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 | April 9, 2013 | Committee Room | House Transportation

Full MP3 Audio File

[gavel pounding] Good morning. It being 12 O'clock and a quorum being present the House Committee on Transportation is now in order. Would like to welcome the pages that are serving us today. Christian Bower, Collin Madison, Shelby Ingram, and Hailey McHugh[?]. Welcome to the committee. Our sergeant-at-arms are Carlton Adams, Antoine Marshall, Martha Parrish. Our staff attorneys, Brenda Carter and Giles Perry and I know you guys are exhausted as we get close to deadline. Thank you for your service. Lynn Taylor and Carla Farmer. I got your name right—did I get your name right? Yeah, okay. Our committee clerks. Our first item is Secretary Tata. He's not yet here. He did arrive. Secretary Tata I apologize and you know I really need to be careful about that. A lot people know that he was in charge of schools in Wake County, but prior to that he worked for his uncle. This gentleman has experience with the 502nd PIR, 504th PIR, 505th PIR, that's Parachute Infantry Regiment. He was a brigade commander with the 101st Airborne, he was Deputy Commander with the 10th Mountain which is a light infantry division and you were in charge of collecting IEDs in the late unpleasantness of southwest Asia. So, after that schools and transportation is pretty easy I presume. Mister Secretary, welcome. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you very much. The combat continues I believe. It's certainly my privilege to be hear to speak to all of you today. While there's been lots of small meetings and joint meetings, this is obviously the first time I've had the privilege to address this body. I know it's a busy time of the year for the legislature and I'm really appreciative of your time and to be able to talk about some of the things that were doing in the Department of Transportation. There's so many things happening right now. There's so many important things that we need to get done collectively working together to better the lives of all the citizens of North Carolina. Governor McCrory has charged me with three fundamental ideas and that is improving customer service in the Department of Transportation and in specific within DMV, the Division of Motor Vehicles. So, I'll talk about that in a second. How we're approaching that because we do have some cultural issues that we face. Also, within the Department of Transportation improving customer service working with businesses, working with citizens and making sure that we are not seen as the big bad government entity, but as someone who is, as the Governor calls it, customer friendly. The second piece is keeping North Carolina moving forward with a 25-year infrastructure plan. I'll talk about that more in a minute. Also, then being more efficient in what we're doing as a government organization. So, those are really the three key things the Governor has asked me to focus on: customer service, the 25-year infrastructure plan and being more efficient. At the end of the day, for me as a leader, whether it's a military organization or school system or within the department. At the end of the day it's about people and our organization, treating people with dignity and respect, and building your culture from the inside out. With that in mind, we have conducted a pretty major reorganization of the Department of Transportation where initially if you were to look at an old wiring diagram there were about 15 direct reports that came up to the Chief Deputy for Operations and any leadership studies will tell you that 6 or 7 direct reports is about what you ought to have. So, we collapsed an entire business line, salvaged those positions and then created one...

