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 21, 2015 | Chamber | 20150421_house_universityedu

Full MP3 Audio File

Get to out seats we've got a full agenda and we've got to get out of here by noon. So members can get to their seats, will call the meeting to order, the house education university committees is called to order. We have a house stuff and our pages. If you all will please stand up and tell us your name and where you're from and who your sponsor is and we'll say too we're glad to have you. Hope you've learnt a lot this week and we'll turn it over to you guys to tell us your names. I'm Davis Prevert and from Guilford County, John Faircloth is my Rep. I am Joyce Lane from Randolph County very good. Thank you guys for being with us again and we hope you enjoy the week. Our Sergeant of Arms Barrymore. B. H Pell and David David Smith [xx] I hope I said that right, but thank you all for helping us out. We've got our coach here Representative Brown, he is up and representative Brown do you want to take up 884 three in state set off debt corrections I know you got two bills is it okay to start with that one? And we will start with House Bill 884, reinstate set off debt collections UNC held, and representative Brown the floor is yours. Thank you Mr. Chairman, members this is truly dejavu, the sell of the collection act reinstatement, we fought very hard last session both long session and in this fourth session to reverse the decision that was made to do away with the set of the collection act availability to the university health systems, at this point we were able to restore a portion of it in the short session to the university health systems, but it still creates quite an issue particulary for East Carolina University with about $6.5 million hit in this last budget cycle and continues to be about that same numbers as we continue this year and into next year per year, so for a university system that is continuing to try to stay solvent in the face of its mission of providing care to the whole communities In East and North Carolina, this is a vital tool for them to be able to collect this past due debts this is a reminder for what's set of debt collection act is. Is it actually allows these universities of health to be able to collect past due debts that is resulted from services that's been rendered in the facilities via someone tax return or any lottery proceeds. This is direct result to the state of North Carolina and needs to be collected and obviously utilized within the service practices. I would urge your support for this full re-instatement, and I will certainly yield for any questions you have. Are there any questions for the members representative Mitchell remind me what is debtor get set off could be, you're talking about, just like a how you go in and take a person's wages. It's not garnished in the way that they would come in and take your wages. It's actually if you came into, let's say a practice facility, and receive some type of services for whatever it could be from a cold to a major service, and you fail to actually pay the debt on that, and there is either parameters on how long that debt, how long that bad debts sits out there, then the system could go in and actually collect what debt is owed to the system via your tax return or lottery process. Follow up. Yes, followup. Then the tax returns or the lottery proceeds are the only things that can be attached? That is the only thing. And it's important to note that every other department and state government is still allowed to utilize the, say Debt Collection Act. We have simply cherry picked the university health system to not be able to do this. One final question. Follow up. final question is how do you determine who is indigent and who is not in a situation like this? I will refer to staff on that if possible or possibly the university system on that definition. We will start with staff. I don't know the indigence is a part of it because it only goes after the brief that the tax refund and the lottery proceeds, and that I will defer to UNC health care if they are available. Is UNC is with us? If someone here wishes to speak. You will just state your name for the record. Good afternoon, My name is Michelle

Brooks and I am from the Brody School of Medicine at East Carolina University, and regarding your definition of of indigent. It takes about 16 to 18 months for SADKA authority to be used. Patients who come who are not insured we first would try to qualify them for Medicaid. If they did not qualify for Medicaid based on their income we have a charity care policy at EDCU that they could qualify there. If they do not qualify for that charity care policy we attempt to set them up on a payment plan where they can pay as little as $10 a month. So really has nothing to do in terms of the SADCA authority of their indigency, it's just their ability to pay. So we try to give them option pay before their account is turned in to the department of insurance. Any further questions? Rep. Insko? At the appropriate time, I'd like to move for a favorable report. Okay, Rep. Johnson? Yes sir how much interest applies to this, I know you were talking about collecting some of the past due. How much interest is added on to that? I would defer that as well, I believe it's the whole process of the past due debt but I'm not 100% sure. I'm getting a look that maybe that's there  If and [xx] want's to help your camp  The question is what is the interest that's apply to the SADKA formula, I don't believe there is. I'm not certain but my understanding, I don't believe there's any any interests, it's actually the dollar amount that's so and