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

searching for


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

Senate | July 22, 2014 | Chamber | Finance Part 1

Full MP3 Audio File

Finance Committee, please come to order. Would all the members please get to their seats and everyone quiet down so we can get through this meeting today. First thing first, we have our pages and we really enjoy having them here and I’m going to read them out, would you just raise your hand please? Marquita Samuelson, I hope I pronounce that correctly. Is that right? Good, nice to see you. Nicholas Cole, Nicholas, good to have you with us. Paris Lewis, Paris, good to see you, glad you’re here. Fulton Gatin, Fulton, good to have you. Kendell Gillespie, Kendell, nice to have you with us. And Jenny MacDonell. There you are, thank you. We’re delighted to have you here and we hope that your time with us is going to be very valuable and maybe even a little bit of fun. Members of the Committee would be missing, not recognizing our Sergeant-at-Arms who help us make this successful. Matt Urban, Ernie Sheryl and Ed Kesler. Good, thank you everybody. Let’s move forward and our first bill will be House Bill 10044. Excuse me, 1044, and that’s Representative Lewis, are you here today? Don’t see him, we’ll put that in the back. Can you present that? Senator Rabin will present that bill. It’s Averasboro Township TDA Changes. Senator Rabin, you have the microphone. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This is a simple bill. It is not a new tax, I’ll say it again, it is not a new tax. The people of Averasboro would like to have it enacted, the Chamber of Commerce in the area of Dunn would like to have it enacted. I ask your support in passing the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Members of the Committee, is there anything that we need to add to that? Very good, I have Senator Cook for a motion for a favor report on House Bill 1044. Any questions from the Committee? Seeing none, all in favor please say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Opposed, nay. Ayes have it. Thank you, Senator Rabin, will you be handling that out on the floor? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes I will, thank you. Thank you everybody. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you sir. Next bill, House Bill 1054. Spindale Cape Fear Sewer Fee Collections. Representative Hager, welcome to the Committee. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. chairman. This bill’s pretty straightforward. It allows the town of Spindale to collect, if you read the summary to collect sewer fees as other cities have done and the background gives you a list of other towns and cities that do this and the bill analysis gives you the alternative ways they can collect the sewer fees. Member of Committee, I got a favor report from Senator Hise for House Bill 1054. Any comments or questions from the Committee? Senator McKissick, question?   [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, Representative Hager. [SPEAKER CHANGES] He’s up in the left corner. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Over here. Over in the left corner. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Far corner right there. Left. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Right over here. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Left. By the left. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, the other left. That’s exactly right. Let me ask you this. In terms of authority to charge these delinquent sewer availability fees, is this one of those sewer availability fees that someone has to pay even when they’re not hooked up to water and sewer? Because that is not exactly the kind of charge I’d like to see passed on to folks. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator McKissick. [SPEAKER CHANGES] There are some utilities that will now move to the point where they’re charging fees where you are not connected to water and sewer, but they charge you the fee because you have the capacity to be hooked up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hager, would you respond to that? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you for the question and if staff has any clarification I’d really appreciate it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Staff, would anyone help? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir, that is the type of fee we are discussing. It is an availability fee and it is a fee that can be charged for individuals that are not taking advantage of the water system but do have the ability to tie into the water system. Its most often charged on empty lots that have not yet connected to the water sewer. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up if I could? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator McKissick. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I think that fee can also be tied to a residential dwelling, whether it’s one.

