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

searching for


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

House | May 21, 2014 | Chamber | House Session

Full MP3 Audio File

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. [pause] Members and visitors in the gallery, please stand for the prayer and remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance. Before Representative Ramsey says the prayer, I believe many of you know that Representative Jim Gulley passed away today. And in the prayer I hope you will keep him and his family in your thoughts and prayers. [SPEAKER CHANGES] May you pray with me. This is an excerpt from our state magazine. A prayer for North Carolina by Dr. Billy Graham. Heavenly Father, we pause to worship you and give thanks for the mighty works of your hands. We praise you for the blessing of our state in this country with a spiritual heritage that anchored a new nation made up of a people determined to seek and obey your truth. Receive our thanks, Lord, as we remember those who came before us. From the first American Indian exploring an uncharted wilderness, to the pilgrims who came to this land seeking freedom to worship the God of Heaven and Earth And our Founding Fathers who built new life upon your loving commandments and holy scriptures. Thank you, Lord, for gathering of families who came to live on the good land that we call North Carolina. You have graced us with a magnificence of your handiwork seen in the strength of the mighty ocean that brushes the Outer Banks and Sandy Shores. The loveliness of the Appalachian Mountains that pierce the clouds of Heaven and the peaceful scenery of the rolling plains of the Piedmont. These are just glimpses of what you long to give mankind. Your strength, your love, your peace. Let us hold up your truth so that you will lead us. Help us to be quite in contemplation and bold to do your will. For as you lead us in the way, we in turn can point others to your truth that brings abundant life. You, Lord, are the giver of all good things and this is the reason for our hope of eternal life. Salvation from our sin against you. The most high God in the heavens. Though we did not deserve your favor, you graciously granted to all who sincerely call upon the name in which I pray, the Lord Jesus Christ, 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 for Tuesday, May the 20th, 2014, has been examined and found to be correct. Move to approve as written. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Moore moves that the journal for May 20th be approved as written. All those in favor say aye. All opposed no. The ayes have it. The journal is approved as written. Petitions, memorials, papers addressed to the General Assembly of the House. Ratification of bills and resolutions. The Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] In Raleigh Clark ?? resolution did arrive ?? proper road percentages of the Office of Secretary of State. Senate Joint Resolution 796 is joint resolution ?? appreciation of men and women in the United States Armed Forces. [pause] [SPEAKER CHANGES] Chaptered bills will be noted. [pause] Ladies and gentlemen, the Chair would like to extend a welcome and a thank-you for the doctor and the nurses of the day. The doctor of the day is Ward Adcock from Gaston County. The nurses of the day are Jennifer Lamb from Rocky Mount and Ann Marie Patterson-Powell from Cary. Thank you for your service. [applause] Ladies and gentlemen, the Chair would like to extend a courtesies of the floor to a friend and former member of the House, Arthur Williams. Arthur, welcome. [applause]

[applause] Also upon motion of Representative Cleveland, Representatives Moore and Hastings from Cleveland County, the Chair is happy to extend the courtesies of the gallery to a delegation of business leaders representing the Cleveland County Chamber of Commerce. Please stand and let us welcome you. [applause] Reports of standing committees, permanent subcommittees. Representative Murray is recognized to import committee report. The Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Murry, Commerce and Development Committee, SB 294, Committee Section 1, allow use of DOT storm water BMPs favorable. Calendar. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Howard, William Brawley, Lewis and Setzer are recognized to send forth committee report. The Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Committee on finance, Howard, Brawley, Lewis and Setzer. HB 1034, Volunteer Fire and Rescue Finances, favorable, committee substitute unfavorable its original bill and re-referred. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Committee substitute will be re-referred to committee for state personnel. Original bill unfavorable. Calendar. Introduction of bills and resolutions. The Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Horn, G. Martin, Szoka and Reives. HR 1030 on our veterans. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Calendar. Pursuant Rule 32A. Placed on today's calendar. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative West, HB 1131, Clay County Opossum Exclusion. Wildlife Laws. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rule is calendar. Operation to the House. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives S. Martin, Burr, Lambeth. House Bill 1132. Strategies for Improving Mental Health Disabilities, DBNSAS. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Health and Human Services. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative T. Moore. HB 1133. Technical and Other Corrections. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rules calendar. Operations to the House. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives T. Moore and Hastings. House Bill 1134. Cleveland County Road Assessment Criteria. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Calendar. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stam, Murry and T. Jutter. House Bill 1135. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The Chair stands corrected. It should be government. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative McGrady. HB 1136. ?? adopt certain ordinances. [SPEAKER CHANGES] HB 1135, which the Clerk had read will be finance. HB 1134 will be government. HB 1136, Regulatory Reform. Finance if favorable appropriations. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative McGrady, Samuelson, Hager, Catlin. HB 1137. Authority to Adopt Certain Ordinances. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Environment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] HB 1138. Representative Hamilton. ABC Permits. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Commerce and Job Development Subcommittee on Alcoholic Beverage Control. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Samuelson. HB 1139. State Nature and Historic Preserve Deletions. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Environment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Samuelson, Hanes, Hager and Catlin. HB 1140. Amend Hotel Carbon Monoxide Alarm Requirement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Regulatory Reform. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Samuelson and Hager. HB 1141. Amend Isolated Wetland Regulation. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Environment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Hamilton, Iler, Davis and Carney. HB 1142. Modify Film to Start Rehab Tax Credits. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Finance. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Moffit, Glazier, Murry and Stevens. HB 1143. Burden of Proof in Certain Contested Cases. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Regulatory Reform. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Malone, Lewis, Starns and Collins. HB 1144. Expand 1%, $80 Dollar Rate for Mill Machinery. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Finance. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Shepard, R. Brown and Millis. House Bill 1145. Insurance and Registration Required for Mopeds. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Transportation and favorable, Finance. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Johnson and Langdon. House Resolution 1146. Set The Date For Community College Election. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rules Calendar. Operation to the House. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Malone and Jackson. HB 1147. Segland Charter Amendments. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Government. If favorable, Finance. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Saine, J. Bell and Tolson. House Bill 1148.

[??] board back-up public safety answering points. [Speaker Change] Appropriations Subcommittee on Information Technology. [Speaker Change] Representative Sane[??], Jaybell[sp??], Cleveland, and Tulsa[??] in HB 1149, State Chief Information Officer of Mobile Communications Devices. [Speaker Changes] Government. [Speaker Changes] Representative Sane, Jaybell, Cleveland, and Tulsa in HB 1150, Education longitudinal data system changes. [Speaker Change] Education. [Speaker Changes] Representative Floyd[sp??], Sokalukas[sp??] and Glacier in HB 1151, Fayetteville[sp??] red light changes [Speaker Changes] Government and favorable finance [Speaker Changes] Representative Moffett[sp??], Murray, Millace[sp??], and Jackson HB 1152, eliminate obsolete boards and commissions. [Speaker Changes] Regulatory reform. [Speaker Changes] Representative Moffett, Glacier, Murray, and Jordan HB 1153 Office of Administrative Hearings, electronic filing. [Speaker Changes] Regulatory reform. [Speaker Changes] Representative Bowls[sp??] HB 1154, War County schools transfer of property. [Speaker Changes] Government and favorable finance. [Speaker Changes] Representative Bowls[sp??] HB 1155, Pinehurst Annexation. [Speaker Changes] Government and favorable finance. [Speaker Changes] Representative Moffett, Ramsy, Fischer, and McGrady, HB 1156, spirits and liquor, tasting, City of Asheville. [Speaker Changes] Commerce and Job Development Subcommittee on Alcoholic Beverage Control. [Speaker Changes] Representative Sane and Corbitt, HB 1157, electronic driver's license amendment. [Speaker Changes] Transportation. [Speaker Changes] Representative Blackwell, HB 1158, Mornington[sp??] charter amendment. [Speaker Changes] Elections. [Speaker Changes] Representative B. Brown and S. Martin, House Bill 1159, City of Greenville private sale. [Speaker Changes] Government. [Speaker Changes] Representative Hollaway[sp??] and Johnson, House Bill 1160, communities and schools of North Carolina funds. [Speaker Changes] Appropriations. [pause] [Speaker Changes] Ladies and gentleman, upon motion of members from McDowell[sp??], Yancey[sp??], Ash[sp??] counties, Dobson, Fresno, and Jordan, the chair is happy to extend the courtesies of the gallery to newly-elected District Attorney for the 24th Judicial District, Seth Banks. Seth, please stand and let us welcome you. [Applause] Also, upon motion from Representative Dean R. and Craighorn and Mark Brody from Union County, the chair is happy to extend the courtesies of the gallery to Trey Robinson, District Attorney for Union Country. Trey, please stand and let us welcome you. [Applause] [Pause] [Speaker Change] Calendar HB 1050, the clerk will read. [Speaker Changes] The clerk will yield. We are going to move for the resolution that was added to today's calendar for immediate consideration. [Speaker Changes] HR 1130, the clerk will read. [Speaker Changes] HR 1130. HR expressing gratitude and appreciation to our veterans. The House resolves... [Speaker Changes] The clerk will read the resolution in its entirety. [Speaker Changes] A HR expressing gratitude and appreciation to our veterans. Whereas, throughout our country's history, generations of men and women have worn the uniform of the United States of America, and have valiantly defended our nation and our inalienable rights. And whereas, our veterans have personally sacrificed as much for the greater good of our nation, some of these brave men and women made the ultimate sacrifice in protecting our country and the freedoms enjoyed by our citizens and all Americans. And whereas, six major Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security installations are located in North Carolina, Coast Guard station Elizabeth City, Fort Bragg, Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point, Marine Corps Air Station New River, Marine Corps Base Camp Lejuene, Seymour Johnson Air Force Base, as well as the North Carolina National Guard and other DOD, DHS activities and organizations. And whereas

Below is the transcript. I left four ?? in the text. All of which are people's (Representative) names except for the first ?? which was half a word clipped into. If this is correct spelling "North Carolinians" then don't worry about that. If it is not correct then it will need correcting in the text. The rest is at least 99% perfect. I would say 100% but who's perfect? Thank you. btw, I am Alabamian. The speakers sounded local to me :-) ?? eight hundred thousand veterans by nations armed forces lived in North Carolina and about a hundred and fort seven thousand active duty guard and reserved military personnel reside in the state making North Carolina one of the largest active duty military populations in our entire country and where as the people of North Carolina grateful and appreciative to all of our veterans for their selfless service to this state and to the United States. now therefore be it resolved by the house of Representatives. section one, the house of Representatives expresses it's profound gratitude and appreciation to all the men and women who served in the United States armed forces. section two, the house of Representatives wishes to honor the memory of all the North Carolinians who gave their lives while serving in the United States armed forces. section three, this resolution is effective upon adoption. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative ?? please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] the gentleman recognized to debate the resolution [SPEAKER CHANGES] ladies and gentlemen, members in the gallery. this is an opportunity for us as a body to thank our veterans for all that they have done. upon enlistment in the army or any of the armed services or commissioning as an officer an oath is taken to support and defend the constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic. everyone who has ever worn an uniform has take that oath and they have lived into that oath. placed themselves in dangers way often being shot blown up losing limbs being injured in ways that you can't imagine seeing things that no one should ever have to see. this resolution is mere piece of paper. its a small token of our true appreciation for what the men and women of the armed forces of the United States have done for us. still today overseas and for the last several hundred years since this country has been around. we are truly an exceptional nations. we have a volunteer armed force which freely enters into the contract. I would just like to thank every veteran who's ever served. I would like us to remember all of the families who've lost people the families who've suffered on multiple deployments, when husbands fathers wives sisters brothers have been deployed overseas not knowing if their coming home in one piece or even when they're coming home. its an opportunity for us to say thank you. now we just ask the members and everyone who hears these words to not just take this one moment to say thank you but every time you see a veteran to say thank you every time you see someone still serving in the armed forces say thank you. they don't even have to know what you're thanking them for. take that moment and thank them for the lives that we are able to live as Americans in this great country of ours. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative [Gary martin ??] please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] to debate the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGES] the gentlemen is recognized to debate the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGES] thank you very much Mister Speaker, members let me first begin by echoing part of the comments of the gentlemen from Cumberland that while we do honor veterans today that its every bit of important that we remember the families that sacrifice so much also along with the veterans. one of the greatest bits of satisfactions I've gotten from my military service is experiencing the diversity of America's military that reflects the diversity of our society. until I joined the army I don't even think I knew that Yankees actually existed. but theres nothing better than sitting out on the docks and wait for Representative ??'s air force to show up late and pick you up. and have a chance to sit there and talk to paratroopers from around the country, listen to them talk about why they joined the army. what their goals were where they've served what they've seen and to hear their plans for the future. what a joy it was for me to get to the North Carolina house of Representatives and find some of the same great experiences amongst my fellow veterans here in the house. I'm not an authority on history I think Representative Dewey Hill was our last World War Two veteran. and then moving ahead to the Korean era Representative Mickey McShaw who joined the army in 1952 the newly desegregated army what stories he has to tell about his experiences. then Representative Rodger West served in the Navy in Vietnam moving ahead to desert storm with Jim Fulghum and then of course former Representative Ric Killian who as far as I know is the only member of this body to actually go off to war while serving in this body.

