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 | July 30, 2014 | Committee Room | House Finance Committee Part 1

Full MP3 Audio File

Good morning. Good morning. If our members will please take their seats and we can have order. We have a long agenda and we have a guest with us that’s on a tight time frame so we’d like to get started. Representative Setzer, sir you are recognized for approval of the minutes from the July 24th meeting. [SPEAKER CHANGES] So moved. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Members will please take their seats and we can start. We have a motion for approval of the minutes for our July 24. All in favor say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All opposed say no. I believe that’s unanimous. This morning we’re going to alternate a little bit on the agenda. House Bill 1224, Local Sales Tax Options and Economic Development Changes will be the first bill on the calendar. Members of the Finance Committee, this is a conference report and again this is for the purpose of discussion with this committee. At the end of the discussion there will be a motion to concur or not to concur that will go to the floor of the House later this afternoon. We have the privilege of having the Department of Commerce Secretary, Madam Sharon Decker. Ms. Decker if you would like to come forward and be available as we start the process. Go ahead with the bill first. Somebody want to go over the bill first? Sandy? Ms. Decker, you can take a chair if you’d like to. We’re going to ask staff to go through the provisions of the bill first and we’ll have Ms. Decker up. Trina Griffin. [SPEAKER CHANGES] When this bill left the House, it had the only provisions in it were some economic development provisions related to jmac and the Senate added some sections to it. In particular, part one of the bill creates some local sales tax options. It’s helpful, if you want to...in your packet, behind your summary, there is a chart that sets out the current rates and what the options would be under this bill that’s sort of helpful. I’ll just give a brief overview. Under current law there are 94 counties that can levy a total local sales tax of up to 2.5%. There are six counties that have the ability to 2.75%. Two of those six counties, Durham and Orange, are currently levying that rate. What this bill does is cap the overall rate at 2.5% and grandfather’s Durham and Orange because they’re already at 2.75%. The other thing it does in addition to this cap is create some flexibility for the counties to use to levy this half cent. All counties currently levy at least 2% and with that additional half percent, this bill creates a new tax that can be used only for education. It makes some modifications to the tax that currently exists for public transportation and then it makes some changes to the article that is currently at a quarter cent that may be used for general purposed. Under all three of these, a county would have the ability to levy the tax in quarter cent increments up to half percent, and that of course depends on want their current rate is. There will always be the overall cap at 2.5%, but counties could mix and match those options, again, up to the cap. The new tax for education, as you can see on your summary, it can be used for school construction, for salaries for classroom teachers or teacher assistants as well as teacher supplements and it can also be used for community colleges. That’s the overall gist of the tax piece and I’m happy to answer any questions or go over the options on the chart if there are any questions. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Members of the committee, are there any questions on part one? Representative Luebke. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Madam Chair. My question, Miss Griffin, would be then...

The fees and there's no direct help from disabilities in this is a visa sales taxes that would be a vote of the rise by county commissions and money with 11% the county's the PM MLM Thompson LED education PCI would not be said that the C.s MI general purpose, send faxes also not shared with the city's banking 97, and attacks are connection to stand up and Addis is so obvious that since most counties spend well, for the most of them by Jerry after budget anyway on education, that from what difference does it make when you save for education and four for general purposes of this money happens to be fungible long MMI DSS think that you policy question but that SMBB education tax would be specifically renovating can only BS from SMS as if it was like you while you crack a dual purpose tax could be used for anything that isn't the same, so there's nothing this one file for the deaf in the bill actually that good economic terms of required to be used for education and sets the defendants have to budget on education any way affect the not asking the technical legal question like that of a list of economic terms, you know it's money is money that is nothing that would stop home that he used every seven this money for quality education in this movie of the money rail seven MEDNME Kelley she would be if I can whistle NLG education tax enacted URL is not letting the general purpose facts are from the proceeds from that particular tax could ID strength coach and you crack any of them the first round and by the first 2% is actually NT for school construction already from five to five prejudiced am terribly good from a 2 to 7 from thinking that changes with questions at this time frame technology NMS, SMS report we cannot change should NMS from MSN E7 FUNNN ash and not the kind that Mitchell XAT F E's NAI Klein said the F sherry UPN-Liane 75000000 (SPEAKER CHANGES) but that's a case are used to sell like you're expecting the motions that you're a move that we do not concur that sometimes constantly FAA said Stephen F white-and the fact that five of the SMS to this mail and that, by the AMA NMS MRI guy, you mentioned for this team and C2L9 with NMS a 7M9 PM SFF SS that the questions of section nine CL and embed 295 AM today face (SPEAKER CHANGES) have questions on that station SSA jab at modification five SF that he would take a state that police are a fortune to the bill would expand eligibility for the job may not think apple development fund buying grants from 453 employers InfoWorld lady's office that would allow eligibility for large manufacturing employers have the employer is investing this manufacturing process by enhancing pollution controls or transition from the use of coal and natural gas to offer unique because the seat for emissions purposes second, the investment thresholds are from 65,000,000 to 50,000,000 dollars in march the period during which require investment must be made from 3 to 5 years and would allow the largely fracture the budget action player to be inserted 22 areas but Kathy employee at least 800-4585 employees at the project and the maintain that will implement to help determine the grant of two also increases the availability of surging academics from 69,000,079 million for old team act between the center Minnesota, the question from section two mentioned to stand out after that Ford as sales as for a new school memo one of the cost??....

And it came back zero, and I would like somebody from Fiscal to explain how something that’s supposed to cost 12 million dollars has a fiscal note of zero. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aubrey. Yes ma’am, please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] My name’s Aubrey Incorvaia with the Fiscal Research Division. This PCS increases the liability cap for JMAC awards; it does not require the Commerce, the Department of Commerce to actually use that authority. That’s why officially it is zero, but if they act upon that authority, it will use 12 million dollars, which I understand is their intent, to provide to a particular company over the course of the next six years at 2 million dollars per year. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stam, sir, do you have a follow-up? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well I just… This may be the least objectionable part of the whole bill, but that will be 12 million less we have to spend on other stuff. Just so as long as people realize that that money won’t be there in future years. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I remind the committee that the Secretary of Commerce is at your disposal if you have questions for Madam Secretary. Representative Hager. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Madam Chairman. Just for a comment. This piece has passed the House and passed the Senate, if you remember, very soundly, and it is for one of our areas, more poor areas of the state in western North Carolina, and I’d just like to comment, this is a piece of the… We placed this amendment back into technical corrections. This is a piece that I believe Senator Rucho removed out of technical corrections, so this is what we do see here, and it would be nice to have it, and we may see it later on in other bills. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Members of the committee, are there other questions? Representative Luebke. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes ma’am. Madam Chair, thank you. I’m wondering whether… is the job catalyst fund in this bill directed to just – [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Luebke, that’s part 3. That’s the next part we will be addressing, so… [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir. Members of the committee, questions on section 2, the LJMAC modifications? Representative Brawley. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Evidently I came from further out in the country or something. I still don’t understand; how do you authorize spending an additional 12 million dollars and not spend it and say there’s no fiscal note? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aubrey, you want to tackle that one? [SPEAKER CHANGES] So a little background – Aubrey Incorvaia from the Fiscal Research Division. The original JMAC authority is for 67 million dollars. Or is it 69 down? I’m sorry. 69. What Commerce did is they made promises for 67 million dollars for Domtar, Firestone and Goodyear. Those are to be paid out in future years, so there is 2 million dollars available capacity in the existing authority of JMAD statutes. This increases it by 10 million, leaving 1 million that could potentially go out to a new company, and that is the intent that Commerce has, it to use that total of 12 million capacity over the next six years. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Brawley, follow-up, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] If I understood what you said, we’ve already spent or committed 2 million and will be spending the 10 million. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No sir, I don’t believe that’s what she said. You want to repeat that Aubrey? [SPEAKER CHANGES] We have 2 million dollars worth of capacity that is not yet committed, and we will commit it along with the additional 10 million that this statute or that this modification would allow. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Which gives us a new capacity of 12 million dollars. Is that correct? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes ma’am. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Representative Brawley? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Just a comment. Our Constitution requires a balanced budget, and generally, if you go back and check history, that is meant when we make a commitment to spend money, we make provisions for it in the current budget where we also make the commitment to spend the money, and it sounds to me like we’re violating that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Collins. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, I have a question. If I’m reading the bill analysis right and the bill analysis is accurate, it looks like to me we’re taking JMAC from a grant – we’re expanding it from a grant program, I thought – and again, I’m not real up on all these grant programs – to increase employment to something which now you can get also for cleaning up your plant. So it doesn’t seem to me to be entirely related to employment necessarily. It looks to me like we’re expanding the purposes for which we’re going to give money away. Is that… am I reading that correctly?

