on this side of the aisle, voted unanimously with you in the majority. Even if we disagree with many provisions in that bill that was passed on the budget. But we did so in good faith to try to extend the discussion on the issues that it raised on t-shirts and all the things that we did jointly believe in. We did that in good faith, and what representative Jackson is simply asking is a return collegiality. We want to vote for all the other provisions in this bill, but you know that the SBI has been a part of an issue between the two sides. It is now been in three different other bills. All we are asking on this side is to allow this bill to have a clean vote, and to allow us to vote with you on all the other provisions, after we did what you ask us to do earlier. Now is time to the majority of us to show some good faith and to adopt representive Jackson amendment. Thank you CHAIRMAN: For what purpose is the gentleman from New Hanover, representative Davis rises. R. DAVIS: Speak to the amendment CHAIRMAN: Gentleman has the floor to debate the amendment R. DAVIS: With all due respect to my colleagues who have spoken for the amendment I would like to reemphasis what representative Burr said it, and ask you to vote against the amendment. Thank you. Chairman: Further discussion, further debate on the amendment. What purpose is the gentleman from Guilford, represented Blust Rises. R. BLUST: representative Burr reveal for a question. CHAIRMAN: Does the gentleman form Stanly yield for a question? R.BURR: Yes CHAIRMAN: He yields R. BLUST: Representative Burr, I notice in the long title it says near the end that it got all the provisions in the bill it says “recommended by the commission for judicial efficiency” I think it is. Was this particular provision recommended by that commission? The SBI be moved? Was that One of the recommendations? R. BURR: The provision that was recommended was the remote testimony from the crime lab analyst. CHAIRMAN: Further question, further debate? If not, the question before the House is the passage of the amendment set for by representative Jackson. Submitting as favor of the adoption who vote A,. There is supposedly a vote note. The court would open the vote.

[0:00:00.0] The clerk will lock the machine and record the vote, 50 having voted in the affirmative and 64 in the negative, the amendment is not adopted, the gentleman from Cumberland, Representative Lucas Ross. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to debate he bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker, we have this bill this morning and the appropriations and this bill in large measure was a rehash of something that we have already voted on. And I heard Representative Davis said that this bill started out as ___[00:54] Prison Bill and I like that he pointed to the bill, I wanna bill the vote before bill and I wish it will be possible to vote up and down on the measures that we all concur that ought to be rectified but moving the SPI, something agenda the body has voted on but its not a divisive vote and it’s something that already has gone over to the Senate and I’m still wondering and why we had it back again but I still have in my what my county sheriff and as I understand the Sheriff’s Association of North Carolina has said about this and they are very be on that they don’t want this to occur. So, at places ___[01:46] how do you vote for the good pass of this bill and then separate those pass of the bill that you don’t feel comfortable for and we know that it’s impossible. So, one has to decide then, “Do I vote for the bill or do I not vote for the bill because you really in your heart want to vote for all of the good aspects of this bill.” We are placed almost in an untenable position and so I just reluctantly will have to say, “No.” Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] What purpose does the lady from Wake, Representative ___[02:30]? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I would like to change my vote if I did not vote no on the Jackson Amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady will be recorded to just having voted no on the Jackson Amendment, for what purpose does the gentleman from Scotland, Representative ___[02:43]? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative’s bill, question please ___[02:50] [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman from Stanley yells to the gentleman from Scotland. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Representative Bill. I just wanna ask you a question in my district I have at least three to four prisons in the area, has technology caught up with those who actually bring cell from anything are you noticed people gonna be risk, it still gonna take the chance, is there anything that you discussed at technology still can find a way to at least keep them out even though if we get the stick to beat him if they bring them in anything your conversation about if you don’t mind. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, Sir Representative ___[03:30], there are in fact possible solutions out there a wide variety of solutions that could be looked at to go along with this to keep cell phone out of prisons or if they get in to simply block them from being able to make phone calls or pickup those phone calls within that radius, it’s very expensive technology at this point and something that cost millions to do just at one location but I do believe that there are a number of possible ideas like that the Department of Public Safety is looking at moving towards in the future but it’s just a matter of what may fit best for the particular prisons that they are looking at. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman yells to a second question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] He yells. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there a pilot for ___[04:20] in the state going forward this time, do you know if there is a pilot program just to see how this technology would work at any provided facility to present time? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I know that the department is certainly looking at a number of different ideas and I won’t get into quite frankly not 100% sure on where, if and certainly would want to disclose anything that they maybe working on to try to address these issues but I know that it’s a serious issue that they realize it’s not just about having a cell phone in there, it’s about giving that person a connection out… [0:04:58.8] [End of file…]

