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

searching for


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

House | April 16, 2015 | Chamber | Judiciary 1

Full MP3 Audio File

I'd like to call the judiciary one so they need an order we have with us pages Thomas cross me back on you Thomas what year do you serve? and you were sponsored by and we also have roman is that right? Villan whereyou from? I'm from North North Carolina why are you in school? claim to have both present, we're always ready to have sergeant at Arms particularity where we set in the bag, is better to have sergeant at arms, ther Carl and David Lincoln. The first bill we are going to take up is unauthorized practice of law changes Mr. Martin Mary who is. Mr. Chairman. If you don't mind you had a, you are recognized but first of all I think it would be a good idea to go have the church go over the bill if you don't mind.  I'll move the PCS Bill before. The motion have the PCS before us, all in favor say 'aye' [xx] definition of practice Any one has an amendment they want to send out? I think this was an amendment that's going to be summed up by maybe representative Martin at an appropriate time. There is an amendment agreed upon by the, where is it now? I did not have an amendment Mr. Chair. Is it being drafted? Where's the amendment? Working on that, Mr. Mayor, if you want to come up and explain what we're doing here today? Thank you Mr. Chairman, with respect to revisions of course, the definition in the practice of law obviously pretail the internet, and the main online research providers will now provide data forms and documents and I quit the amendment to section - 2.1 is to do is to clarify what constitutes the practice of law and what does not and it follows the traditional North Carolina law recognizes that the body forms not the practice of law, you can get forms on the internet, you can get forms in the library and we have never contended at the state bar, that constitutes the practice of law, and the bill will make that clear. In addition, it makes clear that the provision of [xx] called seminar services which is existing and [xx] to make sure it's done correctly and that all the teams also does not constitute the practice of law, what we believe this field does is provide some clarity for the state law when it comes to the [xx] of doing authorized practice of law and it also protects consumer in a couple of important ways. We've seen some online service providers have a problem with the document [xx] is to arbitrate the people and to just inform we've also seen some online service providers where there's a limitation to their liability that's restricted to whatever you paid for the document, and the bill addresses those situations to make sure that kind of activity would not be lawful in North Carolina. So that's the section that deals with the definition of the practice of law. We also added a section to 84-37 that we would like to see passed that deals with what we would call the issues that arose out of the supreme court's [xx] decision. In the [xx] case there

are certain situations where if a regulatory body is taking some kind of conduct, it could be deemed anti-competitive under the trust laws in order to prevent themselves to actual immunity market participants can't be involved in making that decision. We think that happens [xx] to the extent we would pursue any unauthorized practice action or cease and desist letter that might rise competitive concerns we're proposing the way to address that to have it reviewed by the Attorney General's office to make sure that what we're doing is completely consistent with statutory authority may not be motivated by any purpose that can be deemed as bi-competitive. And so we provide for that overview in 84-37. Mr. Chairman, that's a very brief summary. I'd be more than happy to make the inquiries. Does anybody have any questions? Ms. Howard you have a question? Yes, Mr. David thank you. You're welcome. Since realtors use forms consistently. Is there any concern that realtors are cleared from the premium forms that are provided by the association. The state bar is we're taking the position that real estate forms that are being filled out by real estate agencies constitutes the practice of law. And my understanding maybe an amendment proposed to this bill that makes that clear. As a state we're not opposed to such an amendment because what it really does is the existing practice says it's existed for sometime, but we acknowledge that real estate lawyers and filing out pre printed forms that they were within their right to do that. Chairman could I ask [xx] Yeah I think Representative Mark is going to send forth an amendment. Mr. Chair if I would be recognized to explain it, in my explanation consists the standard address is exactly the issue that Representative Howard presented by providing a specific exemption for completion of pre printed real estate forms If you could read the amendments so that we know what it says. Aright let's see moves to amend the bill page two line 48 through 49 by inserting the following between those lines see the completion of addition of a pre printed offer, option contract, sales contract or lease form by a real estate broker licensed under chapter I believe it's 93A of the statues in accordance with rules adopted by the North Carolina real estate commission. [xx] appear a motion to adopt the amendments. I have a question. Yes sir. Representative Howard if I may, does that satisfy your [xx] Yes mum the complete tell me to read more the completion of a prefunded offer, option contracts, sales contract or a lease form, real state broker lies under 93A of the Virginia statutes, in accordance to [xx] representative Howard I think someone is trying to get your attention [xx] perfectly fine with it as it is now and feels more than happy to work with you if you would want to have that amended but as a state [xx] comfortable it is America comfortable but I realized am not going to be missing one phone that they imported, and that's the gramophone, not just late there are various [xx] Representative Martin.  Thank you Mr. Chair, I am somewhat agnostic, do know that this language was discussed by several parties of the Eastern so just to make sure that the bar and anyone else who might have had interest in that was okay with that too. Representative Mark how would you want to work [xx] on the floor the lady is comfortable. They worked it out earlier today. So there is just one important form that is not included that I feel like that we probably should include, but if she is comfortable I'll let her [xx], but there is one form that is missing.

