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 | March 6, 2013 | Committee Room | Regulations

Full MP3 Audio File

Good morning. The inaugural meeting of the House subcommittee, I guess the House Regulatory Reform Subcommittee on local government is now in session. I'm Bill Brawley, chairman, and we welcome you to the work group. To begin, I've been asked to tell you take the contents of the gray folders but please leave the folders and make sure that I get your name correct when you're recognized to speak so that the clerks can take care of the minutes. Our sergeant in arms today are Fred Heinz, Marvin Lee, and Charles Godwin. Our pages, Trevon Williams from Forsyth County, John Reynolds from Alamance, and Demarcus Lucas from Wake. If the last gentleman named bears a striking resemblance to a distinguished member of this body, that is purely a familial, I, that's your grandson sir? And I'm sure you're proud as I would be. Two of them! Williams as well? Congratulations sir. I'd like to give the members of the committee the opportunity to introduce themselves for just a moment. We'll introduce our staff. I'd like to start with Representative Brisson as vice chair. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you mister chair. Represent the, district 22 which is Bladen, Sampson, and Johnston County. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Fulghum? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Jim Fulghum, Wake County, District 49. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yvonne Holley, Wake County, District 38. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Marvin Lucas, district 42, Cumberland County. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Deb McManus, district 54, Olive, Chatham and Lee County. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Michele Presnell. I have district 118, Yancey, Madison, and Haywood. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mike Speciale, District 3, Olive, Pamlico, part of Craven and part of Beaufort Counties. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Evelyn Terry, district 71, Forsyth County. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Johnathan Jordan, House district 93, Ashe and Watauga Counties. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Moffitt, aren't you a member of this committee? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir, mister chair. I was hoping you didn't see me. Tim Moffitt, Representing district 116, Buncombe County. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Elmore? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Jeffrey Elmore, district 94, Wilkes and Alleghany counties. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Josh Dobson, district 85, Avery, Mitchell, McDowell counties. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mark Brody, district 55, Union and Anson County. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Larry Bell, district 21, Sampson, Duplin, and Wayne Counties. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. We also are helped today by Lynn Taylor, our committee assistant, and Nancy Goodman from the legislative assistance office. Welcome Representative Cotham here this morning and also there's nothing worse than a blonde senior moment. I recognize Representative Martin but I can't remember your name sir. Yes sir. Catlin! I apologize. I promise you I will learn your name sir, and would the staff please introduce themselves. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Erica Churchill with the Research Division. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Karen Cochrane-Brown with the Research Division. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. A quorum being present, we're ready to conduct business. We have one bill today, HB-120. Representative Hager the primary sponsor is here to present, and we have a PCS on motion of Representative Moffitt that the PCS is now before us. Any objection? Representative Hager. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you mister chairman. I'd like to make a note that I didn't think you were blonde. [SPEAKER CHANGES] It's been quite some time sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I didn't really see a lot of the skin color. Thank you mister chairman. This bill is basically a home builder's bill. It has three main parts of it. Really two and a half main parts. I wanna say the depth now and say this is a very simple bill. Very short bill. I'll go over the first set. I'll go over it section by section. The first section deals with inspections of homes being built, and I'd like to note before you

Before we get started, we do have two homebuilders in the room today and Representative Brody is a homebuilder and I am also. So I'd like to go over this so that we can both talk very knowledgeably about this. Section One deals with the inspections that a homebuilder has to go through to make sure the building he's building, the one or two family dwelling, that he's building is subject to the Building Code of North Carolina. I've got that right here. You guys can see how much is in here. This is a Engineering Safety Structural Code and basically the inspections are to make sure the homebuilder complies with this code that we have in here. And basically it's for the structural integrity and the safety of the home that's being built. At present, there's eight inspections listed in the, our Building Code. Footer Inspection, a Slab Inspection, a Foundation Inspection, a Frame and Rough In Installation, a Fire Protection, and then a final inspection to make sure everything looks good. What we would like to do is to make sure that these inspections that were built under an Engineering Code for Safety and Structural are the inspections that a homebuilder goes through, period. These inspections are there because they've gone through the time of Engineering practices and Engineering calculations and these are the pertinent inspections for a safe and structurally sound built