...when it's personally occupied or a rental property. I guess because the sewer line is out there, even if you do not receive water and sewer services, they can charge you each and every month. Do we know how much those fees are in this particular case? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Skaff?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I do not have that information. I can get that for you, but at this time, I don't know what the parameters are on that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Just one quick followup Mr. Chair. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hager, I would just go back and check with these folks, to see if that's what they really want to do. Because when you start sending these cases to collection agencies, when I'm not even receiving water or sewer char-,I'm not receiving water or sewer services, but your charging me an availability fee, and it could be 40, $50 a month. It, maybe you can let it accrue, start sending those cases to collection agencies, can hurt some folks. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is that a question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yeah. I guess the question is, could you go back and check with them to see if that's what they really want to do. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hager. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thanks Senator McKissick. I think this is a town that, as many of you guys have in your districts, that used to be a strong, textile mill town, that now basically has almost zero revenue from textile mills. And this is a way to actually keep their systems up. And to keep the right, the environmental issues in the right manner, to keep the service right. And this is, basically, some of the only revenue that they have because of the situation where the town is. Many of you have, whether you're in the East or in the West, have these towns that, that have these, these infrastructure needs, and have these costs to them that can barely, barely pay for them. So folks that are in the system, basically gives them the mechanism for delinquent fees on these, on these available fees to go after those. And a lot of times they're very small, as Senator McKissick included. But what I would do, Senator McKissick, is vote this bill out today, and I will get with Senator Hise, and we'll get back with the town ?? before it gets to the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Representative. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Very good. Senator Barringer. Over on your right. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chair. This could, this may be a question for staff as much as anything. I know that this does allow garnishment of wages, and I know that in North Carolina we don't do, don't allow that very often. What are the other circumstances in which we do allow, by statute, the garnishment of wages to collect delinquent whatever. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Skaff? [SPEAKER CHANGES] This actually is allowed for all collection of property taxes. So basically, all of the remedies that are allowed for property taxes are also allowed in this situation. And on your summary is a list of other local legislation where we have given this authority, in regards to delinquent water and sewer fees, to other cities. So for example, the city of Durham, Davie, Duplin, Lenoir County, Montgomery County, and the cities of Locust, and the towns of New London and Stanfield. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Barringer, you all set? Members of the Committee, any additional questions? Seeing none, I need a motion for, motion from Senator Tommy Tucker for a favorable report on House Bill 1059. No, check that. On 1054. Any comments, questions? Seeing none, all in favor, please say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Opposed nay. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ayes have it. Who would you want to...Representative Hise will carry that on the Senate floor. All right. Members of the Committee, House Bill 1059, New Hanover Occupancy tax use and there is a PCS. Senator Curtis makes a motion that we accept the PCS for discussion before this committee. Senator Goolsby, welcome. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. I was asked by Representative Davis to run this bill for him. He is in court in Brunswick County this morning. I am happy to try to help. What this basically does is, the way these proceeds were originally set, Mr. Chairman, it was, all the money was supposed to go to beach re-nourishment. But the area where this tax is collected currently, that incorporated area, doesn't have any beach that needs to be re-nourished so this resets it, and sets up a different scheme for the money to be spent. It is a local bill. We'd appreciate your support of Representative Davis' bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All right. I don't see any questions. I got a motion from Senator Wade for... [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well, I'm sorry. Where are you? [SPEAKER CHANGES] ?? Right here. Soucek. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'm sorry. Senator Soucek, I'm sorry. I didn't see you there. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. I've got a question. Is, does this bill have anything to do with the Venus Flytraps as well? [SPEAKER CHANGES] It originally did, but that's been PCSed out. And I understand that the Venus Flytrap legislation is currently in our Senate Reg Reform Bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All right. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay. All right. I have a motion from Senator Wade for a favorable report on House Bill 1059 PCS and unfavorable to the original bill. Any comments or questions?