Mr. Chairman as I said the State park has no objection to the proposal. Mr. Chairman, I would just say is that we [xx] on the line. And Mr. Chairman I'm happy to accommodate whatever the committee wishes to do. It might make some sense just to resolve it with the four men, just to make sure that all the parties in interest had a chance to talk about it but I'm [xx] obstacle in the matter those gates. All in favor of the amendment say I, oppose No, the I's have it. now is the motion regarding the bill [xx] Yes sir Motion in favor [xx] [xx] The motion all in favor let me know by saying aye, Aye Oppose no The aye's have it bill is passed. I think you'll [xx] Our next bill is adjustment and reinvestment act changes Representative Faircloth. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Thanks to the committee for hearing the bill. Going to this is a rather long bail but I think we can move through it pretty quickly to first of all comment since the effective date of the Act, Justice Reinvestment Act, a lot of things have happened happens that are great for the state. We have really made a name for ourselves, thanks to our folks in DPS and all those that have been involved. Some of us have been fortunate enough to go out to California couple of months ago for a national meeting out there and everybody there was talking about the North Carolina program, So we all ought to say a round of thanks to those folks that are working so hard. I'll go through this quickly and if you have questions, we have Representatives in the back who can help us with the tech-nectical[sp?] things. The first on the bill, the first page, section one begins on page one but turn over to page three and what that does is add a regular condition of probation that the offendant must wave all rights relating to extradition proceedings have taken into custody outside of the state for failing to comply with conditions imposed by the court, and it sets out how that process will happen. Section two which is on page four and Mr. Chairman if there questions we stop along the way or, if you have questions that we need to clarify for you please stop and we'll along the way and try to address that. Page four amends the statue, to make the statue concerning special probation rules and the air conditions that maybe placed on on offender sentenced to community punishment or intermediate punishment to include possible conditions that the offender obtain a specific sex offender assessment treatment. A section also provides unless the judge specifically finds under the judgment of a court  the delegation is not appropriate. The section of community corrections of the division is allowed to require an offender placed on supervised probation for a conditional discharge or deferred prosecution to comply with the condition except the conditions can find to plan the facility I think that's a pretty self explanatory entry there so to shoot to not have too much problems there. On page six which is section two B billy the section community allowed to require an offender placed on supervised probation for a conditional discharge in the first prosecution to comply with the conditions of the, is there any question about this pretty technical this preside could you sort of explain I think while she's walking up I think you all need to know this is an agency deal recommended by on the agency and this is precise Representative  Agents. Am Annie [xx], Director for