Now it's a joy for me. I don't get much joy from the Senate, but to see Senator Jeff ???? From the county Join me as an Afghanistan veteran in the General Assembly also. And I'd encourage those of you members here to seek out the other veterans in this body and hear our stories and talk to us also. But my main point in this listing of our different members who have served is for the veterans up there, and the veterans listening out of state, particularly the young veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan. You've answered your country's call once but your country needs you again to step up , whether it's to serve on your town council, or to serve as Governor, Senator, or in the House of Representatives, whatever. Please answer your country's call again and once again seek out public service. I commend the resolution to you. Representative West, please state your purpose. To speak to the Resolution, Mr. President. ??? to debate the resolution. Thank you Mr Speaker and members of the House. It's a privilege today for me to be here to honor our veterans who have sacrificed and given so much so that we can enjoy the freedoms that we have today, and that is great. But on a personal note, in my district I'm honored to have a veteran, a WWII veteran who is one of two living veterans that is still survived the Batan Death March. Representative Pierce, the other one is John Mims[sp?] from down in Hope County. The member that's in my district's name is Wayne Carringer. Wayne has been around for a number of years, and he is presently in Ashville over in the George Charles VA medical center. He's living there, but he gets to come home some and he enjoys politics. I send him papers all the time to read over at the medical center. Now the medical center's another story out in the mountains. It's called the George Charles Medical Center, and George Charles was a member of the eastern band of the Cherokee Indians. And he was one of five American Indians that received the Medal of Honor and that VA clinic is named after him. So I just want to say thank you to all the veterans. What you mean to me and I commend the resolution to you, Mr Speaker. Representative Horne Please State your purpose. To debate the the resolution. The Senator is recognized to debate the resolution. Thank you Mr Speaker. With so many young people today not eligible or not willing to serve in the uniform we are all often asked, So why did we serve? We wanted to give back a small portion of what we have been given. We want to let our children know what it means to live in the land of the brave and the home of the free, or maybe it's the other way around. We want others to realize what a tremendous honor it is to live in this country. And because we realize what a privilege it is to be an American and to take steps to serve and protect the very freedoms upon which this nation was founded. Service to country is not necessarily linked to combat. Although I served in a time of war, in two tours overseas I was not directly assigned to a combat unit, but I can say that I fully appreciate the sentiment expressed by Winston Churchill when he said "There is no more exhilarating feeling than being shot at without result." Those that serve, and have served, are men and women from every background and every walk of life. We all knew the price of freedom can be very high but we were willing to put our lives on the line for something that mattered more than just ourselves. Although those who have borne the cost of battle still carry a heavier burden, we all can rightly say that we have served our country. Serving our country meant that we gave up our normal lives. School, family, careers, work force development to do something beyond ourselves. The same can be said for veterans of many types of national service. This is the very essence of what makes us a great nation. As long as we have warriors ready to live and die for the ideals for which America stands, we will continue to be the greatest nation that has ever existed. We have fought around the world, not as conquerors, but as liberators. Not for conquest, but for ideals, and not for treasure, but because it was the right thing to do. Today we honor the lives of those who have served this great nation in our Armed Forces, some of whom have paid the ultimate price.

By doing everything that we can do to uphold the values and ideals that we all hold dear in this nation and to instill those values and ideals in our children, our grandchildren, and our communities. Yesterday representative Cleveland, said freedom is not free, emotion generated by simply saying those words quite frankly is almost more than I can bear. It's the reason a tear rolls down my cheek almost every time I hear our National Anthem. We stand in awe of the heroic men and women of the United States military who have served or are currently serving a grateful nation in thousands of locations around this world. On this very day, at this very moment, American men and women stand in a breach as a human buffer for a common influence, in desperate places and in desperate circumstances and sometimes there is a fierce and relentless force. With no time for second guesses, no do-overs, no reconsideration's, no amendments, no PCS's, no proposed committee substitutes. Ladies and gentlemen I am proud to be an American and an American veteran, living in a land that provides the brightest speak-en of hope and freedom in the world. We all here commit ourselves and certainly intend to see that we can continue to shine brightly for years and generations to come, I commend the resolution to your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES; speak on resolution] Ladies and Gentlemen I can't help but notice when we do this it seems like just about everybody who speaks about the resolution is a veteran. And that's great and that's wonderful, they appreciate their fellow veterans, I just feel like its time for one of us who's not a veteran to stand up and say thank you for my freedom. We appreciate you so much and I'm not a veteran myself but a lot of them have been in my family my dad was navy world war 2, my son who was here yesterday served in Iraq in the National Guard. I lost my dear cousin Bobby Bulla from Ashboro in Vietnam. Let me just say that you guys from Vietnam you did not lose that war it was taken from you. But, we appreciate you so much because we know if it weren't for you we would not still have the freedom of self government that we are exercising in this great place. So God Bless, my wife kind of dreads when we go to Walmart me seeing a Veteran or a group of Veterans around because she's afraid shes never going to get me out of Walmart because I got to talk to all of them and thank them. And if I haven't had a chance to talk to you today I'm sorry but I do thank you from the bottom of my heart. And I've seen occasionally when somebody in a uniform would be in a restaurant, and somebody would go over and pay their bill for them. They've done that for my son, and I've had the privilege of doing that occasionally. And that is nothing, good to do, but nothing compared to what you've done for us and we thank you so much God Bless you. [Speaker Changes; representative Floyd debate resolution] Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to say that I'm proud to serve this great nation. If it was not for the military, and a lot of you have heard me say this before, my father 3rd grade education, my mother 8th grade education, my father was employed at the Pepsi Cola plant but he wanted one of his 7 kids to go to college. So he talked to the owner of the Pepsi Cola plant and shared that with the manager and the manager said why not let your son volunteer to go into the army, to get the GI bill to use to go to college? If it was not for the GI bill, I would not be here today, sitting in this chamber nor would I have finished Varbit?? State University. But going into the army, many of you all have not experienced this and representative Jetta?? mentioned yesterday that he was about the same age as long as representative Stan?? has been married. Well he experienced taken a shower, I'm sure he has, but when we were growing up if you noticed we had what you call a round tub. A round tub that 7 of us took a shower in. I did not know how to turn the shower on when we got into the barracks.

Never taken a shower before. Never knew how to shave. Didn't experience none of that. Didn't even know how to dress and put on a necktie. But the army taught me all of those things. Did not know it, but today I'm proud to have served in the United States Army. And had the opportunity ??? to fly a plane. To ride in a plane, let me say that. Never in my life, being 17 and a half, 18 years old, going into service had the opportunity to get in a plane, the military. Never had the opportunity to get on a ship. The military, when they sent me to Paris, France. The best duty assignment that anyone could get. Anyone, anyone with common sense would want to be stationed in Paris, France, if you understand the French life and how they live. Not any Marine Corps can land there, but the Army can. And I'm proud because as I look at you all today, and look at you that serve and the proud that you have I walked back home after I got out of the military, and put that uniform on and see the young ladies that didn't look at me when I was in high school, smile at me. I was just honored just to wear the uniform, but I'm proud to have served in the United States Army and I commend this ??? to you. Representative Marlboro Please State your Purpose. A point of personal privilege. The lady is recognized for point of personal privilege. Members of this great house, I have a celebrity in my district. Last week, and he has chosen to come and share with us today, I'm going to give you part of the story, and I'm going to let the speaker give you the rest of the story. This person was born and raised in eastern North Carolina, currently lives in my district, in Murphysboro, North Carolina. I'm going to refer to him as Mr. D. He was a 20 year old leading a group of about 30 men into a battle, many one or two years younger than he. And remember, I said he was only about 20. They dropped the gate, and there were so many getting killed going out the front, Mr D said I hollered and told them to go over the side of the boat. That decision saved several lives, but a five foot seven inch, about a hundred and ten pounds nearly ended his own life. I went over the side of the boat. When I did, I went to the bottom. He said, I had 60 pounds on me, and I was over my head. Two men were with me and they were six feet tall. If it weren't for them, I wouldn't be here today. They pulled at my shoulders and pulled me up to keep my head above water. Mr D made it to shore but then had to make it to the base of the cliff. That was forty yards, four hundred yards, rather, further. He crawled inch by inch, his bayonet in front of him, and while he searched for land mines, Mr D and two of his men made it to the cliff, but many were left behind. We decided we had to go back and help the guys hurt and in the water. They were in pretty bad shape. Mr D made the trip back through the water, passing dead and mortally wounded soldiers along the way. Fourteen of his men didn't make it. Holding a dead soldier that was dying, asking for his mom, Mr D said "I want", he said "to see my mother". All he could tell him was someday you will see your mother. That was the worst part of it, and I think about it often. Mr D was wounded by shrapnel the next day. He was injured three more times in the route to and in the Battle of the Bulge. He received four purple hearts for his injuries.

the meadows along the way were many. i was hanging on a wall in his hurt for county home. the more recent caller from the one he received came from the french government 3 months ago. Mr d has returned to normality several times, the last in 1979. he brought back sin from omaha beach. he uses that sin at the funerals of his army friends. when they say dust to dust and ashes to ashes he pours his sin on the casket. he said im glad ive done it and brought it back. operation omahar is sponsoring a free trip for veterans to the national d day memorial in bedford Virginia on june the 6th. To mark the 70th anniversary of d day. the ??? will leave Raleigh on Thursday june the 6th at 1pm and return the following evening. transportation, hotel accommodation and meals will be com bonded. each veteran will be accompanied by a guardian. family members between 21 and 65 are encouraged to accompany their vet and the guardian. the trip is funded through donations. you all keep it in mind. first prize will be given to veterans who participated in the Normandy campaign between june 6th 1944 and august 31st 1944. thank you in allowing me this opportunity to speak and i commend the resolution to you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hastings please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] to debate the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGES] the gentlemen recognized to debate the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr speaker i originally had intended to do this as a moment of personal privilege, but it seems appropriate now to go ahead and mention this to the members. Those of you that know me for a number of years know that I used to do veterans work for congress. And as part of that responsibility we had to visit many of our cemeteries in the state. And those of you members of the house know that your responsible for funding state cemeteries for veterans. But the real reason i stood to speak today that i was going to do as a port of personal privilege is to mention Arlington national cemetery. and as you know were in a commemorative period for the 150th anniversary of Arlington national cemetery and some might wonder why we would discuss a federal cemetery, but of course you all know that we have many North Carolinians who have been buried there. As so, I appreciate the privilege to be able to mention the 150th anniversary of Arlington national cemetery mr speaker and i commend the resolution to you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Torrbit please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the resolution mr speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentlemen has recognized to debate the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you ladies and gentlemen and gallery members of this chamber. Its often times my good friend and dear colleague representative Horne evokes the words of Winston Churchill. and I listen attentively each time you do. It is wonderful for us to reflect back in history so were not destined to repeat it as it were. Ide like to take us back just a little bit further. If we go back just for a moment to march 4th 1865. and i think some of the words that a gentlemen spoke on that day in his second novel ring ever so true once again today. and ill just use with the closing of his remarks that have been known as the with malice toward none remark. at the end of those remarks he states to kill for him who shall have been born the battle and for his widow and his orphan i think its time that we fully and completely own up to presidents Lincolns promise on his second novel. thank you mr speaker [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Witmire please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentlemen recognized to debate the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Ide like to thank my fellow veterans.