Position for Chief Deputy for Support. So now I have a Chief Deputy of Support and Chief Deputy for Operations at no cost, actually cost savings to the organization, and I brought in Nick Tennison, former Mayor of Durham who is the Chief Deputy for Support and he will be leading the effort on the 25 year infrastructure plan, so that's the reorganization is actually helping us become more efficient. Now Jim Trogdan as the Chief Deputy for Operations can focus on all things multimodal, highway division, all the engineers and then Nick is able to focus, Nick Tennison is able to focus on the support aspect of the operation and Jim Trogden and I sat down and drew up this new organization and we feel like it's going to move us forward in the right manner. In my first three months as the Secretary I've been able to officially visit six of the divisions, which is about 40 some counties, and that's not including a quick trip we made out to Mannyo and Roganthe out there in Merlot Beach to see kind of the hardest hit area where some of these low pressure system and noreasters were tearing up NC12. So part of this is getting out into the counties and into all the parts of the state so that we can see and hear from citizens exactly what it is that we need to see and hear. So starting with customer service, on March 2 we began our extended hours Saturday program for DMV and we say give me one east of 95, one in between 95 and 85 and one west of 85, so we started in Greenville, one in North Raleigh, one in West Charlotte and this past Saturday we added three more, one in Durham, one in Fayetteville and one in North Charlotte and just in a few Saturdays, we've served 1,600 customers on those Saturdays at those three and now three more, six, and we're going to grow to about 30 with the rule of thumb being about 80-90% of North Carolinians should be within a one hour drive of a Saturday DMV. For budget reasons, obviously, we cannot have them all open on Saturday because it would not be cost efficient. So we've done, for the Saturday DMVs they're also open an hour earlier and an hour later, so instead of 9-5, they're 8-6 and in those hours, that one hour before and on hour after, we've done about 1,800 transactions since the program started. And I'm saying these numbers because the demand is there and so it's showing us that the pilot is working and that people actually, you know, my governing rule of thumb to my Division of Motor Vehicles folks is that nobody should have to take off from work or miss school to go do something with DMV. If I can bank 24/7, I should be able to DMV 24/7, and that leads me to our efforts to improve credit card options and a huge undertaking right now with my new Information Technology Services Director, Dave Almer, that we took from Bank of America's Global Services Division. So a lot's going on with Division of Motor Vehicles, a lot's going on with customer service and so as we transition and talk about the 25 year plan what we've really got is two phases. We've got to get the framework set and then we've really got to take a look at strategically what does the state need. We have three primary things that we've got to get set. One is how do we get the money that we need to do strategic investment for the state. The motor fuels tax that comes to us is declining because vehicles are more efficient. Even though there are more cars on the highway, they are more efficient, and so we're experiencing about a 2% decrease from the motor fuels tax, and so that's not sustaining

?? going forward. So, we all need to think about how we're going to sustain and increase actually, our ability to strategically invest in infrastructure. So, as Raleigh is the fastest growing city, Charlotte is one of the fastest, third or fourth or fifth fastest growing. And North Carolina is one of the fastest growing states. That means our infrastructure needs are going up. Yet our money, our revenue for strategic infrastructure investment is going down. So, we have an increase demand and a decrease ability to meet that demand. And so, we've got a lot of folks in DOT right now talking about different ways to meet that demand. And certainly, I know there are a lot of conversations going on over here as well. So, that's one. How do you get the money to strategically invest? Two, is how do you distribute that money? We're looking at a strategic investment formula on how to optimize our investments for economic opportunities. Working very closely with Secretary Decker from commerce on where we have economic opportunity zones. And how infrastructure investment may be able to help those economic opportunity zones; where you connect rural and economic centers and help people get to work, get to the hospitals, get to schools. And how we're connecting the citizens of North Carolina with economic engines. So, that we can create that synergy that helps. So that's, the second thing is how do you distribute the money that you raise? So one, how do you raise the money? How you distribute it? And the third piece is how you prioritize what gets done? And so, I'm talking about sort of a theoretical framework for a strategic plan. And we have systems in place now. We have declining revenue. We have an equity formula and then we have a data driven process. And the data driven process right now, one of the things we're looking at is how do you increase a component within the data driven process for jobs creation and second and third order jobs? Businesses that will move in or businesses that will stay. I've talked to several businessmen that are looking