community correction, within the Department of Public Safety,  what we are asking for is give back to just give the legislation is to make the system for the probational officer so as to be able to respond to the type of defenders of their kingdom. Currently, just as reinvestment impacts community and intermediate sentence defenders. And what we're asking for is that the delegated authority provisions be  expanded to also include conditional discharge offenders, DWI offenders, post release supervision offenders, so that it's more consistent for the probation officer to respond swiftly and certainly to particular behaviors that the offender exhibits. And if you'll just stay there ask the chairman to let me use you some more. Page seven speaks to release supervising abide by fallen conditions and could you give us some information on [xx]? Section three. and precise director for community corrections. This particular section we've worked with the post release parole commission to come to an agreement that probation officers can again respond to that particular population. That population has increased from 2, 000 at the time the Justice reinvestment was passed, to over 10, 000 offenders on our case loads now, so this allows us to use those same conditions during the course of their nine or 12 month period of supervision. And Mr. Chairman if I might continue on page nine, page nine provides that a post release supervision is revoked and supervise e is re-imprisoned for violation of a condition, the division must award a prisoner credit. Can you explain how that credit works and how thorough and precise. This change is consistent with the change that we made to the probationary statute in the last session last year. So what this will do is allow the post release offender to have the full 90 days that they are ordered to participate in programming instead of getting that two week or three week credit of time waiting in jail they will get the full 90 days so that they can take the full advantage of the 90 day program that we provide.  Mrs. Jennifer if I may continue on page 10 of justice reinvestment council, and this is a major part of this legislation, so  would you explain to us,  please mam? Yes sir and precise. This is a change from the previous state advisory community corrections board that was included in the initial justice reinvestment bill. This is a change for justice reinvestment council, that would be made up primarily of stakeholders within the system that can help us further our implementation, further our training efforts within the stakeholder community, and also help us continue implementing additional changes for justice reinvestment. And you will see on there where the appointments would come from for that new council, and I think it's certainly step forward. Page 11, allow the post release supervision of parole commission to conduct all hearings by video conference, do you want to tell us how you're going to do that please madam? Yes sir, in precise. This is a change that we made and it was specific to the commission hearings for the commissioners, what we want to do is also include the preliminary hearings that inmates have when they are arrested, when a warrant have been issued by the commission, the inmates are entitled to the preliminary hearing. What this will do is allow the inmates that have already been returned to the prisons system and their designated prisons that they're turn to it will allow the hearing officer to go to the prison and be with the inmate and conduct that preliminary hearing by video conference. An example is a probation officer or a parole officer from Madison County would not have to travel to Craven County to conduct the 15 to 20 minute preliminary hearing. It can now be conducted via video conferencing. Before we go any further outside [xx] wants to make motion that we accept the committee substitute [xx] that's about what I was going to do. Thank you. All in favor say I. I. Thank you Mr. Okay we're on page 12, lower part of the page, on revocation of two or more consecutive senators as

a result of probation violation, credit per term served on concurrent confinements and response to violation shall be created to ignore only one senate, you want to explain a little bit about that? Yes sir I'm pretty sorry currently when an offender has multiple cases of supervision and they receive a 90 day period of confinement, those 90 day periods, it is one sentence that they serve, and currently when the person is subsequently revolt for supervision they get them one day 90 credit toward all three sentences. So this is the clarification that would allow them to continue to receive the consolidated credit for the 90 day period of confinement but when supervision is revolt, they would receive one 90 day credit, and it would not be applied to the additional multiple sentences the person have. Thank you Ma'am, and Mr. Chairman, on page, the bottom of page 12, and on page 13, modifies individuals who may apply for the requisition of a person who has been convicted of a crime in North Carolina and a state confinement by including the post release supervision and parole community, and the director of community corrections, can you clarify that one for us? Yes sir. I am precise, this simply allows the director for community corrections to make the decision to be able to return and offenders who have absconded supervision and have been located in potentially neighboring states that we can send off a search across state lines and to return those offenders rather than going through the full process using our extradition services and we an make that decision to return rather than going through and the current processes that we have now. Are there any questions of or [xx] Yes sir.   Representative Blackwell Thank you Mr. Chairman, and my question goes to Section 7 to be precise regarding the crediting of [xx] when you've been and given the senate's it was one concurrent, and just wondering what the response has been or has it been some response regarding judiciary and the DAs on the question of when they make a sinison deal it would provide that the report approves it, is this the deviation for what was intended by the parties who might have breached their agreement In precise, are you asking if the probation, excessive suspended senate does run concurrent or does suspended sentences are consecutive? Concurrent If they're concurrent then this stays the same, this doesn't impact that, it's when the active sentences are consecutive to each other. That's what this is an attempt to clarify because the intent in the initial legislation with not the 90 days CRV would be the one CRV that run concurrent for all three cases, would be applied to all three cases if it were subsequently revoked. This will clean that up so that it is not in the other question [xx] will have to have a motion to give this committee substitute Representative Martin[sp?] all in favor of [xx] say I I oppose no. The I's have it [xx] very much. Thank you Mr. Hanson[sp?]. Representative   [xx] has informed me that the roofing contract to build is not going to be heard today Is that right? That's correct. I appreciate giving me the [xx]. We had a bit of issue [xx] Next bill we'll hear is House [xx] 328. Representative Warn[sp?] and others. The pubic will have an opportunity to speak for and against the bill you've been limited to two minutes. What's that? I didn't know you were a minister. A minister? And there is a PCS Representative Mcneil moves that the PCS be before us all in favor [xx] you're Representative [xx] I apologize I'm standing in unity with this the other bill sponsors that have got to go chair another committee right now 1:00 I think the first thing we need to do [xx] is to get Miss Churchill to explain the bill How I figured this occupation was