home. What has been happening in other areas is there's been added inspections on here. Now we don't, they may be, for instance, take the Footer Inspection. There may be a couple of inspections associated with Footer Inspection. You dig the footer, you pour it full of concrete, there's several things you need to do. But there's, what is happening in some locations, is there's other inspections added upon this. And you might say that's not a big deal. You got to have a third or fourth or fifth inspection on something that's not in this list. But what it does for the homebuilder, he's got a customer waiting, and he's dedicated time that he wants these homes built in. He's got people waiting, he's got equipment waiting and that usually costs a lot of money. Now, when you guys think about a home builder, you may think of these large homebuilders that you see a lot in the urban areas, but I doubt, Representative Brody and I are probably pretty close to the same, I doubt he's got a big company behind him and I don't have a big company behind me. We are kind of one trick horses so to speak. And so a delay for us means a lot of dollars and sometimes even thousands of dollars on the cost of the home. And you guys know where the homebuilder sector is these days. It's probably one of the most devestating parts of the business that we have. One of the most devestating sectors that we have in North Carolina. But what we're trying to do is make sure that we apply to this code, make sure we apply only this code because this code was put in for sound Engineering practices and make sure we try to reduce the costs and build the sector up a bit. That's the first section. The second section deals with the Code and when this gets updated basically and what cycle it gets updated on. At present, it's a three year cycle and that causes some issues. We had an issue back last year in the Energy Code in how it was updated and the Code was actually updated before the inspectors had the training and before Representative Brody and I got our addition books so we were actually responsible for a Code that we didn't know what we were supposed to be responsible for. So going to the six-year cycle helps that. Helps get the data in there. And, honestly, after two hundred years of building homes, three hundred, four hundred years, there's not a whole lot of things to put in a new code. If it's an Engineering practice, then those Engineering practices are Physics and Geology and those things that are already proven through time. Science is just not there as much. What you'll see mostly, that most folks want to put in the Code are new products. Well, I've got a better window glazing, so I want to get it in the Code. Well, this is not for product placement. This is an Engineering Safety Code that we're dealing with here, to make sure we build good houses and we build safe houses. Those are the two main pieces. The third piece is really some of the inspections we were seeing. We were getting an inspection on inspecting cable wiring in a house, which is low voltage wiring, there's no safety issues there, there's no structural issues there, so it exempts the cabling in a house, the third section does, from any of those inspections. And I'll be happy to answer questions Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: Thank you Mr. Hager. Are there questions for the sponsor of the Bill? Representative Holley. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: I'm sorry, I've got a quick question. Under section two, you said this for products. What do you mean? Like if windows have to meet a certain code and a new company comes out with something that, they can't put those windows in the home if they don't, for six years, if they don't meet this Code? [SPEAKER CHANGES]: Thank you Representative Holley for the...

but no, what I am saying is basically, this is a minimum code. This is the standard you build to. You can upgrade. You can put more insulation in your house. You can put better windows in there, you can put better doors in there, exterior doors. A lot of things you do depends on what you want to spend on a house. My district, for instance, when I got elected in 2010, we had almost a 20% unemployment. My folks can't afford those upgrades. They can afford the basic house and that's what we are trying to get a lot of my folks in. I imagine a lot of your rural folks are in the same issue. We've got to be careful not to over build the code to price our folks out of homes. And I think they can upgrade to those new windows but they don't have to. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Lucas. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chair. Question for the Chair? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Concerning stakeholders, there might be some in the audience, I'm not sure. I don't know if the chair... [SPEAKER CHANGES] I have a list of people that wish to speak and if time allows depending on the number of questions from the committee we will take that input but it is the intent of the Chair to vote today. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Terry. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, sir. I simply want to ask a question regarding and I haven't read it completely, the impact to green building. You mentioned products and I know there is a plethora, plenty of those, does this have any impact on that sector, the green building sector? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Can you explain the green building, I'm not familiar with that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I am simply speaking about those efficiencies regarding new technologies as it relates to buildings that don't have energy leakage and that sort of thing. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And now, as far as the commercial code, you may be talking about the commercial code, we are just talking about the residential code. Yes m'am. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Residential as well. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay, and if you are talking about energy efficiency areas, is that what you are talking about? Okay, thank you. What this does, this sets a certain standard to the last upgrade that we had which was the energy code upgrade. It sets the standard. Now you can always build above that standard. And you can always make your house more efficient. You can always add triple glazed windows instead of double glazed, you can always do a lot of those things. The code book is there to set the minimum standard and saying this is where you need to build. The code book has traditionally, until recently, been a structural code to say if you build a house this way, it won't sink and it won't fall down. If you build a staircase this way, then most likely you won't have accidents on staircases. If you build a house this way, then safety wise, it is a good solid home. Now, if you want, as a homeowner, want to go above that, it is certainly your prerogative again, but folks in my district struggle to do that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Bell. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Move for a favorable report at the appropriate time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Representative Fulghum. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The question I had about the additional local or county codes, over and above the North Carolina code, this does not exclude the county or local codes from being greater, for example, in regards to geology or some kind of special soil issue, or is that not correct? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Fulghum, it does exclude them because what we want to do, and I will give you a great example. If there is an inspection in Rutherford County where I live, because of the geology that we live in, well that geology is not just unique to Rutherford County, it may be in Cleveland County, or it may be in Bert County, it may be in others, but there is an inspection that the folks discover needs to happen, we have a process for driving that back up to the building code council, looking to ascertain where that geology, doing some engineering studies, to know if that was an adequate inspection or not, because most inspectors are not engineers as you know. And then looking at where that same geology would move to because, as you know, it may go to several counties and then input that into our codes. If we do it just for the county and the county has that inspection then that look never happens, so it may be an adequate inspection but it may just be happening in Rutherford County and they may should have been doing it in Cleveland County also. This gives that mechanism to make that happen and even with the 6 year code cycles, anybody can elevate up to the building code council any concerns that can get put into the code. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative McManus. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My only concern, and someone came and talked to me about this yesterday and answered a lot of questions and I really appreciated that. My only concern was changing from the 3 year cycle to the 6 year cycle and I am struggling just a bit with that when I

[Speaker] The states araound us are still ??? on three year cycles and some are examining it but right now thier on three year cycles and i worry about why we would change that [Speaker Changes] Michican i think thats goin to a six year cycle for instance, and i think everybody is looking to move that way and it is the burden it puts on the builders at that time. and with changing technology it changes that fast, you need to have things that change in the code that are pernant for the code again, if you believe its a structural and safety code theirs mechanisims if a safety instant comes up lets say for instance a hurricane hits the outer banks, there is a different clip that needs to be on a house, to keep the roof from pulling off, now there's huriccane clips on there now, but there is a different design and its proven through engineering then there is a mechanism for putting that in there, the code updates are for the normal look for international code , if theres anything different now its usually just small new ???(time: 0:54) , there very simular, theres very very unsusal have large issues in there , now these small new ???(time:1:00) and updating the code, six years is not a long cycle any other issues like huriccane clips, structural issues, job issues, have a mechanism for getting in there within the six year cycle so thers mechnisms in there its just the updates to the book its the updates to the inspectors that cost money and frankly its a cost to the builders, [Speaker Changes] thank you represntaive Brody, [Speaker Changes to representative Rep 55 Mark Brody] thank you mr chairmen and i just like to address briefly that question the representaive for the cycle itself from a real practicle stand point cause im a builder and i can probly say i average about 25 homes a year over the last decade so its not real big but yet its a full time job ,and thats what i did, the problem we run into on a practicle level is that the code gets introduce for example in 2009 , the international building code, the system takes that code and decides if north carolina wants to participate in the code and that takes quite awile and the n once we decide what we want to do that gets filtered to the local inspector and by the time, and we're we, the builders are in this trial period, we are building things along the way and then the inspector comes in and says and sometimes the inspectors are really good and say guess what, what i need to tell this and this is goin to change, im going, we're going do it this way now but, next one your going to have to do this but other times we catch by surprise that the new quotes come through and its probly close to three years before we actually get it and then another six months to build it into our system because