at the congestion on 85 or in different areas. And saying, “Hey, I have to move to a different state, because these roads are congested. And I can't hit my 20 minute window with my trucks.” And with today's logistic and supply environment, that 20 minute window is a big thing. Just in Time Delivery is the verbiage. So, those three components; raising the revenue, distributing the revenue and prioritizing the projects are the key. And then, once we get that set, of course, we will talk about the major projects that we want to do at the state, regional and division levels. So, that's the number two item the governor asked me to look at. And then the third piece, obviously, is being more efficient. And as a government agency, we've already turned in several vacant positions. We took our 2 percent cut and we're selling the state jet, because we don't need the state jet. And we're going to obviously, continue to attempt to be more efficient in what we're doing and across the board. So, that's my real message to you, is that the governor's priorities for me and this department are to increase customer service; are to create a 25-year infrastructure plan with the foundational underpinnings that will sustain the state well into the future for the duration of the plan. And to be a more efficient government organization. And as we do this, we're looking at leveraging all modes of transportation. Not just looking at highways. We want ports and airports and waterways and roads and rail. All of that to be leveraged and synergized. Whether it's the port that we're, the two ports at Wilmington and Morehead. Which right now we have 1.8 percent of the container flow on the east coast. Hampton Roads has 18, Jacksonville has 14. So, we're not where we need to be from a operational standpoint. And

Or the inland port that's being developed right now at Charlotte Airport, which can be a huge economic driver to get containers and product from our ports to Charlotte and then down to Atlanta and South and West. And so there's a lot of opportunity here to overlay infrastructure development with economic development and have one spur the other by leveraging all modes of transportation while still reducing congestion which is a key part of maintaining jobs in North Carolina and enhancing safety of course is always a huge part of what we're doing. And in that vein I'd just want to remind everybody that this is Distracted Driving Awareness Month. 904 crashes in North Carolina last year were tied to distraction from electronic devices including phones and we're urging drivers focus on the road and not multitask behind the wheel. And then Workzone Safety Month. In 2012 there were 20 individuals killed in work zones, and some of those were drivers passing through the work zone, so we're urging people to slow down and pay close attention. We've got a lot of construction going on all across the state, and certainly during this month and all months, I ask that everybody echo the message of workzone safety. So, in closing, thank you for your time. I know everybody's busy and we are very focused and working hard. We've got a great team, and we're focused on the Governor's priorities of improving customer service, developing an infrastructure plan that will catalyze economic development, and being a more efficient and focused government organization. And I do not know the protocols. Should I take questions? [SPEAKER CHANGES] If you have a few minutes. Are there questions for the Secretary? Seeing none, oh, Representative Dollar. All right. Mister Secretary, thank you for your service and your time today and we look forward to working with you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Next item on the agenda is House bill 48, operation of mopeds. I was just looking to see if Representative Tim Moore had left. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, ladies and gentlemen of the committee. I appreciate the opportunity to share this with you today. I've had many questions about where this came from and basically it came from constituents that I met and saw over a period of time, and they were concerned about the mopeds that are on the highways and so on and so forth. And at this point in time, there are no requirements by the state about mopeds if they're on the highways. They can be on the highways and there is not a law that prohibits them or addresses them in any way. So this legislation I came up with basically comes from those individuals. However, since then I've had league of municipalities come and say they supported this and also the state police chief's association also say they support this. Basically what I'm looking at is not to hurt anyone or keep anyone that maybe lost their drivers license from getting to work and those kinds of things, because we all know there are individuals that are in those situations and I don't want to do anything to hinder them or keep them from getting there. But I do believe if they're gonna be on our roadways, and I know in the area that I live in, they're on the state highway, they're on the freeways, they're everywhere. And that they're gonna be allowed to be there, I do think they should be plated and have license tags, and registered with the DMV, and also should have some insurance, because if an accident or something occurs, and they don't have any insurance and it's with you, then your insurance pays for it all. So that is the gist of where I'm going with this. These basically have to be 50 CCs and under to be qualified as a moped or operate as a moped. I have done some research and I found, the insurance commissioners office has weighed in on this, and they have given me some facts and figures on that. I don't know if Ms. Williams is here with us today, but yeah, I believe she is. They can get insurance without having a drivers license. So that is possible. I've talked to local insurance companies that say we will insure them. Some say we are not doing it now, but we will be glad to do that if this comes about. So I'm here to take any questions, any concerns that you have, and this is sort of a

