Good morning. We're going to start just a little bit off time. Welcome to house committee on transportation. Our house Sergeant-at-Arms today are Carlton Adams, Carlton, thank you for being here. Martha Gadasson and Joe Austin. Thank you all for supporting us here today. Also we have a page as sponsored by Representative David R. Lewis, Katie Lee Johnson. Hey Katie Lee, welcome and hope you enjoy your stay here in Rawley, and when you figure all this out would you come and explain it to me? And with that we're going to move right in. I would remind members that we have, believe it not it doesn't appear to by the written agenda, but we have 50 minutes to conduct a whole lot of business, and I have promised that we will have members of the audience here to talk about one of the topics dealing with the repeal of the Math Act and is also supposed here to speak on the Moped Bill for lack of insurance and safety inspection mopeds, and with that, we are going to move on to the first item of agenda, that is House Bill 80, is representative Fisher here? And she like to bring forward only the motion for her favorable report. I'll take that from Representative Price now. Are we done? We're done you can go home, no I'm kidding, to present the plate for the river link background, Representative Fisher. I mean it's been so long since I've been up here. So I have with me one of the co-sponsors of this Bill, Representative John Eger, it's a regional kind of co- sponsorship that you will hopefully notice on this Bill. Representative McGrady, Myself, Representative Eger, Representative Turner, and what it does is just allows this non-profit to be authorised to have a full color plate rather than the first in-flight plate. They have a wonderful design and they are, believe it or not have all of the applications necessary to meet the requirement of 500, at least 500 in order to make this plate a reality. Just a little bit of that River Link and John I don't know if you wanted to add anything to that or not [xx] but River Link is a regional non profit spear heading the economic and environmental revitalization of the French [xx] river and its tributaries as a destination for everyone to work, live and play and that's taken right from their mission statement. And they have been a going concerns for probably over 30 years and the have educate students they, K12, they have public information, education activities for adults and they empower over 1700 volunteers every year. and with that I would ask for your favorable consideration of this bill. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, before you do have motion would you like to state that the former, they far far away representative of Alexander. Yes sir, and favorable There's no PCA's, is there? No. I'll ask you. So favorable, is there referral. I didn't have any question, I'm seeing a question now, can we hold you your thought for a minute I'll come back to you representative Braley. Thank you Mr. Chairman. I think part of the reason that the bill in the last session that was passed to authorize this with the [XX] was just to eliminate a continual parade of this, Mr. Chairman I think the plate laws as they exist will allow them to raise their funds and show their affiliation without a special plate background which have created problems for the camera systems involved with [XX] and also we don't have any artwork here so I don't know that I'd want to go forward with it, what I'd prefer if we just vote this down and let them go forward with the plate as authorized. Mr. Chairman Representative [XX]. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Representative Braley, I have artwork here and this is artwork that was also approved last session before the law was changed, and at that point they already had upwards of 500 signatures ready
to go on this plate, and as I read the requirements now the change that was made was to up the requirement for applications for the tag and that that would enable you to avail yourself of a full-color plate rather than just a first and flight and they have met that requirement and then some, and I would hope that that would be enough for the Representative. Follow-up, Representative Brawley. The gentlelady is not correctly stating the intent of the Bill. The full color plates cannot be red and the plates were modified to have a white box, what you've shown us does not. I understand that the people that originally ordered would like that plate, that plate is non-conforming, and was deliberately taken out. It would need to be a conforming plate designed to go forward, and we would ask the folks to either come forward with that that or let's just vote this down. Representative Fisher. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ladies and gentlemen, I believe that you will see other people coming forward with color plates. There have been a number of these approved in the past. This is a most deserving organization and they have spent a lot of time to conform with the rules as they are today if we need to make any adjustment as per as white background, I think that that concern may be accommodated, but at this time I would really encourage you and hope that you would give this a favourable report and let it move forward. This is a volunteer organization, a non-profit and this is an excellent way for them not only to raise funds, but also to give money back to the state. Thank you. Representative Carney is hiding somewhere I believe, there you are. I never hide. Thank you Mr. Chairman. I just to sort of resolve this without shooting this down. Could we have this bill removed from the calendar and bring it back at the next meeting and lets get some clarification if the bills sponsor would we are in agreement to that and lets get some clarification because my understanding was that they could come forward being in agreement with it If I made to 500 signatory requirement, and I don't know if staff can address that right now, and if that cannot we need further Clarification, I would suggest that we just displace the bill for today and lets get that clarified and bring it back Representative Fischer I am going to agree with Representative Corney, I am getting questions whether it's conforming or not conforming at representative brought forward, if you wouldn't mind lets walk us on back just a little bit and make sure that we're in conforming mode and then we'll re-address at a later time. That's fine, and I appreciate the committee's indulgence and I will come back to you hopefully with some artwork and maybe even more to help you all see that it is thank you very much. Moving right along, we're having so much fun. Let's get right into insurance and safety inspection mopeds. Representative Brown and Representative Representative Shepherd. Representative Shepherd it's my understanding that you might have people here to speak on the bill. If you'd like for them to go first, just simply give me the nod and we will allow that to happen or by all means you have the podium. Thank you Mr. Chair. First of all I'd like to say to give you a little background on this We discussed this last year, and we passed the part that requires registration plates on mopeds, but the health One of us has to go to DOT and have a study done to examine whether we need the insurance and the inspections and so forth or more players we did that. We worked all summer working on this. DOT has gone out and done a study on this 35 states. They requested information states got information 34 and 35, and representative Brown, I also met with Baptist hospital concerning insurance payers ans so forth and we do have people here in the audience that would like to speak to this. Basically, it requires more payers be insured. Provides that more payers subject to safety ins[inspection requirements, and it clarifies that sellers of mopeds are not required to be licensed at motor vehicle dealers, and clarifies that moped do not have to be titled. That is something we've already done, it's already a law to be effected this July, so with that Mr. Chair, we do have some that are here to speak, we first recognize Dr. Lee from Baptist Hospital. I'm sorry, this thing is wrapped
in the Shepherd doctor Anna Miller, Anna Miller. Dr. Miller are you in the audience? I'd ask you please come up to the microphone, there should be a button that you push in the base, and you let us know who you are then you're welcomed to talk to us. Good afternoon, I'm Dr. Anna Miller, I'm orthopedic trauma surgeon, I health, and thank you very much for having me today. I moved to North Carolina a little after four years go, and as an orthopedic surgeon incase anybody here does not know, that means that I have six broken bones every single day. The vast majority of the injuries that we see from some kind of a lot of vehicle collision and that includes mopeds. When I first moved here, I realized that mopeds crashes are major issues and there are some of the most severe injuries that we see and they're some of the most difficult to treat. After I started here I realized was such a huge public health problem that there has not been much research in our state. So we actually reviewed over 1, 000 patients from our hospital over five year period that had been, and moped crushes, and we thought it would be appropriate to compare them with motorcycle, [xx] instances that are somehow similar to moped patients, I actually looked at moped and motorcycle patients, and found that not only does the moped collision patients have a huge increase in their rate of prior criminal convict including 64% rate of criminal convictions compared to only 20% in the motor cycle group, and specifically 49% with DWI or driving when intoxicated compared with 8% of the motorcycle group so much, much larger criminal histories where the patients are mopod [xx]. in addition an unpublished data that we`re working on publishing on we find that these patients has a much higher rate they've unemployment and have much less health entrance and also end up having larger hospital bills and paying less of those hospital bills. So these are very severely injured patient do not have a good way to get better and pay back their bill and have higher rates of criminal convictions, so this is actually a large danger, not only to the patients themselves, but to other drivers on the road, including all of us and our family members. It's a major public health hazards that we are all paying for Posmoniteria and with patients life, thank you. Thank you doctor. representative [xx], representative Brown, would you like to had be available for questions, is that what I'm