In my role as the NORTHCOM liaison to North Carolina for emergency response, I see the best of our best currently serving on active duty and in the Reserves and in the Guard. But also, I think back to grandparents and many people who were so influential in many of our lives. The Greatest Generation and those who followed, who are ultimately the reason we have our freedoms and have protected our way of life and to that I am eternally grateful. I want you to know that this body has several measures that we have done and we continue to pursue. We'll seek out to protect our military interests, but also interests that serve our veterans, and also serve many other interests. We will be dedicated and diligent with that. And I will close by echoing representative Greer Martin's words with, in your communities, and maybe not just at the local level but higher up, with your dedication and your discipline and your experience and your care, skill and diligence for what makes this nation great, be involved, take leadership roles. Thank you much. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Representative ??, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Speaker, I want a resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGES]The gentleman is recognized to debate the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGES]I spent 20 years in the Marine Corps, I actually enjoyed myself most of that time. My son joined the Marines, we were actually Marines together for my last year and a half, before I retired. My grandson just joined the Navy, he leaves for boot camp in July. I have an uncle that just passed away from Korea, that we buried at Camp Lejeune cemetery out there. A lot of family in the military, a lot of friends here that were in the military. Anyone that was in the military knows that there's no place where you kind find humor better than with a bunch a guys in the military. Every one of them's got a good sense of humor, and it doesn't matter how long they've been out, they still got a good sense of humor. I was standing in a line in New Bern, waiting on the folks coming back from the World War II memorial, these were all World War II veterans, and their trip was paid for for them, for the only time in their life to actually see the memorial up there for them. And I was standing in line, and I had a sign, and it said, thank you for your service. And as they came by, most of these folks in their 80s and 90s, and I would say, thank you for your service. Thank you for, I told one gentleman, I said, thank you for my freedom. Now, this guy had to be mid-80s at least, I said thank you for my freedom, and he leans over, and he goes, well, to tell you the truth, I was fighting for mine, he said, but I'm glad it worked out for you. I recommend this resolution to you. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Ladies and gentlemen, if the chair may take a point of personal privilege, today we had several veterans with us, we had the fourth meeting in four years. When the veterans came here when I first became Speaker, we decided to create a tradition where we have all of the vets come into the chamber, and if you think about it, the only reason we have this chamber is because of their past sacrifices. And we had a great time, but I think the think that struck me the most is that these veterans are not just here for this resolution, they're here fighting for other veterans, and they're here fighting to make sure that we take care of our veterans. They have a very well documented legislative agenda, one that I happen to think is rational and important and one that I believe on a bipartisan basis we support. And I know that they came to express their appreciation for the good work that you all have done, and there's much more to do. We do certainly appreciate their service. Further discussion, further debate. If not, the question before the House is the adoption of HR 1130. All in favor, vote aye, all opposed, vote no. The clerk will open the vote. All members wishing to vote, please do so, and please watch their vote. Representative Gill. The clerk will open the machine to record the vote. 116 having voted in the affirmative, none in the negative, House Resolution 1130 has been adopted, will be ordered printed. Ladies and gentlemen, the Chair is happy to extend a courtesy of the gallery and to the floor of all veterans and all.

Active military personnel, please stand and let us greet you and express our thanks. Ladies and gentlemen to finish the rest of the story of Representative Mobley’s, we have a special veteran among us. Mr. D is actually Joe Dickerson, he nearly died twice in 1944. First from a near drowning which Representative Mobley described and then from shrapnel a day later. Mr. Dickerson is 91, he’s a retired US army sergeant. He was at Omaha Beach during the Normandy campaign, the largest amphibious invasion in history. The offensive known as D-Day was the turning point for Allied forces in World War II. You’ve heard about his purple hearts, you’ve heard about his courage. Mr. Dickerson, please stand and let us welcome you and thank you for your service. Ladies and gentlemen the bill filing deadline on bills recommended by study commissions is today at four. The chair without objection will extend that deadline to 5PM. Ladies and gentlemen ?? motion representative from Lincoln County Representative Sane the chair is happy to extend the courtesies of the gallery to Fran Perez Wilheid of Mecklenburg County. Fran is the business development specialist with the North Carolina military business center. Fran, please rise and let us welcome you. Representative Moore please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Motion pertaining to today’s calendar. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman has recognized to state his motion. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Mr. Speaker I move that the resolution 1172 recognizing the third Wednesday of May as hypertension blood pressure awareness day as recommended by the Justice War on Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention Task Force be added to today’s calendar for immediate consideration. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Without objection. So ordered. HR 1172 the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGE] HR 1172. The HR recognizing the third Wednesday of May as hypertension high blood pressure awareness day as recommended by the Justice War on Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention Task Force. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Clerk will read the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Whereas the health of our citizens is the foundation for a caring and productive society and our future rests with our ability to adequately treat and ?? to prevent a variety of illnesses including high blood pressure and whereas heart disease and stroke are the second and fourth leading causes of death in North Carolina and high blood pressure also known as hypertension is a major and modifiable risk factor for heart disease and stroke and is a major contributor to adult disability and whereas in 2011 32.4% of North Carolina adults reported a health professional telling them that they had high blood pressure. And whereas current awareness and treatment for high blood pressure is not adequate and whereas about seven out of every ten people having their first heart attack..

have high blood pressure and about eight out of every ten people having their first stroke have high blood pressure and whereas adequate medical treatment sand proven preventive health strategies such as healthy lifestyle that include a low salt diet with more fruits and vegetables are beneficial and whereas high blood pressure patients who are treated earlier have a longer life expectancy and whereas education can help with early diagnosis, prevention, and better treatment and whereas the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services recognizes that the prevention and management of high blood pressure will require the collective effort of health care providers, other community members and organizations and patients and families and whereas the Justice War on Heart Disease and Stroke Presentation Task Force, the American Heart Association, the American Stroke Association, the North Carolina Academy of Family Physicians, the Consortium of Southeastern Hypertension Control, and the Carolina Senate for Medical Excellence are organizations that have agreed to support the hypertension high blood pressure awareness day schedule for Wednesday May 21 2014. And these partners along with other North Carolina organizations seek ways to improve health for the citizens of North Carolina by improving prevention and treatment of health blood pressure through support of education, advocacy, and awareness and have therefore be it resolved by the house of representatives. Section 1 of the house of representatives joins the Justice War on Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention Task Force and other organizations mentioned in this resolution in recognizing the third Wednesday in May to be hypertension high blood pressure awareness day and urges all citizens in the state of North Carolina to recognize the seriousness of this disease and the meritorious work of public health and health care provider community in the prevention and treatment of this disease. Section 2 this resolution is effective upon adoption. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Carney please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Speak on the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The lady has recognized to debate the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you Mr. Speaker. Ladies and gentlemen of the house, the resolution says what it is I want to send out a special thank you to Representative Dr. Folgium for co-sponsoring this resolution with me, it's one of those that everybody in here should sign on to and have your name out there in support of prevention and hypertension awareness day. A big thank goes to our governor who signed a proclamation declaring the third Wednesday of May hypertension high blood pressure issue awareness day, that's a big step. As most of you know, health and heart disease and prevention, stroke prevention are near and dear to me as it is to many of you that we have talked about this issue. The key is prevention, the key is understanding the statistics that are out there. The heart isn't worn on the outside of the body so we don't see it where we see other diseases that might affect people that are more visible but it is a high issue in our state as a killer so I encourage you if you did not go today and have your blood pressure taken, I did I know I a lot of you did, please do that. Please make sure that you check. Those little cups are inexpensive, you can keep them in your home and check yourself periodically especially after you've had a week up here. Go home and check yourself, it's an issue that we should all be aware of and all of our family members should be aware of and I always have to add, put that salt shaker down, it's not good for you. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Folgium please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Comment on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman has recognized to debate the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you sir. Some of you may know that I had a renal transplant in 2006, my blood pressure was 140 over 90. For several years, little bit on the high side. I did some things that were probably making it worse at times, some of the surgical things I got into occasionally made me a little nervous. I wound up with hypertension from nephrosclerosis, whatever that is. But it turned out to be that really one of the basic causes of it is mild regressive hypertension.

silent killer. And it's the most frequent cause of end-stage renal disease, which I had. So I had a transplant and we signed a law - it was a heck of a prenuptial agreement- and he was the most generous person in my life and I'm just here to tell you that this is something that I take seriously, that you should take seriously, and I commend the resolution to you. Representative Barks, is the gentleman you? I yield, Mr. Speaker. How did the gentleman's blood pressure test go today? That was today. Yeah. It was high, so hopefully we'll make it to Thursday and I can get it calmed down a little bit. Ladies and gentlemen, yesterday I asked those who have maybe had a blood test over the last three months, and we had about 80 lights on. I'd ask now, I understand many of you went. If you've had a blood test over the last three months, please turn on your lights. Yeah, blood pressure. Let's make sure we keep working on that. Further discussion? Further debate? If not, the question before the house is the adoption of House Resolution 1172. All in favor will vote Aye. All opposed will vote no. The clerk will open the vote. The machine. It's working. Try it now. All members wishing to record please do so at this time. The clerk will let the machine record the vote. 116 having voted affirmative, none in the negative. HR 1172 has been adopted and will be ordered printed. Mr Speaker? Representative Burr, please state your purpose. Out of curiosity, I assume you have your blood pressure tested today, how did your test go? Like every time in my life, average to above average. Thank you. You really ought to consider mountain biking. Representative Richardson, please state your purpose. To correct the fact that my light was not working, but I have had a blood test. As a matter of fact, I had it today, but I have had one in the last three months. But my light wasn't working when you called for the answer, so I would like to correct that. Representative Richardson, I noticed that several lights that were not on yesterday were on, and I think that that's great because we as members kind of have to walk the talk and I think that each and every one of us doing that every time you have an opportunity to go to a CVS or something else is very easy to do. There's no excuse. It's too easy and it's lifesaving. Ladies and Gentleman, upon motion of Representative Susan Martin and Gene Farmer-Butterfield from Wilson County, the chair is happy to extend the courtesies of the galleries to the Dynamic Leadership Class from the Wilson Chamber of Commerce. If you are still in the chamber, please stand and let us welcome you. Now we're moving to the calendar. HB 1050, the clerk will read. ??? HB 1050, bill has been filed to enact amended Revenue laws as recommended by the Revenue Laws Study Committee. General Senate of North Carolina enacts. Representative Howard, please state your purpose. To debate the bill, Mr. Speaker. The lady is recognized to debate the bill. Thank you Mr Speaker and Members of the House. We had an excellent debate yesterday and I wouldn't even dare to go back over all the review. The two hours that we did yesterday but I stand to answer any of the questions that you might have and Mr Speaker I understand there might be a couple of amendments that are forthcoming.

Ladies and gentlemen, the chair has been advised by the clerk that we have two amendments, if any other members intend off amendments on this bill, we will take amendments up until 4:15. Representative Hamilton, the chair understands that you will not be sending forth an amendment? (Speaker Changes) That is correct sir. (Speaker Change) Thank you. The lady from New Hanover withdraws the amendment. Representative Samualson is recognized to send forth the amendment, the court will read. (Speaker Changes) Representative Samualson moves to amend number seven to the bill by rewriting page one lines five through seven of amendment seven to read. (Speaker Changes) Ladies recognize to debate the amendment. (Speaker Changes) Thank you Mr. Speaker, members this is a pretty simple amendment, by virtue of this bill for the first time we will have localities taxing banks, so therefore, there have never been any experience of what constitutes a geographic position for an ATM machine. So, what this does is simply add, just as we did yesterday for real estate properties that were in multiple hands the way Representative Brawley explained, this would simple exclude or clarify that an automated teller machine or cash dispenser is not a business location, so I urge your support for the bill and the amendment, thank you. (Speaker Changes) Further discussion for the debate on the amendment, if not, the question before the house is the amendment sent forth by Representative Samualson to the House Committee substitute to HB 1050, all those in favor vote I, all opposed vote no, the clerk will open the vote. The clerk will ?? record the vote, 113 having voting the affirmative none of the negative, the amendment passes. Representative Glasier recognizes sent forth the amendment the clerk will read. (Speaker Changes) Representative Glasier moves to mend amendment six to the bill on page one, lines one through five of amendment six by rewriting the lines to read. (Speaker Changes) The gentlemen recognize to debate the amendment. (Speaker Changes) Thank you very much Mr. Speaker and members, this is simply a perfecting amendment to the one that we passed yesterday on the FDA preemption, it had the wrong pagination number and so it is a perfecting amendment, I know it in ??. Thank you Mr. Speaker (Speaker Changes) Further discussion for the debate? If not, the question before the House is the passage of the amendment sent forth by Representative Glasier for the House committee substitute of HB 1050, all in favor vote I, all opposed vote no, the clerk will open the vote. The clerk will ?? the machine will record the vote, 112 voting affirmative, 1 in the negative, the amendment passes, we are now back on the bill as amended. Further discussion for the debate? Representative Pierce, please state your purpose. (Speaker Changes) Speaker, I have an amendment. (Speaker Changes) Representative Pierce, the clerk is not in possession of the amendment, the House will be at ease.