many times the whole amount is not ever collected, it's just assumed to be uncollectable, but no, it's not charged interest as a bank would a loan, It's not considered a loan Rep. Insko, it looks like it's the appropriate time and we will take your motion. Move for a favorable report. as members share the motion all in favor signify by saying Aye, Aye, All who oppose No, the Aye's have it and the bill does pass. Thank you members. And so you've got representative of Co Chairman Brown of house bill 866 student athletes staffins and trust funds there is a piece CS or we need a motion to adopt the PCS think Representative Davis made that motion he didn't know it just now it and all in favor f the PCS signify by saying Aye, No, The Aye's have it the PCS is properly before you. Representative Brown. Thank you Mr. Chairman, members this is a fun a bill. This bill does exactly what the title says. To give you a little bit of background on what has taken place there was a a law suit that was brought against the NCAA, it's known as the O'Bannon Versus. The NCAA. Essentially O'bannon a former UCLA basketball player, a member of the 1995 National Championship team brought suit against the NCAA upon seeing his likeness being used in EA sports game. Mr. O'bannon, as well as other former athletes, join the class of lawsuit and the US District Court wrote in favor of O'bannon saying that the NCAA was violating the [xx] Anti-trust Act by allowing university players to be able to enter into licensing agreements. The case is obviously as you can imagine has been appealed by the NCAA and will continue to be on appeal. What this bill does is very specific two things, number one is that it offers the Steepens[sp?] sue universe the athlete. This is the current law rule within the NCAA at current time, the big five conferences, the power five conferences many of which are doing this which is providing the full cost of tuition or the actual enrollment course of being a portion of their status as not just the tuition itself but room and board transportation all the things that go along where there is no gaps and grants and aid. So again many of the big power five conferences are doing it now. In fact right here ECU actually announced last week that they'll be doing it for their student athletes but the other portion of this is that it allows the universities where it essentially enjoins the NCAA from enforcing their rules forbidding any type of payment to students athletes and allows for a trust to be set up for the student-athletes to receive up to $5, 000 per year that they're actually engaged in their athletic careers at the universities and to receive

any of those funds that have been generated from the use of their name their likeness, their appearance basically the licensing agreements that's utilised by the NCAA replacing the trust and then received by the player up on either graduation or expiration of their eligibility to the university the most important aspect of these bill thou, is that this does not have an effective data as past. This bill simply allows for the effective date to take place once all of the appeal are exhausted and the court case stands. All indication shows that the court case will stand, but as you can imagine we don't know that or sure. So we don't want to enforce something that would be a violation of NCAA rules until that court case is exhausted, but I think this is an important first step in reforming a much trouble NCAA rules environment, and I would urge your support for this legislation and I'll certainly yield to questions. I don't know whether I have any question of this place, OK how do you get private universities into this? And my question is what if they don't want to buy that how are you going to enforce it. As it stands right now the way that the actual the court ruling reads is that it just enjoins the NCAA from enforcing the rules, but it does not require universities to actually adopt these changes and put these funds in the trust of pay the tipens, so what this legislation will do is actually enforce that jurisdiction to say that these constituent university have to do that and the board of governors have to create some type of rules to do that. Now from the private perspective and the way the bill is laid out is that any private university that is receiving state funds will also have to create similar rules that would be created by the board of governors as well. Follow up? Yeah, how are you identifying receipts of state fund, any state fund? Any state fund received by the private university, yes sir. I see a number of hands, let me jot them down because I don't know if I can remember all these names, and representative [xx] if you got a question, if you will just hold your hand up again let me write everyone's name down. Or they can just sign the bill. Just keep them up, keep them up for a minute. It's Brody, Brown Brayley[sp?] and Jordan. It might be easier to say who's [xx] I think I've got them, I've got Carney Brody, Brown, Fraley and Jordan, did I get everybody? Representative Carney. Thank you Mr. Chairman. You said that the Act doesn't become effective till of the appeals have gone through this room, that the bill itself says it becomes effective when it becomes law. If you look in sections 1B and 2B, it does address that, it actually does not, until the [xx] review has been exhausted or abandoned in the case of [xx] Vs NCAA. OK so it's. Follow up? Follow up, I'm sorry [xx] So my question then is, if it doesn't become law until the appeals have gone through, and that could take several years, why do we need the bill now? I think it's a start of the process, I