Seeing none, all in favor please say aye. Opposed, nay. Aye's have it. Thank you. Alright, House Bill 27 "Workman's Comp. Fund Safety Workers Allocation". Let's go ahead and we'll be having a meeting later this afternoon, members of the Committee, at about five o'clock. We're going to move that one to the five o'clock meeting. Let's do Senate Bill 763 "Revenue Laws Technical Changes", Senator Rabon. And we have a PCS. Senator Hartsell makes a motion that we adopt the PCS for discussion on Senate Bill 763. All in favor please say aye. Opposed, nay. Aye's have it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mister Chairman. Members, these are four changes you see to Senate Bill 763. These changes are all for technical and clarifying. I will have staff go through each one if you have a question on them all or individually. One section was pulled out that was controversial. It had to do with sales tax collection on admission charges. That has been pulled out to be studied in Revenue Laws because there was quite a bit of a discussion and it created quite an uproar and needed some studying. So other than that, if staff would like to run through it, please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Rabon. Would you like to submit your amendment and then we'll have the staff go through the entire bill? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mister Chairman. I was ahead of myself. I do have an amendment which addresses those four changes that I've spoken of and so Mister Chairman, I think everyone has that amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay. Staff. Yes, Ms.Avery, would you please explain this amendment to the Committee? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mister Chair. At the last meeting, we distributed the Revenue Laws Technical Changes Bill and the Chairs left it out there so people could see it and have an opportunity to comment on it. The Chairs have instructed us that this bill is to be purely technical in nature. After the last Finance Committee meeting, we had some concerns raised by some interested parties that instead of clarifying, which was the intent, they were concerned that we were making substantive changes. So this amendment addresses those concerns plus it adds a couple of revisions that the Department of Revenue has come to the Body about since the last meeting. So just in looking at the amendment, and those are the only questions we've had raised, so in the length of time this bill has been out there since your meeting last week we've had no questions raised on any of the other sections in the bill. But on the amendment that you have, that Senator Rabon's offering, beginning on page five, these, beginning on page one of the amendment, line nine, page five of the bill. This had to do with service contracts and clarifying the effective dates, and after some discussions with the Department of Revenue and the Service Contact Industry, we have rewritten this to clarify when the different things become effective going back to the original effective dates of the bill. As far as I know we're good there. The change on the amendment, on the second page, line ten is just a grammatical change, adding a comma. And then the change on lines 13 and 14 is the one Senator Rabon was just talking about. There's a statute that deals with the basis of reporting. And the intent was to clarify when some of the sales tax on admission charges, prepaid meal plans, and pipe natural gas, the basis for those to be reported. We thought it was clarified. The industry with the admission charges did not, so admission charges have been removed. The other two changes for pipe natural gas and prepaid meal plans remain in the bill. The two sections that have been requested by the Department of Revenue is on the first page of the amendment, the first six lines and Johnathan can explain those. The second is on the very last page of the amendment, beginning on line 16 and Heather can explain those. Mr Chairman will be happy to explain any other sections of the bill, but it's been out there for several days and these are the only ones we had any comments about. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Members of the Committee, any questions on this amendment? Senator Tucker, question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir. Thank you, Mister Chair. Ms.Avery if you would just revisit for me page five, number 62 on the service contracts and just give me that clarity once again on real and tangible property? [SPEAKER CHANGES] A service contract is taxable if it is to maintain or repair tangible personal property. If it is a fixed real estate, it is considered real property.

If an item is affixed to real estate it is real property and is not subject to the tax on service contracts. [speaker changes]Thank you Mrs. Chair. [speaker changes] Senator Apodaca, question. OK. Senator Brown, question. [speaker changes] Yes if I could, on the piece on the escort. Explain it. It looks like it clarifies the intent. Can you go over that one more time with me if you would, please. [speaker changes] Johnathan, would you help us with that question? [speaker changes] Sure, Senator Brown this just restores a provision that was inadvertently eliminated in the tax reform deal. Businesses that never been allowed to take a deduction for state taxes paid in calculating their state income. It was inadvertently eliminated in the tax reform deal. It just restores that provision. [speaker changes] Senator Brown, OK. OK, we have an amendment before us. Members of the committee no additional questions. All in favor please say aye. [speaker changes] Aye. [speaker changes] Opposed Nay. Ayes have it. As amended, Mrs Avery[sp] will you continue through the explanation or, [speaker changes] Mr. Chairman we'll be happy to answer any questions for you. We'll be happy to go through it a section by section, but it has been out for several days with the amendment. We've had no questions raised. And to the best of our knowledge they are all purely technical. [speaker changes] Members of the committee. Senator Hartsell. [speaker changes] Mr. Chairman I would like to send forward an amendment. It has been my ?? to duplicate sufficiently though. [speaker changes] This is not a technical... [speaker changes] No, Sir. [speaker changes] No, this is not technical. [speaker changes] Senator Hartsell, one of the reasons why we pulled back on the other portion of that is that this is not a technical amendment and would not be in the right place. And secondly, the revenue laws is going to be studying this issue over the interim for any type of action come 2015. OK. Yes sir? [speaker changes] But I still want to run the amendment. [speaker changes] Well you can't do that. [speaker changes] Since when, Mr. Chairman? [speaker changes] Well, since the fact that this is a technical amendment's bill and where I rule it's not technical, so therefore it can't be in there. [speaker changes] I would object to that ruling because I believe it is technical. [speaker changes] Well, then, they, we've already decided that. I am making that decision and that will be it. Go on to the next part please. Any additional questions? [speaker changes] Mr. Chairman? [speaker changes] Yes, sir. [speaker changes] Reluctantly, I would like to send forth an amendment. [speaker changes] We have a permanent license plate bill? Senator Apodaca, I think this deals with permanent license plates and I believe we have a bill that relates to that. I think that would be appropriate in that bill rather than in this technical corrections. With all due respect to the members we are trying to make sure technical corrections remain technical corrections so there are no surprises. Thank you, Senator Apodaca. [speaker changes] Thank you and I am surprised. I appreciate it. [speaker changes] OK. [speaker changes] Mr. Chairman? [speaker changes] Excuse me,Senator Hartsell [Speaker changes] May I point out the title of the bill is omnous[sp] tax law changes. [speaker changes] Well that is our technical corrections bill and we are trying to stand by what the purpose of it is. OK. Members of the committee, you have had a few days to study this. Senator McKissick. [speaker changes] Yeah, there are a couple of provisions that I wanted to ask staff about if they could give us a little more information. [speaker changes] OK. [speaker changes] And I will identify those by section number. ... If you could let me know what is going on in section 4 this provision here dealing with the new tax on vapor products. As well as number 10 dealing, [speaker changes] OK. One at a time so we can get it. Number 4 was the first one? [speaker changes] Number 4 was the first. [speaker changes]OK. Number 4. Staff, can someone help us with that? [speaker changes] Yes, sir. Thank you. As you may recall House Bill 1050 imposed a new tax on vapor products. And it will be taxed and administered similar to the OTP, which is the other tobacco products. When the tax on other tobacco products, it accrues by the first individual that touches that product in the state. So if you are the manufacturer the manufacturer will normally pay the tax. However, under the OTP statutes they are allowed to pass along the tax and have someone further down the distribution pay that tax as long as they have gotten an agreement from the secretary to do so. This allows