The spec removed from 9:00 AM in nine plays just AM to noon-10 percent to five SMS a good question, is averaging central in this regard, ER, one of the month $2.00, or one of 41111515550 : S.F. Austin is a slow one out all the system to a caller chain that are generally for readability this is something about this one copy of the sun was going to be a little precedent for everybody 14962 I think that many as are SMS that causes us to address (SPEAKER CHANGES) this is money back into all CD opportunity out of the specifically that they cannot adjacent for the musical another regards to appropriately Sally CG six faster than one thing I can tell us how the research that has significantly MADDS and Capital Investments to keep it that the company in this AMA good tackle investors did everything operational medicine requirement over the mob at least they're trying to interest and this is a small portion of the total cost of about 6:00 AM backed by the local economic developers local leadership and the county level without adopting the ATM sales accounts and, in this project is well, public service in North Carolina seven good job of getting as they can agree that we can to make it possible for the natural gas to this project that allow them to change our boilers that unconditional benefit the bank is a special guests, father STSDF for the western state, said is the lines like word on the 40 come down with this proposal services, the NFL any method SMS F2 RF Botha said that the love of his Japanese News, the SLML and the system must learn that would prevent them from Stanford to 19 HMMM, modifications to detail on the one person Howard and prosecuted first stage of the team act, is less than 105 agreements and this doesn't change that three this happened to me this is the fourth plan agreement to your question he'd like to meets this criteria could come and (SPEAKER CHANGES) ask for jay Macmurray at the half to meet the criteria the criteria are they have been developed with a specific project in mind , said that any further questions from section two 2439, the sanction for any staff of part three of the bill creates the job catalyst five city's special modernity on the form of commerce funds will provide grants to local government units for certain manufacturing projects to be administered solely by the sector commerce with certain specified minimum requirements audible requirements are that are the business of the project must agree for the greater of 10 years ago, the grandpa's five years to create (500)-800-1200 fulltime jobs for the volunteer 12 or three areas respectively as investor the project 20,000,035 million or $50,000,000 in real and more personal property for the volunteer 12 or three areas respectively, that's a slight wager, he grew 4% above the average wage of all insured by the employers in the county as chairs were two that says 100% increase 110% to five Health Insurance ?? (SPEAKER CHANGES) this is an overdue tax cuts and citations in a row shovelful serious violations with a little bit the site of the same father is a local government match requirement of 3%6% are 9% economic theory area from 1 to 3% cycle from the three areas respectively by the funds must be used to acquire approved plan for infrastructure for facility development Capital Investment and use from infection problem of projects and funds saw, use in favor of jobs created or Property Investors for which a tax credit, are three tables given the company's for retail facility development for someone special sports change of clothes and there's also a week after provision that says that the five Mrs. Still see the Miller, starkly requirements are depicted in any other biased apple to the business then, there must be recaptured the funds from the top business to the local media and local, we discussing turn turn the money to vote on to the city , said the committee questions the two TCM ??......

I have about four questions, can I do them one at a time? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] First one is...and this would be to the secretary, I guess. We debated a business facility development program in government about a month ago and a real objection to the fact in tier three areas were included like Lake County, Mecklenburg. All the sponsors are from Lake and Mecklenburg. Why are we doing this for tier three areas? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Madam Secretary, would you like to...? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'll save us time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, Ma'am. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'll save us time. Representative Stam, we're doing it for all three areas because we don't think we should exclude them for the opportunity for growth. This fund is specifically targeted towards large manufacturing, heavy capital investment as well as large numbers of employment and it would not seem appropriate to me to exclude an area in the state for that potential. Now the numbers are higher and the investment requirement greater. The way this is established, which I think is appropriate. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Second question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And my questions are short. So for example, tier three has got to be 1200 full time workers. I assume most of the money is going to tier three because that's where most of this money usually goes anyway. What would be wrong with two different companies doing 600 full time workers and investing ten million each. What's about one company that's twice as big and two companies? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I think the objective here where we are finding that we are not competitive is in large capital intensive, large numbers of employee projects. We have tools that allow us to be very competitive with most projects but where we are missing the boat and where we are not competitive are with the larger projects. I would suggest that this money will not go as a necessarily go as a priority to tier three because a lot of the large manufacturing via in aviation. We're seeing our legacy industries in textiles and furniture. Resurgents again. When we look at automotive, there is the opportunity to attract some of these into tier two and perhaps even tier one counties. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Third question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And I only have three. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You're good. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay. On the bottom of page 12 is this recapture prevision? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And I think about Dill and we didn't recapture everything. Even though they took off. And the reason they didn't is because we didn’t have no security. I offered an amendment and I'm wondering if you'd be amenable to this if we go to conference that all of this money we're giving these companies be secured by a deed of trust even though it might be the third or fourth or fifth deed of trust. So that when the company goes in bankruptcy, we are not an unsecured creditor fighting with the bankruptcy trustee but we have some priority. Would you be amenable to some kind of real claw back that's actually enforceable? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'm open to that conversation for sure. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stam, I believe our staff can lend a little bit of help with this. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Alright, I guess I'll just add that there's a slight difference with the original bill ??, excuse me, with the Dill incentives because the Dill incentives ?? had provisions that specifically disallowed certain claw backs and this would be a positive...the current provision is a positive requirement for the recapture of those funds from the new job catalyst fund. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stam. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Just a follow up on that. I'm not debating whether the claw back is required. I'm questioning whether there's any security for the claw back. I mostly real estate finance. If don't have security, you got nothing and I’m just asking to consider whether you'd be willing to have something to go back on if you ever have to do it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative committee on section 3. Representative Brawley...Bill Brawley. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Just a quick question, not to be used for semi-professional sports teams or clubs. How about fully professional sports teams or clubs? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I think the intention is that it's not for sports. The intent of this fund is specifically large capital investment, large employment manufacturing that has significant multipliers. We've had the opportunity to actually catch the totals and join us and some that did. North Carolina's had a real challenge in getting...moving quickly and getting answers around major projects and so part of the drive here is to get a framework...