think allowing the board of governors start the process allowing the private schools to start the process to define how they're going to construct their rules. Some of the questions that have been asked is traditionally the these types of decisions have been left to the chancellor's level Vs the board of governor's level. Perhaps that's the role that they'll like to continue on, but to allow this to move forward, there is supposed to to be a decision on the first any day now, so I mean in this squad effectively become law very quickly Representative Browner dropped the staff she had a statement that might help you also. That question you did a fine job but I think she has some additional information or Karen McGraw, either one. Representative Carney, it's part of the drafting conventions of the Act would become effective but as you probably familiar  a lot of times the bills will say, an Act is effective but doesn't apply until a certain trigger event happens, a school year begins etc. So that's the way this is structured the bill would become law but the requirements to enact this rules will not actually apply until the final quarter was entered and all appeals were exhausted. OK, thank you. Representative Brody Thank you Mr. Chairman. Representative Brown, maybe I'm arguing the case, but don't these atheletes when they get accepted to the universities I'll explain that in

exchange for offering you an educational opportunity you're going to play basketball or football why would in particular would they know all of a sudden say that we want more was it ever presented to them at the time they applied that you're going to get this, but we're going to keep all your royalties or anything like that or whatever you call them licensn[sp?] or something like that. It actually is, students of athletes of NCAA level are not required, but must sign basically a form that states that what they're receiving is to be amateur athletes and that they are not allowed during their teen year as a student athlete or after [xx] can they reclaim any revenue or any income from the use of their name, their image, their likeness through the licensing agreements, coincidentally enough this is the only contract that the NCAA allow students athletes to sign. Just a brief. Followup. So a basic to understand the cases is challenging that as simple as that the case is challenging the validity if a contract. The case is essentially challenging the [xx] anti trust act from prohibiting these student athletes to be able to engage in their own deals for licensing and royalties from the use of their name, image and likeness so that is essentially what the actual legal suit brought forth. Representative Brown. Thank you Mr. Chair. Three quick questions is that OK? we can we got one more bill and we also have one that chair you're going to add for discussion only toward the end so were just members he said just keep that in mind yes mum. I'm going to make it quick, are you saying that any student athlete whether they play or not, but they have been accepted on that team they are going to get a full ride to college? This type and portion says that yes. Okay question number two. Yes follow up. If you don't mind. Yes follow. Which many institutions are doing now. Why only basketball and football players I mean is this equal treatment why not swimmers why not golfers that kind of thing? To you point that is a great question and quite frankly it's the part of the bill that I actually don't like because as the actual judgment says it is for FBS football schools in division one men basketball schools we are simple laying it out as the court decision as being put in place, my feeling is is that regardless you'll see the NCAA if this court decision holds because of quit frankly tittle nine aspects to go ahead and move forward with allowing women sports and these other sports to be incorporated in this with equal treatment, but again we have this laying registration act as it is parallel to the court case. Then follow up?. I think you just answered it cause I want to know why I didn't apply to women sports and you are saying okay thank you. It should. But at the end of the day we also have to to make sure we can protect our institution by not bringing unwanted sessions and penalties and things for them doing for women sports when its not available under the rules Representative Frailly? Thank you Mr. Chairman. Do I understand that you want to go ahead and That parameters a block of $5000 dollars curb before the abandoned cases settled? No, we would go ahead and to make that process, but it will not be effective until the [xx] cases is actually settled. So the schools will not be, " required to enter" into this until the [xx] case is decided Representative  Fraily, it's like this bill has a trigger in it, so this bill should not become law until that case is decided upon obviously if they decided against there been and this bill will be no in board. Representative Frelly the biggest portion of the abandoned case does not again it does not require universities to enter into this, it simply enjoins the NCAA from enforcing the rules as it pertains to using a players name, likeness or appearance. OK thank you. Representative Jordan? Thank you Mr. Chair, a question for staff do we still have let's say tuition grant program? Staff. I'm going to refer to the fiscal staff. No [xx] fiscal research, no sir the instead of twishing gram program was actually done away with and it has been replace by an E base scholarship follow up. Yes follow up. With that count as state funds paid to a private institution if it went to a private school for use a private school?