probably to this convection was increase penalty to acquisition may refer as sale [xx] where the violation [xx] possession or if it was [xx] [xx] increase the penalties for [xx] establishing [xx] the bill would create a [xx] presumption [xx] [XX] on page seven [XX] [XX [XX] probation referring increase in health [xx] become affected, become a first the information provided as well as the accouterments of these. The information provides the issuance of the restricted drivers [xx] for the members this bill has a serial referral to finance, I does not have any cancellation note prepared yet Miss [xx] is working on it is that right? Do you any [xx] how much it would be Today it does have a significance. What is significant? Well right now [xx] a million dollars. Thank you good. What is that same thing [xx] I finished up the we had [xx] information present scenarios based on assuming everyone under 21 is [xx] can role many people out, and it would add [xx] 156, I think. Follow up? should that have a [xx] cost?  The cost that the incarceration mate[sp?] is looking at is only from section 2A and 2B of this bill that [xx]. And a note would be ready if this bill gets to finance, is that correct? representative Moore Thank you, I appreciate [xx] in another adjusting incursiration that because it doesn't exist yet and the one that was created for the bill that preceded this last session, I had some questions about that anyway so I think will find it when all considerations are done in relationship to cost that it won't be anywhere near what we are talking about here, but there would be a cost presentation of the bill as to raise with any bill where you adjust penalties. This bill I want to start off by saying has nothing to do with immigration, immigration law or immigration reform, this is a bill about law enforcement and public safety the bill seeks to do basically five primary objectives the first one is to separate criminal element and make easier for law enforcement to identify, the second objective is to end a de facto amnesty that some folks have in our state when it comes to regard to laws that you and I have to comply with particularly in the area of the highway, the third objective is to reduce the risk to our citizens in terms of identity theft and

the fourth objective is to assist law enforcement to the creation of a state wide database in the fifth interjection is of course is to stop municipalities and non-profit organization from taking the law into their own hands by the creation of certain identification cards. I will go into in the bill just a little bit less detailed and the structure of it, the sale manufacturing and possession of counterfeit documents it's currently just a class one misdemeanor, this bill would take this to a class G felony one of the reason I want to adreess this is because according to North Carolina department of justice between 300 and 400 thousand North Carolinians are the victims of identity theft each year North Carolina ranks 24th in the nation in identity theft and the three of our North Carolina cities Rocky Mountains Goldsboro list in the top 100 cities in the US for identity theft [xx] area rank's just outside the 100 number. So we would take that and move that into a class G felony Part four. Part three of the bill that create a rebadable presumption against pretrial release, and also create a section on secured bill depending on the servility of the crime that the individual is charged with and whether or not they are in the state illegally. The fourth part of the bill, does establish what these established methods for verifying immigration status and does pertain to several different permissible status records for court under certain conditions being met it also provides one portion of the ability to transport and allows the present immigrants to out of state cover and entities with the Governors permission. Our fifth provision of the bill addresses the use of certain documents for legal identification in North Carolina one of the problems they were saying in the State right now for example is with non profits and other fake pase organizations creating identification cards and sending them out for people who are here illegally. We have in the Western St. Mary an organization called which says they should have over 7, 000 ID cards in Greensboro they should have over 17, 350 by the time I did the supervision of the bill. In Borom the local police have been using recognizing retrick reconcilar card and in senate recently they've established what they call an immigration integration task force which was charged with the responsibility of determining ways to integrate the immigrant communities into the shadow areas one of the suggestion they had was the creation of a municiple card for the immigrants there is a need for an identification card that's obvious because land cost in these very cities are named are receptive to that and have some esablished identities but we can't have municipalities on their own creating cards or fake state organization's credit cards without a uniformity of a vetting process. What this Bill will do will establish a North Carolina restricted ID, which require fingerprinting, and criminal and state background checks, it will require prove of identity then prove for residence. It wants to create a restricted driver's permit. There is no way should be confused with a North Carolina valid driver licence, the restricted ID is simply a permission to drive on the highway, and to receive one, to be eligible for one, one must prove that they are here legally, they must prove their identity, prove their residents, submit the fingerprint and a criminal background check, and also take take the DMV standard test, that you and I have to take, and have fiscal responsibility, i. E insurance the provision in the bill is actually critical we have a partly of 325, 000 undocumented immigrants for the North Carolina, somewhere between 90 and 110, 000 of those are eligible to drive. Most folks who are driving here illegally do not have insurance and represents threat to our citizens. So it's actually critical that we that part of the bill in there. The last part of the