SCC formatting L the longer term said we've got a framework in which we can make that decision to stay competitive weapon, and 1999 chair test quick question about this some that the members of job sooner than the creators, Baker end up 55 secondhand tobacco committee to combat that some that have no plan to about specific airline counties whichever represent that my economic developers and home and have a good bet that that's a good that this part of that of the bill that the kids really too bad that questioned about the man that (SPEAKER CHANGES) Jackson had a book that 500 jobs and can look at the bronco two fabrics Pamela NSF, that number to let belly is looking at projects at least had the opportunity to be a private capacity about YS Ellis looking at what we got in the pipeline that in college but we get the opportunity S. Bester TSI is intended for large transformation of housing projects we've got the one North Carolina fine without the development investment plants we have several finds that are very competitive on a number of fronts desperate to define as recommended by then governor scott's three MSZZL gap that we don't have a full to work with an INAR NT chili transformation a large projects and said in a westerly based on IP street experience, enacting an arbitrary to IBM plan for about half the brightest ID A's transformation a large impact and budgets this we got schools to work together in a 2 to 1 Elders said you should have found that some have six times syndicate them in this job catalyst five how much money do you anticipate asking for brown much money you one and five at SA and back as we began this process 20 to 30,000,000 dollars and missed five IS appropriate place to dns the framework epicenter Starnes said we would you specifically asking for example look for major projects like autumn automated manufacturing less actually got a number of large International Automotive companies are going to build North American plants the next 5 to 10 years with ms, (SPEAKER CHANGES) and they like elected in a position to goal after some of this large manufacturing opportunities for SMS two imagination sell back at this point that tout his requests for virtually any apple EMI racial said the other was 20 B appropriated, get back at that point were included here but please understand is the framework of E scored a larger project samurai and nine but that's the thinking at this point in wallet and 555 and 15 stolen from the van was subbing for staff for representative barber how much is appropriate in the call from 4 to 20 estate S of NMS of adding anything about that, too: (SPEAKER CHANGES) that they would like to talk about the meaning of-the virgin Mary your recollection how much money they appropriated for this fund that have spent a good idea to give an answer to use we yet reviewed from documents day and there appeared to be released by coming to emerge and stars, from about a 5 to 9 highway and MMI of the Sonics when she's not latest 20 minutes to spend a page and had me from SID 2 restrictions-GL and 90% of ATX S. Eliot SNA from NSF Committee that six of seven major bug in the church's first after securing their kid can explain how the money flows will sit cross as do you have a catchy question really do we actually write a check to the company allows all the work you can use the exclusion of that system for any stage S Pacific plate SSMIA S5 am just a company that what every 125 dollars will clear that the DNA-E is we've been talking about this new jobs plan process, but it's not like the CS and that's not what I would recommend them back. As a glance find SK to one poll governments to B.S. in the final stage S.F. necessary not daring CFD son every project that that was needed to win a competitive pricing and flexibility DF or infrastructure for Capital Investment ??.......

machinery and equipment long term investment types of issues with claw backs required once this grant is made so real clear it has to be for specified usage its a grant we would make to the local community and has to be a specified need for capital investment by the company and we tried to be real clear about that you might find it of interest that every state with which we do have competitive opportunities they have a similar fund interestingly every south eastern state that we compete with the Republican Governor has a fund like this with the exception of Tennessee and they go about this same issue using some other sources so it has become a very common and a very competitive tool I can provide you a list of each of those states and how they use this fund and the amount of the fund that's in it if you would like that [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Representative Hager sir are you finished? [SPEAKER CHANGES]. just a quick comment real quick I think that part of the theirs a few things that bother me about this is that were allowing the money to flow to areas that already have very good job economic expansion such as tier 3 areas as you know you and I come from the same county you know the devastation that we've seen in the eastern part and western part of the state so that would be one thing that I would like to see changed in this to go conference to see changes to the tier 3 areas taken out of it [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Representative Hamilton ma'am [SPEAKER CHANGES]. thank you madam chairman this is an incentives bill correct okay just making sure we were all speaking the same language here thank you. Two years ago and I know you weren't here madam secretary but two years ago we tried this very same thing to recruit Continetal Tire to Brunswick county and we were told very plainly by House and Senate leadership that we weren't in the business of doing this kind of job catalyst fund this very similar program was announced don't want to get into those details but my question to you is is philosophically has this administration and the leadership in the house and senate changed their position on incentive programs? [SPEAKER CHANGES]. madam secretary [SPEAKER CHANGES]. I would like to speak directly to that and say that were about job growth and job development and in my short tenure I've seen very clearly that there is the need for investment tools is how I like to look at them where we get return which is in job growth and development there's been great progress made in tax reform and I am very grateful to this body for making that happen and that's been a really positive tool there need for some additional tools to support job growth and we've tried to be very careful and I appreciate the Senate's leadership in getting this to the table that very specific goals and the jobs plan is you will see which this administration produced with the leadership of a lot of business folks from around the state included a provision for a number of tools to help generate job growth this is one of them [SPEAKER CHANGES]. follow up [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Representative Hamilton [SPEAKER CHANGES]. you mentioned earlier in section 3 of the bill and I don't want to get into specifics of that but just to repeat language that you used the JMac portion is a retention tool so my question is if were picking winners and losers there are existing credits on the books today like historic preservation and other credits that have contributed a tremendous amount to the states economy why are we abandoning those existing tools and creating new programs for jobs that don't exist yet? I'm concerned about retention of the thousands of jobs in this state that are going to be adversely affected by the elimination of certain tax credits while were creating incentive programs for jobs that don't exist in North Carolina yet [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Representative Hamilton if you would allow the chair we'd like to stay on this bill [SPEAKER CHANGES]. thank you very much yes ma'am [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Representative Holley [SPEAKER CHANGES]. thank you madam chair I just have a quick question and my question is about the job creation piece I get a little concerned when we say were going to create 500 jobs and were going into some of these tier counties that need jobs and that they bring jobs with them but they also bring the employees for the job excuse me I cant hear myself talking thank you gentlemen. Gentlemen and ladies. Ladies and gentlemen please I cant hear myself talking [SPEAKER CHANGES]. members of the committee there is a lot of chatter coming back feeding back this way so Representative Holley you have the floor ma'am [SPEAKER CHANGES]. thank you I'm going to repeat what I was saying my concern is is that a lot of times we're identifying these jobs and then half these jobs are brought into the community and not coming from the existing community is there any stipulation in the rules and regulations of this job creation?

That so many of these jobs must come, like if you got 500 jobs how many of these jobs must come from the immediate area? And are there stipulations that you must run the gamut from the lowest paying to the high and just not the little worker bees? [speaker changes] Yes ma’am. [speaker changes] There are no stipulations in this bill, to specify that I think that would be very difficult to get companies to agree to a specific percentage. What we do know is that based on the facts when companies are recruited to North Carolina we get a combination of new jobs that are for local people, and we get some folks who move with it. And both of those are important as we grow this economy and they need to bring folks and recruit folks locally across the whole bandwidth. From those who are employed at entry-level positions to those that are at senior level management. I think if we looks at the breadth of companies that have been recruited to the state as well as those that are growing in the state there is some of both of those things happening. And we need to do that to be healthy. North Carolina is an in-migration state, that’s a plus and a positive but we need to be growing jobs from within as well. So we’re trying to address both retention and job growth both in-migration and hiring of those already within the state. Trying to manage that both from an education and workforce development standpoint as well as the types of companies we recruit. [speaker changes] Follow Representative Holley ?? You’re good Representative Meyer. [speaker changes] So I understand that this is designed to help in the closing stages of negotiations. But I wonder if it actually ends up helping, because if I’m negotiating with the state and I’ve got a deal 95% worked out and I know that you’ve got this $20 million fund in reserve, I might just wait until the end and say “That’s great, thanks for all your work on this, and now I need another $2 million out of your closing fund.” And then I’ve got the state of North Carolina and its people over a barrel for $2 million. How do you turn that down when you get to that place? [speaker changes] Representative Meyer, I think that that’s my job as the chief negotiator in this process and I think that’s what you have to be mindful for. We’re continuously running evaluations to return on investment before we put any of these tools to the table. You may be aware we have begun meeting weekly in a funder’s forum, both with all of the grants making programs that Commerce is responsibility for and the Golden Leaf Foundation, on a weekly basis looking at all the projects that are about in the state of North Carolina. It’s a lot, it’s a big commitment to the team to do that. We’re trying to make better decisions about how the monies are spent, and that not every program goes to every project and we just keep layering it on but that we make appropriate investments to get a return to the state in a reasonable period of time. So I think that’s a challenge that you place in the Secretary of Commerce and the funding committees that are responsible for approvals of these grants, and we have to be very mindful that we are stewards of every bit of this money, and only to use it in places that we must use it in order to obtain the jobs. We don’t have a good track record in North Carolina from many years of attracting these large transformational investment projects. And as I have accessed, tried to access with great support from our team, what’s been the missing link this is one of them. [speaker changes] Representative Meyer are you good sir? Representative Luebke. [speaker changes] Thank you Madam Chair and Madam Secretary, just an observation which other members have made. For 20 years going back to the 1990’s when I was and Representative Howard were part of the Bill Lee Act discussions, the very first of this kind of legislation. We’ve had the problem of Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3, and my feeling looking at this is that the way the bill is structured too much of the investment is going to go to the counties that there’s just not enough safe-guards to insure that the money is going to go to Tier 1 and Tier 2 counties. And just make that as an observation that I don’t think you’ve protected Tier 1 and Tier 2 enough the way the bill is structured. My question for you is this, you’ve got $20 million that’s in the budget as we’ve heard, and how will you or how will you and others make the decisions to how much to give to each project? How will you decide is this a $6 million project or is this a $2 million project? [speaker changes] Each scenario will be unique and that will be looking at the capital investment, we’ll be looking at the number of employees generated from the project. We’ll been looking at what the state has already committed at what Golden Leaf has committed, what has the county and local community committed, because as you’ve heard me say a hundred times all economic development