Yes and in view to our state funds they are going to an individual who based on some sort of viewed qualification gets money tuition rebate to attend private school. A North Carolina Resident Final Comment Yes sir it seems then that section two no state funds should be paid to a new private institution. Sounds like all the private institutions will get state funds then. Is that intent of the bill to deal with the private institutions in the bait. And may I. Yes sir. This is highly speculative but you would assume that if this court case upholds and is required for instance that the constituent universities we located within North Carolina will require to enforce those private schools will just follow soot just from a competitor perspective. And members [xx] and when you present your bill you don't have to turn and ask me to speak trust you just engaged in your chair of committee Representative Brown. Thank you Mr. Chair. And final person we have on the list Representative Davies. Thank you Mr Chairman a couple of questions if I may for the bill sponsor, when you talk about full cost of attendance, that bothers me, you mention travel what does that mean in more detail? I'll certainly probably easier if staff has that available quickly vs me trying to find it in my notes, but it is important to note that is actually in the NCAA rules now, and the power five conferences of doing that and a lot of the other universities Nation wide are following soon. I mean that's fine, we're talking about a car, buying a car at this money or? No, I believe it will be more defined and I could be wrong and Sir correct me if I am. Let's differ to staff them. We get inducements some additional research the bi-law simply say transportation they don't provide specific as to our transportation includes that likely is intended to cover things like cost air far to the school. But we can see if by laws have any additional definitions? Do you have a follow up representative Davis?   I may a follow up thank you. I guess what bothers me too is the fact I understand that not all public schools have to bind to this, it's their choice. Is that correct? The way the judgement reads yesterday. Yes sir. As for as private schools that would only come to play if they get the state money. That's correct.   But they don't all have to buy into it.   That's correct.   I guess what's bothers me is let's say East Carolina bought into it and Chapel Hill did not and am an athlete.  Am I  going to pick East Carolina because I'm going to get this stipend to help me out?   We hope so. Go Pirates. I understand now or are they not going to pick my [xx] out of Carolina because they won't get that stipend when it ends. I'm just saying. Representative Davis. Stanford have one comment they want add to statement that you made may help you for what your thought is.  Yes sir, thank you. Stanford [xx]. As the bill is drafted for any of the constituent institutions of UNC so ECU, Carolina State et cetera who would have being in this division one cotegory they would all have to do this because it's a uniform policy. The privates would only not be able to if they choose not to accept state funds. One last follow up please. Would this apply to public schools that are not in the University System or are there any public schools that they are not in the University System?   As long as they receive state funds, yes. Yes Representative Mitchell and we'll take one last question and then were going in to vote. This is not a question is more of a statement, Yes sir What's bothers me is that we don't do legislative tuition grants anymore, we do add needs scholarship fund for these private schools and those that need scholarship or not have led to scholarship more and that to me is where a problem arises because you're out of the athletically arena when you're accepting state funds as add need student there and that sort of bothers me.   Members we're to going need to vote on this because we do have another bill, and I promised Representative Myra a discussion on one of his bills, or do I have a motion and Representative Brown and let me just. Can the Chair of the Committee make the motion with their own bill? I don't want to do anything improper. He can. Just making sure [xx] Representative Brown makes a motion for a favorable report unfavorable to the original, favorable to the PCS, all those in favor signify by saying Aye. Aye All opposed say no.