bill refers to the confiscation of vehicles and what I will do is address not only  folks who are here illegally driving without a restricted permit, but even both here in the state, citizens in the state who are driving on a revoked licence for DWI, or for a driving without a licence, what this will do will enable law enforcement to rectify this folks impound the car and from conviction of the vehicle and the money goes from the local MBA. By passing this legislation we'll create a State wide database for law enforcement to help them establish identities for them and it will help us improve better enforcement of child support and assist law enforcement on the residency of suspects. It will help impact a reduction in identity theft, and reduce the number of criminals on the street, it will also enable us to have a state wide I. D that the local organisation would want to work with the onward community can do so but wit the I. D card and with the uniform and provide good vetting at the individual. I hope you see the point behind us again there's nothing to do with inauguration or innovation doesn't seem to do that. Is that to provide better law enforcement and improve public safety for our citizens. Appreciate your support There's a number of people that have asked to speak in the public, from the public, and I do that now. If you don't mind, limit your remarks to two minutes. William Cheen, C H E E N, is that? I'm William Gheen, President, and in fact former member of the Sergeant-At-Arms staff, many of you remember me, and as a prior North Carolina Driving School, driving instructor for the State of North Carolina I'm glad I didn't have a sip of water in my mouth when the bill's sponsor said this wasn't a driver's licence or it was in no way related to migration issues. There's a lot of appealing sounding things in this bill, its title, its enforcement promises, but the poison pill on this bills is it is a license for illegal immigrants. We fought hard to turn off those licences in 2007, when Senator David Hoole[sp?] finally amended the code to stop illegal, the illegal immigrant magnetism[sp?] when we found out that Spanish newspapers in Brazil were advertising for illegal immigrants to come and work in order to get their licences and smugglers in Florida were chartering buses to bring illegal immigrants here because of course Florida cracked down on licences after the 9/11 terrorists used their Lax Licence Laws to attack our country and exploit our immigration laws. The most important thing here is that the licence provision limited restricted whatever you want to call it is opposed by approximately 77-83% of your constituents. October 2007 [xx] Poll went after Hillary Clinton and Governor Spencer came out with the licences 77% of Americans reject any form of licence really on [xx] April 5th of 2015 the way things have gone up, 83% of American object to licenses free legal and investment as exactly what this bill does. I want you to shut this bill down or have them take the licence provision out of here if it really means what he says about stop and show up giving ID in these groups aiding in the betting illegal immigrants and their employers is what they want if he means that then take that out of the bill or shut this bill down. In closing last November 2014 the State Oregon republican being elected [xx] in the state major 88 licence defeated by 67 percent of the vote in the general election. This deals with the 67, 77, 80 people that cast this vote. James Johnson Good afternoon my name is James Johnson I'm with NC Fire Bill 8328 has some very good illegal reinforcement measures in it there's a language in it that appears that some members of North Carolina house are acknowledging we do indeed have have an illegal alien problem in North Carolina and are attempting to do something about it, and we applaud them for that. However, it doesn't make any sense as to why someone would be in favor of enforcing immigration laws on the one hand, and in the same law be encouraging illegal immigration on the other hand. Giving illegal aliens a North