Representative: vapor product manufactures in the state, being able to use that same process, wehre they can apply to the secretary, and as long as there is someone else collecting the tax, vapor product producers can have someone else collect the tax rather than at the time of manufacture. Representative: I appreciate that oversight. Speaker: Okay, that was question number 4. Representative: Some explanation to number 10 and 16. Speaker: Alright, number 10 and 16, staff, who can help us with those? Representative: Mr. Chairman, over here. Number 10 is just adding to the definition of retailer, anyone who is qualified to collect the sales tax. We realized, as we expanded the sales tax base last session, the definition of retailer does not necessarily collect all of those entities required to collect the tax, such as, the universities with your prepaid meal plans. So that is section 10. Speaker: Senator McKissick, are you alright with that one? Representative: Okay. Speakr: Number 16 staff? Representative: This is the one that was also in the amendment as to when a person has to report the sale for purposes of sales tax collections, whether they do it on a cash or accrual basis. Currently, electricity telecommunications is required to be on as it is billed. This would also pick up pipe natural gases, a similar entity that is billed monthly, and it also picks up your prepaid meal plans. That is the way it is currently being administered. We have also put admissions charges thinking that was a technical clarifying change, but the folks in that industry did not believe that, so we removed admissions charges by the amendment. I believe this cash or accrual method basis of reporting is an issue that revenue laws may spend some more time on in the interim. Representative: Follow up Mr. Chair? Speaker: Follow up. Representative: So, [xx] charges are pulled by virtue of the earlier amendment. So that will be dealt with, I guess, later on when we deal with revenue laws? Speaker: That is where it will happen. Representative: And as it stands now, what will occur as it relates to those admissions charges in terms of how we will be proceeding, because I know that has been a controversial issue? Representative: In house bill 1015, the policy decision was made that they would come under sales tax laws, as any other retailer, which, would mean that the tax would be due when the sale occurs. Speaker: Okay, very good. Ms. [xx]? Representative: Thank you Mr. Chair. I need some clarification on this section 16 since we are trying to keep this to be truly a technical amendment bill. What this thing does is – where it says, basis of this article and the sales tax of gross receipts as derived from the sale are considered to accrue when the retailer bills its customer for the gross receipts – that changes the definition of accrual under the generally accepted accounting principles. To me, that is not a technical change. That is a substantive change to accounting principles. Could you address that please? Representative: Yes ma’am. I believe that – I have not seen him, but I believe Eric Wayne, from the division of the department revenue division of sales tax, is here. There is a difference between your gap method of accounting and what we do, and the tax statutes, specially the sales tax statutes. This is a statue that has been impressed for decades as far as the accrual or the basis on which your retailer reports. So, the intent – it does not necessarily match gap, but that is not the intent of this section of the sales tax laws and perhaps Mr. Wayne can… Speaker: Mr. Wayne, are you present? Anybody from the department of revenue? Okay, there he is. Please come forward, identify yourself, and assist us with the question please. Wayne: I am Eric Wayne, department of revenue. Just to go along with what Cindy was saying, we have never, to our knowledge, administered the sales tax, when tax was due on the gap method for income tax purposes. So, basically, the transaction occurs and you may or may not report the income at that time for tax purposes. There has never been a correlation. Today, there are many retailers that bill for sales tax that are on the accrual basis. The accrual basis meaning that the sales tax was billed, the receipt was created, the tax is due not assuming [xx] will be received. Speaker: Question, Senator Hartsville? I apologize, let me go ahead, Senator Barnesville, first. Senator Hartsville? Representative: Eric, if I go to home depot and buy a gift card, do I pay a sales tax on it at that point?