The Chair can't determine from that so all in favor if you will signify by raising your hand, please and [xx] tou can help me count, in favor of the bill please raise your hand. If you're against it signify by raising your hand now, no Chairman Brown, it appears that the bill fails. Enjoy your games this fall. We've one more bill befor discussion, Representative Velmore and Howard, can you please come forward It's house bill 657 U. N. C [xx] Thank you Mr. Chairman [xx] interesting following that and I hope this goes a little bit better what you've got in front of you is a Study Bill dealing with Representative Velmore we've go t a P. C. S we need to [xx] n real quick, okay? Thank you Representative Johnson make some motion with PCS all in favour signify by saying aye, all opposed No the aye's have it PCS's before you representative Delmore I apologize the floor is yours again Thank you chairman. What you got in front of you with the PCS is a study bill dealing with the concept of what's called fixed tuition. What fixed tuition is is the idea when a freshman comes in to the university system whatever the tuition rate is in that year, they would be able to hold that tuition rate for the four years as long as they stay as full time students during that time. If you look at the summary there there's 320 colleges and universities that are using this consept in their schools and also as the recruitment tool, this addresses can help address the problem in my opinion with raising tuition calls. Since 1984 tuition has risen almost 225% in the cost of to the students at the universities. This bill would direct the board of governors to study this concept, see if it could be implemented, see if it could used at certain universities possibly as a recruitment to and report to the joint legislative oversight committee about February of next year.   Any questions from members? I don't see any. Is there a motion? Do you have a question, motion? Alright representative [xx] you are recognize for a motion, all in favor of the motion signify by saying aye, all opposed no the ayes have it, congratulations, the bill passes. Members committee we have one final bill that the chairs are going to add, do not [xx] this bill is for discussion only for sergeant at arms if you will all pass it up. Representative Mayer came to me this morning wanted to have this bill added, I told him Chairs, we just were not comfortable voting on this, and particularly since we're just adding it to the calendar today I do not want to vote on this. This is our last meeting, but I told him we could have it for discussion, this is an issue that is before the Board of Governors. So, there will not be a vote on this at all. This is just for discussion, I told him I'd let him stick his foot in the water if he wanted to and see how it goes. So we'll let the Sergeant-at-Arms get the bills out, does everyone have a bill? And this is House Bill 815 Sexual Assault, Sexual Consent and Representative Meyer, we will turn the floor over to you, but again, members we will not be voting on this today. Thank you Mr. Chairman, I'll stick my size 13 foot into the water. Ladies and gentleman, this is a bill that's attempting to address the problem of sexual assault on college campuses. We know there's been an issue on college campuses for a long, long long time, but it's grown in attention from the public over the last couple of years. Thankfully in North Carolina of our college campuses have been on the cutting edge of moving ahead with creating proactive approaches to reducing sexual assault and providing support to sexual assault victims. This bill in many ways builds on a best practices of our universities as well as universities in other parts of the country an existing legislation other parts of the country to try and make sure our university system private colleges and our community

colleges, are doing everything that they can to reduce sexual assaults and support victims. The bill includes a couple of specific provisions the first provision in section one creates what is called an affirmative concerned standard this is the standard that am trusting to get away with some of the great area that come up in sexual assault cases where it ends up in he said she said requiring clear information for sexual concern which takes away the ability of someone to say well the other participants didn't say no, you have to have a clear information of concern before proceeding and also it makes it very clear that the able to use lack of responsiveness for instance from intoxication as an excuse for proceeding with sexual activity without the concerns of the person involved. There're  number of other provisions in terms of Harvard University or Community College with response to the victims, how the campuses should be investigating any allegation of sexual consult and then also some direction on how to provide some community education and preventitive work to make sure that this is being addressed in a way that students on campus are more aware of how to prevent sexual assaults before it even gets into any type of Campus Judicial Hearing. We do have members here from the North Carolina Cohesion Against Sexual Assault, and I have talked with people from the university system about this so if you have questions, they may be able to answer. We probably can turn it over some questions to them as well. I'm happy to hear what's on your mind as you take a first look at the bill. members are there any questions? I knew those hands would popup. Representative Insko. I don't have a question just a comment. It might be a good idea to run this by local community rape crisis centers or domestic violence because of their broad experience with this and it's fine right now but I think it would be just a good idea to get their reaction. Mr. Chairman. If you'd like to hear from Monika Johnson Hostler from the North Carolina Coalition Against Sexual Assault, she can probably address that she's just here right now. Yes sir.yes.if you will just identify yourself for the committee. Monica Johnson Hostler representing the North Carolina Coalition Against Sexual Assault