hearing? What we would do is that, we will go in [xx] has anyone have any questions of the Doctor? Thank you representative Blackwell she's coming back to the microphone. I'm going to look this way since the mic is in front of me, but I don't mean to be rude turning my back to you. One is did the study that you did give any indication of the nature of the cause of the accident for example the bill that is before us is as I understand it will require inspection of these vehicles. Did you all go into whether or not some of these terrible accidents were being caused by defective morpads[sp?], or is it just a case so looking at people who injured in an accident that may have involved the [xx]. We only looked at the accident itself, the injuries that happened, blood alcohol level, the patients in transit that is and the patients' hospital bills as well as the length of hospital stay, and their prior criminal convictions, we did not look at the actual crush characteristic. thank you doctor, any other questions to the doctor? And that might be a great time that I entertain getting this bill out in front of us, so I'm going to look towards representative Dollar for that motion thank you very much and Representative Catlin for a second. Thank you very much. Rep. Shepard or Rep. Brown. Either one of you all. Mr. Chair and committee we also have Kelly Thomas with the department of Motor vehicles here. The state [xx] done by the department of transportation and DMV, and he'd also like to speak on this issue, and provide the information that came back with the study. Many of you may have these packages already that we emailed to you.commissioner Thomas thank you and welcome sir, please remember to push the button and tell us who you are. Good afternoon, my name is Kelly Thomas, a commission of motor vehicles, and as described
earlier, thank you Mr. Chairman. Described earlier we provided a study and results based on what other jurisdictions found as good business practices, it wasn't what Kelly Thomas necessarily agreed with, it was what other jurisdictions applied to the [xx] legislation in their state. A leading majority of those findings and recommendations were presented to you, and highlighted two areas, one requiring insurance for one, another one was restrictions on roads, and as highlighted here, a safety inspection for the vehicle. As in draft bill the mopeds would be inspected as a motorcycle is today, so there would be no change and turn signals, tire depth and those types of requirements, it would be same as a motorcycle, so in subject to your questions it's what I have for an update. Thank you Commissioner. We have two chairman. For the director, he mentioned the tires, now just for observation riding along the road, those tires don't look as thick or as substantial as motorcycle and car tires. Is that something that we are already doing now, we are not expecting them now, so it's just something is going to be a problem they have the same thickness, so those tires are. Yes sir, it's Kelly Thomas, I don't believe there is any, there's no change in the requirement, whether the current tire on the moped is thinner or in shorter duration of thread, I can't answer that, but let me ask him if a licence there is technically no difference. Thank you. Thank you As the doctor stated, this population might nor be our most successful intestate. I see that the insurance is not going to be subjected to the reinsurance pool. Will there be a market for insurance, for this people driving these motorcades? Reverend of Shepherd, do you have somebody who's want to speak on that? Yes sir. If you had played, make sure the button is pushed and tell us who you are. Tim Lucas with the North Carolina raid be-aural. Currently mopeds will be under the radial jurisdiction, but with this bill it'll remove it from our jurisdiction. So, the pricing will be up to each individual insurance company. As far as it not be subject to the re insurance facilities, the company would write the moped insurance not have a reschedule market place for business, so if they chose not to write they will not be a market forward. Thank you very much. Representative Garber. In your opinion, will there be an underwriter for this insurance? I cannot answer that, that will up to each individual insurance company. Representative Bowles. To the Bill sponsor, do we have any idea the number of potential registered mopeds that we're going to have? We're going to starve for that one. I don't have an estimate on that, I don't know if DMV might have any idea how many are currently operating, I just don't know. Follow Representative Bowles. I guess I'm concerned that we are adding additional already and even implemented stage one, is that correct? Which will be effective The plates of registration. Until this time there are no requirements on mopeds in North Carolina at all, so there is not been any way to gauge the amount of access we're having throughout the state, want to know if the people that own those mopeds, how many of them they're, and police chief Muggy has told us there are a lot of those that are using clients and so on, and so forth, but there's no way to identify most of those, because there's never been any requirements in North Carolina to register mopeds plates number, or anything. Representative Boles?.