you got to remember we got to deal with with multiple building inspection juristictions that even have their they like to interpretate , interpret what the state interpreted differently, from what the state interpreted, so we sort through that and by the time get around that area its about three and a half years, just in time for the 2012 code to come out and to talk about the what are we gonna do next, maybe we should implement this right away or not, its real confusing [speaker changes] is there a question in there, [speaker changes to repsentative Brody] no i wanted comment on [spearker changes] thank you sir but we're taking questions right now ladies and gentalemen we will yield representative Holley is recognized for another question [speaker changes to representative 38 Yvonne Lewis Holley] well actually he's anwsered some of my questions but i, the energy code piece, look at what these codes are and i can see them being standard i also know that the energy field is developing at a faster rate,with energy effiency, at a faster rate because the new technologies are constantly being introduce is there something in here that if something came up they could implement a new code, [speaker changes] reprentative Holley , i think the question has been asked three different times if new technolgy that improves can it be used and the anwser is yes the sets a floor of what the minimum is and also does not allow creation of new regulations [speaker changes to representative Holley] you can still do some new regulations during this period if necessary. [speaker changes] would you like to address [speaker changes] thank you representative Holley , thank you mr. chairmen, resentaive Holley there is a mechanism for getting a code into the code book , as new products come in , if its deemed important enough, so i think if some technology came in all of a sudden, to make a house completely energy efficient, and it is required it could get into the code without having to go through the six year cycle, there is a process for that , but as the chairmen said this is a standard minimum building criteria, and anybody can upgrade anything they want , this is a design to build an affordable house, for the average north ???

?? not an affordable house for someone who lives in South Charlotte. Not disparaging about South Charlotte. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank You. [SPEAKER CHANGES]None Taken We have some members of the public that would like to speak. And we will start with Ms. Joanna Reese. Would you please give us your name your organization that you represent and limit your comments to three minutes please. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Thank you Mr. Chairman I am Joanna Reese with the association of county commissioners and while we've had some mixed response from our members largely the concern has been around moving from a three year cycle to a six year cycle the way they explained it to me is that moving to a six year cycle would put us somewhat for the state out of compliance or out of line out of sync with the international building code, That they would prefer to stay in the three year cycle. There was some concern over limiting the number inspections but mostly it was around the three year to six year cycle. Thank you [SPEAKER CHANGES]Do we go ahead and get the comments and respond to everything? Glenn Batten. Mr. Batten would you hold for a moment? Sargent Barnes will help you with the microphone. Better yet, Representative Louis. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Anyway we don't have the problems in smaller jurisdictions that occur in larger jurisdictions we have much smaller scale much fewer of them. We do face similar problems. With the issue of extra inspections we started doing the extra inspections on the winlow provisions and when the flashing and house wrap started being a very common thing. I've tried for twenty years to get people to flash windows better and it took a couple years of bad weather before they actually believed that they were not doing it properly. And nowadays we have something to hang our hats on when I look at it. And a lot of times the truth is I'm riding by looking at something else next door and I can see what they have. It’s a very quick thing. If I have to go in I can take a three pound hammer and I can tell you if the nail pattern has been maintained and that's the only extra inspection we have over and above those eight listed, And builders by and large are happy to get it in my jurisdiction because number one if I'm there heck I'll look around and if I see something obvious I'm going to tell them and you have to establish a trust bond with builders. A lot of times there is an adversarial nature to what we do but if you've got respect for each other and you communicate with each other an extra inspection is not going to cost a lot of money unless it is something truly exorbitant and therefore I don't think the extra inspection is going to be a big issue here and I urge you to consider that I'm well aware that there are some codes that are not liked and the ?? code being a prime example, I hear it every time I go out somewhere. And the other thing and I don't know if this was pulled from the bill or not in respect to the building code counsel, doing interpretations and putting them online. I know for a fact that the North Carolina Building Association has three seminars a year in all reaches of the state for four days where people come and we attempt to achieve the consistency that is the desired goal here in this and I think we do an excellent job of that and on behalf of the Builders Inspectors Association I would just like to tell you that I am honored to be here on their behalf. I thought I'd never find the day that I'd be in a place like this. If anybody has any questions I'll do my best to answer them. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Thank you Mr. Batten. Is your last name spelled Batten? And you represent The North Carolina Building Inspectors Association? Thank you Sir. Chad Ray. You are appearing as an individual? [SPEAKER CHANGES]Thank you for allowing me to have an opportunity to speak to you. The first thing I'd like to do is thank each of you for your service to our state. Not everybody bites off the bullet you bite off and I know it's not easy so thank you. I'm not here to make big waves either way