Into the public, to potentially do some dangerous, participate in some dangerous activity, as was done here in Wake County and trying to prevent that. So they know first-hand what a serious issue it is and I know they’re working to address it just as I mentioned earlier about the issues at Waynesboro. I know they’ve been down there with the SBI and the FBI as they worked to weed out a number of issues they seem to have at that one particular prison and I’m sure it’s not the only one. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Just one follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Does the gentleman yield to an additional question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I yield. [SPEAKER CHANGES] He does. [SPEAKER CHANGES]?? You and Representatives from Wilmington? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Correct. [SPEAKER CHANGES] A lot of investigation. Just for me personally, is there no way that the system, if the gatehouse, I just say the gatehouse to really stop those phones from coming in at the gatehouse, is there no other policies or ways that they’re actually stopping them at the gatehouse? Like I said I’ve worked at, in my area I’ve got three or four facilities that I know about it. My wife in fact retired from there. Is there nothing at the gatehouse that’s really stopping that from coming in, if you don’t mind. [SPEAKER CHANGES] There are tools that they have. I’ve seen them, the last time I was at Central Prison. They’ve got a cell phone detector as you come into the facility that they can use. How well that works, I’m not sure but I know, I believe they have been able to capture folks off that. But individuals get creative, unfortunately, with these things and they’re sneaking them into prisons and it’s an issue that they’re working to address. But yes, they have some technology. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Durham, Representative MIcheaux rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well, here we go again. You know, you all need to sit down and just think about what you’re doing. This bill, what you’ve done is put in this bill like you did the other bill, Senate Bill 3, you’ve put in there the things that both bodies basically have agreed on. The Senate has agreed on moving the SBI to Department of Public Safety. The Senate agreed on actually teacher wages and this type of thing. Everything that you’ve got a conference committee sitting out there, trying to work these differences out. But what you’re doing is trying to double insurance on this situation by introducing bills on items that have already been agreed upon, and knowing that you’re antagonizing the folks on the other side to the point where you’re not going to get anything done. It just doesn’t seem right to me, when you’ve got the process, a process which takes care of itself. You don’t have to take these extraordinary measures to do this. It’s just not necessary. Why would you, people say well we’ve got to do it you know, because. No, no that’s because of time, this type of thing. We’ve go the time. Let me tell you something. You have left some items in there that you’re never going to agree on. You may agree on most of these items here but there’s always room for compromise. We agreed to go, we agreed that teachers ought to have a raise. No question about that. If you wanted to something about the SBI why didn’t you make it an independent agency, with an appointment by an elected official, or non-elected, and make it as independent as you can without putting it under anybody? To me if you’re trying to take the politics out of it, you put more politics in it now by doing this than you had before. So my friends, let’s just think about what we’re doing. Why don’t we let whatever it takes, let the conference committee go to work, do what both houses have done, try to bring everything back together, and keep, just quit running stuff by us twice, three or four times when you don’t need to do it. I hope you kill this thing. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Wake, Representative Stam rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To offer up an amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to send forth an amendment. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stam moves to amend the bill on page 29, line

Seven by deleting December 1, 2014, and substituting September 1, 2014. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman from Wake has the floor to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mister Speaker and members of the House, I think one of the great, really good provisions of the bill is the one on remote forensic testimony, and the reason for it just, very briefly, is so that we don’t have our forensic analysts running all over the state, sitting in the back of court rooms at trials instead they can be in the lab doing their work. And in many cases, they’ll be able to do their testimony by video. We asked the head of the lab by Judge Joe John if they’re ready to go, and he says, pretty much they’re ready to go, at least in some places. So this would allow them to begin this three months earlier. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate on the amendment. If not the question before the House is the amendment sent forth by Representative Stam. Those, also, who favor the amendment will vote aye. Those opposed will vote no. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will allock the machine record the vote. One hundred and eleven having voted in the affirmative and three in the negative. The amendment is adopted. We’re now back on the bill. For what purpose does the gentleman from Chatham, Representative Reives, rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To send forth an amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to send forth an amendment. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Amendment ARV-65 B1. Representative Reives moves to amend the bill on page twenty-eight by adding at the end of line forty-nine the following. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman from Chatham has the floor to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mister Speaker. Members of the House, I would just ask that you support this amendment. I agree with Representative Stam. One of the best thing about this bill is remote forensic testimony. One of the issues that came up when this was brought up in judiciary B was a clearer meaning of the word report and what we want to do is to encourage both sides to use remote forensic testimony. It’s going to save us a lot of money and save us a lot of time, and so all we've done is further define what is meant by that report so you’ll have less objections and more uses as remote forensics. We didn't get a chance to add it on in judiciary B because of the speed of the bill moving through. Representative Davis has been very helpful and assist me, trying to get this together and to bet it. He’s thought to, if I remember correctly, the conference of district attorneys, talked to the bar. All of them are in agreement with it, and it will make this a better working part of this bill, and so we’d appreciate your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from New Hanover, Representative Davis, rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mister Speaker. Representative Reives is correct. Not only the North Carolina bar, but also the District Attorneys conference is okay with this language, and I ask you to support the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate on the amendment. If not the question before the House is the amendment set forth by Representative Rieves, Amendment Four. Submittee in favor of adoption of the amendment will vote aye. Those opposed will vote no. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will allock the machine and record, record the vote. One hundred and thirteen having voted in the affirmative and one in the negative. The amendment is adopted. For what purpose does the gentleman from Macklenburg, Representative Moore, rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mister Speaker, to change my vote to yes on the Stam amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman will be recorded as having voted aye. The lady from New Hanover, is that the same request? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady will be recorded as having voted aye. The lady from Guilford, Representative Adams, the same request? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady will be recorded as having voted aye. For what purpose does the gentleman from Guilford, Representative Hardister, rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mister Speaker, I’d like to be recorded as voting no on the Jackson amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman will be recorded as having voted no on the Jackson amendment. For what purpose does the gentleman from Haywood, Representative Queen, rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Again, there are many good things in this bill, but I can’t vote for it because of the poison pill of transfer and the SBI. It is just not in the citizen’s interest, and I ask you to think of, refer to this as being

… independent, politically-independent decision on your part; just that you’d like to have an appointed chief law enforcement officer rather than an elected one. An elected official is accountable to the people. That is politics. That’s the good part of politics. That’s the part of politics that I stand for. It’s like we just say in this body “Let’s just decide the county commissioners can appoint the chief law enforcement officers of the county. They don’t get to elect their sheriffs anymore.” So we know that in the counties, it’s a good thing to have your chief law enforcement officer independent, able to do his job, and in particularly when it comes to investigating political officials, people in this body. I just read a couple of things, just out of the popular press, why this is not important. Why would we want to let SPI answer to the very people they may be investigating or who may play a part in the legislative confirmation of their director? That’s not a good thing in my opinion. The article goes on to say – there was just an anecdote about this just a couple of weeks ago – pick something like sweepstake poker gambling that we’ve all handled in this General Assembly and it been hard to get our hands around. Lots of money comes in from this gambling enterprise. What does it say that the state’s most powerful political politicians top the list of recipients? Thom Tillis is first, followed by Governor McCrory and then Berger, and they’re under investigation for illegal campaign contributions. You want an independent agency to deal with these kinds of questions, independent of their appointed positions and answerable to the people. So again, this is for our Republic here, our state’s integrity. This is why it’s such an important issue and it shouldn’t just be dealt with as a political power play. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker? [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Mecklenburg, Representative Jeter rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To see if Representative Queen would yield for a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Gentleman from Haywood yields if the gentleman from Mecklenburg…? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I yield. [SPEAKER CHANGES] He yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] He referenced three individuals being under investigation. Does he have some knowledge that the rest of the world does not currently possess? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I’m just reading form the ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I rest my case. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman from Haywood has the floor to continue his debate. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Does anybody else have any information they want to reveal at the moment? Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Guilford, Representative Blust rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, just to speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And I’ll try to be brief. I really don’t want to be here Thursday afternoon debating this, but some of the gentleman’s comments were just so over the top, it cries out for a response. And I voted with you on the amendment. I’d rather just not do it right now myself, but it’s being way overblown, I’ll tell you that, and the idea that Roy Cooper, the Attorney General, is not political, is laughable to his face, and I know him well, I graduated law school with him, but he is a very political individual himself, and the idea that politics does not intrude on anything is just… come on, let’s not be naïve here. This move to some will make it less political. I don’t know that. I guess any agency like the SPI, which will be still serving under an elected statewide leader, the Governor, it will still be subject to political control even with this move, so to make it some kind dire thing where you guys are just trying to keep politics out of it and we’re trying to inject politics in it is just not accurate. [SPEAKER CHANGES] If Representative Blust will suspend, for what purpose does the gentleman from Guilford, Representative Brandon rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To see if my good friend Representative – [SPEAKER CHANGES] I yield. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman, he yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I just wanted to know, do you think the Governor – you might no Pat McCrory, you might know Beverly Perdue – do you think they’re political figures?

I do. I’m not trying to pretend there’s a way that you can totally take politics out of everything. Look at the national scene right now, Representative Brandon. If I don’t think Eric Holder is political when he’s appointed by the president, and is not making political decisions on all kinds of things just like the current IRS scandal, I’m just not that naïve. So I hate to see it overblown like this, a simple move, the Governor is elected. The attorney general is elected. There’s no place you could put it. I sure wouldn’t want any law enforcement type agency out there on its own, unaccountable to nobody. There is no way to totally isolate politics. We have to do the best we can. This is not some dire thing that’s going to terribly change. I think a few years ago the SBI had a whole lot of trouble and had some scandals in it, when it was under the attorney general’s office. If you remember, go back and check the headlines and check the stories. So I just hate to see it overblown like this and I guess I can’t stop you from playing politics either but investigations can go on. I’ll close by just noting there were a lot of scandals up here five, six, seven, eight years ago. And I didn’t see the attorney general then involved in any of this. It was all federal officials that uncovered it and prosecuted it. So the idea that the current attorney general’s going to throw the book at political corruption and if this is taken from him, there’s no answer, it’s just not accurate on its face. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does then gentleman from Stanley, Representative Burr rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] For a motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman may state his motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Move the previous question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman from Stanley has moved the previous question. So many favoring adoption of the previous question will vote aye. Those opposed will vote no. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. 72 having voted in the affirmative and 42 in the negative, the previous question is adopted. Does the minority leader wish to offer three minutes worth of debate? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, Mr. Speaker. I wish to offer three minutes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The minority leader has three minutes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And I hope someone will put me on the clock, make sure I use all of these three minutes. We’ve all agreed this is a bad way to do business, yet still virtually every piece of policy we’re bringing though here now is an omnibus bill. You have a super majority, first of all, so the only people you have to answer to is yourselves. And it’s almost as if you’re scared to answer to yourself. You’re saying let me give myself an out. Let me put some good things in here so I can do something I know should not be done this way or should not be done at all. But I don’t want to be accountable to myself so what I’m going to do is put it in and give myself some excuses. That’s where we are now. I’ve said it before. Democrats can’t save you from yourself. Your own ethics are going to come to pass. You know they say alcohol makes people drunk but power, well power makes you drunk as well. So now you’re in a situation where you’re