And I agree with everything that you say, and I guess I'm concerned, instead I'm here from the insurance at a rate, I'm not sure there is going to be a market for the insurance and from the start we do not even know how many this will affect. And the DMV hasn't even implemented the programs. over my end, I don't know, maybe we are a year ahead of our sales to find out what is going to affect and if impose something that people are not able to time the initials with the companies with and keep them from working. Representative Shepard. In response to Rep. Boles there are people now that already have insurance on mopeds and some of the local companies that I've talked to recently said that they will insure mopeds if there's a need for those, a market. Before we go, I'm sorry. Before we go on, representative Begon has next question but I'm going to try to get a vote out of here if we've got about seven, eight minutes tops. Rep. Bumgardner. Thank you Mr. Chairman representative Shepherd, do we have any idea at all how much this is going to cost. Average low pay, owner who may have lost licence already and according to the information that I have from the insurance department, it would be $90 a year if you've never had a ticket or a violation. If you've had a DWI or maybe two DWIs, the most it would be would be $380-400 a year for liability the insurance, which would cover you if you got to an accident with some one and so forth. Follow up Mr. Chairman? Follow up representative Baumgardner. That's just a position, we don't know that that's what the numbers are going to be yet, and don't you think maybe we're being premature here that we've already required registrations and tags starting in July of this year, and now we want to put this on top of that. Don't you think we need to do that first and see where we are and how many we have and if there is a market and how much it's going to be, there is a lot of unanswered questions that I've personally have about this absolutely Representative Shepard. Representative Baumgardner I understand your concern, but we are already behind the rest of this the states that we've surveyed, I know that DOT and DMV surveyed 34 out of 35 states. And in 34 out of 35 states the they surveyed, if you've lost your license due to VWI you can't even drive on those highways, or for one reason or the other and if you drive a moped in 34 out of 35 other states in this country you have to have a Drivers' license to do that, and we're not asking for that, but have been many many instances the last year we used where mopeds in accidents and sometimes it was their fault. The ones that I sent pictures of last year was in Wrightsville Beach. The lady lost turf, Toyota 4x4, it blew up and caught fire, it was the moped's fault, but her insurance had to pay for it all because Moped had no insurance. So this is where we are at it's increasingly becoming more and more of a problem and we can put it off for a year or two years, but the problem doesn't go away, and so we were asked representative Brown and I were to go out and research and get information and Thank you representative [xx]. Congress chairman thank you. A couple of points, one is if the bill moves along if it does move along it'll be good for you all to get a physical note for that because I have some questions along that line but I won't ask any cause I don't have a note ready yet. The other question that I would have have is representative Shepherd mentioned looking at the driver licence requirement in 32 out of 34 states was an examination of what the insurance scenario was and those 35 and they were people able to get insurance or not able to get insurance. Yes Mr. Chair. Absolutely representative Shepard, it's 19 of 33 states surveyed required a moped operate liability in turn now there were 15 states that did not respond to the survey and so they were 19 out of
33 required that as of now. Power this concrete power but off course those days will be once I don't know why I did not North Carolina you would have to have a drivers license, as opposed to the fact that you don't necessarily have to have a drivers license in North Carolina to operate a morbid currently. yes sir, representative Speciale, you do have to have a drivers license if you are operating a moped of 50 cc or it goes over 30 miles an hour, something of that effect. So what we are talking about, we talking about Mopez that are treated like bicycles, okay, this is where I think we`re getting off into the wrong into a wrong area here. First off, there's a lot of people that depend on the Mopez to get to work, because (a), they have lost their licences for one reason or another there`re supposed to be treated like bicycles there`re not supposed to be driving in the middle the road like some of them do but be cause we have no idea what kind of how many wrecks they get into, how much money this is costing. If we're in search of a solution to a problem that doesn't exist or anything else, I'd like I could see that us wait and we did do the registration and we did pass that so once we've got them registered, they can't they're not going to jump up and run away, we can see how many don't have insurance if there are what kind of problems there are that runs into a lot of questions that you would not be able to answer right now and neither is your study there, and I got to tell you I don't know where that study came from, but to say 34 states require a driver's licence, isn't that what you said? I find that hard to believe. Mr Chair. Absolutely Representative Shepherd. Well Representative Shirley, that was a study that DMV conducted. They reported back to the Joint Oversight Committee of Transportation because that was a requirement that we put in the bill to have them registered and plated. That was a part the requirement that we all required last year, and they came back and did the study, and they asked all 50 states and 34 out of 35 reported back that they require you to have a driver's licence and 19 out of 33 require that you have some kind of liability insurance. And also the doctor of [xx] Hospital reported what their results were as far as those who were involved in accidents. So I don't know what more