updates us I'm the owner of this uncertainty is off to school property or service and faster about 10 of them might want is to follow time-honored spot is not surprised ourselves as firsts arrival of U.S. one, the timetable handiwork and light when I saw the light layer of U.S. sales tax on the platform, time enough to sell sex and one of my-cost thousands of soldiers for soap operas us to resolve this time as a sign of the results of the property is transferred and a strong, smart times estimated holiday concert by the mayor did not have also made on sales of one ?? all of these early version sells its first time is Monday night the lights on personal property, Janney situation where he can cause enormous services at Saks the city to pay something doesn't live at your trial-nation of one of the blaze and found as a dozen based on the official line was just trying to seize around the stars the issue questions, contact 83 points for mature, a very good , the seven times in seven of a few of the things in life, and we can take about five months, and a reminder to the couple's for a timeout-80 report to call on the floor dominance of its action against the government comments and a daytime, that's just about everyone to stay here for a weekend of serving one of the same time and has made his comeback that AM-he hides separating we have the jury army of contents and the 763 that the lack of times that comedy of PCs, even as a promising too late to make an offer and I might mention any additional questions seem to generating about sex, a non-for a reply of senate bill 763, the last battle changes of PCs and, and that of an opposition to any of the Oregon National City any questions seemed out of favor the sad that was any time that U.S. has happened, but this time-to-DOS 6 to 5 zoning helped me and that share , in the long been added at the regulations on the other U.N. and , as if those things that are beyond the senate finance of his bills actually simple bill Murray State of those receiving mystical sausages or white, this is a man of the midst of all of this bill Risley in 2000 other house bill 87 as the house of the men signed a 2001 that Corel centre and stress on 2000, four session of saving always happens, Scott Leon, as bill passed the house and you for a crossover 9% of the same as well as noted in an unofficial is one of times to they'll sell points in the realtors structures of rejection of the better off under the middle of a snapshot of the structure is the nose was even maximum of 300 square time includes one bedroom one that considering his bill to North Carolina residential buildings of the house and not some time one mentally or physically impaired person is located on property with it. I'm motivated and civic leaders of our ones on the Korean with his requirements on the bill recession one was for sure that no one has allowed us to the polls on a setback requirements time in this film is it was one of 2000 of them would set its own subcommittee in the house??.......