Is local, and so, this is going to have to be a partnership. This does require a match from the locals. It's not a one to one match, but does require the locals be involved in this catalyst fund as well for it to be available. So we'll have to look at the total investment that's being made and not exceed a fair return. And so it'll just have to be the process of evaluation. Tremendous amount of conversation. Evaluation of what the risks are and what the investment is worth in North Carolina. In some cases, it will come down to what our competitive state's doing, and what is the value of our adding to that in order to get the jobs in North Carolina. That's the edge, that's the leverage we have not had historically to be able to play at this game. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up Representative Luki. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Madam Secretary, it's my concern is that you've 20 million dollars, how do you bet on one project as opposed to another. How do you have any real notion as to whether you're gonna run out of money. So is this one maybe ideally a five million dollar project, but we're running out of money, so we can only give a million? [SPEAKER CHANGES] There will be some of that evaluation. There's no question as we move through this process. I would hope that over time, very early over time, we would have some type of frame work for the decision making like we do with J Digg. It's very, it's statistically, evaluated. And it is done in a measurable way so that we can track what we're giving so that's it's comparable for comparable projects. We'll have to develop that as we get into this. Some of it will be based on, is in your businesses, what you got at the end of the day to get the deal and to get the jobs in North Carolina. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stone. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Miss. Chair. Thank you Madam Secretary. I have questions related to the talk about jobs coming into North Carolina. One of the primary problems we have in tier 1 and 2 counties is we're always competing against tier 3 counties. And what we fill like we end up doing is just sweeping in a pot. So when we talk about the definition of a job, is it merely 600 jobs transferring from the eastern part of the state that's getting enhanced to got to a tier 3 county, or is it 600 new jobs. I mean that definition of job what we really need because as we hear these job reports coming out, a lot of the times, it's just companies moving within the state. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This is not about moving companies within the state. This is net job growth in these numbers. This is about new job generation. So these types of projects are new investment for most companies. It's a company that, for example, be it aviation or automotive, where their production demand is up and they don't have the capacity. So they're building significant additional capacities and these are net new jobs. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stone. [SPEAKER CHANGES] So is there anything in here that prevents us from actually competing against each other within the state? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I hope the way we will prevent that is what we do in the early stages of getting companies to the very best locations for their particular needs. I think our team is very focused now on sight development. Understanding the sites across the state, with a very high priority on rural communities. One thing that I do know, Representative Stone, and I wanted to make this comment around the other questions, the world is urbanizing. And so a lot of times, when companies come to us, they want to be in an urban center. And convincing them otherwise, is not possible. These are the types of projects that find more rural oriented communities very attractive. Now I'm going to be honest with you. They might choose to go to a whim of a tier 3 county because they've got access to workers. But if you look at North Carolina's map where that's the case, they would be within easy commuting distance of a number of tier 1 and 2 counties. And so we're going to have to start looking at it in a regional kind of way around where a massive plant like this locates. Where can they get commuting employment within a thirty minute to forty minute commute time. So even if they maybe, I would be concerned about taking tier 3 out of it because they might choose the whim of a tier 3 area where some of our larger sites are available, quite honestly. But you've got commuting distance in the others. It's our responsibility in commerce to show them the sites all over North Carolina. And we have an accountability for doing that with a very high priority on rural jobs. [SPEAKER CHANGES] One last follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Nowhere in the bill did I see that we will, are looking at unemployment as a factor of the incentive. So in other words when we look at a tier 3 counties that are having the lowest unemployment in the state, there's no incentive for them to take the one or two tier counties over the tier three county, which obviously we know tier one and two are really hit hard right now with unemployment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We didn't specifically, Representative Stone, because the tier designation is in part a factor of the unemployment rate. So it factors it in their. There would be a higher priority for those tier one and two counties because their rates would be higher. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Rodney Moore.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Secretary Decker. A very question, I want to drill down into your statement about this particular scenario and some of our neighbors from our neighboring states, what have...what has been the outcome or is there any data that you can gather or give us about the success, the outcomes about such a program that you say discretionary funds with either the Secretary of Commerce or the Governor. I want to understand more about how that process works and I want to understand what are the other states doing, especially those, our neighbors and how they’ve been successful or what have been their successes or mistakes. Outcomes that are good or bad with this process. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Madam Secretary. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Let me give you a couple of anecdotal responses to that and we can give you more full data and I’ll be happy to provide the specifics on the funds from other states. South Carolina in 2014 appropriated $37 million to their, they call it the Deal Closing Fund, is what they call it. Fancy name. And they used...that was UT tire. That was a specific place where that fund was very helpful to them. they looked at North Carolina and that would have been helpful to us. There was a bigger issue, single tax factor apportionment was a bigger to that company in North Carolina, South Carolina, as you know, provides for that. That would be one place, one example, where that fund would be used. Clearly this type of fund has been used in states that have been successful in attracting automotive plants so that at the end of the final negotiation, they had the ability to move quickly to make a final close. That would be a good example. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Carney. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Madam Secretary for being here today and answering all these questions for us. I just want to follow up a little on Representative Luebke’s question about determining which project. Madam Chair, if you’ll bear with me, I might make a few comments before I ask my question. This bill, this omnibus bill we have here, also has in there the sales tax issue of a cap. You were, and I applaud your comment about the world is urbanizing and looking at the urban cores with the rims out there. I think we’ve looked at the demographics in this state for several years and we are moving in that direction. Having said that, and keeping in mind, the capping of the sales tax, part of that is a push back, I think somewhat on transit, but our intermodal bill that we passed a few years ago, five to be exact, offered for all counties a quarter cent or a half cent sales tax for transit. Transit isn’t just a train and for these rim areas, they could use that money to draw down federal dollars that they chose to draw by referendum and get that money to develop a commuter vans to get people to those jobs in the tier three areas. Having said that, what if a tier one county, when choosing the projects, they want the project. They don’t have the ability to raise money, maybe a little bit of sales tax, except raise their property taxes and these tier one counties have kind of pushed up to the brink on just about everything and I sympathize with that. How, if they are the best suited for that project, but that can’t get the matching money, what happens? [SPEAKER CHANGES] That’s the beauty of what’s begun to happen in commerce by looking collectively at all of our resources. The job development investment grant creates a utility fund. Every time a JD grant is made, about 25% of that and the experts can give the specific numbers, goes to a utility fund. I’ll show you some numbers when we get to that particular provision in the bill that shows that fund could grow exponentially. We could use that fund in an instance like that to help a tier one or tier two county with infrastructure development for this type of project. We are also working very closely with the Golden Leaf Fund. For those counties where those funds are available, there’s a significant opportunity for investment in infrastructure should this type of project be interested, and we’re going to try to get them interested in a tier one or tier two location.