Work in progress. The dealers support the plates and being registered with DMV. That is something that they asked me for and I said I would be glad to see if we could incorporate in this bill that part of that. So if there's anyone that has anything that could make this bill a little stronger and make it a better bill then I'm open to those options, within reason, of course. So if you have any questions I do have some people with the league of municipalities here that would like to speak, Mr. Chair, and also some from the insurance company. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Are they speaking in favor or in opposition. [SPEAKER CHANGES] They'll be speaking in favor of the bill, I believe. [SPEAKER CHANGES] OK. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And also. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well, hold on just a minute. Representative Dollar, do you want to send forth an amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I think that amendment is being copied so when it's copied, we hopefully will still be on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] OK. ?? OK. Let me go ahead and represent, recognize Representative Stine. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you to my former seat mate who has this bill here today. I've talked to him about this bill in the past. In, I think, 2010 this bill came before us and I worked hard. I had a lot of questions about this particular bill. For those who don't know I used to sell mopeds. I figured it was something I would do in my spare time back in 2005 or 6 that was some fun to do, and what I realized was I learned a lot. I learned a lot about people more than I thought I knew because prior to selling these vehicles I classified them as drunks. I classified them as people that didn't care about the future. There was a lot of misclassifications that I put on this group of individuals into. What I realized was that a majority of these folks were trying to do the right and put their life back together, move in the right direction. I know we're all aware of what our unemployment rate is. I know we're all concerned. From my understanding these mopeds are considered as the same as a bicycle. As you have them on a road, and this allows a lot of people to get back to work and it also allows them an opportunity to get their life back together. Now after selling those moped for about two years like I said, I had a huge change of heart in what I thought versus what reality is and I know that a lot of people in Raleigh, particularly Representative Sheppard because he's got a heart of gold, I know that, but a lot of folks in Raleigh especially behind the scenes. They're looking for opportunities to make money, they're looking for more opportunities for more regulations to make it tougher for someone to get a job, to keep a job, to maintain a job, and this is just one way that a guy that has nothing has an opportunity to get back and forth to work. So the question is do we want to kick a man that has nowhere else to go. Now, I'll tell you because we talked about this bill, Representative Sheppard here, I guess in February we talked, and a very good gentleman in conversation, and that Friday morning I had a meeting in Harnett County and I think it was 28 degrees and it was mist raining and I was going to meet the president of Campbell College or University, and I'm going down 421 and there was a guy in front of me on a moped going to work. Now for a split second I was upset and then I looked down and I realized I'm drinking a warm cup of coffee, I'm eating a ?? and I'm listening to my favorite radio station. I wouldn't want to switch shoes with that guy any day of the week. But he was making what he had to do to go to work. So there again, I share my story with you. I know it's a big decision. There's a lot going on in Raleigh. I'm worried about the unemployment rate. There's a time and place for everything. I know the industry's pushing this bill. They're worried about the taxation that's going on in Tennessee cause there's no tax on this product in Tennessee and they're coming across the border. My solution to that is put a bill in to make them tax exempt in North Carolina. I'll support that. That won't kick a working man down trying to go to work. But anyway, this is kind of a last resort for some guys who commute. They don't have a way back and forth to work, they lose their job. So saying that I'm sure is probably a different perspective from a republican, but I would hope that we could find some way to not support this bill. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Carney. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Just a question about the liability. You don't have an amount in here, do you? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I don't believe that we do. I know that some Rose Vaughn-Williams, you may want to weigh in on this. She has given me information on this and to this little bit of what Representative Stone said, the insurance for these would be $100 a year.