on either side. What I personally believe is irrelevant in this case. I personally believe that the three co-cycle is efficient and that it works, but I'm here to tell you if you decide otherwise, like me and every other build in their state, that's what we'll do. My main concern is why this argument is being held here. There's no one in the building world and no builder in North Carolina that I respect more than Dan Tingen, who's here, a good friend of mine, and I don't understand why this case isn't a Building Code Council, if Mr. Tingen and his council decided this is what was best for the builders of North Carolina so bet it, but I don't understand why this can all be decided without the council is my main question. And I do only have a couple of statements about what was made from our Chair, there, about the science. It's true we have been building homes for thousands of years but we don't build them the same way. We have indoor plumbing and electrical codes that don't kill people and there's lots of things. The ceiling, the floor has always been raised over time. It always will be raised over time and in today's world things change at a faster pace than they ever have technology-wise. Products do come out, and I'm not here representing any product, could care less about a product, but things come out that make people's lives more comfortable, saves them money, and most importantly keeps them safer every day. Again, it's my person opinion, going to a six-year cycle keeps those things out too long but, again, I'm a builder and I'm a member of the association and whatever what it goes is fine with me. But that's how I believe. And I thank you for your time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, sir. Dan Tingen. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee. I appreciate the opportunity to speak to you this morning and comment on this bill that I thoroughly support. I am the Chairman of the North Carolina Building Code Council. I'm not here to represent the North Carolina Building Council today but I am a builder of over 35 years in the state of North Carolina and can speak with some opinion about the items in this bill. To go back, for a second, to something Mr. Ragis[?] commented on or questioned, was why the Building Code Council was not dealing with this, why was the legislature dealing with it, and in fact, in order to carry this thing out the way it's being designed it would require legislative authority and a statutory authority, which we do not have. Just, real briefly, I know you have all received some correspondence from various interested parties about this bill and I just want to take just a second to run through some of these items. Some have defined this bill as creating inflexibility and I would argue that, in fact, this bill is going to be tremendously helpful to the industry and also to the inspectors it's going to go assure the consistency of enforcement around the state. One of the cornerstones to the legislative authority that we have is that we have a statewide uniform code and this, to have a statewide uniform enforcement policy behind that would be very, very helpful and, in fact, will limit the exposure of local inspectors it tell them exactly what he's supposed to be looking for. Local departments have created their own unique set of inspections and has created tremendous amount of burden on the industry. There was a time before the economy fell that my company was doing about 25 houses a year and I had people in various subdivisions, various locations, and they understood the requirements to of that jurisdiction and unfortunately, with the economy like it is, I'm down to just me. And as you can see I've got a few grey hairs and I'm getting too old for this, a little bit, but in the last 12 months I've done business in 5 different jurisdictions. And quite honestly I can't keep it straight what my next inspection is. So it is quite a burdensome process. One comment that's been made that I think may need some clarification, and that is, from time to time these model codes are referred to as national standards and I want to be sure that members of the committee understand that the ICC code volume, the model codes that we use as a basis for our codes are not an industry standard. There's a tremendous difference between the codes that we use as a model and what an industry standard would represent and this is not an industry standard. The ICC is in the business of making, of producing model codes just like I'm in the business of building homes and they're in the business of selling code books and that's what they're there for and we appreciate the work that they do, it does help us, but it is not a national standard. With regards to the legislation, it has been mentioned, questioned to me about whether, why the code council would want to do interpretations. And as I've read this bill I don't see that the code council would be doing interpretations. The only