The planes that the economy now one that's what the schools are forced to put this in a position have an account two CD from the tiny, thank you for 592927. NSF, the LM and SL states that MN 92 questions and Sarah said stamp HTML MSN line 40 A DIS N2, S is selling responsible for the administration program and sell about that once applicable to the platform SNA left warning back from the safety of commerce he or she S lane and got S is there in reporting the MU 2 the general assembly stand and the third quarter, Sergei Bubka for the page 13 of the bill Vaughan subdivisions he caught a included information on the grants awarded a baseless test the projects a number of volunteer areas of the list employment levels, from there to the guidelines specifically and that you're looking for just a general, review of the report but if you look at the last requirement for the first game record after the option got lost about the department implement a subpar a copy of the guidelines that have been adopted into cells, pork, forsaken the fish and the changes in the stock price in the previous year and had five SAMF Kennedy, rephrase said SNA ms projects a fair chance and MI is there anyone 0.92 that legislature S2 then t made 2952 NF5: in real time in the annual report 49th , there's no provision for real fun reporting but there is the annual report that's 1/4 and manages to run through that you know you have a list of the trail awarded by includes the name of the business by the project a description that project , no fee at a convention that at least 10 minutes ago from the MSN, from MSN, we could have won more from RFMLNMZKS lee for building at 952277 banking MMI? (SPEAKER CHANGES) She was answered by your previous comments about privatization of the questions is one thing he can command, said the committee that NMS SM with the sub at 2:00 PM 56 N ninth A.L. around the canyon questions to sanction for USFSAM F's that sector your answer to that of the property so you're saying the local match which is an old page 11 from the mess of section four -fax paper sack does include cash and the way we're smack of about five from me say that local match can be can consist of other government grants like badly seven on the local infrastructure fund so that potentially a local better than at any thing in this battle over the next half duplex nine, finds an SS the dns from local governments said they would not E C's understand that, only five for other state grants as the magic has to come from local governments to take the stand and not enough is vs. (SPEAKER CHANGES) Taylor said to the Wayne C, 597 AM AM AM question from 6 to 35 three , display information and share what additional comments in SM activist_the catalyst five visit schools specifically to attract the transformation of accent projects like cattle and bass that large numbers of people that have significant standoff ancillary jobs so we not only have the opportunity to get the initial business but the supply chain and Esther B7, of Costa mesa BS multiply these attacks and products musicales for exponential elk grove < S4255 27 questions ms patient AA champ MF SS 7 he would take it for you are four of the bill makes 53832-changes to take the program first increases the cap for J.D. commitments by additional $14,000,000 to 201315 fiscal biennium family set a change is that a cost benefit analysis by J.D. requires a cost estimate analysis to determine whether a jaded award is appropriate, we all calls are considered for purpose of determining whether the word is a probe ??...........

him till July one twenty fifteen. the bill would allow disregarding of costs associated with an award from the newly created job catalyst fund else. absent that award a cost-benefit analysis would affirm the idea of making a jaded grant after July one twenty fifteen. the analysis and consider all costs, including hotel catalyst fund awards for purposes of determining whether jaded award is appropriate and finally, the bill would add a monthly reporting requirement for jaded to the finance committees when the generals and leaders in session, or to the new laws within the general simile is not in session and to the physical research division on the current status of the jaded cat and itemized grant award information, Change speaker:members of the committee questions with respect to part four since installing Change speaker:page fourteen outline forty one to forty three while the world with the committee disregard the job catalyst fund award in determining whether a grant award is appropriate under JK at one eight. Change speaker: let me address that specifically here's the reason these types of job creation opportunities exponential opportunities often times have annual average salary just about the county average in the Walden model. the return is obviously the opportunity is greater as the salaries and a lot and the number of jobs a lot their general investment if shorter and greater as you can understand in manufacturing jobs. we are on it. we will not do it if it doesn't pass the model, but we are often writing the cost is a factor of salary more than anything else. and so we won at twelve months here to work within this will always be a return will not use it off. it might take it from twelve years. the return on the JJ maximum, which I did. it might be fifteen and I'd like a little as you see, I know it is not a return they might extend that some are asking for this one year time frame to understand that how it works but we do know in these manufacturing large manufacturing product projects get in the model that we used it if it will be very time within that twelve year conference update and can we want an opportunity to measure that see it and work with the next twelve months Change speaker: review and expand distant piano man is a provision to sense something language is Change speaker:structured information to be ability to to use this modified approach only extends until July one twenty fifteen a sort of a learning curve. and then after that I felt solved in the Walden analysis of the life of your cost-benefit analysis of the Change speaker: committee are there further questions. our multi color and Change speaker: didn't want to provide as chairman. a copy of an analysis that we have gone always a day if there is not an appropriation needed for this year to make this change, as you know how the data program works. there is a budget impact long term. the next positive, and I want you to see that impact, so whatever vitamin analysis. we talk a lot about the total liability of a program I want you to see the actual liability at the actual with holdings and total actual payments. we have made my year so that you can see the return began and nineteen thousand rate of necessity analysis two thousand three to two thousand. well, I'm sitting you can see clearly the return. it comes from this program. this generates revenue for the state of North Carolina that investment through a very importantly, it spends office utility find that we must use in rural North Carolina. I during the recession. it was used for a lot of purposes that we are committed to using that were more rural purposes on in general way, I guess, for the reasons representing Kearny, you are asking the ability to have times when the opportunity .com and is created and you're wanting to counties. this stated program spins out that pool to help Change speaker: their members on the committee on general questions with respect to the entire video Change speaker:. I think about Jen 's failure recognized share this committee and subcommittee. Change speaker: you've heard the motion that they yell relevant committee is a motion to not confront before the house later today where conference committee with the appointed and hardly any glitches in the bail on that time not to be worked out

Do you stand? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I support the motion and this is less than one minute. I'd like to do a major compliment to the North Carolina Senate on its tax reform work last year, getting rid of dozens and dozens of targeted tax expenditures. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Luebke. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The, I have one second sentence. The functional equivalent of a targeted tax expenditure is a discretionary targeted grant program. There is no difference. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Luebke. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you madam chair. I support the motion not to concur but I think for different reasons. I think there's tremendous pressure being put on counties to raise the sales tax for education, and many counties really can't afford to raise enough money by that sales tax plus, as we've talked about many times the sales tax is a regressive tax, and this is happening, this push on the counties to have to, to recommend a sales, a regressive sales tax to their citizens is because of a decision of this general assembly since 2013 to cut back on appropriations for education, actually going back to 2011. So I think we need to recognize that public education is a state function to be funded by the state overwhelmingly, and not to cut back on those appropriations for public education and then push to the counties that they have to raise sales tax even while people here are saying oh we didn't raise taxes, but you're pushing on the counties. I just think that's very, very important to consider the, the origins of the bill, or the consequences of the bill because of cutbacks in public education between 2011 and now. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Members of the committee, chair, I ask for an apology. There is one more section of the bill which is part five, the crowd funding. I believe this bill passed the House unanimously out of respect to the sponsor of that section. Are there any questions with respect to that part of the bill? If not, I'm going to accept the motion, Representative Jones has made a motion that the finance committee recommend that we not concur on the floor of the house and we go to conference. All in favor will say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All opposed no. Thank you madam secretary, thank you for being here. Gonna jump back up to the top of our calendar. House bill, House bill 366, North Carolina Farm Act. The, again, this is a motion to recommend concurrence, or non concurrence, there is a provision on a feed that's been included in this report. So staff, if you would take it from there. Representative Dickson, welcome to the committee sir, we'll let staff run through it if, first if you have no objections. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you madam chair. Chris Honors, Research Division. Would you like me to run only through the finance related pieces or the entire bill? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well, how about let's take it all the way down? You're in the finance committee. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All right. Section one of the bill would provide the complaints to the Department of Environment and Natural Resources concerning an agricultural operation and all records accumulated in conjunction with the investigation are confidential and may be released by court order, but if DENR determines that a violation has occurred, the complaint and all records accumulated in conjunction with that investigation will become public records. This section would also allow DENR to request additional information from the complainant, a complainant, and allow the department to decide whether or not to investigate a complaint further if the initial investigation of the complaint leads to a finding that the complaint is frivolous or was filed in bad faith. It would also allow direct DENR to adopt rules to develop a formal system for receiving and investigating environmental complaints about agricultural operations. Section two would prevent ?? counties from adopting ordinances regulating the use, sale, distribution, storage et cetera of fertilizer. This section would not limit the authority of DENR or the EMC to enforce water quality standards. Cities and counties would be permitted to adopt ordinances to regulate fertilizers to protect water quality provided that the ordinances have been approved by the EMC or DENR as part a local plan or a national pollutant discharge elimination system permit application and don't exceed the state's minimum requirements for water quality. This would not prohibit a city or county from regulating explosives or inflammables by ordinance.