average. And so if it would be okay for Miss Williams to speak to that? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Right now I've got 7 more representatives that want to ask questions, and we are going to have to leave here at 10 til so I want to try to get a chance to at least vote this bill today if that's alright. Is that sufficient answer for you Rep. Carney, or do we need to go... Alright. Thank you. Rep. Starnes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Did I understand you to say that the registration on these is $100? [SPEAKER CHANGES] No that would be the insurance. That's an estimate that we received from the department of insurance. The most that it would be could be $300 but the average would be $100 per person. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And what is the cost to registration with the DMV? [SPEAKER CHANGES] The same that it would be for motorcycles. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And most of the people that are driving these mopeds, they don't have a driver's license, has there ever been any thought to having people have a- I guess it would be a driver's license, but it would be a moped endorsement. Maybe just something issued by the DMV saying you're entitled to drive a moped? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Right. Rep. Starnes, I didn't consider that, because I knew that would be an issue for people that Rep. Stone was talking about that are trying to get to work and back, and it is not my intent to hurt people that are trying to get to work and back, but I do believe as prevalent as they are on the highways and the district that I live in, they should have some coverage, they should be registered, and from what I got from the Police Chief's association, a lot of these are high theft items and several of them have been used in dealing drugs, and when they throw them down they leave them when they're running from the police there's no way to track them to see who they belonged to, if they were stolen, there's no record of these at all. And so my whole thrust for this was not only to protect them, but also to protect other individuals that are on the highways that are paying gas tax, that are paying for license, that have not lost their driver's license due to driving and drinking. Now I've even had some people say to me, "Rep. Shepard, if they lost their driver's license from driving and drinking with an automobile, then I don't think they ought to be on the road with a moped if they lost their driver's license." But I looked at the other way, because unlike you feel like, they're trying to get to work, they're trying to do the right things, so all I'm saying is we need to protect those on the highway that are law abiding citizens that have not lost their driver's license and so forth and I believe that registering these and plating these, which is consistent with what the dealers want as well, is consistent with what the police chiefs would like to see in our state, and requiring some sort of insurance, liability insurance is the way to go. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Is there a follow up? Rep. Dollar is recognized to send forth and amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman, and I believe the members have a copy of it. Just by way of preferencing this, I know for those of us in Kerry, we've got mopeds there, we've got tons of mopeds around. And the problem is is that they're on a lot of roadways that are 45 miles an hour and they travel 30 miles an hour, which is a problem during commutes, it's a problem in a lot of occasions. Now you know as a practical matter, if we said you can't be on those roads, then that kind of negates the whole reason, well the reason for a significant segment of that population buying the mopeds, which we don't want to do. But what this does is it at least gets that part of this to make it very clear that the operator of a moped shall drive the moped in a position as near as possible when parallel to the right hand side of the roadway. In a lot of our communities, we have 2 extra feet over there. Sometimes they're marked for bicycles, sometimes they're not. Mostly they're riding these things in our cities and towns were we have that extra space actually over there, and if they stay over there, then they pose much less of a irritation or a nuisance or a traffic flow problem for everybody else who's driving. And to me it's kind of a common sense accommodation where they can still travel, but we sit down and say "You've got to be on the right hand side of the road, you can't be in the middle of that lane.

On a 45 mile an hour street and backing up traffic and creating a problem for yourself and others. So I would answer any questions. I would appreciate your support for the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Blackwell, did you have a question on the amendment? OK. Is there any discussion or debate on the amendment? Representative Torbitt. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to ask the amendment sponsor a question please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized for a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Representative Dollar, what sort of fine or something would you associate with a person who was obviously not travelling on as far as possible to the right side of the road parallel. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'd have to ask staff if this is connected in with a fine or not. [SPEAKER CHANGES] They're looking at the moment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chair. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Stone. [SPEAKER CHANGES] If I could comment briefly on the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I thank the amendment sponsor for the bill. I think it's not a bad idea to remind people on mopeds to be on the right side of the road, however I want to make sure you understand from a guy that rode one for fun at one time, you want to be on the right side of the road. There ain't a question to it. It's the most, I saw my life become before my eyes in one day, that's why I have another pity for the guys on the scooters. I'm like the guy hit six times and I was on the right side of the road. No one's looking out for the guy on the moped. So, just so you know, I support the amendment and I hope he'd want to do it voluntarily if he had the experience I had. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And I would like to say that I also support Representative Dollar's amendment to this bill. I said I'm willing to entertain anything that would make this bill better and as I said earlier it's not my intent to hurt anyone that's trying to get to work and back, but at the same time I think that it's something we need to do to cover everyone. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Jeter, did you want to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I wanted to make a motion for approval of the amendment and I also wanted to point out if the chair would allow me some leeway that going, having a transportation item going slower than the posted speed limit I agree is a bad idea, which is why I think Brody's school bus bill made so much sense. So. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Please don't bring that back. Actually, the amendment before us, do we have an answer? OK, staff is recognized for an answer on the fine. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The offense would be a misdemeanor, we're just having some discussion about whether it's a two or a three. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Do we need to know the answer to that to vote the amendment? Representative Cleveland? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I think that's a little bit steep for not driving to the extreme right of the road. Maybe the amendment sponsor would like to put a $20 fine or something in his amendment. You know, well, we're on the amendment. I feel ?? on the amendment. Representative Cotham. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just a question looking at the effective date of July 1, 2013, could you speak to that a little bit and just going along with what Representative Stone was outlining as some concerns, that kind of gives me a little bit of pause. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All right, wait a minute, let's hold that one for later. Representative Boles. [SPEAKER CHANGES] If the amendment is approved, does this have another referral? [SPEAKER CHANGES] This does not. When this is voted out today it goes to the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Dollar. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I believe, and maybe we could do this with a verbal amendment to the amendment from staff, we'd make this an infraction, which I'm being told by my law enforcement expert here would be the way to go. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Can we do that? OK. So what, we need to. [SPEAKER CHANGES] There would be an addition. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We'd vote the perfecting amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] OK, so we're going to add. ?? and add the words and failure to do so is an infraction. [SPEAKER CHANGES] It would be whatever, I apologize, it would be whatever the staff would say would be the technical language to tie it to that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] OK, and so is there discussion or debate on the perfecting amendment? Representative Boles.