which is a state wide organization that represents the over 80 plus rape crisis throughout the state of North Carolina and a representative is here to answer your question. We've actually introduced this bill to all of our Rape Crisis Centers as well as our member campuses. We have several campuses including UNC Chapel Hill, that are members of the coalition who've all seen this bill, who've all weighed in. We've given Representative Myra some of our feedback as well, and so we have made sure that this has been distributed across the state, to Rape Crisis Centers as well as our campus partners. Representative Bradley, any other questions? Representative Jordan. Well I guess I'd like a little maybe discussion of line 32 and 33 on page one. Yes sir Representative Jordan, is there a specific question or you just like to hear about it? A little discussion about exactly what that involves. So what you're asking about is section C there, affirmative consent must be ongoing through a sexual activity and can be revoked at any time. This is to say that if there is [xx] consent at the beginning of sexual activity but the activity changes in a way that becomes dangerous or harmful to someone involved, they can revoke the consent in order to protect themselves, and any further progress in that could be termed as sexual assault because you're acting against the will of one partner. Follow up? Yes follow up. You actually added something to that you said if it becomes dangerous, that's not what this is, this is must be ongoing and can be wrote[sp?] any time that would be for any reason, any purpose whatsoever according to that language correct?  correct  Representative Turner also has thank you Representative Dobson Jordan I'm sorry. This also goes to should the condition of anybody who's engaged to that conduct change during that activity, so if someone is conscious and becomes unconscious and someone through the process of engaging sexual activity becomes intoxicated, so this also covers that's why the consent must continue on going because those conditions changes as well. Yes follow up.

Such a condition change automatically revoke, is that what you just said? I'm saying that the proxy that's heading the ongoing consent, an affirmative consent so situations that are changing within the activity that you need to re-affirm that everybody is okay with what's going on. So, the change in condition would automatically revoke [xx]   I wouldn't say automatically revoke, I would say that you need to be aware of changing conditions and if there is a question you need to maintain and confirm consent. Any other question Representative Johnson. Yes, a little bit concern about that lines that a read of course, No thank you Mr. Chair, as you read it you have a chance one as above you can be re-voted during the time of the activity right? The central activity and to be voted anytime correct. I think nobody's here is under 20. I'm just concerned about that line more than anything. Because you can kind of set somebody up, I'd say, "Go to the police, then I say that this was I didn't want to consent to this sexual activity. " So, this bill does not impact criminal statute, this policy for campuses in terms of how they handle this on campus with their own investigations and any activities. But it does, that clause is designed to protect someone from being victimized during the middle of any activity. Representative Mitchell. It could impact criminal [xx] and it could play a distinctive role, and that my question is, have you talked with anybody in the Board of Governor's about their movement toward this. I know there's some activity going on there and rather than that then [xx] with this bill or whether or not they could help you formulate a bill and it will be palatable. Yes Representative Stem, we have reviewed this through the University of North Carolina General Administration and having included all the recommended changes that they gave us and has been through their legal counsel. If you'd like [xx] to address that any further I think you'd be able to do that today. And it does, it actually complies with what several campuses are already doing. Is there anyone from UNC who wants to speak? We do you happen to have a mountaineer here? If the mountaineer would like to speak on this bill I'm not sure we know why? [xx] I'm going to differ to we have the bill sponsors and we appreciate the outreach and the efforts to seek feedback I can see guys [xx] incorporated into the PSS as the development along. We greatly appreciate the working relationship we've had and provided feedback and again this is an issue that we take very seriously, we spend nine months working on a campus security initiative that touched before our Board of Governers recently incorporated many of these provisions already on campuses from a passive perspective and so I just want to appreciate the working relationship we've had, thanks. Any other questions or comments from members of Committee? Representative Sane. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you committee members, again this is a working progress Representative Mitchell, so at any point and time as we kind of get through this process and finding the interested party have something to offer for we're very open to that. But it is something obviously from what Mr. [xx] said and our campuses are addressing it and trying to find best ways and trying to accept what obviously some passive decisions and things that [xx] will continue to address these very serious issue, doing it in a way that is respectful of everybody involved, but I think this is the whole summation of everything we are doing here is about respectful every individual and so thank you I appreciate your comments for that and so if anyone does have added commentary or some your legal minds probably know better than some way I do, but if you do I think this is the time as we broke this process. Thank you. Further questions. We're seeing none, thank you gentlemen for presenting the bill, we appreciate you doing that. Members we have have nothing else on her agenda list and this meeting is adjourned.