continuing to violate what you know is the proper procedure for carrying legislation through this body. I’m disappointed. We understand you have the power. I’ve said this before. But for you to continually violate it. Even Representative Blust, he said this is not the way to business. But time and time again we continue to bring these bills. This bill shouldn’t even be in this situation, where all of these good things are being captive in a bill with a major policy that should be debated. It should be voted on its own merits and it should not be hidden in a bill so people will have an out for not standing up and making a decision based on a good analysis. Again, you have the power. You’ve chosen to use it in this way. You’ll ask why people don’t have confidence in our institution and in our government. You have the power. What way will you use it? Will you continue to use it this way? I think the people deserve more and better. I know you can do better. I hope at some point in time you’ll choose to do better. I hope you’ll oppose this bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Majority leader has up to three minutes to speak to the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker and ladies and gentlemen of the House. What you have in this bill are some provisions that will move the people of North Carolina forward in the right direction. I think

look at the provisions of the bill, either individually or collectively, I think you would come to the conclusion that this bill is a good bill. It does a lot of good things for a lot of good people. We can debate and argue about specific proposals, but over all I think that it is something that moves our agenda forward. Our agenda is to provide good government, good policies to the people of North Carolina. That's what it does, you can vote for this bill and be proud of it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The question before the House is the passage of the House committee substitute for Senate bill 594 on its second reading. Those members supporting the bill will vote "aye", those opposed will vote "no". The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. 75 having voted in the affirmative and 39 in the negative, the bill passes its second reading and will without objection- [SPEAKER CHANGES] Objection. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The bill will remain on the calendar. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Just a moment. Rep. Burr is recognized to send forth a committee report, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rep. Burr for the rules, calendar, and operations of the House, Senate bill 761, Credit for Military Training, favorable? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Calendar. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate bill 871, Wally Durn v. Annexation, Annexation favorable to the House committee substitute unfavorable to the Senate committee substitute. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate committee substute unfavorable. ?? bill, House committee substitute calendar, and without objection added to today's calendar. So ordered. For what purpose does the gentleman from Cumberland, Rep. Glazier rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Pursuant to rule 8 for a moment of privilege. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Moment of personal privilege. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I normally don't use this at all, but I think there was one comment made that does affect the integrity of the House and I do wanna speak to that. Rep. Blust, and I know this was not ment this way, but Rep. Blust stated in the last debate that during the scandals of the last decade the attorney general wasn't involved at all. That's simply incorrect and fundamentally wrong. And I know that because I, along with Rep. Stam shared in co-chair in the legislative ethics committee during those scandals, and I had to chair the impeachment proceedings of a representative on this side of the aisle. And the people who did the prosecution of that were representatives in the Attorney General's office. They worked with this body throughtout that proceeding, and in all the years that we shared together, the legislative ethics committee on the House side, ever time we asked the Attorney General for assitance to prosecute members of this body, be they Democrat of Republican, we were always accepted and they always did the work. The Attorney General never refused to assist, and in fact assisted in the only impeachment of a sitting member, a Democrat, in this body. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Pages, on behalf of the House we'd like to thank you for your service this week, you've done a wonderful job, we hope this has been a great and rewarding experience for you. You have earned the weekend off. Thank you for your service, glad to have you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate bill 871, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House committee substitute for Senate bill 871, a bill to entitle an act to remove certain described property from the corporate limits of the city of Raleigh and to add the property of the corporate limits of the city of Durham, and to make changes to SL2013-386. General assembly of North Carolina enacts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman from Durham, Rep. Luebke has the floor to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker. It's a straightforward bill, the first part is a voluntary deannexation from the city of Raleigh, and accepting the annexation is the city of Durham. The second part of the bill involves a subdivision which previously had been requested to receive both water and sewer from the city of Durham and at this point has asked that it receive only water, the city did not initiate this, but we in the delegation have talked with our mayor, and we are in support of this. I urge support of the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? If not, the question before

