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

searching for


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

House | May 7, 2013 | Committee Room | Education

Full MP3 Audio File

Call the meeting to order. Sergeant-at-Arms today Marvin Lee, Barry Moore and Doug Harris, and McQuaid, and I appreciate what they've been working hard to get stuff out since we had a committee in here before, took up the place. Our pages are Skin Williams, Chad Turtleton, Benjamin Tweeter and Jane Sulliban. I appreciate you people being with us today. I'm going to shift a little bit because the people got some other places to be. Try to help them get to the committee that they need to be in elsewhere. We're going to start with House Bill 691. Representative Lucas? This is the PCS, you going to have a motion for that? Representative Collins make the motion. All in favor of the PCS being forwarded say aye, all opposed no. The ayes have it, the motion's carried. Representative Lucas. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chair. This bill came to me from Fayetteville Technical Community College, a local community college that serves Cumberland County and serves Ft. Bragg. And I represent District 45 which includes Ft. Bragg, largest military installation in the United States. The issue here is, you see we have a very active community college and serving our soldiers there. Out of approximately 56,000 active duty soldiers, about 5,000 of them are enrolled in a course at FTCC towards achieving their associate degree. As you are well aware of, the country has had several wars going on and Ft. Bragg has played an integral part in that with numerous deployments of soldiers to foreign theaters of operation. And additionally, when they come back they don't always stay at Ft. Bragg. They often are conduct what's called a PCS, a permanent change of station, to another military installation. So the issue here that this bill is addressing is you have a soldier who starts with a North Carolina community college, their education, they may get deployed somewhere, they get transferred to another State. My example, from Ft. Bragg to Ft. Hood, Texas. Now what happens when they go there? They might be deployed again. The issue here is that we want to make sure that people who start their education in a North Carolina community college can actually achieve their degree from that North Carolina community college, not stop that education and then pick it up somewhere else. That saves the service member money. It helps us and it's just really showing that we're a very military friendly State by what we do. The PCS is there, you can see the summary. It adequately lays out all the different parts of that. I've just told you what the bill accomplishes. We have Dr. Larry King here, the President from FTCC. Also, Dr. Mary Shoeping, who represents the community college system. They're both very much in support of this bill. In summary, for the small amount that we might be forgiven, $11 or $12 for every credit, what we're gaining is the fact that we're showing soldiers that we care. We're relieving that potential burden on them. We're keeping soldiers who PCS somewhere else and they're deployed, the opportunity to finish their education in a community college in North Carolina and not lose their investment and frankly, not lose our investment in the fact that they've started here so that they can finish here. And it really is an incentive to those soldiers to continue on to degree completion. And it just continues to show to our soldiers, to the State, that we are a military friendly State. I ask for your support on this bill and I'll entertain any questions. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Glazier? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, very much, Mr. Chairman. I agree with Representative Szoka. I recognize that they're issues that appropriations will have to resolve when the bill gets passed, if it does there. But as a matter of educational policy and as a matter of security policy for the country, actually, I think this is really an excellent bill and at an appropriate time, Mr. Chair, I'd like to move for a favorable report. [SPEAKER CHANGES] OK. Representative Tolbert? Representative Lucas? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chair. Representative Glazier has already beat me to the punch on what I desired to say. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Sheppard? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, sir, Mr. Chair. I'd like to ask the bill...

sponsor a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Yeah, I hear you. [SPEAKER CHANGES]You may. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Representative Szoka, have any of the community colleges weighed in with you on this, and do they have a staff, a community college presence or anything on this? [SPEAKER CHANGES]Well Dr. Larry King, who's President of the Fayetteville Technical Community College is in support of the bill, and he's here today. Also the community college system has said that they support this bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Representative Graham, G. Graham. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Thank you Mr. Chair. One question to the presenter. Would this also impact on continuing education courses? Could we make it applicable to continuing ed courses, or is it? [SPEAKER CHANGES]Well, it was just to achieve the associates degree because they start a course of study, and it's to completion of that course of study, so it really wouldn't apply to that. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Yeah, I was thinking that there may be a training program where they would get CEU, or continuing education credit and the fees could be applicable. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Well, that's a good idea. The majority of what soldiers are enrolled in the community college for is to achieve their associates degree. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Representative Glazier. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Thank you very much Mr. Chair, I move a favorable report for House Bill 691, and re-referral to committee on appropriations. [SPEAKER CHANGES]So, wait, this is a? [SPEAKER CHANGES]Sorry, favorable to the PCS, unfavorable to the original bill, re-referral to the committee on appropriations. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Any discussion on the motion? Hearing none, all in favor say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES]All opposed say no. Ayes have it, the motions carried. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Representative Cleveland? [SPEAKER CHANGES]House Bill 239. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Thank you Mr. Chairman. House Bill 239, Non-resident scholarships out of state tuition, would remove the prerogative of the university system of giving in-state tuition to out of state students that come in under the various and sundry programs that Morehead, Cain, and others. Presently we're spending $6 to $8 million, a little more subsidizing these scholarships, and it is something I do not feel, and others do not feel that the state should be subsidizing. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Representative Ross. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. For those of you who don't know much about the Morehead scholars and the Parks scholars, these young people who come to our state and take these scholarships are some of the most extraordinary students in the entire country. And they come to North Carolina, they make tremendous contributions here, many of them end up staying here. In fact, our own Jerry Cohen, who has done such a great job here at the General Assembly was a Morehead scholar who came to North Carolina from Connecticut, and stayed and made incredible contributions. I think it would be penny wise and pound foolish to not support bringing the best and the brightest to our campuses to make both contributions to our campuses and to our state. But the other thing that you need to understand is, if we cut this money out, the Morehead and then the Parks there at NC State, their foundations will have less money, and they'll still want to bring out of state students, but what the result will be, is that they'll just have fewer scholarships. And that will be fewer scholarships not just for the out of state students that they have to pay for, but the in-state students. And so our own North Carolinians will have fewer opportunities for these incredible educational, and work experience, and cultural additions to this state. And you know, sometimes we have to protect our crown jewels, the things that make this state special. And these programs at our public universities

Fees, but this isle says things than I would strongly urge the committee to vote against this L um and let's hold North Carolina tool higher standard than simply , is chairman of the isolated as of the students and the scholarship programs are from the state of North Carolina independent states which the scholarships a passive told me that 50% of the graduates and staying or state of North Carolina residents , I cannot think the taxpayers North Carolina to be subsidizing the education of people from Austria and the brothel Turkey again, the United Kingdom I don't think they should be subsidizing the education of a bit from Georgia telephone we have been made I do not fall program I think it's a good program (SPEAKER CHANGES) I just didn't think that we as citizens in the state should be subsidizing the reconnaissance and this will be fewer students will get scholarships however if the university system feels this is a worthy program they come up with money within their system which are a host of other sources including tax when they come up with the money in their system to cover the state solution to these four and announced a two and represents them like to support this bill if you look at the pass some repair the first paragraph very less sense these persons must be consumer resolution or, for all purposes by using must be given if a commission but they're not and cannot display the display this idea that old proverb project much is given much more should be given that might be the principle of theology but it's not a good principle of us to screen the tax lines emerging Cleve is exactly right we had no duty to distribute tax funds to people from other nations or other states that inflation thank you very much is chairing the only really rise to 22 fundamentally disagree with the spill on five-hour simply when you are on the same page two years ago when we all know the number of us here in both parties to get rid of the Cal state athletic scholarships but that's very different from the academic scholarships their ideas will inform the C with New Orleans,(SPEAKER CHANGES) it's not just a Morgan hill there are, 10 merits and user merit scholarship programs, and that of the 10 or institutions are so many of us have universities of benefiting from the eye and what is essentially of scholarships to, is a lot of the scholarships are funded by private money a public money we put it simply leverages that allows them to create additional scholarships and so the net effect of the culmination of the money allows play on scholarship to have a lower cost which thereby allows the program have more in state students receiving scholarships that they would otherwise be able to uncover the scholarships by the donors to the university's have a certain percentage about the state scholarships to have to be part of that in order for the funding to continue from the dollar so we don't allow that's how we essentially cut back in fact that some of the scholarship cases may end up winning scholarships to eliminate any new scholarships and Wilbur chief liberty in state students because the money is coming in will they all have to go for the out of state does not want to happen, I think it's really a porch and I was well that we get them in the statute several years ago so that ended in a string the scholarships 116143.6 says that the institutions still have to maintain the current number of North Carolina residence entered into the institution that is the scholarships for taking the place of the north Carolina’s to their own funds some brilliant as state students that will increase the research and prestige and we (capacity of the school's stadium are staying allow for recruitment, in the other students were brilliant, North Carolina State year as a philosophical matter we spent hundreds of millions of dollars last year supporting subsidized, tax credits and incentive programs to bring in our state businesses ??...........

business capital in this state. Why are we oppose to spending a little bit of the money to bring in the human capital from out of state to keep in this state and move us forward? And so, because I think this actually creates more in-state capacity, adds prestige to the university, doesn't take away any in-state spots, and really does all the things we would want to happen in a university community, I would really hope that we would defeat this amendment, for the same reasons we came together to get rid of the athletic scholarships, the reverse reason exists to keep the academic scholarships and the talent in North Carolina, and at our university, and I would be voting no on this bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Representative Gliddon. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Thank you Mr. Chairman. It's my understanding that the larger organizations that have these scholarships, basically are required to have 50% of the students residents of the state. They may drop a couple of students, I don't see where that's any humungous harm. I'd like to point out that 4 or 5 years ago, there was about $2 billion in federal and state aid for tuition to the universities. Today, that amount is pushing $4 billion. I would think there's sufficient aid out there to make sure that if this student, and North Carolina resident, that got dropped from this program, that he would not suffer the loss of his education. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Representative Jeter. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Thank you Mr. Chairman. I am opposed to this bill and I'm going to give an example, kind of echoing Representative Glaziers comments. If you look at the Levine scholarship, that goes to the University of Charlotte, it has by the foundation, 15 allotments that cannot be reduced. It's not permissible by the foundations statute, so what the net affect of this bull, if it passes is, you're going to increase the cost, because 4 of those are automatically out of state, based on the foundation. You will eliminate 8 other scholarships that are given primarily to in-state students that go to UNC Charlotte if this bill passes. Just that case, and that to me is concerning, because I agree with Representative Cleveland on principle, what I'm concerned about is the unintended consequences of some of the foundations and the detrimental impact it will have on our in-state students, national merit scholars and others that are going to lose funding because some of these foundations don't have the option to reduce their scholarship from 15 to 12. That's not permissible. And that's why I would oppose this bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Representative Adams. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Thank you, Mr. Chair. I was curious when you mentioned Representative Cleveland in the bill of the sundry scholarships, and I curious about what that, if somebody could provide that list, and I want it in a comments. Does the staff have a list of those scholarships? I know Morehead was one that was mentioned. What was the others, or would you know, Representative Cleveland? [SPEAKER CHANGES]Representative? [SPEAKER CHANGES]I honestly don't know. Parks is one, Levine scholarship. To give you an exhaustive list, I couldn't. [SPEAKER CHANGES]A follow up? [SPEAKER CHANGES]Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES]If I can just comment on the bill then. [SPEAKER CHANGES]You may. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Thank you, Mr. Chair. the fact that we don't know. I mean, I think we need to know what we're doing before we do it, that's number 1, but I also believe that as had been said, there's going to be an indirect negative impact on our state students. I also believe that, from the things that I hear about around here, there's not a lot of value placed on students who come to North Carolina to be educated, who has been mentioned. Many of the students stay, I'm one of those students who came to be educated and stayed. I think I made a tremendous contribution, paid taxes and done some other things, I think we need to place a little more value on what students who come to North Carolina bring to our state, to add to the diversity of our university programs and have an overall positive impact of what we do here in North Carolina.

And I don’t believe that with the problems that universities are having now with funding with even foundation funding dwindling that we can just say that it’s gonna be easy for these universities to come up with the money, I just don’t believe that. It’s very difficult now for students to be able to stay in school and to get an education so I’m opposed to this bill and I hope that you vote no. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Represent ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman I didn’t say it would be easy for the universities to come up with the money, I said, that if these programs were such a benefit to the universities that they could come up with the money, I neglected to state that the bill holds harmless those that are already in the program, and moving forward they would be funded at the in-state rate. And I would think that would assist the various foundations in adjusting their programs to do what they have to do to remain viable. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Horn [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman. I‘d like to ask the bill’s sponsor. The bill as I understand it says all of the scholarships. So what percentage, I’m curious, we’ve heard comments here about the merit end. What percentage of these scholarships are merit? There are lots of kinds of, lots of types of scholarships, for lots of reasons. So is this scholarship program truly targeted or the result is that we really do get a significant number of high performing students? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I think each program has different criteria for their program. The Morehead-Cain does go out looking for exceptional students and they recruit them. Exactly how they go about recruiting them, I’m not really sure ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] My point, Representative Cleveland, is if these scholarships are in fact oriented to or achieving the goal of bringing high performing students, that creates an environment on our college campuses that we want, and I can’t help but believe that a reasonable percentage would find North Carolina a good place to stay and do business and that they would be students that our industries here in North Carolina would want to recruit so that my concern about eliminating these scholarships with a broad brush when in fact they help our universities raise the bar. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We’re not eliminating the scholarships with a broad brush they’re maybe some reductions in the various programs. I can’t take that as fact cause I don’t think is fact, it’s gonna depend on what the university system wants to support and if they are really interested in this diversity that they claim they are interested in they should support this. I do not see or expect a drastic change in the way the number of students and in the way things are going on right now. It’s just taking the taxpayer’s dollar direct dollar support out of the equation. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Glazier [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, just to respond to several points and to speak a second time on the bill. First Representative Horn is absolutely correct that all of the scholarship services are merit based this is not a need based program, they are all merit based scholarships that we’re talking about. Second the institutions that are affected by this in numbers are AFT, Eaton, Elizabeth City State, FSU, NCA&T, North Carolina State, UNC Ashville, UNC Chapel Hill, UNC Charlotte, UNC Greensboro, The School of the Arts, those are the institutions that have these scholarships. There may be others but those are the ones I’ve been able at least accumulate. And just sort of in response to that, there is no question for some of these scholarships by taking out the state money either the scholarship will simply have to fold or in some of these cases the rest of them they will not be able to offer the numbers of scholarships nor the numbers of in-state scholarships that they’re currently offering because we

Help cover the cost and it seems to me again that we ought to be encouraging best in the business talent to educate and stay and build businesses and come to the state and we do in every other thing we do here. This is the minimal price that we pay to bring these people and really rev up the reputation of our universities and our business entrepreneur in the state. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative ??. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman. I heard a lot of anecdotal evidence and I'm not the educational expert on the panel here but I'm ?? of a little bit of balance to what I've been hearing. These foundations are totally independent for the state of North Carolina for it's decision making on how many scholarships they offer. Isn't that correct? [SPEAKER CHANGES] That's correct. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Couldn't this have an affect on system we have now? Couldn't this have an affect on actually costing tuition money and increasing tuition on other students. Representative Cleveland. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Cleveland. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The possibility exists, I couldn't ?? say it would. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay, I think we should keep tuition down and this is a good step on this bill. Follow up, Mr Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I have leaved it and affect hasn't been mentioned. Could also be that these foundations decided to opt for more in state scholarships. The reputation and designation of the best bargain nationally makes us feel great but it's there to serve students, primarily North Carolina students and that's just an opinion I'd like to share and support the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stam. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, and I'm glad Representative Iler made those points because I think he is getting down to the basic math problem here. I think there is idea out there that there is some free money that if we supplement these foundations, somehow the money doesn't disappear elsewhere. But we subsidize our in state students about $13,000 per student per year. So just to make the math easy, if this affected a thousand students that maybe more than it affects but we'll use that because it has lot of zeros, effect would be that the university, board of governors will have an extra 13 million dollars that they could apply to its priorities. Now that maybe for merit scholarships for some people, it may be more needs based, maybe for cutting tuition but the priority will be decided by our board of governors and our assembly and not by these private decisions of these wonderful foundations but nevertheless, no matter how wonderful they are, they are private. It's also disproportionally chapeled here in NC state, you give a list of other but really the big numbers are chapeled here in Raleigh. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Folks, we are delivering this point and this bill it does go after appropriations after here. Representative Catlin. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I have a question it goes a long line before the last few speakers have mentioned. Does anybody know how much money these programs are costing to the state of North Carolina and exactly what the savings would be if we cut it? I'd like to hear some numbers. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We do have a staff person to say she has that number. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chair. Andrea ??, physical research division. If every non resident receiving one of these scholar ships, we'd have to pay non resident tuition instead of resident tuition and total additional revenue would be about 7.9 million dollars. Under representative Celveland's bill, the impact would be phased in over the years as different classes phase out the impact would accumulate so the estimated impact in the first year since everybody has already been awarded these scholarships would be zero additional revenue, 14-15 just under 2 million dollars of additional revenue. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Representative Ross, a second time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you very much and I'll be brief. This goes back to Pennywise

foolish, and many of the points that were made by representative Horn. If these students don't get the benefit of any of these scholarships, they're simply going to go to school and other states. And their talent will go to other states, and that's a decision this general assembly to make that we think that every bit of talent is here in North Carolina, and that we shouldn't benefit from some of these folks. But, these are kids to get accepted to MIT. These are kids to get accepted to Stanford. And if these opportunities are not here in North Carolina for them, they're smart consumers. They'll go somewhere else. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to call for the ayes and no's when we do the vote. [SPEAKER CHANGES] May I ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, you may. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I would like to point out that the house voted to do this during appropriations deliberations in the last session. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Fisher. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think I heard someone say that if we pass this that, or if we don't pass this that tuition will go up. Is that what I heard? Question for the bill's sponsor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I don't think that was the statement that was made. I think the statement was that the costs at the universities, fees and whatnot, could possibly be increased to support the programs. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I guess what I'd like to remind the committee of is the fact that part of the funding for the Moorhead scholarships or the park scholarships comes from the fact, as representative Glazier said, that a lot of matching money is made available to the college's if they give these scholarships to people who come from out of state. And then, the other thing that I'd like the committee to consider is how many of your children have ever gone to school in places other than North Carolina? There you go. And how many of those states, where you have sent your children to school, have footed at least part of the bill to make sure that your student got there? I would say that there are a lot of opportunities that are given to students in other states in other parts of the country modeled after what North Carolina does currently. I would absolutely hate to see these opportunities go away, and I will be voting against this bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Bumgardner. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This bill fundamentally says that the university can call something something that it is not. Either we have an in-state student, or we do not. That's a question here. We're going to say something is what it is not, or that it is not what it is. And so, that's the basis we need to vote on, and I support the bill on that basis. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Folks, I don't have anyone else, and I need a motion at this time. Representative Gill, I'm sorry. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I do have my hand up. I just wanted to ask one question. I don't know whether the staff would be able to answer the question, or the [SPEAKER CHANGES] By the way, this is the last person. We're gonna vote after this, OK? [SPEAKER CHANGES] That's fine. Or the presenter. We talk about the amount of money that we pay toward the scholarship. We don't talk about the amount of money that the private group pay to North Carolina. So I would like to know what percentage of money has come from North Carolina through these scholarships. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Does anybody have that? I wouldn't think so. No. We don't have that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Need a motion, Mr. Chairman? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'm ready for a motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I move for a favorable report. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Referral to appropriation. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We have a motion that we refer for a favorable report, and refer to appropriations. We're going to count the vote. So, we're ready. Jackson's gonna call the vote. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Adams.

Ark. Bale.[SPEAKER CHANGES] No.[SPEAKER CHANGES] Brandon.[SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Brown. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Bryan. Bumgardner. Carney. Cleveland. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Collins. Cotham. Daughtry. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Dickson. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yeah. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Dockam. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Elmore. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Fisher. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Deal. Glazier. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Charles Graham. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] George Graham. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Hall. Hardister. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Horn. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Iler. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Jeter. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Jones. Jordan. Lambeth. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Lucas. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Luebke. Malone. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Martin. Miss Sho. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Pittman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Presnell. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ridell. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ross. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Saine. Schaffer. Shepard. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Speciale [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Stam [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thine [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Tolson [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Torbett. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Turner. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Warren. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Whitmire. Wilkins [SPEAKER CHANGES] Nay. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We have 13 ayes and 26 nays in the bill fails. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman. Thank you committee. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 273 is been displaced. The next bill is House Bill 337. That's a PCS. Can I have a motion to have that ?? Representative Delucas moves that we have the PCS enforced. All in favor say aye all opposed, no. Ayes have it. PCS is before us. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you and Mr. Chair, with your permission I'd like to recognize that Dr. Garry Green is ?? The president of Pasai Technical community college, and I'm sure he'd be happy to answer any of your questions that might remain after my presentation. This bill is the re-purposing of 3 million dollars that was allocated to Pasai technical community college way back in 2005. The original intent of this 3 million dollars was to construct a facility within an economic development project located at the edge of Winston Salem. This property originally was part of RJ Reynolds tobacco company. It was ther warehouses. Some of their factories. And this project is being overseen by wake forest university. You might be familiar with this economic development project by the name of Pedmont triad research park. But it is recently been re-branded as the wake forest innovation quarter. You may be wondering why here we are in 2013 talking about the utilization of money that was appropriated in 2005. This economic development project has taken perhaps a little bit longer than Pasai tech and others had originally expected. For a number of reasons. First, we had the downturn in the economy. Second there was a lot of infrastructure that was required of this part, including the movement of railroad tracks, which is a big endeavor. Second, some of the executives at Wake Forest university had changed over time. And most importantly, and what is the driver of this bill, as the developers also changed. The new developer is Wexford and in its agree

Met with White Forest University. No longer could Versailles Tech construct a building there. The new agreement requires private sector ownership so that the community college will need to lease space rather than purchase a part of an existing building or land for a new construction. What this bill will do is this $3 million dollars will be divided into $300,000 dollar payments over a period of a decade for the operations and lease for this building. It will be called the Center for Emerging Technologies. It will be involved in biotechnology, nanotechnology which is a fascinating innovation if you're not familiar with it. We're very fortunate to have a leader in nano technology, David Carol [SP] at White Forest University. Also a design, an advanced information technologies program, a small business center and corporate and industrial training programs. Again I emphasize this is not new money, it is just re utilizing and re-appropriating through the community college system the $3 million dollars that was granted back in 2005. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Elmore? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I motion at the appropriate time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] do we have anyone else who wishes to speak? If not it's the appropriate time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Motion for a favorable report to house bill 337. Oh it's PCS? Okay, sorry, favorable to the PCS and favorable to the original bill with a referral to appropriations. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You heard the motion. All in favor say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All opposed no. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The ayes have it and the motion is carried. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House bill 537. Representative Steinberg., [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir, thank you Mr. Chairman and good morning ladies and gentleman. You have in front of your a local bill, house bill 537 which is simply reducing the terms of the board of education members from six years to four years. Moving forward anyone who is currently serving under the six year term will be allowed to continue doing so but this is basically changing those terms moving forward from six years to four years. Out of the 115 LEA's in the state of North Carolina, only four have terms that exceed four years and the [??] school district is one. So this is an effort to get us more in line with the other school districts across the state. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Anyone wish to speak on the bill? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Pittman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For a motion at the appropriate time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We are ready for the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I move favor report on house bill 537. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You've heard the motion, all in favor say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All opposed no. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The aye's have it and the motion is carried. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you committee and thank you Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Our next bill is house bill 718. Representative Holloway. Anybody handling this for Holloway? Oh here he is. I kept him waiting so long he's done gone to sleep back there on the back row. I need a motion report for PCS before us. Representative Stam moves that we have the PCS forward. All in favor say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All opposed no. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The ayes have it. Representative Holloway. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chair. This bill is just simply a study bill. And Mr. Chair I think this is a number of study bills that the committee rolled them together, is that correct from PCS? And so this is all the education study bills that's just all wrapped up and rolled into one. My bill is the engine that they've been placed on and I'll be glad to answer any questions. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Do we have any questions? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I can't tell where you're at. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I want to make a motion if this is the appropriate time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is that okay? Okay, you make the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Move to give the bill a favorable report. [SPEAKER CHANGES] [??] PCS, Leo. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And favor as to the original, favor as to the PCS.

These are the most all of those they are all oppose the do said (SPEAKER CHANGES ) the motions David Lakers and that is only invite up playing the consort-on the play goes on with online 68 but as a PCs somebody give them the right thing to look as if emotion or open the PCs for small employers a lot will close the onset PCs Force the fed bought bank as chairman of the head-nodding back 4 May 2 sunny day I am excited about the spill on the next hill fire captain percentage well , I think both of these bills have a great deal of potential for the study on the wall were reimbursed at the first film that the governor signed a and two so the first bill for his administration was a bill that the house and senate passed which created endorsements, four of high school deployments recognizing that, like its word well not well suited for choose not to go 124 your institution in some areas and affect a career path that they can take and we give them endorsements the player, we're ready and the other is for somebody that does choose to go 124 year institution presumably in its are calling for a portion of 968 is a film that is designed to try to enhance the type of CT E courses that students were primarily working on a career any endorsement would take we frequently during my relatively short and legislation your people refer to morning too good programs based on baton and in the systems we have some very supportive data which comes from the state of Florida and began a 2007 with a program down they're and are they get caught doing something for some order what this bill proposes in daddy is that four students and K A course in high school that leads to a certification that he is awarded not by the school but by Shawmut National business Kennedy sang that matched the 9/2 offensively mastered the skills from the knowledge that are needed in order to take back the skill and translated into something in the work force that would find aside version of the kinds of courses that we walked two and 7 to 5 stars too much you're on the school where ready a path to take and so what we would do is DPI working with the department of commerce would again to 52 categories of CGE business certifications and they would consider essential a (SPEAKER CHANGES) Al Leiter Russian requirements of the course work for and in the second component would be what is the employment value of the role of particular certification and one of the things that alike about what this bill conditions is that it would all our DPI working with the department of commerce and local economic development too tight were some of these course selections to the specific job in the industry needs of the community which might be different in the western part of the state from now on the cuts or might be different in an urban area from what it might be in rural area and some of the structure here is to develop two levels of difficulty and toward incentives to the school system based on statements to successfully not only take a course like to pass the business certification in conjunction with it were also provide that we would pay for those students to take back as so that it would not represent day of restriction or a disincentive for some students to be able to take it also are legends semis our students and their teachers ??.....

To look broadly at bringing students into the program that could successfully complete it because they could have an opportunity to get a bonus as a result. Now I said that in Florida this program has worked quite successfully and part of that is illustrated by the numbers that have occurred since this program has basically been in effect down there since the school year 2007 and 8. They have something that are called career and professional academies and each school district in the state of Florida beginning back then was required to have at least one of these cape academies operating in the school district. They have in fact since this program has started expanded very dramatically. Students who are in these cape academies and who are taking the certifications and completing them successfully, over the roughly four years now that the program has been in place shows several things. But basically all of them are that their grade point averages are higher, their drop out rate is lower, their absences are lower. Various of the measures that we look at. They're earning their high school diploma. If they go through these more rigorous courses that are leading to jobs then they do better in school. A final point that I will offer on this is that the data would suggest that this is true across all ethnic groups in the state of Florida. looking just at the 2011 membership the white membership in Florida was 42.42% and essentially the rate at which they were completing these certifications their percentage was about 45%. Not sure that statistically that little difference between 42.42 is much difference. For African-Americans the statewide percentage of the overall membership is just under 23% and their percentage of completion of certifications is at the same level, just under 23%. The Hispanic population 28.5%, their certifications completions rate is right at 26%. So it is across all groups that this benefit is being spread. And so I would like to close by simply saying that we are pleased that the North Carolina Association for Career and Technical Education has described this as an excellent bill, it has their full support, and I hope the committee will support the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Dr. Bill you're first up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman I just wanted to say that it sounds liie a good bill and I wanted to know if the state board endorsed it. Sounds like it's going to call for a lot of collaboration between state board and the school systems to get this moving. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The liaison from DPI is here, she may want to speak on it. It's my understanding is that they are supportive of the basic intent that lies behind the bill. They are a little antsy I'll say about the use of incentives for teachers. But my concern is that if we're going to use data from other areas and we've got a model that worked, I'd hate for us to say well we're going to delete pieces of it and expect it to do as well here. So I think it's worth our piloting it and we're going to follow this and if it doesn't produce the results I hope we will abandon it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Bill you had a follow up? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Could we hear from her? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Who do we want to hear from, Joanne? Honeycut, who is CTE director to the state. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman. The department of public instruction and career and technical education already collaborates with a lot of the entities that this bill names. It's part of our standard practice in developing programs of study for students in career and technical education. We collaborate with department and commerce and work force development boards as a matter of practice. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative...

And to lend the Holland had to have copies even if those that have gone and I believe there are one has a copy and everybody got a copy the menu supposed to them and I will match like written by callers from human bankers and Ford chairman of the basically this is adding something into the bill already is in the next bill which coming out all summer and that is the limits the total amount and CNN that individual future could receive an ice singles school year to the more than $2000 we had to be a lot would call the eight people rich and 969 and I will talk about next and Stu might have provisions basically parallel that they could the people and people are convinced and restore us out how was this man until one of the best of the money.(SPEAKER CHANGES) So if I was a real person in the real world with outlook for the law could that the body lay out our we got him in the bottle is a Spiegel man and family members include of the first test results can be with you in making centralizes and that we start to unite the number will get either it's awful from the only word on the amendment itself , represent what option of voting by actually think the selected bonuses or programs is a bad idea option of human I would encourage you to vote for it because I'm optimistic the bill will pass it this way you can at least a lot when academic you fear that you they put together the bay on the memo that all of them and CEO (SPEAKER CHANGES) of bold move does it in the amendments or will there have got to lose the two most people 69629 ongoing own speed: 96 to 91 and speak on the youth law, on Monday as admitted that your newspaper and if this then played please identify the sale they live from monetary flooding idea for a cure for technical education from the county schools offered 15 before throwing a fifties. Technical education of bacon is chairman of the very brief of the critic of fish and professionals estate to the house four of 968 and now we have you believe this will complement of citadel 14 which was of course I eagerly by another in February on stage and are seeking programs in the state for much Wednesday welcomes taken this chair from the ball just not seeing the body turn that would allow been sold and those polled today on notice them corporation earlier this month that the move is that you had better make that they can escape, we're sending a policy committee that they were talking about is the centerpiece that appears to me that this committee needs to be looking up on the line bill Marshall the program and not paying so much attention to those stains say that these which will be determined corporation -partly owned by an act of quickly, (SPEAKER CHANGES) and said it's like they were quite so the question for about a high would prefer that not be so much to focus but there are other important pieces of legislation 18 years that the this sets up a mechanism for helping us 25 this CD course work in those areas that are regulars and leaving two employment, there's also been reporting process that this provides that brings the information back to education over slight so that we can monitor the success of the program the incentive is just one piece of it but the other pieces are there as well as checking get ??....

Have you had an offer for a motion yet? [speaker changes] I have not. [speaker changes] Would you entertain one at the appropriate time? [speaker changes] I am ready right now. And this is a PCS as amended to go forth. You can handle that? You want me? [speaker changes] I'll do my best. [speaker changes] Yeah, I'll bet you can. [speaker changes] Thank you Mr. Chair. My motion would be that we give a favorable report to the PCS for House Bill 968 unfavorable to the original and that appropriations do its thing going forward. [speaker changes] It was as amended now. [speaker changes] Thank you, sir. [speaker changes] Everybody got the motion. What we're doing is a favorable report to the proposed committee substitute as amended rolled into the new proposed committee substitute with a favorable report to the new committee unfavorable to the original and referred to appropriations. Representative Luebke. [speaker changes] To speak on the bill. [speaker changes] you may speak on the bill. [speaker changes] Thank you. I may be the only one thinking along these lines. Representative Wilkins and I usually agree on everything but I am really troubled by this bill because we're going down, particularly if I take a glance at the next bill, about AP incentives. We're going down a road of providing bonuses for teachers, a kind of - a sort of a merit pay for engaging in a particular part of the curriculum. And that seems to me to be very very troublesome. I heard the representative from DPI, Mrs. Honeycutt, say that they were already collaborating with school districts. I am a very very strong supporter of CTE. We have one of the best CTE programs in Durham - in the whole state and our school board is encouraging our faculty to expand in the area of CTE etc, but what this bill does is actually then puts money int he hands of teachers and students, if I'm reading it right, who go down a particular track. I don't think that's a good way to go. I mean, I wanna know, for example, surely we need to have young people understanding globalization. Where is the bonus for getting students t get scholarships to go to college- four year scholarship to study issues of globalization? Why not that? To me, there's no difference between studying globalization, studying CTE, or increasing AP participation. They're all important activities that we're doing. We should not be starting to go down a road of giving teachers bonuses, students bonuses to do things that are really their job. And to me, it does distort - a phrase that's popular around here - the marketplace, distorts the marketplace because it really would say to teachers, You know, you get a little bit of money now granted Mr. Stam is right, it's not a whole lot of money, but still, you're giving people money to push students in one direction as opposed to another and I submit to you that globalization - what could be more important than having our students get prepared for globalization? I just, Representative Blackwell, can you tell me why it's a good idea to be shooting money to teachers, a kind of merit bonus for pushing in a direction? Why is this a good idea as opposed to supporting the program which I totally do. [speaker changes] I guess it's a, perhaps, a philosophical divide. If there is the concept that teachers who do a good job should they be paid somewhat differently than teachers who are not getting results, then it seems to me you want to take advantage of this. We have a program that worked rather dramatically so far in Florida enhancing the very things that I think you are alluding to when you talk about globalization. Globalization largely means preparing students so that they can compete in a global marketplace. That means more rigorous career-type work and it means having a relationship to jobs that are available in the global economy. That is precisely what we would be rewarding. [speaker changes] But globalization could also be having someone study political science, or sociology, or economics. We could continue this conversation

looking outside this room, but I do want to ask one other thing about your bill. I'm very troubled about the idea that the Department of Commerce is gathering some data on economic employment needs and somehow that’s being thrown into the mix as we determine how big the bonuses should be. Do we really want to say that the intent of our high school programs is to directly link itself to where there's job shortages in one particular year. That seems to be really troubling. We can disagree on all the rest of it, but bringing in the Department of Commerce to tell us which jobs have the greatest shortage in this year. That seems to me we're crossing a real new line there. What do you think about my concerns there? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Again I suppose the [SPEAKER CHANGES] Folks we've got a bill before us. We're gonna move on and I'm gonna vote right now and we're not gonna answer your question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman. Could we have at least [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. Representative Lucas. [SPEAKER CHANGES] a division on the vote please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Pardon? [SPEAKER CHANGES] A division, so I can see whether I'm all alone with my concerns here or not. [SPEAKER CHANGES] A division. Show of hands on the vote. All in favor of the motion raise your hand. All opposed. The motion passes. Before us next is 969. Yeah. By the way you people remember who is Chair up here. Sometimes you're trying to bypass me. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman this is the other piece that deals with those student who are on a college ready trajectory. Nobody is forced into one of these things, but again the desire is to have students better prepared for whatever they might choose to do after high school by taking more rigorous preparation and hopefully helping them get a head start on completion of work that may get them credited at the college level. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Blackwell let me interrupt you. I got a pcs Representative Cleveland vote that's before us. All in favor say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All opposed. The ayes have it. Go ahead. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Here again the explanation is somewhat similar to the earlier explanation on CTE. In this instance the data goes back over a longer period of time, but it does again come from Florida. In 2000 the State of Florida began working under the system that is akin to what we have attempted to duplicate in House Bill 969. Some of the data is worth taking just a moment to tell you about. From 1991 through 1999 that's before the full program was in place in Florida, there was a 67% increase in the number of students in Florida taking the AP exams. From 99 through 2012 there was a 391% increase. That's just the number taking it. For the same time periods there was an 86% increase in that first period in the number of AP exams taken and there was a 404% increase from 1999 to 2012. From 1991 through 1999 without the full program in place there was a 100% increase in the number of students passing AP exams. From 99 through 2011 there was a 316% increase. The greatest impact in Florida has been on rural and minority students. From 99 to 2012 there was a 585% increase in the number of Hispanic students taking AP exams. For the same period 99 through 2012 there was a 710% increase in the number of African American students

Taking the exams while the numbers are not quite as high there are some more dramatic increases in the successful completion of this examines the wobbly for catching people here is duplicated as closely as we can add model down there that involves a partnership , which such as the college board delayed help you think its path and again, contributions to work with part of the district's other two can play better some more income districts in some districts with a list of two suppression rates are too good professional development with students and again make use of the state to teachers if you do better with your standards actually taking the course and passion the AP exam will give you like acre of legends and maybe like $2000 may not be much but we would like to holy sites are beyond that we thank you're doing a good job and we want you to work more closely at the bank and to pay the work bell project somebody because of their skin color or their background but the more comprehensive and we thank the incentive helps to increased enrollment in the car you don't get it unless you're successful on the same, it's not just pulling more kitchen and vertical markets successfully out on the other and so I urged the committee and today as it will give PM on the budget process called them a way that we can come up with the money two actually fund the program with your approval will allow western waste our framework in place and then we'll work on the appropriation has taken the pledge -efficient 5:42 M and MI had 79 experienced offensive to let a little higher schoolboys hand this INIH and two find, from (SPEAKER CHANGES) MUCH 2 KEAPNG M's NB scandalize success MFN, and in fact it turned out that are school system had organized dissipation range 10 AP M at any of the school systems in the country am IIM 5 URUF ricks MI remain a little skeptical about VMI E.F. Hutton and the faculty of finding any U.S. MF, like a star halfback K2 RT2 is morning, from the very beginning instead MSN EL penny and fans everywhere back MIIND support SIVME Mann C hall line had the potential in our statements by not offering any separate E6 LMAD print and seek an MRI two of the commission thankful they keep a low-budget Baker motions to(SPEAKE CHANGES) Chairman Michael listening to our descendants of fisher's I agree with some of us were 4 to 5 court's ability don't agree with bonus provision would think the government bill far away as the more controversial issue and agree completely on the appropriation of the funds for the testing and the other work the bill requires and then you hope that, of all the patients are shorter resolved in a larger case study the only notable you're involved in a suggestion that we offer base pay for teachers up to four start doing incentive programs and commitment progress beyond the ballistic all the rest of the bills are really did go for that reason to support the debris and the Knesset error, but two of support is building a form of battles so we had this year, the two women say that I think that come undone, was to become a problem with the with America into something that you have two teachers and they have the same: one futuristic simplifying the one better than our feelings about which a little more money because of that, we always talk about future pay the bills to be one key democrats are going on the job would do once again and again in the finance and business from the one key people the welfare for the Boston and – became too, but how do women say about the requirements or more public input is a good expression on the ground, where possible and still does not in the bill that would like to ??.......

Say that we have a plateful of the lost worse than I would hope that we can implement a window contents are grateful to see if people are eligible to take a second test with LC box scores to concede a roomful of whether they will actually do well to commit the district as a limited area of Haiti policy testimony to know that we literally like some very great and so bad that seems to be a great play wage also not just limited to the safety of our PS 60 to see if they are impossible to convey the test or what they would do well but I think the law sources and other great indicator that we've now got an eyeful box and hold back the sport with the district court amendment evolution collaboration would look into the box score stood up and go directly into the Indianapolis, in which students, despite a lofty status has a more comprehensive way of looking at as much as they saw for the state of affairs in Sebastopol remember different factors that we can determine whether the proportions, but to Wilmington Trust and love those students from all four were demolished and this is like a floor apartment, then we can recognize a separate parts of the which include a buffet for great northern beans support will lead the guests invited the mistake of the bad when they led against school's board of director quickly lead employee said the wayward says Owens touch with that in either direction for too long for the school board the county small rural districts in or so before we have approximately 5700 students are free and reduced rate of 70% four years ago we were selected to be a part of the college or partnership at the flywheel for three courses three AP courses and we administer 50 exams would buy schools a year also received a four school grading system border should demand to work directly with the superintendent for school board are short show came and went out to the schools and met with administrators not install slurs group provides scholarships for all of our teachers to retain the PF troops end of the ?? (SPEAKER CHANGES) storyline shortages and really amazing um we read from a 15% pass rate of four years ago and every year since we've increased 7% from hour 33% which is about as the average I would increase from 50 exams to 400 exams are minority participation bears what are you heard today along with AAA effort is tentative for blacks, we have we achieved our communities transform the strip is transformed our culture and our schools are parents do was to their students today that the courses we have one teacher at two from high school at 13 of 13 possible tissue tell us forward this every Saturday, I was able to do this and courses this week to the prepare for the psychology by Richardson is ready to commit to perform an hour excited about the future and the level of work to be still love with the help of a partnership I we know we're going to continue 63, the age of the most basic element that it could bring this chairman of answer the previous mail things like discussion is my wish I could support but the buttons from the back side is to abolish made on purchased as a lawyer on small church pastor detailed knowledge of the lobby of the dolls law to make the event and he reminds me of my brother was living in supplying the city's court to stop you were to get back to his big bill work it out and then any way back to complaints about the helicopter mechanic is not talk to them and what sets up the mechanic to 9:00 PM talk to the mechanic goers claims alongside his job as opposed to going and established by the slaying strikes many of the party and play good job should be getting a budget skills and finally going to be a hit the back of that year at supportability as I can benefit fisher motion because it can and cannot I missed him I had done this team together economics and then mind,(SPEAKER CHANGES) I just wanted to do nothing down level we can do to support children and NT two start the clock to that of concern about the money in this bill affected the last one, not a bad break a five S to do with them over how ??............

Of our teachers because we have just not made an effort to increase the salaries of our teacher who work hard everyday on behalf of our children and one day when we are gonna get to that point, incentives are fine, I think teachers are ought to be doing what they are supposed to be doing anyway but I don't believe we need to believe in any teacher or any student behind and when we don't do something for the collective body of teachers who are working with our children, making a serious commitment, I think we are just creating a problem we shouldn't have. Our teachers shouldn't have moral problems that they have because it doesn't appear this the general assembly is really concerned about the work they are doing. I have a grandson who is 11 years old, sixth grade, he is an AP student takes all AP courses, reading at 10th grade level. I support those students who may not be in AP courses, who maybe in other classes but the teachers are still doing what they need to be do these children which is forgetting about them. That's my real problem with the bill, I support these children, I support AP courses, I support other courses that students may take that may not be AP. We have got to be consistent, show some consistency and support for our teachers and all of our children. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Fischer. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman. I move that we give the PCS to house bill 969 a favorable report with a referral to appropriations, unfavorable to the original bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. You heard the motion. All in favor say Aye. All opposed say No. The Ayes have it and the motion is carried and I believe that's it. The meeting is adjourned.