Representative Pierce is recognized to send forth an amendment. The Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Pierce moves to amend the Bill on page 12, lines 38 and 39, by inserting the following between those lines. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The Gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mister Speaker. I’ve got a couple calls from folks down my way, down round across the state, dealing with county fairs, asking to be exempt from the admission sales tax. I just wanted to just share a few reasons. Many of our ag. fairs are owned and operated by non-profits – American Legion, Lions Clubs, Rotary Clubs and all their volunteer members. Many of the volunteers are youth and senior citizens. Trying to handle the necessary compliance ?? these tax would be cumbersome upon senior volunteers. Fairs provide an educational and fun event in these areas. Fairs are diligently trying to hold down their costs so it’s affordable to all of rural North Carolina. Our ag. fairs are located in rural counties across North Carolina. To put a sales tax on the admission ticket would impose an undue burden on many North Carolina rural families who live on or below the poverty level. These ag. fairs expose both children and adults to the rural agriculture that plays into parts of our rural communities. An increase in sales tax would decrease attendance at these fairs, making it ?? for operators to have these fairs annually. County fairs are organized and operated by community volunteers, civic non-profit organizations – we’ve already talked about the different organizations. Funds derived from these county fairs are used to do charity work within the local community – eyeglasses for children, needed surgery operations, counselor research, provide assistance for needy families, and also funds are used for scholarships for children to further their education. County fairs provide venues for community events at no charge – Race for the Cure, Relay for Life, March of Dime, church fundraising activities. County fairs provide an opportunity for civic organizations and agriculture entities to talk more about our rural communities, help community colleges and universities, and with those reasons, I ask that you would join with me this afternoon to exempt our county fairs from our admission sales tax, and I move for adoption. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Howard, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The Lady is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mister Speaker, and I appreciate all the words that were just spoken in addressing the amendment, but folks, I will tell you that there is a free-standing bill that has been filed by Representative Bryan Holloway – it will be filed – and it does this sole purpose, and I would ask you not to support this amendment and load this bill any heavier, and let the issue be addressed in Representative Holloway’s bill. And I understand that there was a space available on that bill for a primary sponsor if the member so opted. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Question, Mister Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Pierce, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Representative Howard. So we have your… [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Howard, does the Lady yield? The Lady yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You are committed to supporting that bill if that bill is filed like… [SPEAKER CHANGES] The bill will come over to finance, and yes Sir, we’ll hear it, and we’ll get it back out on the floor, and I believe the support is here to take that provision out. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mister Speaker? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Pierce, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] With those comments from Representative Howard, I move that we take the amendment off the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Pierce moves that the amendment be withdrawn. Further discussion, further debate? If not, the question before the House is the passage of House Committee Substitute to HB 1050 as amended on its third reading. All in favor vote “Aye”, all opposed vote “No”. The Clerk will open the vote. The Clerk will ?? machine record the vote. 84 having voted in the affirmative, 29 in the negative, the House Committee Substitute for HB 1050 as amended has passed its third reading. The Bill will be engrossed and sent to the Senate by special messenger. HB 775, the Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Committee Substitute Number Two for HB 775…

[SPEAKER CHANGES] ?? to establish the juvenile jurisdiction advisory committee to create a pileup civil citation process for jueveniles and to raise the age of juvenile jurisdiction to include 16 and 17 year olds who have committed misdemeanor offenses. General Assembly of North Carolina ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative ?? please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker. First of all, I want to thank all of you all that did your homework and studied and debated this issue internally and externally and voted with us in the last session on this important piece of legislation. And since we've had such a long summer break I thought what I would do would be to refresh your memory about what it is actually we're trying to do. This bill is one that I feel like North Carolina needs to consider because we're one of only two states who do not have our 16 and 17 year old juvenile delinquents placed in the juvenile justice system. They go into the adult system. The other state that is keeping us company is New York. And the New York Governor has just appointed a task force to look at raising the age in that state. And we're ahead of New York on several points simply because since 2007 our state has commissioned 5 studies regarding raising the age of jurisdiction on 16 and 17 year olds in North Carolina. They were done by the Governors Crime Control Commission, the North Carolina Sentencing and Policy Advisory Commission, Youth Accountability Planning Task Force, the Vera Institute for Justice, and the Legislative Research Commission of the General Assembly. And all of those recommended that North Carolina raise the age. And in terms of what we need to do in the bill and what we're planning to do is we're dealing with misdemeanors only, and there is a very long planning time, simply because there's been a lot of concern, justifiably so considering past legislative action, of whether or not the system can handle this change. So there will be a 5 year period until July of 2019 before any juvenile 16 year old will go into the system. An advisory committee is being appointed to study where we are, what we have, what we need, both in terms of facilities, programs and funding to make sure that we'd be able to do this in the right way. Too many times down here I think we can find examples fairly recently of where we've put major wide ranging reforms in place that's going to cure all of our problems we did not put the timing into it to study what we needed to do and actually how we were going to do it and pay for it. And that's why a mistake I do not want us to make in this move with juvenile justice. A lot of you have received, all of you probably have received a document from the Sheriff's Association and have been heavily lobbied by them and their concerns, and I want to address those. They're rightfully justified in saying we have concerns. And we have listened to those concerns in the bill that we have finally put before you. We have taken a lot of their issues to heart. But I'd like to talk with you about the specific ones they mentioned. That the state can't adequately handle the influx. Well, I placed on your desk a letter that I received a couple of years ago from the Commissioner of the Department of Corrections in Connecticut who has gone through this same process. And I think you will see that a lot of the same sorts of end of the world scenarios that has been placed here in North Carolina has been in other places. Connecticut and Illinois, a lot of the states. The argument's always the same. If you'll look at how they approached it, the reactions and the actions that they took, I think you'll gain heart that we're moving in the right direction. They're saying that we're closing facilities and it's depleting our resources. Well, misdemeanants do not go to detention centers or development centers, so that is not a factor that really should impede your decision to vote yes on this bill. And it says we're going to fund a policy that's not been fully analyzed or completely developed. I just explained the 5 year planning process that we've put in place in order to do exactly that. So that we'll have the proven facts where we can develop a policy that will work

And that will be implemented by the General Assembly that will be in place at that time because they have adequate funding to do the job right. The last point they make is referring to an unfunded mandate on the local governments because of housing costs for secured facilities for 16- and 17-year olds. That mandate is already in place. The federal law, PREA, Prison Rape Prevention Act, was passed and the requirements for compliance under that law are much stricter than what we faced and have in fact here in North Carolina currently. Currently, we have the issue in the compliance with the federal that those 16- and 17-year olds either have to be out of sight and sound of older inmates or under direct supervision while they're in the presence of older inmates. Currently, the only time that there's a separation under North Carolina law is during sleeping hours. Another one is a simple thing like exercise. The law now says that they have to have daily, large muscle exercise. Currently in the state of North Carolina, it's three days a week after you've been in jail two weeks. You've had very powerful voices come to you and ask you to vote no on this bill. And I'm coming with voices that aren't going to be heard yet. It's the voice of a 16-year old, because of just natural brain development does not have the ability to make good judgement decisions and does a stupid, crazy, typical teenage action. And ends up with a criminal record for a misdemeanor. We have damaged his life in terms of his education, getting into the military and getting jobs. I'm just asking that if you would consider what you considered in the last session. And remember who you're planning to help with the vote that you make today. I would really appreciate your support. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative McNeill, please state your purpose. Ladies and gentlemen, the Chair understands representative McNeill has an amendment, therefore, we'd like to hear the amendment before we go back to the bill. If you'll leave your lights on, the Chair assumes that you are wishing to speak on the bill. Representative McNeill, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I rise, Mr. Speaker, to oppose the bill and to send forth an amendment at the appropriate time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to send forth an amendment. The Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative McNeil moves to amend the bill on page 4, line 4, by rewriting the line to read... [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Many of you remember when I debated this bill on the last day of session last year. And one of my main concerns was that the bill didn't do anything to speak to gang members that were juveniles. Basically, what this bill does is two things. My amendment first excludes 16- and 17-year olds charged with a gang offense from being considered as a juvenile under this law. Those changes are accomplished by asserting the exception on line 4 of page 4, which excepts offenses listed under Article 13A of Chapter 14, which is the North Carolina's gangs suppression statute. The same language is also duplicated in three other places. On line 16 of page 4, line 10 of page 6, and line 16 of page 10. Secondly, the amendment provides that 16- and 17-year olds who are found by the court to be a gang member could be transferred to district court to be tried as an adult. This is accomplished by adding a hearing process to determine first, gang membership, and a transfer process to district court once that finding has been made. I personally believe this creates a fair process which puts the burden on the state to prove gang membership. I also believe that our law enforcement community is clear, and the state is clear, that gang activity is a serious problem and that criminal gang members should be treated accordingly. I ask your support for this amendment.

Representative Avila, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I guess my, thank you Mr. Speaker, I guess my first reaction is like a lot of people when you've got your baby here, it doesn't need any changes. You've worked, you thought you've talked to everybody and you've worked it out and I actually, honestly, had that first reaction and in talking with people, though, and understanding just how serious the issue of gangs is and the concern that the law enforcement community has I just rise to let you know I have no objections to Representative McNeill's amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Brandon, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The Gentleman's recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well I do have huge objection to this amendment because the very, well, Representative Avila statement so that she made, that's not, does not constitute just because it's a gang member that you still have a 16 year old making decisions with a not fully developed brain. Your amendment, this amendment, what it does is actually perpetuate gang activity because once we actually get this person out of jail from 16, 'cause let's be honest they don't stay there long, the only thing that happens is they end up with a record and now because we have now painted this picture on them at a 16 year old, the likelihood of them going back to gang activity is probably about 95%-100%. So if you really, really were concerned about gang activity and if you really, really were concerned about curbing it you don't treat those people differently than other p-, problems are problems. It doesn't matter what crime you're doing. The same reason why a 16 year old smokes a joint is the same reason why they're into gang activity. It's because of lack of parental support, lack of brain development, where they are, so this whole amendment just really derails the whole purpose of the bill. The reason why we're raise the age is because we know that when you are 16 years old you cannot make those decision. That doesn't matter what crime you do. Just because it's gang related doesn't make he's not a 16 year old. He's still a 16 year old, and the same rules should still apply. I vehemently oppose the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ladies and gentlemen, the Chair has been advised that there may be a technical issue with this amendment and we're gonna have to deal with a perfecting amendment so we're gonna temporarily displace the amendment and we will wait until the perfecting amendment is ready and therefore we'll go ahead and hear debate on the bill. And the Chair will recognize members in turn, Representative Duane Hall, 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. First thing I'd like to do is acknowledge there are a lot of juveniles that we need to keep in the adult system. My colleague, Representative Allen, mentioned this is only for misdemeanors and just to draw out to you how minor of a crimes we're talking about, class I felonies are not included in this bill. One example would be uttering a forged check. So under this bill, if a 17 year old writes a $10 check to Dominoes and it bounces he can still be prosecuted in adult courts as an adult. This is just for misdemeanors. When I first got out of law school I practiced in the juvenile court for quite a while and the overwhelming majority of cases I had were things like a 16 year old girl that steals a bracelet at the mall. It was a 17 year old boy who had a fight at a high school football game. A common one I saw was when a house party got busted after a high school game and there was beer there, everyone got charged. Those students, I'm not trying to belittle it, they need to be punished as well, but the problem with North Carolina being only one of two states in America that prosecutes those kids as adults is that they have to go out, then, and compete against states that don't give them permanent, life-long, criminal convictions for those very same activities. A criminal conviction, for instance, is not a bar to get in to universities, we all know that. But if a North Carolina kid has that conviction and a kid from any other state does the exact same thing, the North Carolina kid could have worked 12 years in school, hard, and gotten great grades but he's up against a kid with the exact same record he may not get in to that university. Most job applications, for the rest of your life, is gonna show a criminal conviction for things like that, which, it hurts our economy but there's so many more other implications. I don't usually like anecdotes but I would like

I’ll give you a couple quick ones. About six years ago, I house a 17 year old boy in my office and we were discussing taking a plea for a fight he had during a football game. And the reason we were discussing the plea is because he was guilty. He did it. I was trying to work out a deal for him. He sat next to his dad in tears and the reason he was so upset is that the week before, he had applies for the early stages to get in the Marines. He was concerned that this conviction would stop him. His dad, his uncles, his grandpa had all served. What I’m asking of this body is not to take away that chance for one first time youthful mistake. Who knows. That soldier could have possibly become a future John Blust or a Larry Hall. For those of you that still have concerns, I have a few mitigating factors I would like to mention. Implementation doesn’t start until 2019. That’s over five years away. Almost two years before implementation, this bill requires that a study commission comes back to this body and accounts for the exact cost of it. In the meantime, we a pilot program in a few counties to work on the details and exact cost of it. I think you all also saw a study on your desk from the John Luft Foundation and it’s their estimate that this bill is actually going to save us 52 million dollars. Other than cost, US Department of Justice says that prisoners under 18 years of age are eight times more likely to be raped than adult inmates, 36 times more likely to commit suicides than youths housed in juvenile detention centers. The recidivist rate for children forced into an adult system is 35 percent higher. So this bill can save our children, but can also save North Carolina a lot of money if we get it going. We had strong bi-partisan support on the first and second vote and if conservatives like John Locke and John Torbit are on board, friends across the aisle it’s a safe vote for you, I commend the bill and hope you can vote for us. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Baskerville, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Representative Avila for staying vigilant on this issue. I support the bill. I think it’s a good bill. It’s a great start. To address our juvenile court system. My colleague, Representative Brandon made my point eloquently when we are trying to decide whether to prosecute these folks as adults or juveniles. We look at their mental state. We look at their frame of mind. A lot of these crimes that they are charged with require a mental state. So you have got to look inside that person’s mind and see whether they are guilty or not guilty of a crime. If you are talking about a 15 or 16 or 17 year old mind, their mind might not be fully developed and able to understand or grasp the consequences of their actions. Now I was reading this document on my desk here that details some of Representative Stamm’s remarks the other day. I just want to address a couple of the points briefly dealing with the confidential nature of juvenile court proceedings. I think that is very important that juvenile court proceedings are maintained in a confidential manner. There also circumstances where we keep juvenile records. We keep juvenile documents. We keep them sealed. For example, educational records. We understand the importance of maintaining the confidentiality of those proceedings. I don’t think that is a problem at all. I think that is a good thing. Also in this letter here, it discusses the fact that in juvenile court it’s quote “How can we fix your problem whether you are guilty or not?”. End quote. I think that is a good thing that 16 and 17 year olds that have taken the wrong path down the wrong way has a courtroom full of folks – court counselors, judges, lawyers – that are trying to get to the underlying issue, the underlying problem with this criminal behavior. I think that is a good thing that in juvenile court, we have social workers in there that are trying to get to the problem so they won’t repeat that behavior in the future. There is none of that in adult court. As a matter of fact,…