Sections 3A and 3B would rewrite the statute regulating landscaping contractors to require that any person engaged in landscaping must obtain a license. The section would create definitions for several terms. Require licensure for a person to use the designation landscape contractor, provide exemptions for licensure, establish the North Carolina Landscape Contractor Board and set forth powers and duties of the board. Establish requirements for licensure. Standard for issuing licenses to corporations, partnerships and persons doing business under a trade name and authorize the board to impose several fees and articulate causes for disciplinary action, civil penalties and injunctions. Section 3C would provide that the existing North Carolina Landscape Contractors registrations Board, the members on that board would continue to serve as members of the new board until the new members of the new board are appointed. Section 3D would provide a procedure for future appointment and would provide that all records, staff, funds, and other items of the existing North Carolina Landscape Contractors Registration Board are transferred to the new North Carolina Landscape Contractors Licensing Board. Section 3E would provide that a person who meets one of several criteria on or before December 31st, 2014, shall be issued a license without needing to take an exam if the person has submitted an application and paid the application fee before August 1st, 2015. Those criteria are that the person’s either registered as a landscape contractor, licensed in irrigation professional, certified as a turf grass professional, or has ten years experience in the person’s own business as a landscape contractor or ten years experience as an employee and meets all other requirements for licensure and either has one year of credit for a two year degree in a related education training, two years credit for a four year degree in related educational training. Up to two years credit for education or business experience and general business management. And this section would also provide that landscape contractors currently registered under chapter 89D are not required to renew their registration for the 2015 to qualify for a license. Section 4 would direct the Department of Public Safety to study North Carolina’s participation in the commercial vehicle safety alliance north american standard inspection program. This is essentially a program that says for commercial vehicles, if you pass a roadside safety inspection you would receive a decal good for three months indicating that another roadside inspection isn’t required for the period of that decal. DPS does participate in this program currently, this section would just study the state’s participation. DPS would have to report back to the Agriculture and Forestry Awareness Study Commission by February 1st, 2015. Section 5 would define the planning and harvesting season and planning and harvesting period as January 1st through December 31st of each year for purposes of agricultural operations exemption to the federal motor carrier regulations on hours of service. Section 6 would amendment the chairmanship of the Agriculture and Forestry Awareness Study commission to allow the President and Pro Tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representative to each appoint one additional member of the Senate and House respectively to serve as co-chair. Currently the chairs of the House Agriculture and Senate Agriculture, Environment, and Natural Resources committees are co-chair of the commission. Section 7 would authorize the Commissioner of Agriculture to appoint as many Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services Law Enforcement officers as he or she deems necessary to carry out the department’s law enforcement responsibilities. These officers would have to meet the training standards of North Carolina Criminal Justice and Training Standards Commission and take the constitutional oath of office. Certain officers could also be designated to have the powers and duties of forest rangers and the power to enforce the forest laws. Section 8 would amend the definition of commercial horse feed. Under the Horse Industry Promotion Act which is a check off program for the Horse Industry. It would amend that definition to include any commercial labeled or marketed for equine use, under current law only commercial feed labeled for equine use is covered under the definition. Section 9 would authorize the use of pesticides registered by the Pesticide Board to control moles other than the star nosed mole. Section 10 would amend the statute for first degree trespass to provide that trespassing in an agricultural facility is a first degree trespass. Currently, special occasions, electric generation facilities, water seamless facilities and liquefied natural gas storage facilities are locations where trespassing is a first degree trespass. Section...

11 would require a person before operating a motorized all-terrain vehicle on property not owned by that person to obtain written consent from the owner of the property. A person given written is only owed the duty of care that a trespasser would be owed. Section 12 would provide the no state statute or rule or local governed ordinance concerning riparian buffers for the protection of water quality will apply to the construction, operation maintenance or repair of canals under the control and supervision of a board of drainage commissioners. Section 13 would exempt any residential building subject to periodic inspections, but North Carolina housing finance agency from county or city’s authority to conduct periodic inspections as part of a targeted effort within the geographic area if the residential buildings is in compliance with federal standards and provided the owner of the residential building supplies the compliance results letters from the housing financing agency to the local inspections department. Section 14 would require the building code Council to amend the building code, such as security grills are permitted at all exit of the building. If the grills may be open from the inside during periods when the building is occupied by authorized person then remain open when the building is occupied by the general public. Under current law the building code requires that no more than half the doors of certain buildings be equipped with certain security grills when two or more means of egress are required. Section 15 would designate the got to be and see marketing campaign of the Department of Agriculture as the official agricultural marketing campaign for the state of North Carolina. It would also add seafood to the list of products to be promoted by the campaign. Section 16 would allow the pesticide board to adopt rules to classify private pesticide applicators. Section 17 would exempt the board of agriculture from rule making requirements with respect to annual admission fees for the state fair and section 18 contains a severability clause in the effective date. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Chris thank you very much. Members of the committee are there any other questions with respect to House bill 366? Motion would be, Representative Samuelson. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Madame Chair I have a question, but it may not be finance related but it’s in one of the portions that he went over may I ask that question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes mam, you certainly may. [SPEAKER CHANGES] On section 12 the allow drainage districts to maintain ditches and buffers zones. Has anybody checked in to make sure that that doesn't conflict with any of our NCPE, whatever it is those federal storm water programs that they've allocated to us? I can never get the initials correct on. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Dixon ?? you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Samuelson it is my understanding that they have done that and it is not in conflict. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hager. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Madame Chairwoman I’m trying to search on my smartphone real quick. How many times Lazarus rose. I think it’s only once. But this is landscaper bill’s what five times now Representative Starnes? Is that correct? Five times, this is it is a terrible way for the Senate to try to get something through and I express my concern to Representative Dixon on this. Everything that, every piece of investigation I’ve done on this piece. I can't understand why this landscape contractor piece keeps coming up. If it wasn't from the government protection program and that's really what it is. If you look on page 3, on lines 41, take 40 and 41, it sets out any persons who for compensation of the considerations does any, to make sure I understand it, you hear that any of the following: first one says, basically if you prepare a contract, you have to have a license and it says prepare a contract for including installing, planning, repairing and managing gardens, lawns, shrubs, vines and trees. If you prepare a contract to do that for over thirty thousand dollars a year for one contract. A Walmart ?? stone has an example of that. For Walmart you have to have a license. And Representative Dixon knows that I hate what they've done to his deal hear and he know my concern with this it just is deeply concerned with this issue of a government a protection program for landscapers when really we should be opening up the way our young men and women should go get into this business, not closing it down. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Warren. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Madame Chair. I just have kind of a question for clarification on section 11, on page 15, line 9, when we say a land owner who gives written permission, a written consent to operate an all-terrain vehicle on his or her property owes the person the same duty of care that you owes the trespasser. Are we saying the