information to give you except that there is a problem here and we need to address it. Follow up Mr. Chairman. Representative Speciale. Again I'm not questioning you. I'm just questioning the numbers, okay? And what you probably got is 450 cc you're better. Bottom line is I think we're jumping into something here before we have enough information to make a decision, and I'd recommend everybody vote this thing down right now. Representative Shepherd, Representative Brown, I'm going to beg your indulgence with me. It seems that with that last sign up that everyone on the committee wants to talk about this bill. So we're going to ask that we displace this bill till next week and bring it forward and try to move on with some other business we have. You're very welcome. Mr. Chair, thank you. Next on the agenda, House Bill 169, Limit Motor Vehicle Emissions and Specs. Representative Hager, do I have a motion to have the bill in front of us from someone? So moved. Thank you Representative Brawley. Representative Hager, you have the mic. Thank you Mr. Chairman. This bill would, and I'll answer the question you guys have, I will just tell you this bill is very simple. It remove four to five counties from the mission inspection program which we [xx] stand for questions. Thank you representative Dora. I understand why but my concern is that I have a couple of concerns and on of them is if we take back off, this bill gets to the floor somebody in the call will say why should my country be exempt. Someone in Franklin will say what about my country, or Stokes, or Union, or Nash, or linking a number of others, and so it's a snowball and I know the in the past, there has been some questions, because the issues come up that were encountered before about what were the empact, so I think three questions; one is this issue of what's going
to happen when this bill get to the floor if it gets to the floor, why we're treating other similarly counties the same way and the other question I'd like the department to expound on is does this in any way and would go further elimination of counties, at what point, would be endangering some of our federal highway funds because for better or worse, I'm not saying it's great but as everybody knows and all these federals are tied to a mission stand it and I would like to hear from the department on how it would analyze this bill and what member of county is being removed, would have a potential impact. and what might that impact be? Representative peiger Good questions, I appreciate the questions, now you deal with several different areas, you deal with urban areas versus rural areas. Under the federal guidelines a department can give more details as we have a programme in place to implement certain pollutant exceeding which we've had specifically in the show more you see those exceedences maybe not the exceedences. We get awful clothes exceedences. More on ordinary cycle like a wait county or [xx] county, we're not asking for that. what the state has done is actually taken that, and moved it out several times, made the circle several times bigger, and what's not needed. More of this rule counties don't have the exceedences has never had the exceedences and in addition you have powerpoints sometimes [xx] is like the actual point now has scribbles on them like flip side plants for the one, two, four the older points shut down the pulse. Most of the pollutants in number 5 has a [xx]. Number 6 has probably has the most advanced pollutant system in the state so those factors themselves actually reduce the amount of pollutants, 10 fold if not 100 fold more than what we would do during this issue. So it's more of an rural issue, not really an urban issue, that answer your question [xx] I wouldn't know if representative Hager went over the amount of acronym usage during that answer [xx] Mr. Chairman, where are you centered, I'm used to be in the status quo and it's difficult to medicate reforms. Representative Donald did you require something from this department. No, I wanted to hear from the department answer, for them to respond to my question as well. Anyone here from the who would like to respond, as we all run for the exit, Oh, yes, sir, please tell us you've pushed the button, Thank you . Yes sir thank you Mr. Chairman and I'm Mike [xx] I'm Deputy Director for the division of air[sp?] of quality, I appreciate the question we have a requirement in Dina right now to study this very issue and on the verge of delivering a report on this on the next 2 weeks, on the ERC. A sessional of 2013-413, requires the department to examine whether all the counties covered under the missions testing program are necessary to maintain current and the future air quality standards in North Carolina. So we're on the verge of delivering that report which maybe very informative, and insightful to this very issue. Thank you sir, Representative Higher. Thank you Mr. Chairman and he's exactly right what we want to do is put a referral on this bill to finance, and hold it in finance until the report gets here, and see if we need to modify it. It's on my list of to-dos here in just a minute but before we go there I Representative Dollar unbeknownst to us being a little Nostradamus on us and I'm going to go to representative Yarbil Do you have an amendment to add other counties representative? I do in the spirit of representative Dollar I would like to amend the bill to add Granville County to the list of exempt counties. Another rural county. Does everyone have a copy of the amendment, that's going around now? It's simply the addition of Granville yes [xx] Thank you. Representative Harger comment on the amendment. Thank you Mr. Chairman as always and it will hopefully garner the representatives support, I'm in full favor of this. Representative [xx] I'm assuming your moving your amendment in a form of a motion? Seems that you're not paying attention to me right now I'll take that as a yes. I move for the adoption of the amendment. Thank you, thank you so much. You've heard the motion. The motion is on the amendment. As for aye's and nay's all in favor say Aye. Aye. Opposed. So it appears to the Chair, the Aye's have it, we're back to the original Bill as amended.