These crimes that are on this document here, if a 16 or 17 years old goes to a [doco] they are gonna get a slap in their wrist. Nobody is gonna try to find out why they’re doing what they’re doing. Nobody is gonna try to rehabilitate this person. They are gonna get a slap on the wrist, they’re fined, they’re not going to jail. I think a lot of my colleagues might think juveniles are gonna go to jail, you know 17 year olds go to jail when they commit crimes in a [doco], but that’s not the case. You know any law you practice here will tell you that 16, 17 year olds go in their [doco] they’re gonna get a fine, they are gonna get a slap on their wrist and we need the juvenile corporate savings to help these kids. I think that’s actually a bit [??] representative stand that we have somebody there trying to figure out how do we help you with the problem. I think that this is a good bill and I recommend it to my colleagues. Thank you. [Speaker Changes] Representative [Steim]. Please state your purpose. [Speaker Changes] To speak on the bill? [Speaker Changes] The juveniles [recognized ??] bill. The house will come to order. [Speaker Changes] Respected members of the house. I couldn’t even remember what I said last year about this. You could be used if you didn’t remember so I have to tight up to save the style. So you don’t have to listen to that again. But I would like to make a few additional points. This is not the first time, of course we’ve heard this. 25 years ago, I chaired the North Carolina juvenile law study commission under the Martin administration. This came up then we rejected it then and it has been rejected for last 25 years and I predict that when (where’s roger yeans? Is he here, our newest member?). When he is the majority leader of this house, it will come up again in 25 years from now. Now, when we discuss hydraulic fracturing, the senate wanted to put that on automatic pilot so that it required no additional votes. Remember that last year? And the house rejected that. What this bill does is put us on automatic pilot; so when this is in full effect it will cost us $63 million a year. You’re committing that we’ll spend that much every year unless by majorities of both houses we repeal it. Transparency; Representative Hall’s argument is all about “we don’t want this on people’s records”. Don’t you all remember last year, we expunged everything in the world. I mean, these kids this age, they don’t have to keep these records all their lives. They can get them expunged by hiring a good lawyer like Representative Hall. There’s a feature of juvenile court you don’t realize. I do have this in the third paragraph. Look at the title of the bill. Young offenders’ rehabilitation act. There are 3 different models of course of justice. Retributive, Deterrence and Rehabilitation. And ideally, justice should do all three. But the juvenile model is rehabilitation. There’s something wrong with this kid. Let’s fix him. And the juvenile court is the last place you wanna be if you’re innocent. Because even if you’re innocent they’re going to find something wrong with you. And they’re gonna fix it and without a jury, you can be locked up on a ‘he said’ ‘she said’ for years. Couple of things have happened since we voted on this last July. One is that it’s 2014 now and I’ve read the senate rules; I can’t imagine any way this is eligible in the senate. So I’m wondering, number one - Why we’re even here under their rules. But we’re here. Second thing is this house unanimously passed the bill in 2013 to decriminalize what a lot of these 16 and 17 year olds that you might be concerned about this bill. Prostitution, it’s not even in the fits anymore. It’s not that they’re not going to district court, they’re not going anywhere. Except unless they’re maybe considered neglected juvenile or something like that. So, there’s no need for this bill. It not gonna pass this year. It didn’t pass last year, it’s not gonna pass next year because it’s just bad policy and I [vote] no. [Speaker Changes] Ladies and gentlemen, the chair’s been advised by the court that they’re perfecting a [??] before us. The chair would prefer to move to the amendment 7? The debate is focused on the final content of the bill should the amendment pass. Representative [Mig Neils] recognize some forth of perfecting a [??]

The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative McNeil moves to mend to amendment on page one line three by rewriting the line to read. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman has recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you Mr. Speaker. Basically what the amendment does is where before when I told you that the language that I inserted in the beginning of the bill on page four of line four that language remains. On page sixteen of line four the language is removed. On line ten of page six the language remains and on line sixteen of page ten the language is removed. Basically it was decided and basically I think when they looked at the amendment was that it was not necessary to list it in two of the four places that it was listed so that's really all it does. It doesn't change what the amendment does, it just to perfect the amendment that takes the listing out of two places and Mr. Speaker I'd like to commend this to you and would like to answer one of the points that's been raised if it's appropriate time. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman has time to debate if the matter is on the amendment otherwise the chair would prefer to take action on this amendment and then go back to the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] It is on the amendment, I just wanted to point out to Representative ?? that the state does have a gang suppression statute, it has been on the books for several years so the state of North Carolina recognizes that gangs are treated differently. That statute is listed, article 13A of chapter fourteen is listed in my amendment and it has been around for many years so I hope you'll support the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Further discussion, further debate on the amendment. Seeing no members rising. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Mr. Speaker [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative ?? please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGE] We are on the the amendment or on the perfecting amendment? [SPEAKER CHANGE] We are on the perfecting amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] I want ?? on the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The question before the house is the adoption of the perfecting amendment sent forth by Representative McNeil to the house committee substitute number two to HB 725. All in favor vote aye all opposed vote no. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk ?? record the vote, 102 having voted in the affirmative, 12 in the negative. The perfecting amendment passes we are now back on the amendment. Representative Floyd please state your purpose. The senator wishes to speak on the bill. Ladies and gentlemen at this point because of the two amendments unless you intend to speak on the amendment please turn off your light at this point. Representative McShaw please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Speak on the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman has recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Mr. Speaker, ladies and gentlemen of the house I happen to serve on the ?? Policy Advising Commission which started the actual study on looking at looking at ?? and much of the information that we got from that commission, from the state using psychologists, using all the necessary means and methods that we could in order to be able to do this was looked at by that commission and the commission came up with the idea that we did need to make some changes in this area and I would suggest that we do it. The problem is this with with this amendment, if you have an individual who is sixteen, seventeen years old and let's say gets a ticket for a moving traffic violation or no operator's license or something like that and then somebody wants to come in and fake that he is maybe allied with some gang or something, there's nothing to stop him from being pushed to that particular process. The process is there for handling gang related instances, I know it's there because I wrote the bill so we don't need anything in this bill trying to relate back to gang supported evidence. Like I say, if that individual that sixteen, seventeen year old gets a minor or a major

Infraction. Then they can be subject to what this amendment puts ??. This amendment is not needed. The bureau as it stands is a good bill and so we just don’t need to mess with it as it is and I would suggest that you vote down the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Frasier, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment as amended. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, sir. Thank you. Let me explain my concern. I’m showing Representative McNeil actually a draft of an amendment that might help fix my concern. I agree, actually, with the first part of the amendment which adds in the gang-related part of the statutes. I disagree slightly with a few colleagues, although, it’s not necessary, but I understand the concern and as a compromise measure, I understand that. My concern is in the process and I think it’s going much further than Representative McNeil has maybe intended. And that’s in the second part of this amendment. Because if you read it, what it says is - if the court must transfer from juvenile to adult, if the person is found to be a gang member and there is probable cause to believe they committed a misdemeanor. But there’s no language in there that creates a nexus between the two. And I would certainly favor an amendment that creates the nexus that says: transfer should occur if there’s reason to believe you’re a gang member and the crime you’ve committed – there’s probable cause to believe it was gang-related. I am with Representative McNeil on that at least for right now. I would certainly vote in a spirit of compromise for that, but that’s not what this says. So what this would do right now without the nexus language says “I’m a gang member, but I forget my license and I’m driving to school and I have a no license charge.” It’s automatically transferred because you don’t need any nexus. All the bills of the amendment that Representative McNeil has put forward requires is are you a gang member, and if so, you’re transferred. If you have any probable cause that you have committed a misdemeanor even if it has nothing to do with your gang membership. That’s problematic for me. I think there’s other reasons there are to be opposed to this. Representative ?? and others have talked about, but I’m willing to vote for it if we put some nexus language in that says that transfer should occur. It should be exempt out of the juvenile court if you’re a gang member and there is probable cause to believe that you’ve committed a misdemeanor for which there’s some relationship to you being in the gang. But otherwise, we’re catching a lot of kids I don’t think there’s any intent to catch. Sometimes people can be gang members, not committing any crimes, not involved in it, but they end up. Like I suggested, no licenses or there’s a trespass, or something unrelated to their gang membership. Do we really want to transfer them to adult court? I’m going to be proposing an amendment that perhaps can fix that perhaps if Representative McNeil is willing. It simply says what he wants to do, I would agree with as long as there’s a nexus between the two. Without the nexus, we’re catching every kid who just does something where they may or may not be currently involved in any gang activity. So I would speak against the amendment as it’s set, and then we’ll be offering an amendment to fix that. At which point, if that passes, I would vote for it. And I just wanted to explain that. I think there is a real problem here. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Richardson, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, I would like to be recorded as voting “yes” on the amendment. I missed that vote. Thank you. On the perfecting amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady will be recorded as having voted “yes” on the perfecting amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Lucas, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To see if my good friend and colleague, Representative Glazier would yield for a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Glacier, does the gentleman yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I do yield. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Glazier, we’re making this use of this gang member. Is there a definition of a gang member that has been certified by the courts? What qualifies one as to be a member of a gang? [SPEAKER CHANGES] There’s certainly lots of definitions out. Representative ??’s legislation created a distinct definition. If you would, Representative Lucas, you might direct your question to him because I think he can answer your question more directly. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative ??, does the gentleman yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, sir. I do. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] There is a very distinct definition. I think if you look on your desk…

Information that Representative McNeill passed out to you cites that particular section of the statute that deals actually with what gang activity and gang membership is. It was closely crafted. It took three years actually to craft the definition of what gang activity was, what a gang member meant. And that document, I can’t quote it to you directly, but it is there and it is very very specific. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative McNeill, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment as amended. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. In reference to Representative Glazier’s amendment, I know the example that he used was possibly a motor vehicle law violation. But this bill itself, nothing to do with anything that I had to do with changing. This bill itself excepts motor vehicle laws, so that’s not really going to be an argument as to what he’s arguing. North Carolina, like I said before has had a gang suppression statute for many many years, as Mr. ?? said and he helped write it. Article 13a of chapter 14. Our own state law recognizes that gangs and gang members should be treated differently. I think the amendment is a good amendment. Representative Avila who’s a bill sponsor has said she is for it. I understand their arguments. There is a process in the bill, set out in my amendment, that says that either the juvenile’s attorney or the prosecutor can ask for a hearing to determine whether they’re a gang member. Then and only after then after that hearing that they are determined to be a gang member, then can the case be bound over to district or be tried as an adult. I think it’s a good amendment, and would ask you to support it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative ??, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Would the gentleman yield for a question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative McNeill, does the gentleman yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir, I yield. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative McNeill, you do realize that there are other misdemeanors that we have in law other than traffic violations which would be affected by your amendment, and that particular person that would come under scrutiny as a result of your amendment. That there are other misdemeanors other than traffic violations, minor misdemeanors. [SPEAKER CHANGES] That would be affected by my amendment? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Oh yes sir, I know there’s a lot of other misdemeanors out there, class 1, 2 and 3 misdemeanors and class a1 misdemeanors. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Another question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Does the gentleman yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] That violation, that you would have to prove gang activity, you’re violent. Your amendment takes out, as Representative Glazier stated, the nexus between what that minor misdemeanor is and gang activity. There’s no nexus there at all, which means that that kid who is basically accused could be accused of being a gang member and then sent into adult court, without any nexus at all in your amendment. Do you understand that? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir, I do understand that, and that’s why I feel like when I said that there is a process in my amendment for the prosecutor and the court to hear that. I think that is sufficient to take care of those concerns. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Glazier, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To ask Representative McNeill a question and then perhaps to speak a second time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The chair also has been advised the gentleman has an amendment to the amendment as amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I have gotten to the point that it’s late in the day and I think what I’d like to do is see if we can resolve this Mr. Speaker through some questions. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative McNeill, does the gentleman yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir I yield. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Representative let me just draw your attention to the last part of your amendment on the second page, last paragraph. And it says at the end, I think the hearing you’re referring to. And I just want to read the language and then I’ll ask my question. At the hearing the prosecutor and juvenile may be heard and may offer evidence and the juvenile’s attorney may examine any court or probation