The permission to operate on their property because assume any liability is at what that means 55 banks and said that such midrange -very helpful as saying that the 2227 am thinking man can sell a representing about the question that after staff M and SMTP nothing under standard center to say that if you write that contract in the contract is for 30,000 B after the license palace and was only a few weeks doing the worker contract is a work in a work that he was over 30,000 and I corrected the person writing the contract doesn't get NP 9 at 30,000 to try to contact stand MFN extension and that the 30,000 figure to require that you don't have to have licensure for landscaping over the place of all contracts for labor material and other items for a given job site during an eicon second form of Perry is less than $30,000 from concerns those from a bucket and the guy from age three and no one's 40 at 143 page 49512 those already budgeted to require licenses not contractual five, Spanish can't set up to the Atty. with Mia not like the contract in the contract is for more than $30,000 worth of work, because I like the contract don't have to be a license landscape contractor of the season 7 to 77 to scan the second please -chair of the presents and said if you look at the definition of landscape contractor S. Chris pointed out, beginning on the bottom of page story here are the activities that would require a license and its invasion in the business, a barnyard experience ability knowledge sciences § truck bomb four landscape work by (SPEAKER CHANGES) John C. Brian contract in those activities thanking them share one follow-up-FMSC are calling earlier discussions of this belt that that's not all that number had that activities them under here to think that have E coli cases landscape contractor they might have had several contract license said the question is, they have to get laces to Denise things that are somebody's job fair enough to get a contractor's license and this would allow them and the landscape contractor's license revenue general contractor's license and a macroeconomic scene models of the innocents FM station and factual not have spoken with PLO licensing contract in message of anger is either they're telling me (SPEAKER CHANGES) that if a licensed contractor for contract until five days in the contract in business if he is building something here she is Billy senator for a license this licenses I sent him from any contract refuse they do require a contract to license has no intention on a knoll body and specifically the building code has forced out the landscaping piece they don't cover going to do some cover landscaping in there in the building code 577 with floppy beyond older folks are telling me this is not exactly anybody from an avalanche made a building contractor license if they're practicing building contract been doing he was in the code discussion of unfair, but at ms and senate committee that the spec two this position that fits into Bali two men out that provision and therefore one section six stationary and foam allow certification of private has decided applicators as someone who buys it applies to sell pesticide finish your name of product has to sign applicator them a covered by this staff, 5 to 7 game is someone who's authorized to use restricted use pesticides, do I believe I recommend from the pests are then given agriculture passes a division to confess that further incentive to 27292 factor that I would like to have someone from A. Lewis led the expert from development ??......

him, if you will come forward and give us your name around here. Change speaker: I'm Jim Barnett, I'm director of the macabre part by culture and consumer services, structural pest control and pesticides, and Chris is right. the definition of private pesticide applicator is an individual who uses a restricted use pesticide to produce an agricultural commodity restricted use pesticides are those which are not available to the general public. see you buying a pesticide at Lowe's or Home Depot or Ace Hardware and applying would not be required to be certified as private as site applicator Change speaker: and questions from the committee. everybody exempted fluky chair. Change speaker: I just wanted to draw the committee 's attention nation endeavors and Dixon. I have all already had a conversation about in the agricultural committee that is the denial of public records with respect in section one of the bill to deny the public to know about complaints that are filed against agricultural operations. what the bill does is take away the public record,public access that exists in virtually every other activity in the state and says that in this specific area of the complaints are confidential to the public and not find out about this complaint until after the department made a decision, and that decision has to be that there was a that there was a violation and without violated. finding a violation of public will never find out that there has been a complaint filed against the operation. I have a serious problem with that. I think that's that's really not right, it's, it's very bad policy and notwithstanding a good person will have a real problem with it him him him( respected by know and I'm really saying that's a nightmarish addiction can reply to and maybe make a counterpoint to my Change speaker: vacating the consumer Change speaker: fragment and chaired not represented legates in fact, it can be released by court of competent jurisdiction, the complaint scan the second four years as languages, Barb item from the language that we use in the ethics legislation concerning complaints against us. this language is exactly verbatim from that the attempt here. this may sound trite, but it didn't .it's important once the veil is run again unring the bell. and just because somebody makes a complaint doesn't mean this has an invalidity. they led their needs. it goes on to say that once that complaint is issued and is investigated and then if it has validity than it is public record. it's trying to avoid the many opportunities where certain groups mistakenly consider a policy knowledge from the error as turkey or chicken liver, which is happen. I think the same. Change speaker:thank you, Madam chair, and I hate to beat a dead horse, but on page four, linesforty eight specifically makes his contract about the general contractor license versus the landscape contractor license and so whether you Dixon or a believe they are members of theaudience might be able to explain where those two overlap so that we understand it's important because if we're taught where acting as they were creating a whole new licensing forpeople who don't have to be licensed and I think they'll explain it to some degree they are having to be licensed and so if we could just have the next him provisions they are ready overlap to be helpful Change speaker:men in general are two individuals in the audience a good address is either Robert Doug Hider or Scott Mackey of the cheer which event the column insert ear phone non normative Change speaker:that gentlemen would come forward and known as good as your name and your title police are Change speaker: thank you, Madam chair, my name is Scott Mackey, I service the current chair of the landscape contractors registration boards. I like to point out that it is a registration board am not a wife not a licensing board. right now we run into situations in my company as it is a very small company located just out of Benson and I like to give you a specific example where we were to entry by not having a general contractor 's license. I would consider a barrier attached at a general contractor 's license to engage in a planting project for

rotation that occurred at a rest area less than eight miles away from my property from a nursery where we brought in plants, the number one item on the state specification sheet, so you must be a licensed general contractor to engage to bid on this planting project for rest area at exit three nineteen and that's an area on interstate forty. because of that we were not able to build plants have been less than eight miles away. I couldn't build the project because of my general contractor. I don't feel like as a landscape contractor that I should be required to have a general contractor 's license to engage in landscape construction work planting projects, things of that nature is going to build houses, Representative Hager, or engage in certain structural things absolutely. there should be a requirement for general contractor 's license. we as a scheduling right now and withdrawn. the statute requires us to have a general contractor 's license, not a landscape contractor 's license to engage in projects over thirty thousand dollars. we are not creating a new licensing board where morphing the registration board into a licensing board on the chair of that board. right now our staff. the current board and all of our funds transfer over to this new board it, it gets us out of having to have a general contractor 's license, which is expensive. we have to qualify with a lot of financial audits if folks that are engaged in landscape lighting projects is a barrier to entry. I'd like to also point out all forms of landscape maintenance your Walmart project. for instance, that includes knowing trimming of hedges installing batch installer are wiser. all of that maintenance work is completely exempt in this legislation, you can engage in five million our rear and not have to have this license that is considered maintenance, not landscape construction Bank manager, Change speaker: member, subcommittee questions for the settlement makes a good value. have a question for the other gentleman. I'll run our Raleigh. just when Mister is is the start of an offer yet… Change speaker: I appreciate your explanation. the bottom. I did not understand either the question of the answer. it's my understanding the question was does the general contractor have to have a landscape license in the brewing landscaping work with over thirty thousand dollars Messieurs. Change speaker: completely exempt there are a Y listed exemptions in that legislation on NHL contractors. Change speaker: one of the first exemption Saturday night in their punishment is not registering my finances of the question Salazar on message, Change speaker: it probably and a landscaper does not have to have a general contractor 's license under this bill, if they go over thirty thousand dollars disturbance correct in thinking Tiger and a geologist… Change speaker: she just a general comment here in Rio 's legislator here to create a greater bureaucracy, but remove these various entries, it still is talking about, must distance a gentleman in this in this community is less remove the barrier that VMT hasn't been great whole new bureaucracy of licensing bugs in getting and stopping a bariatric, Change speaker: you are young present that our status to DNC thought that we run into hundreds of the private sector as well. the statute requires that any thirty thousand dollars requires us to have a general contractor 's license, whether it's for the state did not refresh station user edger and private property. we have some folks that had run into this very same problem where product contracts for the installation of place projects he had exceeded thirty thousand dollars is not able to get paid because Change speaker: they didn't have the general contractor 's license material men 's visitors will follow you and I go to the Nike of the again the building code is not required a general contractor license and leisure gauging and building services into building practices. it does not require building code for landscaping services requires building code if your point voters in regards doing coded your building structures. you have to have an engineering of plants or Niger license design wall of retaining wall so just to make sure we understand near the building code does not require a license if you