Do we have any idea what an infraction fee may be? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Faircloth. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The maximum penalty for an infraction is $100. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] So it's gonna, the fees are going to be more than the actual insurance on what this original bill is going to do. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Blackwell. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Question for staff on the infraction. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is it possible if a person plead guilty or was convicted of the infraction that in addition to the fine they would also be required to pay court costs, and if so, what would the court costs add to the charge. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Court costs generally are about $200. I think it's 190. If you want to provide in your amendment for a maximum penalty and no court cost, you would have to specify that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Catlin. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Just a question, are bicycles required to do this, or can they ride anywhere in the lane? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'm gonna, we have, Representative Catlin, I think since bicycles are not motorized, that question wouldn't be relevant to the discussion here, since these are motorized vehicles. I think they're subject to the rules of the road, but they're technically can ride anywhere in the lane, or at least they certainly do. Particularly the more colorful outfit they wear. Representative Gill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The fine for riding a moped and getting an infraction is much more then the fine for a motorcycle infraction. That kind of bothers me, because most of the time, a motorcycle person will have a license to operate, and a moped driver may or may not have license to operate, and then you're gonna attach a court fine to it, and the motorcycle driver who only gets fined $25.50. I think this is a little unfair to a moped driver. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Shepard. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I think we should displace this because we're not gonna solve it today and we'll schedule it for rehearing next week. [SPEAKER CHANGES] That would be fine. I have one answer to Representative Catlin's question. My desire also was to give this a year to be implemented, so that DMV and everyone would have a chance to. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Shepard, let's work that out for next week. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Appreciate you guys. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. House bill 86, Representative Hamilton moves that the proposed committee substitute is before us. It has been, it's distributed in the package. The lady is recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you mister chairman. In the interest of time, I'll be happy to answer any questions about this bill very simply. I do very much, thank you. Very simply. This is the restoration of 27 miles of track between Castle Hayne and Wallace, predominantly to serve the military needs, freight needs for the state ports and encourage economic development in the more agricultural center of the state. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Moore is recognized, I think, for a motion? ?? referral to appropriations. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay, favorable report on the PCS, unfavorable to the original, with a referral to appropriations. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? All in favor say aye. It is the decision of the chair it's, or, opposed? I didn't think so. Representative Jeter, House bill 375, increased allowed size, yes ma'am. I'm sorry. I did announce it. The ayes have it, the bill's passed. The motion is agreed to. Representative Jeter, House bill 375, allow increased size of passenger buses. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you mister chairman. This was a request by Mecklenburg county and the city of, well, primarily the city of Charlotte. This would allow for 60 foot buses. Currently there's a 1955 law that prohibits Charlotte buses from being more than 40 feet. This would allow them to have 60 foot articulated buses, the kind that look like they

...at the little apron[?] in the middle only on the express route which are the interstate main routes not across town. Happy to answer any questions. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Cotham. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This is a local bill applying just to Charlotte and at the appropriate time I'd like to make a motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Cleveland. [brief pause] Representative Boles. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I would just like to make a comment that you're only authorizing a speed limit of 45 miles an hour. [SPEAKER CHANGES] It does not limit the speed of the buses. It limits the roads that they can travel on predominantly. What we're trying to do is make sure that these 60-foot buses don't go on cross town routes. So, it doesn't limit the speed, it just basically says—as you can see in the bill analysis summary—that on highways with a speed limit of 45 miles per hour to more. That's the access of the road they're allowed to travel on; not the speed of the buses themselves. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And just a follow-up and other counties contiguous to Mecklinburg. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yeah, the reason why that is—Iredell County ,for example, Gaston County, Union County. They have express routes where they pick up some commuters, drive them in to the City of Charlotte. So, if you just limit it to the City of Charlotte you really defeat the purpose, which is to get these people from the outlying areas into the downtown area--uptown areas. Excuse me. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Anymore questions? [brief pause]. Representative Cotham is recognized for a motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that we give House Bill 375 a favorable report. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? [brief pause] This one goes straight to the floor. Okay. So, Representative Cotham moves favorable report to the House Bill 375. All in favor say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] [chorus] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Opposed? [brief pause] [silence] Motion carries. We're on a roll here. Let's try House Bill 410 Cancel Title to Manufacturing Home. Representative Jordan. Is still with us? [SPEAKER CHANGES] It's a PCS, Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay. Is he still here? [pause] Lacking the bill's sponsor, I think we are done for the day. Is there further business for the committee? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Wait a minute. Here he comes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Jonathan! [laughter]. Representative Torbett moves that the proposed committee substitute on House Bill 410 is before us. Representative Jordan, we just passed three bills in five minutes. Well, [inaudible] in five minutes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is House Bill 410, Cancel Title to Manufactured Home. Do we have the proposed committee substitutes that we were supposed to? [SPEAKER CHANGES] We have the committee substitutes before us. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Members of the Committee I'll be very brief. When you buy a manufactured home, there is a title to it just like there is for a vehicle and it's taxed as personal property. If, however, you attach that to real property it's a residential home and you take off the hitch, take off the wheels and you put it on a permanent foundation and you either own the property that you put it on, or you have a lease for 20 years or more for that property. That makes it real property according to the taxes. The problem is; there's another step you're supposed to take and that is to file the fact that you have canceled the title. You file it at the Register of Deeds with a particular form from the DMV that says the title is canceled and we're never going to move it again and it's no longer personal property. Well, as you can imagine, what has happened in the past is people lose these titles. So, we have estates where nobody knows where the title to grandmama's mobile home is. We have situations where they're trying to refinance but they can't because the bank wants them to file that form from the DMV that says there's no title anymore. So, this bill is basically to provide an additional way to cancel the title by using the current forms that DMV has and adding a section where the person says I'm the owner. I meet all the requirements for real property; I just don't have the title with me. Will you accept this and they can still mark it off the records. That's the hope and intent of the bill. At this point I'll stand for questions. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Torbett. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For a motion, Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Gentleman is recognized for a motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Move favorable to the proposed committee substitute; unfavorable to the original bill. Zero referral to... [SPEAKER CHANGES] Judiciary. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Judiciary B.

Further discussion, further debate? Representative Starnes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I don't understand the mobile homes real good but once you take the wheels off and you take the tongue off and it becomes real property and let's say I buy your lot to have the mobile home on there but I don't want the mobile home, can I put the wheels back on and weld the tongue and move it? [SPEAKER CHANGES] You can take it off, I don't know that it can be residential property again, though, because it's been permanently affixed to that real estate. But you can have it removed. [SPEAKER CHANGES] But I can sell it to someone else and then, and no title is required at that time? [SPEAKER CHANGES] That's correct. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Staff's got an answer to that, Mr. Giles? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, Representative Starnes, there is a procedure in law re-title the vehicle and sell it. That's a separate procedure. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay, thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Obviously it's not quite as common. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? So many as favor the motion say aye. Opposed? Motion carries, we are adjourned. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman.