The house will come to order. Members will take their seats. Visitors will retire from the chamber. The Sargent in Arms will close the doors. Members and visitors will be asked to please silence all electronic devices. ? Would ask the house come to order Today’s prayer will be offered by representative Brody member and all the guests in the gallery are asked to please stand and remain standing after the prayer for the Pledge of Allegiance Representative Brody [SPEAKER CHANGES] Almighty God and Heavenly Father, you are our fortress and our strength. You have given us this good land for our heritage and have called us to serve the people of this great state. We humbly ask you to be our guide during this legislative process. We thank you for this session and implore you that you will direct the discussions and decisions that lay before us. Help us to make decisions that abide by your law, decisions that uphold the general welfare and peace for the people we serve. You are the author and sustainer of all life and we humbly implore you to make us people who cherish all lives in our midst. As you have spoken to us by your word, we beg you to guide our own lives as well so that we may be moved to live by the same laws we make, administer and judge for this state. Give wisdom to our leaders, guidance to the people who support our efforts, and a quiet heart and mind to hear your words. We ask this in the precious name of Jesus Christ. Amen. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Gentlemen of representative Lewis is recognized for motion [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mister Speaker. The journal for March 2nd has been examined and found to be correct . I move that it be approved as written [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Lewis moves that the journal for March 2nd has been examined and found to be correct and moves to approve. All those of your in favor of this motion, please signify by saying aye [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye [SPEAKER CHANGES] Opposed no. The aye’s have it. The journal is approved as written. Members the nurse of the day today is from Septim Claremont from Raleigh. We’re glad to have you here with us today Ms Claremont Representatives Brawley, Saine, Hastings, Martin, Setzer and Soca are recognized to send forth the committee report to Corporal Reed [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Brawley, Saine, Hastings, Martin, Setzer and Soca City bill 20 RC updates no fuel Taxes. Favorable house committee substitute. Unfavorable senate committee substitute are reaffirmed [SPEAKER CHANGES] Committee substitute for city bill 20 is reaffirmed to the committee on appropriations The original bill is placed on the unfavorable calendar. Representatives Brawley, Saine, Hastings, Martin, Setzer and Soca are recognized to send forth an additional committee report to Corporal Reed [SPEAKER CHANGES] House bill 117 NC compete’s act. Favorable committee substitute Unfavorable original bill re-referred [SPEAKER CHANGES] House bill 117 is re-referred to the committee on appropriations [SPEAKER CHANGES] Amendment to the referral of the original bill is placed on the unfavorable calendar The committee substitute which received a favorable return is referred to the committee on appropriations. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Member a number of recognitions for some guests in the gallery today. First of all on behalf of Representative Bowles of Moore County the chair is happy to extend the courtesy to the gallery to Stanley Fry who is the youth pastor at Yates Stagger Baptist Church in Cartage. Mr Fry, if you’d please stand, let us welcome you. Glad to have you here today And on motion of Representative Farmer Butterfield of Wilson and Pickens counties the chair is happy to extend the courtesy to the gallery to Carliet Bramwell and Cathie Bramwell, student of St Augustine University who are from Jamaica. If you all you please stand so we can welcome you We’re glad to have you here today
And on motion of Representative McElraft, the Chair is glad to welcome and extend the courtesies of the gallery to a number of homeschoolers from Carteret County. If you all would please stand, let us recognize you as well. And I believe there are a number of other homeschoolers here from all around the state. If you’re a homeschooler or a home school family member, if you’d please stand and let us welcome you here also. Glad to have you all with us today. Introductions of bills are resolutions. The Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 122; Representative Presnell. Add Counties, Towns to State Health Plan. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The bill is referred to the Committee on State Personnel; if favorable, Appropriations. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 123; Representatives R. Johnson and Brockman. Legislators Spend Time in Schools. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rules, Calendar and Operations of the House. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 124; Representative Floyd. Eliminate Second Primaries. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Elections; if favorable, Rules, Calendar and Operations of the House. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Joint Resolution 125; Representatives Insko, Harrison, Fisher and Queen. Amend Constitution, Citizens United. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rules, Calendar and Operations of the House. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 126; Representatives Hardister, Szoka, Meyer, Ross. Mortgage Organizations Support Registration. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Banking; if favorable, Finance. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 127; Representatives Stam, Jackson and Bryan. DOT Condemnation Changes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Judiciary 4; if favorable, Appropriations. Senate Bill 14. The Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate Bill 14, a bill to be entitled ‘An Act to Provide Funds for Litigation Expenses of the Rules Review Commission, to Provide Funds for the Operating Expenses of the Academic Standards Review Commission, to Require that the Academic Standards Review Commission Post Certain Public Records in its Website, to Provide that the State Officers May Serve on the Economic Development Partnership Board, to Certify Coal Ash Management Commission Appropriations, to Certify that the Practice of Engineering does not Include the Development of Dam Emergency Action Plan, to Extend the Deadline for the Submission of Emergency Action Plans for Dams not Associated with Coal Combustions’ Residual Surface Impoundments to December 31st, 2015, and to Limit the Use of Funds Appropriated to the Department of Health and Human Services for Health Information Exchange.’ The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Wake, Representative Dollar, rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker and members of the House, we had a very good vote on this bill yesterday. Be happy to respond to any questions; would appreciate your support. There may be a couple of additional amendments coming today – I’m not sure of that, but would appreciate your continued support for the bill today. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Cumberland, Representative Glazier, rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, having been in the majority on the vote yesterday on - [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized for a motion I believe the gentleman is seeking for a motion. The gentleman may state his motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I apologize. Having been in the majority yesterday and the vote on the Hager amendment. Amendment number 3, to Senate Bill 20, or Senate Bill 14, I hereby move to reconsider the chamber’s vote on that amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman from Cumberland has moved to reconsider the vote by which amendment 3 was adopted. The gentleman has the floor to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, and very briefly. My concern yesterday, and I attempted because it came up quickly without much notice to find out what the amendment was about. I talked as fast as I could to staff on the floor, tried to get with Representative McGrady, who was tied up looking at other amendments, and at first blush
The amendment didn’t appear to be one that was gonna cause great significant issues. But on looking at it overnight and today, my concern is, number one, we’ve added, effectively, a provision on fracking into a bill that has nothing to do with fracking. It was meant to solve some very specific time-sensitive problems as it related to the Colash Commission, as it related to funding for issues at DPI and the exchange issue. This was added in, unrelated to anything directly in the title, frankly, and unrelated to the substance of what the bill was doing. I think that there’s a real important discussion to have about any issue that comes up that’s fairly substantive and that will have an effect on, whether it’s fracking or any other issue, in the way that this will as it relates to air toxins. I think that this is an issue where there is an open gap right now, that this attempts to fill very substantively and will have a significant effect. It deserves its own bill, or at least its own consideration and discussion in Committee, and it deserves, for the body, when we vote, as we were voting last night, to be told of what the real effect of this provision is going to be. I’m seeking to reconsider because I think that we all deserve that discussion, we deserve the scientific knowledge and the basis, we deserve to know where the amendment is coming from, and we deserve to debate the substance of the amendment and not have it thrown fast last night in a bill that has nothing to do with fracking. And for that reason, cuz I believe we’re off to a really good start, this session, in a bipartisan manner, I think what happened on that amendment, probably very unintentionally, but what happened on that amendment I think caught most of us on both sides of the aisle off-guard, and I think we need to reconsider our vote, and renew a discussion on that at a later time, pass this bill that I voted for, and, and get that moving, and deal with the fracking issue at a later date. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I do move to reconsider. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate on the motion? The Gentleman from Hardick, Representative Lewis, is recognized to debate the motion? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The Gentleman has the floor to debate. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, and ladies and gentlemen of the House, it’s very rare that we do a motion to reconsider, but I have conferred with the Speaker, with the maker of the motion and also with the majority leader, who will be debating the motion, and I’m gonna ask all of the Members to please vote to, in this case, to please vote Green and to allow this matter to be reconsidered. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Does the Gentleman from Rutherford, Representative Hager, desire to debate this? Further discussion, further debate? If not, the question before the House is the motion by Representative Glazier to reconsider the adoption of Amendment Three offered by Representative Hager to the House Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 14. So any favoring the motion will vote ‘Aye’, those opposed will vote ‘No’. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will let the machine record the vote. One hundred and eleven having voted in the affirmative and five in the negative, the motion is adopted. We are now back on the, back on the amendment offered by Representative Hager, on the third reading to the House Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 14. The gentleman from Rutherford, Representative Hager, is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think when the Rules Chairman and I talked about this, we had said we would just go ahead and have it considered ‘cuz we think the amendment’s a good amendment, and it’ll stand up the, I think a hundred and five ‘Yes’es that we got yesterday. What this amendment does, as I explained yesterday, it fixes the issue in our Mining and Energy Commission Rules. In the original bill, we stated that we wanted the Mining and Energy Commission to develop the air toxin rules. Well, what we didn’t allow them to do was say, “Okay, is the state and federal rules good enough for this area? If so, you can adopt those.” We didn’t allow them to do that so now if, and what the, what the amendment does if you remember it from yesterday, it allows those folks to go back and look at the state and federal air toxin rules for, especially on the interjects ?? side, and say, “Are they stringent enough?”, and if they are, it allows them to adopt ‘em. If they’re not stringent enough it allows them to go develop other rules. Basically all the amendment does. So I would ask you all to vote as you voted yesterday, vote Green. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the lady from Guilford, Representative Harrison, rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady has
...the floor to debate the amendment [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you Mr. Speaker. While I respectfully disagree with my colleague from Rutherfordton [sic], I think this is actually a very substantive amendment. As you'll recall, those of you who were here in 2012, and as Represenative Hager referenced, we mandated that the Mining and Energy Commission and the Environmental Management Commission adopt rules relating to air toxics related to the fracking operations. This is a very significant side effect of fracking operations, and our rules - we had no rules on it and this is a very substantive gaping problem with our rules relating to the fracking - ??fracking. We also, in that same time, when we adopted Senate bill 821, we promised North Carolinians that we would adopt the strongest and the safest rules relating to fracking in the country and I'm afraid that if we adopt this amendment we will have abdicated on that promise once again. I think that this is the - Representative Hager's amendment removes the only statutory requirement that the EMC move forward with air toxics rules. There are so many problems associated with air toxics related to fracking. And I think this is very important and I think, as Representative Glazier mentioned, this is substantive enough that it deserves its own debate in a separate proceeding and not as an amendment to a quickly-moving bill that needs to be - it's a must-pass bill - so I respectfully request that you vote no on this bill - on this amendment. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Henderson, Representative McGrady rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman from Henderson has the floor to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well, I very much appreciate the majority leader's willingness to have a discussion about this amendment. I really don't believe the amendment should be part of this bill. If you go back to the original bill, this is an appropriations bill. It had to do with getting funding to three things that needed funding at the time, Common Core and the coal ash. We worked with the senate on another coal ash issue as opposed to running an amendment with respect, an environmental amends bill. By agreement with the Senate we added the coal ash provisions to the coal ash funding provisions in this bill. This amendment takes us to a different place. It does involve complicated issues. I was surprised by it, obviously, because it's largely inconsistent with positions I've taken in the past and I voted for the amendment, but you couldn't tell what the amendment did. Putting aside the pros and cons of fracking, which I don't want to get into at all, this bill should not become a Christmas tree, and it is an appropriations bill that by a broad consensus, we worked out the coal ash piece to, to add to it, but otherwise there's nothing else been added here, and I really do ask that we don't take up this amendment now. I'm certainly willing to debate it at some point in the future when we've got the facts in front of us, but trying to debate the pros and cons of what is clearly not just a technical amendment today, I think is a mistake, and I urge you to vote no on this amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] What purpose does the gentleman from Wake, Representative Martin, rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the amendment [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman from Wake has the floor to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Members, I'm one of those that voted for this amendment yesterday, and also voted for the bill. I am now in a position where I have to vote against this amendment as it's presented for me now, and its own process grounds, separate from any sort of policy contained in the amendment itself. One reason that I voted for it is because like many members who support the amendment is that I thought it was essentially a technical amendment, and for that reason, I supported it and allowed it to move forward. If instead, we are gonna start adding on, like Representative McGrady said, ornaments to a Christmas tree on the floor, items that are significant - whether you agree with the policy or not, but the one thing that's not in doubt is that it is a significant policy item. If we're gonna start doing that, it's gonna grind our house proceedings on the floor to a halt, because those of us who are concerned about these sort of amendments that pop up are gonna have to start asking a lot of questions and in some cases objecting the third reading, holding it over to the next day - and probably on 90 percent of the items that we're doing that on it's - it is, those bills are gonna be innocuous, they aren't gonna need that kind of scrutiny, but the problem is when we're confronted with an amendment that we have not seen before, we don't know until we have time, so my concern, members, is if an amendment like this moves forward now...
that we are setting ourselves up towards very, very long sessions and wasting a lot of time going through bills and amendments that don't need it. So instead what I suggest we do is perhaps withdraw this amendment, or vote it down, put it into a bill, with the bill filing deadlines are still in the future. There's still plenty of time to introduce this amendment into a bill of its own. Have it go through the committee process and vet it like the process is supposed to work, and then we can go back to the way we tend to do business here, which is if we believe it's a technical bill, we'll tend to support it and we'll move forward. So for those reasons I'd urge you to oppose this amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Lee, Representative Reives, rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And I'll just say without reiterating everything we've already heard. I think we've heard plenty of times last session discussions about just where?? Representative Martin is discussing. We have an opportunity for a good, clean, easy bill to go through that everybody's pretty much in agreement on. This amendment changes the character of that bill. And we ask again, not for you to vote based on your belief about policy or not policy regarding this particular amendment, but based on the fact that this amendment does not have anything to do, at this point in time, with what this bill was originally intended for. Right now, this is something that I think we do need to look at. We just had Senate bill 820 that addressed this issue just a couple of years ago, and then suddenly we're readdressing the issue in an unrelated bill. And so I agree with Representative Martin, Representative McGrady, Representative Glazier. They have all discussed. Let's get this amendment away from this particular bill and if it's something we want to discuss, let's have it discussed in a separate bill. I thank you for your indulgence. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Nash, Representative Collins, rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I would concede that you could argue the germaneness of this amendment. I fail to see how this is a significant policy change, to quote one of our representatives. I fail to see how it's any kind of policy change hardly at all. If you will read the first sentence under number two, which is the only thing that was changed, what you'll find out is that nothing has been taken away from this commission. They've just been given two additional alternatives. They can either determine that state air quality rules are good enough. They can determine that federal qualities are good enough and we'll copy those. Or they can come up with their own. So nothing has been taken away from them. Nothing. Absolutely nothing. We're just giving them two additional alternatives to what they had before. To say that this is a significant policy change is really, really a stretch. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Mecklenburg, Representative Jeter, rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To speak to the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'm less concerned about the Christmas tree aspect, or whether or not it's a technical amendment, because if we're gonna start that litmus test, Katy, bar the door. We're not gonna get out of here until October. I will say that I think this is indicative of a different problem which is we require PCSs to be out by 9:00 at night, but yet major substantial changes to a bill which happen or are going to happen and we're not going to stop, can be done in an amendment without any prior notice, without any prior warning. And then we end up voting on things we've never even really read, seen, comprehended, and have no way of doing so. I think this probably illustrates more so than any the need for having some rule, and I hope we would address our permanent rules, that this will be part of those permanent rules, that amendments have to be given to the members at least in time to do due diligence. As Republicans, we like to say we read the bills before we vote on them. I know my colleagues in this chamber like to read the bills before we vote on them. We should be given the same opportunity on substantial amendments. I don't say that in any way as a criticism of this case, because I'd be willing to bet Roger West five bucks. Just kidding. I'm not. This amendment's gonna pass regardless of what I or anyone else says on this floor. So disposing the amendment, doing away with it, I think is a issue. I think the way this happened has brought up a bigger issue that we need to address as a body to protect every member from amendments that are impossible to understand on the fly. I expect Representative Hager's amendment to pass, and I hate that his amendments got tied into this, but I think it's a solution we need to fix. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Rutherford, Representative
STAEGS [0:00:00.0] …To debate the motion, to debate the amendment second time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to debate the amendment second time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker, guys this is don’t for yourself and what this says, this in an issue folks, it don’t like energy exploration, this is a small change that actually makes it better for the EMC and gives them alternatives, it makes it a little tougher they can choose to have their own rules, if they don’t have the State and the Federal rules aren’t strict enough, that’s what this is about, it’s not about the amendment in itself as far as having a Christmas Tree, it’s about those folks that don’t like energy exploration, look at the folks who spoke against this bill, everyone on and let’s say to the TS spoke against energy exploration in the past so that’s what this is about, it’s not about to remind itself this amendment, it’s not about how minor the amendment is or how technical it is, it’s about a policy that folks that don’t like energy explorations to have and block by all means that they can, so that’s what this is about. So I would implore you to vote green on this issue, let’s get this amendment back in there and let’s make sure that we get this and there is a small amendment and it is a technical change like my colleague Representative Collin says and it makes it better for the EMC to do their job. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Henderson, Representative McGrady raise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the amendment second time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment second time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] With all respect for my colleague, I don’t view this as a technical amendment by any stretch of the imagination. It relates to potential and ongoing litigation that could occur, it opt to be, I’m certainly comfortable, I’m talking about this in the Environment Committee and passing out a bill when ?? but it should not have been brought up here and it shouldn’t be added to this appropriations bill on this session. And I just think we are going down the wrong road if we go there, as the gentleman from Nash conceded this is a no way to remain anything else in this bill. There is nothing else in this bill that relates to the subject of this amendment. Therefore, I again urge you to vote no on this amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion further debate? If not the question before the house is amendment 3 offered by the gentleman form Rutherford to the third reading of the House Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 14, so many favoring adoption of the amendment will vote aye, those oppose will vote no, the clerk will open the vote. The clerk will lock the machine and record the vote, 41 having voted in the affirmative and 77 in the negative, the amendment fails. For what purpose does the gentleman from Harnett, Representative Louis raise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] The house will come back to order, is the gentleman from Pender, Representative Millis ready to proceed with his amendment? Representative Millis is the member to proceed with his amendment? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Millis is recognized to send forward an amendment, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Millis moves to amend amendments number 84 S14-ASP-5 on pages 1, line 32 by ?? where it does and require. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman from Pender, Representative Millis is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ladies and Gentlemen, yesterday evening we debated the actual requirement for engineer certification or engineer CO all and actual emergency action plans dealing with dam. [0:04:59.9] [End of file…]
and we actually debated the measure correctly you all remember that we actually had to take a recess to get this drafted correctly. Well, it actually while it was debated right it was held a little bit of a drafting error. So we want to actually take care of that drafting error so make sure it will actually pass the house as debated and not as incorrectly written. [Change Speaker] What purpose does the gentleman from Henderson to representative Mc Grady rise? [Change Speaker] To ask representative Millis a question. [Change Speaker] Does the gentleman from Pender yield to the gentleman from Henderson? [Change Speaker] Most certainly. [Change Speaker] He yields. [Change Speaker] You do a little oblique am I correct in understanding what happened is you and I explain the amendment last night correctly and we left out the word, not? [Change Speaker] That is correct. [Change Speaker] To speak on the amendment. [Change Speaker] The gentleman from Henderson has the floor to debate the amendment. [Change Speaker] Representative Millis and I were embarrassed a little bit last night after explaining this amendment at some length. It was drafted to fix a particular concern that representative Millis and others were raising and in the haste of moving it to the floor we only forgot one word and that was not. It's sort of a critical word and so I would urge the adoption of the amendment so that it is consistent with what we told you the amendment did last night. [Change Speaker] For what purpose does the lady from Guilford representative Harrison rise? [Change Speaker] Question the amendment sponsor. [Change Speaker] Does the gentleman from Pender yield to the lady from Guilford? [Change Speaker] Most certainly. [Change Speaker] He yields. [Change Speaker] Thank you, I don't have the language of the amendment in front of me, last nights amendment but is this the provision that says that it does not require that a plan that is not affiliated with the coal ash plan does not have to have to have an engineer plan is that the relevant not? [Change Speaker] That's correct if you actually support this amendment, what the actual legislation will say is that if you are associated with a dam that's associated with coal ash that you will require an engineers seal in actually to do the emergency action plan. But if your not associated with a coal ash basin you will not. [Change Speaker] To speak to the member. [Change Speaker] The lady from Guilford has the floor to debate the amendment. [Change Speaker] Thank you Mr. Speaker. I think representative Mc Grady pointed out the problem with representative Millis's amendment last night and that's that several of these ponds are high hazard ponds. The definition of high hazard pond is that it can result in loss of life or significant property damage. So I would say that we shouldn't exempt high hazard ponds from the requirement to have and engineering plan even if they are in a coal ash related pond. So I would encourage those of you and I think there are at least twenty three of us last night that voted no to continue to vote no on this amendment. Thank you. [Change Speaker] For what purpose does the gentleman from Pender representative Millis rise? [Change Speaker] To make a few last comments about the amendment. [Change Speaker] The gentleman has the floor to debate the amendment the second time. [Change Speaker] First and foremost in light of representative Mc Grady's comments there we understand what happened last night in no way shape or form will I stand up and disrespect bill draft and since the aspects there's a long session ahead and what they do is tremendously help us out so while it was an honest mistake the debate was correct. In regards to representative Harris and his comments, one thing I want you guys to realize is that before the passage of this bill emergency action plans where not actually required. Now they are. So the problem you have is whether your a little small farm pond or your an intermediate hazard things of that nature now all of the sudden there's this requirement to get emergency action plans. And the actual part that has to deal with the price of engineering is the actual inundation map. So whoever is downstream modelling who actually needs to be notified if there is a need for an evacuation if a dam would fail. But the one thing you guys need to realize and I want to make sure this comment is made so you guys can decide how you wanted to vote is that Diener still has the authority to actually regulate this process. And again Diener has the authority to accept the emergency action plan or to not accept the emergency action plan. So again we're not forgoing any protections to public health or safety or welfare because that agency is actually charged with that responsibility. What we're actually removing is the potential red tape for every single farm pond in your district to require an engineers seal and therefore to drive up the costs for you constituents. We're protecting health and public safety while also not having a jobs bill for engineers as well. And I say that, I'm a licensed professional engineer myself. So again so your not hearing it from someone else your hearing it from me a licensed PE so I want to make sure you understand there's nothing that's forgoing public protection but there's also a study that's going to happen. Where Diener and
Then the board can have this conversation if we need some further action in the future, so vote as you will, but I want you guys who vote for this to be very comfortable of what you're actually voting for and not have no misconceptions. [SPEAKER CHANGE] For what purpose does the gentleman from Henderson, Representative McGrady rise? [SPEAKER CHANGE] To speak on the amendment a second time. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman has the floor to debate the amendment a second time. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Harrison, is correct that I did point out the pros and cons of the amendment. I did want to point out that I supported the amendment and will support it again. The state was one of only two states before we passed the ?? Management Act, that did not provide for EAP's related to dam safety and with the passage of this amendment we'll make it easier for those EAP's to be put in place, but recognize that in some cases an engineer may be needed and in other cases it isn't need to be needed. I think its a very reasonable amendment and I do fully support the amendment put forth by Representative Millis. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Further discussion, further debate on the Millis amendment? If not, the question before the house is the adoption of amendment five offered by Representative Millis to the house committee substitute for senate bill 14. Submitting in favor of adopting the amendment vote aye, those opposed will vote no. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will lock the machine and close the vote. 96 having voted in the affirmative, 26 in the negative. The amendment is adopted. House will be at ease for just a moment. Members of the house are in recess until 3:0 . . . [SPEAKER CHANGE] The house will come to order. Representative Brody and McNeill are recognized to send forth a series of committee reports. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representatives Brody and McNeill, house bill 15, year round funds for CCUGCT favorable and re-referred to the committee on appropriations. [SPEAKER CHANGE] House bill 47, youth career connect, favorable, committee substitute unfavorable for reasonable bill and re-referred. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The original bill is placed on the unfavorable calendar, the committee substitute is re-referred to the committee on appropriations. The clerk may continue reading . . .Strike that, Representative Iler, Shephard, and Torbett are recognized to send forth two committee reports. The clerk is recognized to read those. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative's Iler, Shephard, and Torbett, transportation committee report, house bill five, Military Veterans special plate, favorable and re-referred. [SPEAKER CHANGE] It was re-referred to the committee on finance. [SPEAKER CHANGE] House bill six, auto cycle definition and regulation, favorable committee substitute, unfavorable to original bill and re-referred. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Committee substitute is referred to the committee on finance, the original bill is placed on the unfavorable calendar. Members on motion of . . . Representative Graham from Lenoir County and Representative Bell, the chair is happy to extend the curiosity's of the gallery to B.J. Murphy, who is the Mayor of Kingston. Mayor Murphy, if you'd please stand so we can welcome you. We're glad to have you here today, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Members we are back, we were still on senate bill 14 when we recessed. Senate bill, the house committee substitute for senate bill 14 is before the house on its third reading. Further discussion? Further debate? If not, the question before the house is the passage of the house committee substitute for senate bill 14 on its third reading. Submitting in favor of the passing of the vote aye, those opposed
...?? will vote no. The Clerk will open the vote. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Jones does the gentleman wish to be recorded on this vote?Representative Riddell does the gentleman wish to be recorded? The clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. 116 having voted in the affirmative and 1 in the negative. The House Committee substitute for Senate Bill 14 passes its third reading. It is ordered engrossed and returned to the Senate. Notices and announcements? For what purpose does the lady from Yancey County, Representative Presnell, rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] For a point of personal privilege. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized. Speak up to three minutes for a moment of personal privilege. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Today marks the 100th anniversary of Mount Mitchell State Park which is comprised of a unique topography that makes Western North Carolina a great place to live and to visit. In 1835, UNC professor Dr. Elisha Mitchell initially mapped the peak of the mountain that would bear his name using only barometric pressure readings and mathematical formulas. Dr. Mitchell's measurements were within a margin of error of only 12 feet. I know you engineers in here would be surprised by that. Mount Mitchell was named in his honor in 1858. North Carolina General Assembly enacted legislation on March the 3rd 1915 that created a commission to purchase land on and around the peak of Mount Mitchell located in Yancey county for the purpose of creating a state park. In purchasing Mount Mitchell, the tallest peak east of the Mississippi River standing at 6,684 feet, North Carolina's first state park was established. Mount Mitchell State Park, which has recorded snowfall in every month of the year, now encompasses 1,946 acres. Includes a restaurant, camping grounds, a handicapped accessible viewing tower was added in 2008, and scenic hiking trails through the miles of remote wilderness among the Black Mountains. Now, I want to tell you a little personal thing. We were on a hike, across the Blacks, we started at Mount Mitchell and we went into Deep Gap, my husband and two of my boys, and as we were going the boys (of course) went quite a bit ahead of us, and they came back in a little bit and they said, "Dad, there's about 25 or 30 men up there" in the Deep Gap where we were planning on spending the night. So Keith went on up, and i just kind of laid back a little while, and as he finally came back he said, "I don't think we're gonna have any problem at all. That's the Charlotte Police Department up there." So, thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And, members, one housekeeping item. The Chair's gonna order that Senate Bill 14 be sent to the Senate by special messenger. For what purpose does the gentleman from Wake, Representative Dollar rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Gentleman is recognized for an announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The Appropriations Committee will meet 10 minutes after session. 10 minutes after session, full Appropriations. Come on over to 643, and we have the two bills as we mentioned yesterday to dispose of. Senate Bill 20 and House Bill 117. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further notices and announcements? For what purpose does the lady from Randolph, Representative Hurley rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Announcement, please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Lady's recognized for an announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Just as a public safety, appropriations will meet at 8:30 in the morning in 415. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose...for what purpose does the gentleman from Rockingham, Representative Jones, rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] For an announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor for an announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you members of the House. Notice has been sent out, but the Health Committee will plan to meet tomorrow at 10 o'clock AM. After two weeks of trying and being snowed out we are gonna try it for a third time. So hopefully the third times the charm. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The clerk is recognized for an announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Committee on Health will meet Wednesday, March 4th 2015 at 10am, Room 643. LOD. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Rutherford, Representative Hager, rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] For an announcement. For an ?? excuse me. For a minute, Mr. Speaker I wanted to announce that we will not, the Republicans will not caucus tonight. We will try to move it for tomorrow. I will look at the schedule for tomorrow due to the Appropriations meeting. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the lady from Carteret, Representative McElraft, rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] For an announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady has the floor for an announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I just wanted to announce that the Agner committee...
That’s the Ag NER Committee for Appropriation will meet at 8:30 in the morning. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further notices and announcements? Seeing none, the gentleman from Harnett, Representative Lewis, is recognized for a motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, I move that the House adjourn, subject to the receipt of committee reports, to reconvene Wednesday March 4th at 2 o’clock pm. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Lewis moves, seconded by Representative Blust, that the House adjourns, subject to the receipt of committee reports, to reconvene Wednesday March 4th at 2 o’clock pm. Those in favor will say “aye”. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Opposed, “no”. The ayes have it. The House stands adjourned.