unless you’re building and building practices and doing building things. Just to make sure everybody understands that, that the Building Code Council and building code which I have been a licensed contractor before, does not require that if you’re doing landscaping. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hager, you’re correct, however this isn’t about building code…. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Point of order. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Sorry Madam Chair, I’m new to this. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir. Representative, I have Lewis, Moffitt, Stone and Moore are the others. Okay, I’ll just remind the committee that we have to adjourn at quarter session, so before session, and then we will come back and continue as we are doing now. Representative Moffitt sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Madam Chair. Just for a little background for the committee, I am a co-chair of the Joint Legislative Administrative Procedures Oversight Committee, and we had actually taken up this issue during the interim as we were reviewing all of our occupational boards and we did determine that the requirement that these landscapers face regarding projects that exceed $30,000 become general contractors, is a true barrier to entry of the way that we’re setup and the way that we operate currently. We also determined that the quickest way to remedy this was to allow an evolution, if you will, of taking their registration board and converting it to a licensing board and that would at least provide them the opportunity to actually do work that exceeds 30,000 and the way that the law is currently presented in this particular bill, does not create a barrier to entry for people that are looking to get involved in landscaping. The barrier to entry is the requirement that they become general contractors to do certain work, not the establishment of this particular board. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Representative Moffitt. Representative Stone, sir? Representative Moore. Tim Moore. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Madam Chair. This is a question to either Representative Dixon or whoever wants to answer it, and I apologize, I’ve been having to step out and dealing with some other things for session today, but my question is, how does this differ with respect to the licensure piece about the landscape architects to other legislation that has been introduced in the past? Is it the same, is it different? I’ve just had a couple folks both pro and con who’ve contacted me and I just wonder what the difference is between them. I don’t know that we’ve passed it before, I don’t know what’s happened. I just don’t know. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Dixon, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Moore, I’m only familiar with what has happened in the last couple of weeks. I’m totally unaware of how this particular piece has been treated in the past. However, I believe that the most exact information appropriate to our feelings on this bill were just expressed by Representative Moffitt. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up, and maybe this is just… [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir, follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Maybe the staff...can staff...there was other legislation on this. Is it...how different was it and where did go? Was it acted upon? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Moore, I believe this legislation has been around in some form or fashion for several years. The last time that I was able to find it was from, I believe 2011. It was largely identical to this. The exemption number five used to be for landscaping work with a price of all contracts over a 12 month period was $25,000, it’s been increased to $30,000, but otherwise it’s identical and the legislation did not pass in previous years. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Moore, do you have a follow up sir? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Not right now. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Representative Dixon, on that question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Along the lines of what staff has just said, I think where the real kicker started out, and I’ve discussed this with the landscape folk, it was originally $7500 which would have been a true barrier. It’s moved all the way from $7500 to making it equal with the general contractors thing putting in 30 and 30. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Lewis. Representative Stam sir. Representative B. Brawley. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Madam Chair. I keep hearing talk on both sides of this. But we’re talking about converting a registration board to a licensing board. I want somebody to say definitely that there will be no landscaping activity open to an individual today….

A fifth of tomorrow after this bill passes and pleasure boat in your examination the picture license before doing it are you going to change the market in landscaping, but today of allowing a landscaper wish you were licensed and not need a general contractor's license to be the state jobs phenomenon that definitively give them a bit of a change to enter the landscape as the ID of (SPEAKER CHANGES) Eugene Dennis M yes men share at college of-seven FMAIC is definitively the only change would be that we will no longer be required to have a general contractor's license when of projects exceed $30,000 but if my son was 16 will be able to come into this business without adding that this license that the graduates I school pass the exam because that is licensed engage in projects above $30,000 without having to go bombed out for a general contractor's license said defensively to be no change other than we no longer have to require ourselves to become general contractors that (SPEAKER CHANGES) I'm such a way you're saying that somebody and exams and issue a license will not be changed by saying is right now there is no requirement for licensure telling me the bodies, doing landscape contractors must become licensed after this bill Me serve said five misrepresented them I had had any licensed at all to do the form of landscape work planting nine anything and so they had $30,000 less than $30,000 state right now have to have a general contractor's license would like to see that now be the case in the future service a passes today no change about under $30,000 92, one thing that shed five -1, up from right, we talk about this that allowed has been nothing 594 committee sat into one E to me that that approach, making installation that that was the dimension that poorly after that, too many commands that, if any of them is that the study guide of this memo that now because at that we close this chapter begins to turn back the anatomic and seven -Jan that was good as I came to us that good, that one issue that malice but nine times that said this live in the coming from sat five Sam SM P79 back and say, is to say I had to go before it and who we have continued to make it easier process to capture fewer people in a way that needs those who need to have a S. Mohammed FD 5 N that they can then she rents in the modems from coming later, you a budget matters that media have a question that the gentleman from area and that is from video memory, this month, judge to the home page 13 we're the good looks like we're expanding the law enforcement some powers of the department of agriculture can yell them through which actually being done their homework hours are being 58 extended of this scenario that spend legislative home in the past two and a few years ago, and (SPEAKER CHANGES) I just curious Sonoma fishing run to lead that a committee are not for woody Allen what is the situation there were some section seven on home page 13 if you can run through that would do that with a mallet cliche or staff s can nine, the SFSC 5 dollars to five and 7:00 AM jet that the nation that the measure the part of a little trickier and could speak about 7 to 7 ?? DSX ?? thinking of 9255 X legislative liaison to the party that, we have approximately 14 law enforcement officers we SSA CF possibly 12:20 AM a camera for service that he lost it for two S film and got just S143 officers from the north, for service can trust and that the jurisdiction from Las State fair police have a North Carolina SSFLE ??......

??. The forestry laws are folks that the state fair can enforce the agriculture laws. Both can enforce crimes that occur on the property in front of them. What we would like to do is be able to efficiently use all those law enforcement officers to enforce any agricultural laws, either forestry or agriculture that occur and need to be investigation. This is a matter of efficiency allowing us to let them use that jurisdiction anything underneath our laws. We have worked with the Sheriff’s Association and they have also agreed and signed off on this. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Dollar, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Just a quick...so is that just making sure that the two groups that you currently have are able to cross pollinate or does it in anyway expand what either of those groups would have beyond just being able cross pollinate between the two current responsibilities. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Madam Chair and Representative Dollar, the language that you see in front of you is the language that is currently in statute, but if we were to hire any additional law enforcement officers, then that would have to go through OSP. State fair’s completely receipt support it. The North Carolina forest service is general funds, so we would not be able to create additional positions if that’s what you’re asking. You’re right that we are wanting to be able to use those efficiently if we have, for example an agriculture investigation in the western part of the state. We would like to send our most closest officer. Currently we would have to send someone from Raleigh to work with the local sheriff’s office because they're the only ones that have the jurisdiction to look at agriculture laws. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Madam Chair, I apologize, I wasn’t clear with my question. It’s not additional jurisdiction over and above what either one would have currently. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Madam Chair, Representative Dollar, correct. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Setzer for a motion, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I recommend the adoption of the conference report for House Bill 366 as presented. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Members of the committee, you’ve heard the motion. All in favor say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All opposed say no. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ayes and nos. We’re going to call the room. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Alexander. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Blust. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Robert Brawley. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative William Brawley. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Burr. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Carney. Representative Collins. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Carney’s here. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Collins. Representative Cotham. Representative Davis. Representative Dollar. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hager. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hall. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hall, aye. Representative Hamilton. Representative Hamilton aye. Representative Hanes. Representative Hanes, aye. Representative Hardister. Representative Hardister, aye. Representative Holley. Representative Holley, aye. Representative Howard. Representative Howard, aye. Representative Johnson. Representative Jones. Representative Jones, aye. Representative Jordan. Representative Luebke. Representative Luebke, aye. Representative Lewis. Representative Lewis, aye. Representative Martin. Representative Martin, aye. Representative Meyer. Representative Meyer, aye. Representative Moffitt. Representative Moffitt, aye. Representative Rodney Moore. Representative Rodney Moore, aye. Representative Tim Moore. Representative Samuelson. Representative Samuelson, aye. Representative Schaffer. Representative Setzer. Representative Setzer, aye. Representative Stam. Representative Stam, aye. Representative Starnes. Representative Starnes, no. Representative Stone. Representative Stone, no. Representative Tine. Representative Waddell. Representative Waddell, aye. Representative Warren. Representative Warren, no. Representative Wells. Representative Wells, aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The motion passes on a vote of 23 to 8. Members of the committee, we have to adjourn now. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Madam Chair. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Please stand by. We’ll need to come back immediately after session and we’re going to ask the Sergeant of Arms to clear the room….

I say we can be prepared to come back in the profession that I have adjourned care Change speaker: yes I said willingly, yet happy, yes. onlookers said it will only have it before since they could. Change speaker: we had it before then