If resident might be made in fact we do have time to time and when we have appeals is pill decision should be posted invite to the public is the allow those interpretations we have Oldfield about those interpretations a network that would cost I like idiots and will ask or comment this bill refers to the councils website the Billy curtails really does not have website we are housed within Department of insurance where staff by the Prime Minister's personnel and those of the people that we was possible for developing this website I can write much acute representative space shot question gentleman is the engine would you are you sometimes are I at user get you not here to represent the development your organization a Council but did they take a position on this bill the biblical counsel has not convened since this bill introduce a we have not discussed broody underwood that commission reminds Rudy and what I'm come research director for the American chemistry Council appreciate you let me come else legislation's 10th largest chemical reason state in the country many of the chemicals used fear to one construction products including roof materials insulation price when disabled sidings pines how felt a lot more stuff of our members particular now they are dupont basf have major production facilities your north carolina aware of a major part of the building industry here critical decisions regarding the construction techniques from far safety to energy efficiency polis are often going to be with the building for life with 50+ years the life of the building is when resistance insulation levels energy demand far resources are usually determined by some amendment code in place, construction the international code council which is composed of state and local government officials homebuilders building construction product manufacturers of paste the code on a three year cycle this year cycle provides continuous review and improvement which provides the foundation for north carolina state code as well as take those cross-country most state separately code accordingly on for your cycle state of michigan's mission has just recently adopted a six year cycle but their sexual cycle is called flexon which allows for the review of the code by the council every three years or premises safety durability the lifecycle cost assessment homebuilders like car buyers move the latest techniques and safety requirements embedded in the purchase when you buy new car you won't the 2013 the univar brandy 2003 model in closing we support your efforts to reduce the regulatory burden homebuilders but we hope that you allow some flexibility regarding the and a review of the kos or safety durability is lifecycle assessment is present thank you dave sampson admits this chairman members a committee him and they said south carolina's adcs as a general contractors are folks the commercial nonresidential construction is some multifamily we support the proposed committee substitute we appreciate heger, dennis and what it basically does is it gives flexibility the state building code council to update the commercial code as they see fit i have a mandatory three-year update is very much as mr. carmine are obscenely mr. sampson my carpenter as chairman members the committee money is my carpenter i'm executive vice president and general counsel ron homebuilders association will recommend a represented figure 4 in the other sponsors and because of your life were sponsoring to support legislation on i will not belabor the point to the been married previously but i will like a couple of of important points i think the to summarize out one is the north carolina this is general assembly many decades ago towards the greater the north carolina building code council and jvm the responsibility to develop a uniform statewide code that would that would be the same in murphy is it is a manager words on the page of the site now others difference of interpretation at the local level about what these words may

But, the words are the same. There needs to be, in order for this system to work fairly across the state. By the way, let me say. A uniform state code is unusual when you consider the codes in the rest of the country. Some states don’t even have a building code. Okay? Most of the building codes in this country are municipally based. The larger cities have codes, but often the surrounding countryside does not. North Carolina has been a pioneer in the protection of the public. We’ve had a building code actually technically since colonial days. In 1935, this legislature passed the system that we have now and they created the North Carolina building code council. Which is a 17 member council with tremendous expertise, categorical appointments. Who update the code not every three years, but every time that it needs updating. We are not changing the authority of the code, of the code council, under this legislation to consider any change that needs to be made in the North Carolina building code that they can make at any meeting that they hold. It is not we’re delaying products. If there is a good idea that needs to be adopted in North Carolina, there is nothing to prevent the proponent of that idea to come forward at the next meeting of the building code council. And say, this is the sort of the thing that needs to adopted in North Carolina. Now, with respect to the number of inspections, the types of inspections we’re talking about. The building code council, this legislature has given the building code council the responsibility to decide what are the number of inspections that are necessary in North Carolina to make sure that we’re delivering safe housing in North Carolina. The building code council has decided that number is eight. Some local jurisdictions have decided they want some additional inspections. All of this, but you’ve heard Mr. Tension say, they don’t believe they have the authority in the absence of this legislation to tell local governments that they can’t do more than the eight inspections that are set forth in the code. This legislation encourages any local jurisdiction that believes they ought to be doing inspections in addition to the eight that are set forth in the code… [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Carpenter, I need to cut you off. We’re out of time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The motion before the committee. A motion of Rep. Bell is favorable to the PCS unfavorable to the original bill. Serial referral to finance. Any discussion or debate? Hearing none. All in favor of the motion say aye. All opposed. Motion carries. Is there any further business for the committee today? We are adjourned. Thank you.