Carolina drivers licenses or permit, whatever you want to call it, would only encourage more. And is that what we're trying to do with this bill? Or is it's purpose to combat the rampant illegal immigration that we have and all the negative effects that are coming with it? I'd like to share with you some of the experiences of the other states that have passed licenses for illegals, and I believe there's 10 or 11 depending[sp?]. Four of them wish they'd never done it, one has repealed and two others are trying. Oregon decided to repeal it by a vote of 66 to 34, to cancel the law that would provide drivers licenses for illegal aliens. Georgia is trying to repeal it with Senate Bill 6. New Mexico is trying to repeal it and its turned into a complete disaster, and one of the assumptions of this bill is it will reduce the number of uninsured motorists on the highways. Well, New Mexico found out that it didn't it didn't do that at all, as a matter of fact it made them soar to number two in the country for uninsured motorists after they started giving licenses to illegals. California, Colorado, Vermont, all these states have found out that they underestimated by nearly half the numbers that would apply for these drivers license and it's turning out to be a huge unfunded liability that they're having to open and more officers and man-hours overtime, and one more assumption of this bill of these licenses will not be used by the TSA to board aircraft, well it's already happening in California. Your time is up. They've already been accepted for boarding aircraft. Thank you, Sir. Jurant[sp?] Bordart[sp?], I'm Ron Woodard, Director of NC Listen. I urge you to vote against House Bill 328 as written. Why reward people illegally in our nation with illegal driving permit and help them legally drive to a job that belongs to a citizen. The purpose of this Bill is really to give illegal driving permits to illegal immigrants with some enforcement thrown in. The bill should be enforcement only if it's about public safety. Ironically it takes about six pages of this bill to offer driving permits to illegals but it takes 14 pages of this bill to try and clean up just part of the mess already caused by illegal immigration in that state. The legal driving permit, part of this bill is like giving an amnesty to  illegal immigrant. To fix this problem our people driving without a driving licence AAA says we believe we should see a difference if penalties were more severe, let us not [xx] ahead as one of the most lenient states. Last time I stayed late legal driving privileges to illegal immigrants, illegal immigration increased to more than 10 fold. It would be a disaster again. Would you want to have to explain this to your voters and all the associated costs of illegal immigration? Section eight of our Immigration and Nationality Act says aiding and helping illegal aliens remain in our country is a criminal offense. Isn't giving legal driving permits to illegal aliens actually helping them remain in our country and circumvent federal laws. Giving driving permits to illegal aliens will not make our roads any safer. If illegal state client insurance that don't keep it on time, so who's actually going to find them and take away their permits? I hope that problem would work better than enforcement we have with our current state program for catching business as a council workers cop. Do you believe your voters back home want more illegal immigrants in your state, or for them and for them help illegals legally drive to a job that belongs to your unemployed citizens, so then I urge you to vote against this bill as written, thank you. Thank you. Miriam two Miriam Two, I'm here from [xx] constituency located in North county North Carolina and I'd like to say that I do support the majority of the clauses within H328, I think it can be a very good bill but I am opposed to, in section six pardon me part six, the granting of drivers permits to people here of unlawful status. Present time there are estimated to be 410, 000-785, 000 you illegally present here in the state. Most of these individuals came here to seek better conditions and to escape lawlessness within their own countries. Giving permits to people here of unlawful status only helps to insentifience[sp?] lawlessness, and we don't this is not going to help the people who come here to escape lawlessness nor will it help the citizens of North Carolina thank you. Thank you Fred Baggett Fred Baggett I represent the

North Carolina Association of Chiefs of Police. Chiefs of Police of my association quote this bill because of the identification aspects of it. We've heard that there are hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants in the state here today. They we're here last week and they're going to be here tomorrow and law enforcement encounters them everyday. They encounter them on the streets, in their homes, other places and they encounter them driving cars they will continue to drive cars with or without this bill. Identifying drivers of vehicles, identifying people that are encountered by police officers is critical to law enforcement. Now there is no identification, faulty identification or absolutely fraudulent identification offered to law enforcement by these people. This bill at least for those that apply and succeed will provide reliable uniform identification to law enforcement by those who are driving vehicles and for those that law enforcement encounters otherwise so for the identification aspects of this bill, the Chiefs of Police Association supports it. Thank you. That concludes my list of speakers, if there're any questions by any members who would like to address to the speakers who have spoken or to the bill sponsors now is your chance. Yes sir?  I just got a question on representative Warren, and you explain to me doesn't this bill say that to get a restricted license they have to have prove of insurance first? Yes sir, and  also there's a stipulation that if there is anybody  calls and cancels insurance and they're here illegally, the insurance company is not to give a refund or cancel the policy. The other area I want to point out one of the other speakers mentioned this, try and make a distinction again, make a comparison of this being the same as the license, it is not. This permit is not in compliance with the real ID Act in the sense that it cannot be used to board a plane or enter or federal building, and the bill also stipulates that it can be used as an ID for entitlement programs in North Carolina that are not fairly mandated, and it can not be used to register the vote. The example that was given about New Mexico and a Washington state, they gave drivers licenses out, as we did in the 1990s. When I was working on Viva, the vital ID bill. One of the reasons I had a ten year expiration date on the drivers license because the last licenses that would have come out issued to illegal immigrants would have expired, I believe, in February of 2006 and the bill I had it phasing in coming in at 2016, and so that would include those being used as ID. This is a very well thought out portion, but at that time, North Carolina was the only state on the East Coast that offered drivers licenses and as result, we did have an influx of folks coming here to get a drivers license, that's a a heck of an idea to have if you're somewhere illegally. But today is a different situation. Nobody that's offering drivers' licences or some form of driving privilege is asking people to do or demanding people to do but we are here in the North Carolina but the finger printing in the criminal background checks and any fears you may have about this creating an influx of illegal immigrants into North Carolina, I put to rest now, there are 13 other states involved in issuing drivers licenses and some form of permit, and non of them have the strict requirement that we do, this permit is only good for one year. If I was in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Kentucky, West Virginia, Virginia, I would go to Marilyn, I would go to Illinois and get a drivers' license. I wouldn't come to North Carolina and submit fingerprints and the criminal background check for one year permit that just doesn't make sense, and also drivers' licenses don't motivate immigration, economics do, people don't sneak into the United State to get the drivers' license, and they don't go to Arizona or to Florida they get drivers licenses they go there to work, and so there's nothing wrong with issuing a permit. It's acknowledging the fact that we have people driving without insurance, without being vetted, without being tested, and to recognize that and for us as a legislative body to do nothing about it, is my opinion a dereliction of duty. Follow up. Follow up. So, just following up on what you just said, and I apologize to the [xx] staff. Where in this bill does it