Representative Harger, and I wouldn't mind you're kind of a clock. I have no further comments, let`s see the question that comes up, Mr. Chairman. I'm sorry Representative Harger, I was not paying attention to it. What were you saying? If endorse the Chairman I have no further questions unless there are no further comments to those questions. Okay I'm starting to see pop hands coming up I`m saying that`s is for a motion to move it on to finance. Alright, we have some other question for representative and we are going to hopefully take about two more minutes with this. Representative Mcgrady. Thank you Mr. Chairman I've got some concerns about the bill, but primary just related to the idea that the department is required to report about two weeks on this thing, with the referral to finance, and with the understanding to gentleman in [xx] are going to wait until we get that back, I would move a positive recommendation on house bill 169 referral to finance. As amended. You've heard the motion I apologize several people want to speak on that. I believe into a PCS that's all one, please motion being in front of you [xx] those in favor say, Aye. Aye. Those opposed, no. The Aye's have it, Thank you. Representative Harger. On the next topic. This is for information only, relative to the House Bill 183, there will be, this is a no vote, information only. Representative Brown and re-appeal map Act House Bill 183, Representative Brown you have the mic Sir. Okay. Thank you Mr. Chair. We have 10 minutes and I'm just going to give a brief overview of the Map Act, a lot of people have never heard of this. So our interest today is just to bring you up to speed on exactly what this was, but we have folks that have come from Winston-Salem, from Forsyth County here today to speak. We have others that are local that are here to speak so in the interest of time I'm going to make this very short and then with the permission of the Chair we'll have them speak before we adjourn today. Then we will take up our explanation and spear to defense of this Bill next Tuesday. The Map Act was passed in 1987. It's a law that allows DOT to establish official maps of future road quarters Now, we've build roads since 1915 and from 1915 to 1987 there was no Map Act. We managed to build roads without one. Right now we're one of only 13 states to have a map Act, or to have any map Act statutes. 37 states have none. Right now officials maps have been used to North Carolina for at least two dozen projects state wide, Cleveland county, Guildford, xx, Wake, Pitt, Pender and Cumberland are just a few of the counties affected. So, now if with the permission of chair, we do have facts here that will tell you, give you just a very heart felt understanding of what it's like to own property, and to live under the Map Act. Thank you representative Brown. Ladies and gentlemen here to discuss this topic would you please get the microphone, tell us who you are, press the button. Representative Brown we have the back count about 10 minutes of discussion. Thank you very much, my name is Jim Denis and I live in Wake County, North Carolina inside the quarter protection, and my purpose here today is to seek both empathy and understanding. Empathy is the shortest right of understanding, and understanding is the shortest right of empathy and I seek both from you, today regarding the map act affects the everyday citizens in Wake County. Looking around I see no one in this chamber that appears any where near retirement age so let's fantasize for just say a moment and say that you're in retirement. Thank you sir you do get extra points for that one you have prepared for your retirement in an area prime for development, so your retirement plan is at retirement sell this land for development, and move a [xx] island and you've got your retirement home and retirement income. Now let's assume I'm
a buyer you are the seller. I have come to you with a contract, the terms of this contract is you as a seller agree that you will not sell this property to anyone except me, I am the only buyer. You in the meantime, will not improve your property, will not develop your property, will not add value to your property, even though their value has not yet been established. The terms of this contract are none existence as time, there's no time. We can live under this contract for 5 years, 10 years, 20 years, 30 years, there's no expiration date on this contract. So during the time that we're under this contract, there has been no compensation, no money ever changed hands, yet I as the borrower have control over this position your property is my discretion is to when I should actually acquire this property if in fact I do because I may decide at some later day I don't think I want this after all after 10 15 20 years of having control and then finally I just said nah forget it, you can keep property. Okay I know this is fantasy if you, this is reality to me and my family in is six our property was placed in court protection