[0:00:00.0] …House is the passage of the House Committee Substitute, the Senate Bill 871 on a second reading. So, favoring passage of the bill will vote aye, those oppose will vote no, the clerk will open the vote. The clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. Senate Bill 871 with 109 votes in the affirmative and none of the negative passes its second reading it will remain on the calendar. Members of the chair will be recorded who just having vote aye on the ___[00:40] amendment to Senate Bill 594. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the lady from Orange, Representative Insko has? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you I would like to be recorded as yes on 793, 793. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady wants to be recorded just having voted aye, notices and announcements? What purpose does the gentleman from actually…Representative Berg is recognized to send forward the committee report the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative ___[01:28] come up in house, the Senate Bill 388 ___[01:31] favorable ask committee substitute on favorable supervision of bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Original bill in favor calendar ask committee substitute referred to the committee on finance. What purpose does the lady from Yancey Representative Presnell rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] For appoint a personal privilege. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady may speak up to three minutes to appoint a personal privilege. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I just want to announce my little grandson was born yesterday Kate River Presnell, 7 lbs 9 ounces, he is well and I just really wanna thank this body for helping my JMAC Bill, House Bill 1224 get through and preserving thousand jobs in my district, thank you so much. [Applause] [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. For what purpose does the gentleman from Henderson, Representative McGrady rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Inquire with the Chair. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman may state his inquire. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To determine when we have session on Monday. [SPEAKER CHANGES] 6 PM. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Then an announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized for an announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The judiciary B Committee will be meeting two hours before the session so that’s at 4 PM and we will be taking up three bills Senate Bill 320 and the new title will be successor best liability, it’s the worker com loss of organ and this will be house PCS, Senate Bill 794 Disapprove Industrial Commission Rules and Senate Bill 853 that’s the Business Court Modernization that we took up before. I anticipate this bill last meeting we are gonna be trying to clearly see bills through, thank you Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The majority of leaders recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, the Republicans will have a clock set at 5 o’clock on Monday. [SPEAKER CHANGES] What purpose does the gentleman from ___[03:36], minority leader Representative Hall will rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] An announcement Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman may make his announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Democratic Congress will meet at 5 PM on Monday and 1425. [SPEAKER CHANGES] What purpose does the gentleman from Lee Representative Stone rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] An announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman may make his announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen before the members of the government committee will looking to have a meeting Monday at 4 stay tuned to your email we will get you the room number and make sure that bill number is right on the agenda, thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Alexander, Representative Hollo arise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] The point of personal privilege. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to speak up for three minutes for point of personal privilege. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman, as all of you know I have decided not to have election this year but my only regret is that I won’t be here to see what Justin will become when he grows up. Please join me I’m wishing Justin Berg the happy 29th birthday on the Saturday. [Applause] [0:04:59.8] [End of file…]

[Clapping} Representative Hollo, I thought you were going to rise to a point of personal privilege to send praises upon your, your ah favorite seat mate from the past but ah....[inaudible noise from someone else] there ya go. Alright, further notices and announcements. If not the gentlemen representing Stanley Representative Burr is recognized for a motion. [Speaker Change]Mr. Chair, I move that the House do now adjourn the subject to the ratification of bills messages from the Senate Committee Report, Comps Reports re-referral of bills and resolutions, appointments of comforees, introduction of bills and resolutions and modifications of the calender to reconvene on Monday June the Thirtieth at six pm. [Speaker Change]Representative Burr moves, seconded by Representative Hollo that the House adjourns subject to the ratification of bills and resolutions, messages from the Senate, Committee Reports, Conference Reports, Re-referral of bills and resolutions, appointment of comforees and modifications to the calender to reconvene on Monday, June thirtieth at six pm. Those in favor will say aye. [Ayes] Those opposed no. The ayes have it. The House stands adjourned.