say that the insurance companies would not refund? And then also, is there a provision in this bill where if they did cancel it and didn't get their refund or they would report back to DMV that they had?   That's standard procedure for insurance companies to notify DMV. While she's looking that up, on a different note, is there a path to a regular license in this bill or office is always going to be restricted. Whatever you call it. May I? Thank you I din't mean to overstep your authority this will always be a reciprocate one of the speakers mentioned something about why don't we just enforce immigration laws, so they tried it in Arizona, they tried it in Georgia, they tried it in Southern Kansas and they got sued by the Federal Government that's why I've stayed away from enforcement of immigration law this is North Carolina law and until the Federal Government our counterparts on congressional level bite the bullet and do something about this and politics aside and help out an entire country and people living within it illegally until they do their job we're going to have a a restricted permit to ensure the safety of our folks on the road. Any the other question the bill sponsors. Yes sir. Couple of questions one deals with driving privileges verses this issue in an ID card According to you, those are integrally linked. Is that correct? You're not willing to figure out the driving privileges having an ID card that goes through the background check, has this piece but doesn't fully grant driving privileges. That is correct?   That is correct. Second question Follow up. Follow up. One new thing is that could you help me explain this piece on page seven at this [xx] where it talks about the criminal investigation, arrest [xx] different than the licensing. Does that provide a protection against the to [xx]. Rep. [xx], I'll do better than help you explain, I'll explain it to you. What that is is a surety that the information submitted by an illegally present person is to qualify for a permit or restricted ID or a restricted permit cannot be used to initiate charges against them in all the information that is provided is held confidential unless that individual gets charged with the crime somewhere along the line and then all the records are available as they would be for me and me. Follow up. Follow up. What if it's in the background take that perfect turned out for you, what did you found? Then we will put through deportation or whatever normal proceedings that we would. Follow up it's not what it says it says can be used to initiate charges. No for a ferenny can be the information for those who qualify would be held confidential. Here is the thing in your legal community you have a section just like you have a society you have an element there that has engage in the previous crime and there not here to become citizens there not here to bail the law and there not likely to come out and smith the fingerprints in the criminal background check to get a background check to get a one year permit. Question. Yes. Representative Jackson is recognized. excuse me representative criminaly investigated or detained perhaps an Amexican versatile your not going to meet that can rent would be able to meet with the Mexicans no questions take the last comment Mr chair the last thing I'd say this bill has been three years in the making has been defined several in the process I've dealt with 97 different individuals representing 81 different stake holders and as many as your surprise it doesn't involve simply agricultural agribusinesses, 81 different stakeholders support this bill I encourage you I employ to support this bill, thank you in the ball of discussion I'm sorry we've already had a any other questions or anyone have a motion to make? representative Jackson. Mr. Chairman I make a move for a favorable cost of PTA front papers for the bridges. You pull the motion any discussion debate. If not all in favor the

motion vote enormous aye "aye" oppose no. I believe the ayes have it. The ayes do have it bill has been adopted. Thank you. We adjourn.