...Or other records, the court may consider in determining whether the juvenile is a member of a street gang. Then the next sentence. If the court finds by preponderance of the evidence the juvenile is a member of a street gang, the court shall transfer. Would you not agree with me that once the decision is made on the street gang question, there is no capacity for the juvenile or the judge in that language to make any finding about nexus? It's strictly are you or are you not a member of the street gang, and if you are, does it matter that there's no nexus, the attorney can't argue it, and that in fact the transfer must occur. [Speaker changes] I would not argue with that. [Speaker changes] Second question please. [Speaker changes} Does the gentleman yield? [Speaker changes]The gentleman yields. [Speaker changes]Thank you, representative. All-all my amendment, which would do, and if you would consent to it being heard and..and...and passed, I would be fine-cause I think it would fix this-would be to simply create that Nexus requirement. Um, would you agree-because I think you're trying to get at the person whose committing gang activity or potentially, and get them out of this juvenile statue and keep them in adult court. Would you agree to, if we passed your amendment, to consent to the Nexus requirement being added in, and then we can fix it over on the senate on the exact language? [Speaker changes] If you'll vote for my amendment, then I'll vote for yours. [Speaker Changes] That works for me. Thank you Mr. Speaker. [Speaker changes] The speaker is a little bit confused, is there gonna be another amendment sent forth? [Speaker changes] OK, representative ??? sent forth an amendment, the clerk will read. [Speaker changes] Thank you very much. [Speaker changes] Representative ??? moves to men, amendment number one on page two,line 3 of the amendment, by deleting adults and substituting: [Speaker changes] The gentlemans recognize to debate the amendment. [Speaker changes] Thank you Mr. Speaker, uh and thank you representative ??? Members, what this amendment will do, is create the causal link and the Nexus between gang membership and the commission of this misdemeanor being gang related. And I think we've debated it enough and I hope I would have your support and I appreciate Representative ??? doing that. Thank you. [Speaker changes] Representative ??? please state your purpose. [Speaker changes] Just to inquire... [Speaker changes] Yes Mr Speaker-- [Speaker changes] The gentleman may state his inquiry. [Speaker changes] This would be another perfecting amendment to the amendment is that correct sir? [Speaker changes] That is correct, sir. [Speaker changes] Thank you. That's a good idea. [Speaker changes] Further discussion, further debate, on the perfecting amendment. If not, the question before the house, is the amendment sent forth by Representative G??? to the amendment to have house committee substitute number 2 for HB 725, all in favor vote "I" all opposed vote "No". The clerk will open the vote. [Speaker changes] The clerk will ??? machine recorded the vote. 108 having voted affirmative and 6 in the negative, the perfecting amendment passes. Now we're back on the amendment. Further discussion, further debate. If not, the question before the house is the passage of the amendment as amendment to the house committee substitute number 2 for HB 725. All in favor, vote "I", all opposed, vote "No", the clerk will open the vote. The clerk will ??? machine recorded the vote. 102 having voted affirmative, 13 in the negative. The amendment, as amendment, amended, has passed. Representative Stan, please state your purpose. [Speaker changes] Mr. Speaker, in my debate, I talked about whether this would be eligible in the senate, but after thinking about it, I'd rise to the point of wondering if this is not eligible to be considered in the House during the short session because it is not listed in the adjournment resolution. [Speaker changes] Representative Stan, Representative ???, Representative ??? Please approach the dais. The house will be at ease.

Representative Moore, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To request leave to change my vote on the last matter. I thought that was the final vote on the bill. I would like to be recorded “Aye” as opposed to “No”. On the McNeil Amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman will be recorded as voting “Aye” and admitted he did not know what he was voting for. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The house will come to order. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Samm asked to be recorded. Representative Stamm, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] With an explanation, I would like to withdraw my point of order. And if I may make my explanation, I wasn’t actually here to vote on it because I had to be at a mediation last year. But I understand now that there was some discussion that it would not be objected to on third reading if we went ahead and done so. I didn’t know that so I withdraw my point of order. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Fisher, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to be recorded as having voted “No” on the last bill, please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady will be recorded voting “No” on the amendment. As amended. Ladies and gentlemen… [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Can’t see where that’s coming… Representative ??, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I’d like to be recorded as voting “No” on the last amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady will be recorded as voting “No” on the amendement. Now we are back on the bill as amended. Members will be recognized in turn. Representative Stevens, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized to debate the bill as amended. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and gentlemen of the house, I have a lot of the same concerns that Representative Stamm has and that is, we have an advisory committee that’s going to go out and look at this. That’s fine. We do that a lot. Then we’re going to have the advisory committee determine what it costs and go ahead and do a pilot program. Okay, we’ve done that on occasion. But I know of no occasion where we then told the advisory committee to go ahead and take it statewide without coming back to the legislature. They do come back to us to ask for money. They do come back to us and say are there any special laws that we need, but the program itself will go statewide without further input from us. Now, one of the things that Representative ?? said is that juveniles will not get… on misdemeanors, you don’t get jail time. Well, I disagree with her. If you look at your schedules, Class A1 misdemeanors, the courts can impose confinement on the first offense. Class A1 misdemeanors, which juveniles who commit these will be in juvenile court. Anybody under 18 will be in court with this. That is assault and inflicting injury, assault using a deadly weapon, assault by pointing a gun, assault on a state officer or state employee, assault on a female, assault on a child under the age of twelve, violation of a protective order. Then in Class One misdemeanors, we’ve got breaking and entering buildings. If you recall, as we did the Justice Reinvestment Act, breaking and entering, especially multiple breaking and entering, is one of the most serious crimes where we really need to take harsher action. I think this is a bad idea that’s moving far too fast. It’s going to have costs and implications that we don’t even recognize yet. So thank you. I oppose the bill.

Representative Samuelson, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. The lady is recognized to debate the bill as amended. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. We've heard from a lot of attorneys. I think it's time for a story, and I'm going to tell you a story as a mom. When one of my sons was turning 16, he wanted as a gift a replacement for a water balloon launcher that had broken, and he wanted me to buy it for him. I convinced him that I could make him a better water balloon launcher than one he could buy from the store. So I proceeded to do so, and it was really a pretty awesome water balloon launcher. In fact, they got so could at it that they could knock squirrels out of the trees - very tall trees - out of our yard. One day it disappears, and about a week later I'm at an event on a Friday night and I get a call from the sheriff, bacause I was a county commissioner, "We have your recently turned 16 year old son in custody. He got arrested for shooting water balloons full of ranch dressing at a local office building". What had happened was he had figured out that that water balloon launcher was so awesome that they could go and shoot it over the four story parking building near his 15 year old buddy's house and shoot the glass office building across the street. One of the men in the office building got mad about it, and came out and did this to them. So they filled the water balloons up with ranch dressing, and shot it at the building so it would make a really discernible mark because they were impulsive, stupid 15 and 16 year olds. The police were called, the building manager did not press charges, the man whose office it was did not press charges, but the police officer decided to press charges. The 15 year old was released into the custody of his mother. The 16 year old was taken and spent all Friday night in adult custody, in the Mecklenburg County Jail, on a night that was later told to me, "Yeah, it was one of the worst nights that we've had in the last few months for people to be in jail". We were eventually able to hire an attorney to get the charges dropped, the record expunged, but his picture was up for awhile on all those little things that you see out there. As it came time for him to apply for college, it was still up. He would call me and say, "Now Mom, can I really apply for college and check off that I wasn't arrested?" He wanted to apply for a summer job, and we went through this for several years until I finally had the attorney write him a letter saying your record was expunged, you don't have to check this off. And yet the memory of spending that evening in jail, arrested for launching water balloons full of ranch dressing at an office because he was a stupid 16 year old still haunts him. I think we ought to think, "Yes, there are arguments that the attorneys make", but as a mom I don't want 16 and 17 year olds treated that way for minor offenses. I urge your support for the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Pages, some of you I'm sure are 15 and 16 year olds, we're going to release you at this point. Your day ended at 5:00. We're see you back tomorrow. Thank you. Representative McNeill [sp], please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. To debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill as amended. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Thank you, Mr. Speaker and House members. This bill was passed on the last day of session last year. The vote was 61 to 37. That's a difference of 14 votes, but what nobody has said is that there were 20 House members with excused absences on that day that didn't get a chance to vote. Could the vote have been different? I don't know. I'm not going to spend a lot of time on that. It's possible. But currently 16, 17 year olds are charged as a misdemeanor and tried as an adult. Basically what this bill does is change the age and they're going to be tried as a juvenile. Let's just look, just real briefly, at what a 16 and a 17 year old would face if they continue to be tried as an adult. For Class I, II, and III misdemeanors the only possible punishment in that statute for their first offense is community punishment. So the first time they're arrested for Class I, II, and III is only possible punishment is community punishment. For a Class II or III misdemeanor, the only community punishment and intermediate punishment is available for the first four convictions. One through four. So no jail time for either one of those. Only after the fifth conviction, for a Class II or III misdemeanor, do they have the possibility of jail time. That begs the question, how many criminals, or how many times should a person be allowed to violate a criminal law before they receive . . .

... punishment. So to repeat again, as it stands right now, for 16 or 17 years olds - they would not receive any jail time at all until their fifth conviction of a class 2 or 3 misdemeanor. Also as Representative Stanton has already said, last year we declassified a lot of the criminal code. We also moved several Class One and Class Two misdemeanors down to Class Three misdemeanors and the statute specifically says that, except for a few listed ones, the only possible punishment is a fine. That was part of the budget bill last year. Also, as Representative Stevens has so eloquently stated, this bill includes Class A One misdemeanors which are all violent misdemeanors. The North Carolina Sherriff’s Association, which represents all 100 sheriffs, opposed this bill. The Congress district attorney opposed this bill. The Police Chiefs Association opposed this bill. I would certainly hope that would be enough. There’s been several comments made about criminal record. As Representative Stamm said, there’s adequate expungement laws in North Carolina to deal with that. Also, as far as the prison rate and the fact that they are saying people under 16 or 17 are the most likely. We have a very rare chance that a 16 or 17 year old will ever serve time for a misdemeanor. If they ever serve time, it’s going to be a felony and this bill does not address felonies. I oppose this bill and I would like for you to vote no. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Floyd, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity to work with the city ?? for 30 plus years and I always thought, learning from my training, that disciplinary action was not to punish, but to adjust human behavior. To adjust, not to punish. What a reasonably minded person would assume. Representative Stamm mentioned about what a reasonable officer had done as it relates to her son. You demonstrated today with two representatives what a reasonable minded person would do. And one with Representative Pierce and one with Representative ?? back there. When you allow them to make the necessary adjustments to their particular bill and amendment, that’s what we are talking about here today. What I see, what I feel as I sit back here, we believe in total punishment. That’s what we believe in. Total punishment. Now if we do not look at it from a state point of view, do we believe in fronting an education, or rear-end, or in-between? But if we do not support this bill, at the end of the day, we ?? somewhere down the line it’s going to have to appropriate money for either family assistance or long-term care in one of our high-rise facilities for a long period of time. If you understand what a high-rise facility is, it’s our prison system. Or taking care of them from our welfare system. What I’m simply saying is that this is just to adjust human behavior. Sometimes we as parents, not that we dislike our children, we have to apply tough love and sort of adjust their behavior to come back because they didn’t think about a decision that they made. That’s what this bill is trying to do. Now we are talking about 2019. I’ll probably be dead and long gone ??. But we are giving the kids some opportunities. Just stop thinking about punishment. I mean, where is the reasonable minded person in here? Now we are talking about expungement. Sure, in my neck of the woods, if the officer or someone let my neighbor go, he could care less about expungement. He will have to be released. Then if he asked for expungement, he’s going to have to go to my next door neighbor’s house and get something from there to pay for expungement from a legal person. So there you go again. He’s broke down a man’s door again to get $250 to pay and get an expungement. Now the person down the street has got to pay $2500 to get his door replaced because the gentleman wanted $250 to pay for the expungement. So what I’m simply saying here…