Of municipalities, as well as the city of Charlotte, participate in the finishing up of this particular bill, and the things that we added after that subcommittee were the following. Local governments can require an annual permit. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] That’s the guy behind you. [LAUGHTER] [SPEAKER CHANGES] It’s okay. My apologies. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No problem, I know you all get confused from the House. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodaca. [SPEAKER CHANGES] If the city in charge [SPEAKER CHANGES] by God I am. So I move for a favorable report. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We, before we proceed forward, I do have an amendment for House Bill 625. I think you have it before you. Miss Frenell, you going to explain that amendment for us please? It’s strictly technical. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodaca. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, sir. The amendment actually makes three changes. The first change is on page 2 and actually corrects the citation. The second change actually changes the effective date because this was submitted last year. The effective date was July 1, 2013, this changes the effective date to October 1, 2014. And the last change is to clarify that the fee that the cities and counties are allowed to apply for these structures does not apply to any structure that’s currently built. So it only applies to new structures on or after October 1, 2014. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Members of the committee, you heard the explanation of the amendment that’s before you. Questions, comments? Seeing none, all in favor please say aye. Opposed, nay. Ayes have it. Representative Moffitt, Senator Moffitt, question? Okay, question, Senator Hise. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Just to clarify this, and I’ll try to get, zoning is not one of my specialties where I represent west North Carolina, but this allows individuals to use a mobile home or other device placed on their property, that’s got an appropriate setback, for the care of an individual most likely in their family or others, if a mobile home would not otherwise allow by some arcane rule. [SPEAKER CHANGES] An answer for that please, sir? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman. That is correct, but these are specifically designed differently. And they can be put on a foundation but once its use has been concluded, then it has to be removed within 60 days. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All set, Senator Hise? All right. Senator McKissick, yes sir. Good to see you here. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Good to see you again. [LAUGHTER] Representative Moffitt, let me ask you this. Because it talks about people who are ill or disabled. I mean are these basically intended for use by senior citizens or, I mean how do you determine the status of the occupant, who’s actually staying in it? So you really can avoid situations where that, what you’re trying to create is being exploited by someone who isn’t really qualified, let’s say a teenager who wants to live in one of these units and is tired of living in the family home. Or whoever else who may be involved. If you could explain that a little bit more. How do you get to the actual status of the individual who’s the occupant, since you’re looking at really a 360 foot unit. And where does the League of Cities stand on this? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Senator McKissick, Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, let me just read through the provisions that we added at the, in working through the subcommittee with the League of Municipalities and the city of Charlotte. A licensed North Carolina physician needs to provide a certification regarding the condition of the person that would actually be in this particular structure. That can be asked for on an annual basis for recertification, at the request of the city. Local government can also revoke the permit if they feel that it’s being used for an unintended, for against the intended purpose. So the cities do have an opportunity if they do sense that it’s being used inappropriately, they can revoke the permit, which at that point would require the structure be removed in 60 days. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. So does the League of Cities support this in its current form, and to what extent does local government have setback requirements or other abilities to control what the placement would be so you don’t end up with one of these in a front yard in a subdivision? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Answer that please, sir? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. To answer the first part of your question, the League of Municipalities I spoke with prior to the meeting today. They are in support of the bill. I also spoke with Mr. Fenton with the City of Charlotte and their position is in support of the bill. In regards to the second part of your question, I would have to defer to staff on that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Staff, Miss Frenell. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir. If you look on page 2, lines 12 through 15 of the bill, it requires that the temporary

sure I want to comply with all setback requirements that apply to the primary structure to believe this would protect them. they can be in front yard. you have to fly with setbacks and pricing of life. the primary structure. thank you okay thank you [SPEAKER CHANGES] any other questions, members of the committee regarding House Bill six two five ups are excited to apologize no problem, but missed you here on earth, and Moffat, sometimes longer, go home through Sanford and Sanford has manufactured homes suit your road really nice in the middle of their law for lack of a better term, they have an assisted living unit and a bill that's larger than three hundred square feet and small monstrosity, but it's itself is twelve feet wide. it has low small front porch owners, and then all the bathrooms and everything, or acclimated someone who has a disability would be structures be excluded. calls are over three hundred square week is I guess that are targeted would a location set attacker. yes, Rogers three hundred square feet is not a good addition to the sunroom. I know how you take care of someone who needed to personal care services, a guy in three hundred square feet to stop communal issue of the market at this chairman Arthur Tucker, we do have a floor plans and renderings of these particular units in a way that they are designed. it seems to be sufficient to curb to satisfy the requirements of woman tending to the borough fight restrictive items of the committee you have hospital, six twenty five before you are emotions instead of forward form of February court on House Bill six two five, as amended him. please say hi. I suppose they eyes have it. thank you [SPEAKER CHANGES] whether Robert would you like to have to take care that you says about how Doctor will handle that. okay, wonderful, thank you. I be bill, House Bill one two two four will be held until the five o'clock meeting. we are trying to get six fifty six forty three for the five o'clock, but with no pay attention to your e-mails and you get a notice that will be. I will be handling the sounds at that time. that means that will just have a recess of this meeting until five o'clock