for the seven loop of the weekend express way, my time of date was set for 2001 our term-on-income was to be 17 acres of the 20 some acres of properties that we owned. We even divided three and a half acres as of that 20 plus acres towards the homes homestead so that we can sale the adjourning property, as once[sp?] for [xx] okay, 19 years later, we are still in her [xx] protection we are still respected from developing, improving and [xx] you to the property. The hardway protection code of protection as I essentially remove any potential buyers from interest in our property, so what do I do now? 14 years after my retire, 14 years after I have retired, do u tarmac once or you are saving there, we are watching [xx] we pay taxes on it, but we can't sell it, we can't develop it now department of transportation their attorneys have said we've caused you no harm. I argue they you have caused us harm, you've caused us harm for everyday that we have lived on the code of protection unable to dispose other property as every other citizen of this state is allowed to do, only those citizens who are in a high way court protection are restricted from developing their land. So I just want to leave you with this words today. The map act is contrary to that little bit of, tiny little phrase, and the fifth amendment to the constitution of the United States, and that phrase that I'm referring to is one that states that private property will not be taken for public use without just compensation. In 1996 our property and those other property owners inside the quarter had their property taken for a perfect use without just compensation, without any compensation. So please consider strongly, this change in the law The Map Act, should be declared unconstitutional and should be changed as quickly as possible. Thank you sir. Thank you, for your attention. And I assure you everyone in the committee thanks you sincerely for you coming here and taking of your time to share with us your thoughts. Thank you. [XX] to push the button and tell us who you are, state your name. Mathew Brian, can you all here me? My name is Mathew Brian with Hendrick Brian [XX] in Winston-Salem, I own the law firm representing various about 120 property owners that
have filed various law suits law suits in the counties as representative Brown, has mentioned we were successful at the court of appeals which recognized that this law is a bad law it's been used in a very bad way on very good people for too long. I could repeat that story there hundreds of time over die leaving millions of dollar to their heirs and it's still locked up with the state of North Carolina. It's a shameful thing that this law is state on the books as long as it has and representative Brown, and the rest should all be applauded for noting what this state did for so long which no other state in the union does. We are the only state that abuses our citizen in fashion and it`s long time and coming both in the justice system, and in our laws. I had the pleasure this summer of taking, I think that's Mr. Watford they got in my car and I drove them around the neighborhoods, in Forsyth County, and they were stunned. This law ruins neighborhoods, destroys neighborhoods it has allowed the state to come in and indiscriminately buy those people that it wants to buy and then rent those properties out to people that it wants to rent to, and you would not want to live next to this renters, and so nice neighborhoods deteriorate people do not fix their homes up, everything wastes. The department rents out 100 40 homes Forsyth County, and nets $700000 in net revenue renting houses in Forsyth County. It takes real tax Dollars out of Forsyth County I grossly calculate using my [xx] math skills, but with the aid of an economist that Forsyth County in real Dollars probably looses about $750000 in uncollected tax revenues in the protective corridor the entire areas of these county have deteriorated. I have been to every [xx] way in this state, meeting with these owners. I have met with at least 250 owners in the last four days once this decision came out. They're hungry for a resolution. You're all long overdue in giving it to them. The state is long overdo and paying them. I appreciate your time. Thank you very much for sharing your concerns with us. Representative Brown. I just want to thank both sets of people for being here and for caring enough to come, we're going to discuss this, I really don't, we're just out of time so we'll just wrap this up for discussion only today and then hopefully you read we made sure that there was information in your packet, on a history of The Map Act the effect the consequences, please read that and we will be I assume we'll be back on the schedule Tuesday, Mr. Chair, next Tuesday. We'll make those determinations here shortly. Alright, so please do that and thank you very much for your time. Thank you, members of the committee, we are on time thank you very much and this committee stands adjourned.