[0:00:00.0] Let’s be reasonable minded individual this is just simply another to in the tool box to not to punished but just simply adjust their behavior to correct them and we talk about 2090. So, I support the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Moffat please state your purpose? [SPEAKER CHANGES] The debate? [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman recognizes to debate the bill as amended. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker the members of the house everyday when we walk on to the floor this August body I do not ___[??] our task. We are poised at every moment to make decisions that affect the lives of the good citizens of our state that we have had the good fortune of being chosen to represent. As I have elected this bill and as I had signed on as a primary sponsor I did so because I challenge myself to maintain my prospective on each piece of legislation that I have to sponsor and that I vote on. So, I try to keep my prospective about how I feel about my journey and my life, where I’m and how that applies to what we are face to vote on. I do not have a law enforcement background so I do not know it feels like to apprehend someone or to be apprehended, I’m not afflicted with the law degree. So, when I look at the written language I interpret it as I see it that for those of you that have a law degree I wish you the best. But when it comes to this particular bill I’m approaching it from two different directions, I’m approaching it as a dad of father of three sons and I’m also approaching it if someone who has a management consultant who has been involved in human resources for 27 years. So, let me take that prospective, there is no doubt in my mind that today’s child is far less matured today than we were when we were their age and when I was that age I was far less matured than my dad was at that age. Last year, I had an opportunity to sit with my dad and my sons and we were talking about where each of us were at the age of 17, my dad was willing his way into the military, I was starting a life on my own outside of the home and my son that was 17 and I was concerned about him actually going to the grocery store. The reality is our children do not mature as fast and I would argue that society has recognized that simply because we have changed the age of legal drinking from 18 to 21 which I think is an acknowledgement that children do not age or society does not age at the same rate as we change in a society. For me human resource prospective I will tell you that is very difficult for people to change jobs since today society if there is a record of them violating the law at any point in their life, it could be simply something as DWI or it could be something that they did when they were 16 or 17, I understand about expungement but you folks also need to understand that there is a determine move by a number of our occupational licensing boards that want us to pierce the expungement avail, they want those records to be part of the record of the person that holds their license so they can make a decision based on person’s overall character. So, when it comes to this particular bill again I think that it’s something that is a policy decision, it is a difficult one I have been on both sides of the debate, I have heard from law enforcement on both sides, my sheriff supports the bill, your sheriff may or may not support the bill, I have seen the argument from a fiscal standpoint I have seen where we save money and I have seen where it cost us money. So, all of those arguments aside we are faced with the decision about moving our state forward being consistent with 48 states that have already made this move or one of the last two as Representative Eva pointed out and when I came to this body in 2011 one of the things that we had committed to do was to move our state forward in a lot of areas to where we were competitive with the states around us. I think that this is one more step in that direction and I would encourage you to vote ‘I’ for the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Brandon please state your purpose? [SPEAKER CHANGES] The speaker on the bill and the gentleman is recognized to debate the bill as amended. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I believe because I have hear a lot of ___[??] speeches about this and it was really encourage to hear the personal stories and I’m gonna let you know as the Representative that has probably deals with this the most in terms of I work everyday with these kids and it’s a fight, it’s a huge… [0:04:59.9] [End of file…]

And I know that if I can get them to 18 without a record, I can maybe get them in the Army. I can maybe get them somewhere else where they can have a fighting chance. Some people don't understand what reference point is, and we go through our lives and we think that because my life is this way, everybody else's life is that way, and it's not. When you grow up, it's not only just being 15 or 16, it's also being a product of an environment that perpetuates crime. A lot of these kids cannot help where they grow up from. They can't help the neighborhood that they live in. So when you say 16, yeah, one might launch balloons because that's their reference point and that's cute. But sometimes in my neighborhood, it might be a little more serious, it might be a little more different. But they're still 16. They're still 15 years old. And they still deserve that second chance, they still deserve a chance to be able to be an adult and get there. Just because you punish someone doesn't mean that you are tough on crime. I see it every day. Why do you think crime perpetuates itself in these low income neighborhoods? Because they had already had a crime. And now they have a record, no one will hire them, and now they have to – only choice they have is to go out and continue to do the same things they were doing to be able to get, because it's about survival. It's not about all these things from the Sheriff's Association, and all this other stuff. None of that even matters. It shouldn't even be brought up here. What really matters is these people are trying to survive, and if you're looking for 50 cents so you can get some potato chips to eat, you're going to eat – everybody's going to eat every day at 5 o'clock. They're gonna eat the right way, or the way they have to. And that's the reference point we need to look at in this body. Is that it's about survival. And if you really were true honest about crime, and suppressing crime, you wouldn't make policies that create more criminals. Because that's what these types of things do. You just create more criminals. There's a reason why you have a recidivism rate. And if the Sheriff's Association and the police folks could have been able to deal with what they were supposed to deal with, which is rehabilitation, and if they were doing that correctly for those 16 and 15 year olds, I wouldn't even be saying anything. But because we know they're not doing it, they don't have the capacity to do it, and they've failed miserably at doing it, we need to bring those folks into the juvenile where they can be rehabilitated. We can have an attitude adjustment, and they can have a productive life. But it is a fight. It's a fight in that community to make sure that I can get some of those kids to 18. And so they can have a fighting chance. If they don't make it to 18, and they have a record, we've lost them. And they're gonna be hopping through your house, or somebody else's house to survive. Because everybody's gonna eat at 5 o'clock. The right way, or the way they have to. So remember that when you're making the vote. Everybody's gonna eat at 5 o'clock. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Starnes, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, I'd like to request the ayes and nos on this vote. We were gonna do a recorded vote. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Jordan, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, to debate the bill... [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman's recognized to debate the bill has a minute. [?] [SPEAKER CHANGES] And as I make my debate, may I also ask you for discretion to ask question of a couple of members? [SPEAKER CHANGES] At that point in time just address the chair so that we can direct the question and ask the member if they will yield. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker. This is a very, very tough issue, as we all know. And I think a lot of you have already made up your minds, but as I look at the complexity of this bill I really don't quite see how you've made up your minds cause I have a couple of questions that really determine whether I support this or not. I support it in theory but we need to watch the execution of this kind of a program very carefully. The first point I want to make is that right now we are in a class of states that includes New York and North Carolina, and that's it. Everybody else has already done this. That makes me very nervous because there's very little that New York has done that I would like to copy. And I'm afraid if you vote against this bill, you are saying yeah, we like New York, we like the way they do things. Maybe an oversimplification, I understand, but I have some concerns and I wanted to ask some questions about -- the first question I have about this bill involves the implementation. We've heard that there's an advisory committee and there's also a subcommittee that's created in here, and we've heard

That it’s all going to be on autopilot without the legislature being involved. That concerns me a lot. I will not submit if it’s done that way. But then we’re hearing from the bill supporters that no, that’s not. It’s going to come back to us to approve certain things. Mr. Speaker, I’d like to ask a question first of Representative Stevens. If I may. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I’m sorry, Representative? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stevens, if she would yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stevens. Does the lady yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I yield. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you very much, Representative Stevens. We’ve worked on many different issues before, and this one as well. Can you explain to me where you see in this bill that this advisory committee takes over and once we vote today, or the senate votes and it’s passed, the advisory committee runs with the whole process, does a pilot program and then runs immediately does it state-wide. Can you show me that, because I do not see that in this bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] ?? Representative Jordan, I’ve looked several times to see where it directs it to come back to us, and perhaps it may be a question we better ask of, I thought staff was on the floor, who was instrumental in drafting this bill. But what I see, yes she’s working with her. What I see in it says they come back to us if they need particular legislation or they come back to us with a plan of money, but not anything about our approval to get it done so I would ask if you want to defer that question to staff. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Mr. Speaker, I would like to inquire of Representative Avila, if she would yield. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Avila, does the lady yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I do. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Representative. I would like to direct that question to you and perhaps staff can help you as well. Can you show us in this bill where this advisory committee does not automatically take over and run with this pilot program and then state-wide implementation, without the involvement of the general assembly unless the advisory committee wants to. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I believe it’s in the actual charge to the advisory committee, and that is in section 1F, page 2, line 30. The advisory committee shall develop a specific plan for the implementation of any changes in the juvenile justice system that would be required in order to extend jurisdiction in delinquency matters and proceedings to include 16 and 17 year old persons charged with misdemeanor offenses within the juvenile justice system. Any changes to the system have to come through us. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Will the gentle lady yield for an additional question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Does the lady yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I do. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Representative. Further on it has the statement in the bill, right after where you were reading, that concerns me, that says as the expansion of the jurisdiction of the division of juvenile justice to include persons 16 and 17 years of age who commit crimes or infractions, which is the youthful offender whole point, expands, let’s see. Becomes effective pursuant to this act. The advisory committee monitors and reviews. Where is this expansion in this act? Because that’s what I can’t see. I saw that section but it looks to me like it’s not clear how the expansion of this occurs. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I’m assuming when they’re talking about expansion, we move from 16 in one year to 17 the next year. Is that the expansion that we’re talking about? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Does the gentleman yield? The gentleman has the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I do not know. That’s why I’m concerned. Because that section made me think that Representative Stevens had a concern. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yeah, I’m thinking there what they’re talking about is that as we’re working at implementing the plan and making changes, they’re going to be looking at any of the types of changes that are going to be made when we’re going to expand and add 16 and 17 year olds to the system. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay. And does the gentle lady yield to an additional, final question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Does the lady yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I do. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] So it is your position that this process will be controlled by the general assembly, because the advisory committee comes to the general assembly to get approval for each additional step. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, that was the intent of the bill and sometimes as we’ve noticed, intent and letter of the law kind of get mushed up. If there is any cases where that is left in question, it will be straightened out to the true understanding. Because this is such a pocketbook issue, that the responsibility for the decisions of any changes in law or statute belong strictly with the general assembly. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. To continue the debate, [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I am satisfied that the implementation will require legislative action. If it does not, I think we’ve heard from Representative Avila that we will work to make sure that happens, because that is the purview of the legislature, not an advisory committee that we set up, not delegate those powers

in the advisory committee, but my second concern about the bill was the discretion involved. We had Representative Stam talk about a number of misdemeanors but they seem to be all Class 1 misdemeanor, A1 misdemeanors that were violent. I want inquiry, again, to Representative Avila regarding this issue. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Avila, does the lady yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I do. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Can you tell me the treatment of Class A1 misdemeanors in this legislation. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I cannot give you the specifics on that. I don't have that in place but the discretion, I believe, in a lot of cases rests with the judge. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Does she yield for additional questions? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Does the lady yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I do. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] So it's your position that there is discretion here from the judge, maybe not the prosecutor, but the judges certainly have discretion in these types of misdemeanors whether to remand them to juvenile court or keep them in the adult court? [SPEAKER CHANGES] This is where I wish I had a law degree but that's my understanding, that we're not taking away any jurisdiction in terms of the discretion at any level that already exists in the court system. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Jordan, the Chair would ask, is there staff on the floor that could consult with Representative Avila on the issue? The Chair assumed as much, so the Chair can consult with Representative Avila, in the meantime Representative Stam, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak a second time on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The Gentleman is out of order at this time, Representative Jordan still has the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, at this point my two concerns, the first one has been addressed, regarding the implementation of this, the second, regarding the discretion, we need to continue to keep discretion of the courts to deal with the individual cases, cases by case, to make sure that we don't make a mistake in any particular case. As far as the general system, we need to move to the rest of the 48 states and have our juveniles treated as juveniles, except in those specific cases where we have a court and a judge looking at the situation. That's the place we need to be. This is a first step, it's a great first step, and I think that we should support this bill and watch it carefully, monitor it carefully, to make sure that we correct any problems that may show up, thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stam, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak a second time on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill as amended. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members of the House. After consulting with the staff I'd like to make two points for Representative Jordan. First of all, the pilot program is about the civil citation thing. The bill itself automatically makes these things, in the jurisdiction of the juvenile court on a specified day, it's on automatic pilot whether you like it or not and whether that advisory committee ever advises you to do anything. Thirdly, it does include the A1 misdemeanors that, some of which, are very serious. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Glazier, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] See if Representative Avila would yield for two questions. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Avila, does the lady yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I will. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker, thank you Representative. Am I correct that on page 3 of the bill the reporting requirement in section 1i requires that there be an interim report on the specific plan and the costs and the staffing and that is to come directly to the General Assembly by January 15, 2017? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir, it is. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow-up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And am I correct that this bill is predicated on the legislature funding the changes in order for this to really be implemented? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes it is. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Last question, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And am I also correct that with regard to A1 misdemeanors, where A1 misdemeanors occur in juvenile court, the juvenile court retains the discretion if the 16 and 17 year olds are there and they believe that they are serious or dangerous, that if they fit under the appropriate category they may send those people to a YDC and to a youth development center and, in fact, can give them tougher sentencing, tougher disposition, than would ever happen in adult court for those 16 and 17 year olds with the same misdemeanor? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir, it is. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Avila, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill a second time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized to debate the bill, as amended, a second time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I think, just the confusion that all of you saw with the amendment to the amendment to the amendment, that this is a very complex issue. Because of that reason we cannot avoid it but there's something that we're not paying attention to today. We're arguing my bill five years from now with a system that exists today. The purpose of the Advisory Committee is to determine what is our juvenile justice system. Is it the

It can be. Is it the most effective? Their recommendations in year two, three, four and five, will be changes we need to make in order to get to the system that our young people need. There's so much more I could say, but it's simply this. Law enforcement works on evidence. They use evidence to convict the guilty and they use evidence to exonerate the innocent. Ladies and gentlemen, we have given you sufficient evidence beyond a shadow of a doubt, that North Carolina needs to change the age for 16- and 17-year olds. And I would just ask for your support for this bill. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Mobley, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized to debate the bill, as amended. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Members of this House, I have sat here and I've listened. And some of it I can't believe is being said in terms of what should happen with this bill. I worked for 28 years as a court counselor, juvenile court counselor and retired as T4 counselor. And I saw these children, starting as early as age 6, being hauled into the juvenile court system. Then there was a... No, I didn't say 16, I said 6. [laughs] As early as age 6. Then I saw the intake process come into being where it allowed a counselor to meet with the family, to meet with the officer or the petitioner who's trying to get this child into court. Giving them some leeway to divert some of what was coming before us. I know that you've heard someone say along the way, and I'm going to make sure you understand that our psychologist and psychiatrist have given us enough evidence to know that the brain of a young person is not fully developed until they get around 25 years of age. And you know what? Sometimes I think those of us who are 50-, 60- and 70-years old and older, that our brain still hasn't developed either. And I'm just as serious as I can be. I'm speaking as a mother, as a grandmother, and as someone who has had some experience in working with these children. Some of your children are crying for help when they commit crimes. Why? Because sometime parents are not doing the discipline jobs that they need to do, or that we need to do as adults. We're quick to say, I know I don't want to get involved in that. But our children are at a point in their lives where they need some guidance. And I've heard some good points being made and I want to thank those of you who are planning to vote in support of this. Sometimes I see our sheriff's department and our police officers being a little hot doggish. If you remember Barney, with his gun and his one bullet. Sometimes I think that's where our law enforcement are like. They've got a gun on their side and they're just a little bit hot doggish. But I think you need to think seriously about what we're doing. I'm like one of the representatives who said earlier, I don't want a follow ??. We're only one of two states who are prosecuting our children as adults at age 16. Where is the money going to come from? How do you put a price on your child's life?

Its difficult to put a price on a childs life i would not want to have to put on on my childs life and my babys 40 some years old i think we need to come together and agree that its time and i hear representative stan say its not going to happen now its not going to happen 45 years from i caint believe that coming form you representative sam i hope its time for us to do some positive things and stop worrying about and lets get in there and do something about and these 16 year olds who are being labeled im not talking about anybody whos black white or any other race im talking about all the children they are important to me and i hope they are just as important to you lets vote in support of this deal thank you [SPEAKER CHANGES] representative pitman please state your purpose [SPEAKER CHANGES] to debate the bill [SPEAKER CHANGES] the gentlemen has recognized to debate the bill as amended [SPEAKER CHANGES] yes sir thanks i mean no offense to representative Samuelson but when she was telling little ?? about her son i couldnt help but reactive that i knew better than to do that kind of stuff when i was 6 years old a number of years back my stepfather had obtained his old home place out in the woods down at clarks north carolina and it was very much in need of repair and he was going to fix it up and he spent alot of money and did alot of work and was doing repairs on that house and had it coming along better than new and a group of teenagers went out there one night and stuffed two by fours down the toilet they broke out windows that he had replaced they took a piece of tin and laid it in the living room floor and set a fire on it and i dont know if they had marshmallows of what but they had a fire going inside the house marked up the walls messed up plaster and all kinds of stuff they found out who did it they went to court and what they had to do was go clean up the place and try to repair some of the damage they had done only one parent of those teenagers showed up with her child and was pretty mad at the child and thought it was fair punishment i guess but the rest treated it like why are they making our kids do this its just an old house in fact one of the parents even said that its just an old house what does it matter well they kinda halfway did what they were supposed to do and there was nothing more about it and guess what 2 weeks later the house mysteriously was burned down now what do you think those kids learned from being treated so leniently in that situation and of course i didnt want to relate it down to a 6 year old but this stuff about them not knowing any better cause their only 16 or 17 from Romans paul writes in the 2rd chapter verses 14 and 15 for when the gentiles which have not the law do by nature the things contained in the law these having not the law are a law unto themselves which show the work of the law written in their hearts by which he is saying [SPEAKER CHANGES] speaker [SPEAKER CHANGES] representative floid please state your purpose [SPEAKER CHANGES] i just wanted to know at this particular hour if representative ?? is a sponsor of the bill [SPEAKER CHANGES] gentleman please restate [SPEAKER CHANGES] im wondering who is the sponsor of the bill at this particular point in time [SPEAKER CHANGES] representative babila [SPEAKER CHANGES] shes the sponsor of the bill [SPEAKER CHANGES] yes [SPEAKER CHANGES] can i call i had one representative ask for the eyes and know is it proper for me to call for the question or to make other bills [SPEAKER CHANGES] no sir im afraid your out of order [SPEAKER CHANGES] follow up speaker [SPEAKER CHANGES] im with you in spirit however [SPEAKER CHANGES] can representative ?? for the question [SPEAKER CHANGES] the chair sees two other representative pitman and representative steinburg has their light on

It's the Chair's intent to end debate when Representative Steinburg has had an opportunity to speak. Briefly, I'm sure. Representative ??, you still have the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I will try to be brief with this, but what I was pointing out was that they didn't have to know the law of Moses to know right from wrong. He was saying that when those people who didn't have the law of Moses happened to do what was right in the sight of God, they showed that they already had it naturally within them to know right from wrong. So therefore when they did wrong, they had no excuse. That's what Paul was talking about there. And I just don't think that a 16-year old is that devoid of an understanding of right and wrong, which most of us, I think, probably did have when we were 6 years old, as I did. So I don't think 16 is inappropriate for being treated as you do the crime, you pay the consequences. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Steinburg. Please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Speak to the bill, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentlemen is recognized to debate the bill, as amended. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and gentlemen, a lot of the legislation that we have passed here in the last session, and we're just getting into the short session here, was legislation that was created to give people an opportunity. And many of the bills we passed, it was to give people a second chance. I would be willing to bet, and I'll put myself first and foremost, that if it weren't for some quirks in background and some people who were willing to step out and help me, that I would not be, at a very critical time in my life, and I did not make the wisest decision that I could have made. But I probably would not be standing here in front of you today. However, I think what we need to do is we need to look back into our own lives. Let's go back to when we were kids, when we were 16 and 17. And I'd be willing to bet that a good number of the people that are sitting right here in this House managed to escape what we're asking others to face. And to me, for those of us who had that happen to us, and we're going to vote the opposite way of the way we should? I think that is the ultimate act of hypocrisy. There is not one of us, I don't believe there's any of us, just maybe some of the gals, but most of the guys, I doubt it. I think we may have done one thing or another that we got a pass on. We were very fortunate. There were others that we grew up with that did not and they paid the price. And so I ask you before you cast your vote today and it appears that I will be the last speaker, I ask you before you press that button yes or no, I want you to just take a quick look backwards at your own life. Think about what might have happened to you had someone not given you a second chance. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The question before the House is the passage of the House Committee Substitute No. 2 to HB 725, as amended, on it's third reading. All in favor vote Aye. All opposed vote no. The Clerk will open the vote. [pause] The Clerk will ?? machine record the vote. 77 having voted in the affirmative, 39 in the negative. The House Committee Substitute No. 2 to HB 725, as amended, has passed it's third reading. The bill will be engrossed and sent to the senate. Ladies and gentlemen. As an announcement. A reminder. Tomorrow we will be meeting at the Old Capitol Building. The session begins at 11:00 a.m. The Chair does anticipate one bill possibly being taken up for a roll call vote, but other than that, it's a time sensitive matter. Other than that, there will be no other bill.

Business taken up. Instead of session of Monday night, we will have a skeleton session on Friday morning, simply to adjourn in and out so that you have more flexibility returning to Raleigh either on Tuesday morning or Monday night. There will be no session on Monday night. Notices and announcements, Representative Howard, please state your purpose. Representative Floyd, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] A question, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman may state his inquiry. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Will the vote be taken at the old. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Howard, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I would like to make an announcement Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized for an announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The full Finance Committee will meet immediately after the adjournment of session for one very short time sensitive bill and we will meet in room 1228 immediately after session. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Starns, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] An important announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The Republicans will have a caucus in the morning at 9:00 in room 544. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Rodney Moore, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] A point of personal privilege, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The house will come to order. The gentleman is recognized for a point of personal privilege. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. For all of good NASCAR fans here, just wanted to let you know that Wendell Scott, the first African American race car driver in NASCAR has been elected to the 2015 class to the NASCAR Hall of Fame. He finished second behind Bill Elliot. He was the first and only African American not only to be in the NASCAR series but also win a race. So I just wanted to share that today as we commemorate our history. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Larry Hall, please state your purposes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For an announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized for an announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Democratic Caucus will caucus in the morning in 1425 at 10:00 to 10:30. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Samuelson, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Make an announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Banking Committee will meet immediately after session tomorrow downstairs in 1228 for a very short but time sensitive bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Fisher, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] A point of personal privilege, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The house will come to order. The lady is recognized for a point of personal privilege. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Just as a reminder, you know the finals of American Idol were last night. People have been voting all night and all day. Keep your fingers crossed that we have another North Carolina American Idol who just happens to be from Asheville, North Carolina. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Sheppard, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For a matter of personal privilege, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized for a point of personal privilege. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I would like for the other members of the General Assembly and the House to join me in recognizing John Torbet. Today is his birthday. If you didn’t get any of his birthday cake maybe you can get some tomorrow. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Dollar, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For all of the Appropriations Subcommittee Chairs, we will be meeting right after this. We will only be there 10 minutes and you can go to the growler or wherever else you’re going to go, but 10 minutes if you are a Subcommittee Chair in Appropriations, we do need to see you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We are meeting in our normal room. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Representative Moore, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] First of all, for an announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized for an announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Members of the Rules Committee will meet tomorrow morning at 10:00 a.m. We have three measures to take up. We have two confirmations of the Governor’s appointments and then we have the Roger West Possum Bill, tomorrow at 10:00 and I hope Representative Hall mentioned that there was a Democratic Caucus. Rules is meeting at 10:00 tomorrow. I just want to make sure. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay, and ladies and gentlemen before we allow the adjournment motion, please again remember in your thoughts and prayers Representative Galle. The gentleman is recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn subject to the receipt of committee reports, receipt of conference reports, and the referral of Bills and Resolutions, do adjourn in honor and in memory of former Representative Jim Galle.

to reconvene at the old state capital, on Thursday, May the 22nd, at 11 o'clock AM. Representative [??] Moon, seconded by Representative [??], subject to receipt of committee reports, conference reports, re-referral of bills and resolutions, and in memory of our friend, Representative Jim Gully, that the house now adjourn to reconvene on Thursday, May 22nd, at 11AM, in the house chamber at the capital. All in favor say Aye. All opposed No. The ayes have it, the house stands adjourned. [Speaker Changes] Representative Mike Hagar is recognized to send forth committee report 448. Representative Hagar public utility and energy committee report, HB 1052, adjust the utility rate [??]favorable, serially referred to finance. Bill will be referred to the committee on finance. Representative Tom Murray is recognized to send forth committee report, the clerk will read. Representative Murray, for commerce and job development committee report, HB 1032, for his original bill, and serially referred to judiciary subcommittee B. [Speaker Changes] The committee substitute will be re-referred to the judiciary subcommittee B. Original bill unfavorable calendar. Representative Harvester is recognized to send forth a conference report. Clerk will read. [Speaker Changes] President of the Senate, Speaker of the House of Representatives, a copy of this report [???????] ...private wealth contractors, [??] ...recommend senate adopt official report, [??] Willis, Dobson, and Tyne. [Speaker Changes] Calendar for Tuesday, May 27th. [Speaker Changes] HB 1149, an act to remove certain lands from the state nature and historic preserve as recommended by the environmental review commission, serially referred to the committee on finances, is added. HR 1146, HR set in today for the house of representatives to elect a member to fill an unexpired term in the state board of community colleges, is removed from the committee on rules and forwarded to the committee on education.