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 | June 30, 2016 | Chamber | House Elections

Full MP3 Audio File

[BLANK_AUDIO] Good morning. The House Committee on Elections will come to order. I'd like to begin of course by thanking our capable sergeant at arms for their assistance. Marvin Lee, Reggie Seals, David Latten/gg, Joe Often/g and Randy Walph, and by introducing and welcoming our pages who are here with us, if you'll stand and let the members see who you are. We have a page, Everett Macau from Bomcombe County, thank you for being here. Heather Dorall from Mecklenburg, Quinn Teddy from Cleveland and Alina Batista from [INAUDIBLE]. Thank you for being here and for your assistance this morning. Members, we have two bills that will be considered today. The first is senate bill. is a proposed committee substitute for senate bill 667. This bill was distributed to members last night pursuant to the rules. Therefore, the Chair declares that the proposed committee substitute for this bill is properly now before the committee. Chair is going to recognize Chairman Jones to present the bill. Chairman Jones. [BLANK_AUDIO] >> Thank you Mr Chairman. Good morning ladies and gentlemen of the committee. I'm going to walk you through this bill just a little bit. Section by section and then we will stand for any questions. I you may want to defer to staff for portions of it but lets to start with section one. Section One is a non-controversial bill that the House has already passed provides for 10 days of compassing for primaries as is done for the general election. So it just conforms the primary time to that. Section Two simply requires the Attorney General to defend state laws in court just clarifies that portion of his job. Section Three clarifies the order of the ballot for the Court of Appeal's races as you know in partisan the Governor's party is listed first. And now that the Court of Appeals the parties are listed with the candidates this dictates that the Governor's party will be listed first for the Court of Appeal's races. Section number four says that proposed amendments when they are on the ballot they will be designated by short descriptive caption not just by numbers. So that people actually know something about what they are voting for and in the preceding time it's not gonna be just amendment one or amendment two or amendment three there will be some description there for the amendment. Section Five is a study regarding providing for even numbered year municipal elections. In even number years, it's anticipated that there would be considerable higher voter turn out. Less cost associated if the odd numbered year elections were not done and this is something we want to look at, it would be gradually implemented over two election cycles. But in this Bill, it simply provides for a study to come back early next year to determine how that might would be done or whether it should be done. Section six is a local provision, for the city of [UNKNOWN] 2014, the voters had a referendum that passed with 87%. It moved the elections from October to November which was done in 2015, this provision simply fixes the filing period to conform to the filing periods of, The other municipalities in the county that also have November elections. Section seven through nine basically are preparing for the receipt of the 2020 census. Speaks of our participation in the 2020 census data program of the US census Bureau and, the reporting of voting precincts. Basically as you know there's a census every decade. That census information is used in elections. This also has to do with voting tabulation precinct, voting tabulation district or ETDs and precincts. Would seek to do would make them be the same. Currently we report elections by VTDs and sometimes VTDs do not necessarily match up with the precincts. The current VTDs were frozen in 2008, they were set to align with the precincts as they existed at that time. However in the last eight years there are many precincts that emerged.

Others have split. And so now there are two maps of VTBs and precincts that don't marry each other any more so this will basically go back and conform that. Mr chair I would stand for any questions at this time or defer the staff but that's basically the nuts and bolts of the bill. >> Thank you for the presentation, Representative Torbett for what purpose does the gentleman seek recognition? >> Ask chairman Jones a question >> The gentleman is recognized >> Chairman Jones thank you on the brief description the bill announces, it consists six members. >> I'd like to [INAUDIBLE] report terms and a mayor each odd numbered your three members of the city council. Is that gonna- [BLANK_AUDIO] Representative Warner what purpose you wanna seek recognition? >> Just for a motion appropriate time sir. >> All right let's hold that just for a moment. >> Representative Stam what purpose do you seek recognition? >>To speak. >> The gentleman has the floor to speak on the bill. >> As the further explanation of section 2. This relates to local bills and we've had a couple of cases where local bills have been attacked, and no one had standing to defend who cared. So this is saying at least the attorney general We'll have standing to defend. It's really unusual in court to disallow the people who care about something to have any representation, but that was what happened twice. >> Representative Harris purposes does the lady recognition. >> I have a question for Representative Stam and then I'll offer an amendment if appropriate. >> Will the gentleman from Wake yield to the lady from Guildford. >> I do. >> He yields. >> And I am sorry I missed some of that explanation. But I think my concern with this provision is that it looks like it forces the Attorney General's office to defend what he or she might perceive to be unconstitutional statute. Does it do that or you're saying its just circumstancing? >> That's a different question. We already have a state statute requiring him to defend state laws that are attacked, and not being too political about it, but he's refused to do it. What this relates to is local laws which the courts have agreed that if the state's not a party, then the Attorney General is not gonna represent the state. This happened for example in the Wake school board redistricting case where, The only defense was by the Wake county board of election whose opinion was just tell us what the rule is and we'll go with it and the people who cared had no standing. So, you don't get a very good result in an adversarial system when one side is represented and the other side, is not. >> Representative Harrison, would you approach the Chair, please. [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] >> Members by way of announcement what the chair conveyed to the lady from Guilford and will still give her the opportunity to speak if she so desires. is that the bill before us is essentially a pre-conference bill with the Senate. The chair's of this committee have no objection to the content of the ladies amendment. But as is it's not been discussed with the other chamber, the chairs have asked her not to send it forth, but that's the nature of the

conversation that just took place but the chair would allow the lady to make up her own mind to that effect. The lady is recognized. >> Thank you Mr Chair for that and I will withdraw it for now and hope I will opportunity to run it on the floor or, in technical corrections or something so I appreciate that. >> Yes ma'am. Is there further discussion or debate? Representative Harrison. >> Thank you Mr Chair I don't believe I have any issues with other sections of the bill but I think I just got some problems with forcing the Attorney general to defend what he or she perceives to be unconstitutional legislation. So I'm opposed to that section unfortunately for now I have to be opposed to the legislation thank you. >> Further discussion or debate? If not the gentleman from Rowan Representative Warren is recognized for a motion. >> Thank you Mr. Chair I make a motion for an extremely favorable report for the committee substitute for senate bill 667 unfavorable to the original. >> The gentleman from Rowan has moved that the proposed committee substitute present the bill 667 be given a favorable report unfavorable to the original bill. Is there further discussion or debate? [BLANK_AUDIO] There has been a call for that as ayes know as the chair is going to grant that if the committee will give the chair just a moment to prepare for that. [BLANK_AUDIO] But is there any further discussion or debate on the motion? Very well the chair is about to put the question as soon as the clerk is ready. Mr chairman. >> Representative [INAUDIBLE] >> I apologize in my mind I was trying to formulate a question if I could ask the chair to >> Since the chair has not yet put the question the gentleman is recognized for that purpose. >> Does the bill cover all the residency issues and time in the residency issues as a normal election would be in state law? Like if you are running from a district do you have to live in that district for a period of time on top of is there any addressing on that or is that you feel like safely covered in the current existing structure? >> Representative the chair does not believe that subject matter is contained at all within this bill, would 667 is there a specific provision the gentleman's question. >> I might be addressing the next bill again am I probably, okay thanks never mind I bring up again. Thank you Mr. Chair. >> Are you ready? Members, the question before the committee to be clear - [LAUGH] is the motion from the gentleman from Rowan to give the proposed committee substitute to Senate bill 667, short title propose [LAUGH] short title election ominous revisions. Those in favor will vote aye when their name is called those opposed will vote no, the clerk will call the roll. >> Representative Mitchell? >> No. >> Representative Szoka? >> Yes. Representative Warren? >> Yes. >> Warren yes. >> Representative Blast/g? Representative Blast/g? Representative Brody? >> Yes. >> Brody yes. Representative Brown? >> Yes. >> Representative Brown yes. Representative Brian? >> Yes. >> Representative Brian yes. Representative Burr? >> Aye. Representative Barry, yes. Representative Conrad, >> Yes. Representative Cotham, >> no. Representative Cotham no, Representative Davis, yes. Representative Dickson, Representative Faircloth, >> yes. Representative Faircloth yes. Representative Fisher >> No >> Representative Fisher no. Representative Floyd >> No>>. Representative Floyd no. Representative Ford. >> Aye. >> Representative Ford yes. Representative Graham. Representative George Graham Representative George Graham no. Representative Hardister. >> Aye. >> Representative Hardister yes. Representative Harrison. Representative Harrison >> No. >> Representative Harrison no. Representative Hunter >>No. >> Representative Hunter no >> Representative Iler. >> Aye. >> Representative Iler yes Representative Jackson >> No. Representative Jackson no.

Representative Susan Martin. >> Yes Representative Susan Martin yes. Representative Richardson. Billy I'm sorry. Bobby Richardson, Representative Bobby Richardson. Representative Richardson no. Representative William Richardson. Representative Riddell >> Aye. >> Representative Riddell, yes. Representative Saine. Representative Speciale. >> Yes. >> Representative Speciale, yes. Representative Stam. >> Aye I. >> Representative Stam, yes. Representative Torebett. >> Aye. Representative Torbett yes. Representative Willingham. Representative Jones. >> Aye. Representative Jones yes. Representative Lewis. >> Lewis yes. Mr. Clerk representative Dixon is in the room, does the gentleman wish to record, the representative Dixon will be recorded as voting Aye. [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] Members with 20 members voting in the affirmative and none in the negative the motion to give senate bill, the motion to give the proposed committee substitute senate bill 667, is adopted. >> Thank you. >> Thank you representative. Members we wanna move now to senate bill 897. The bill is properly before the committee and was distributed to members last night. The chair is pleased to recognized to present the bill, The my colleagues from the senate, senator Apodaca welcome to house election sir. You have the floor. >> Mr. Chairman thank you very much, it is a pleasure to be here this morning as we come to the end of this wonderful session, and I would like to say upfront beginning my remarks that the local delegation, other than myself, is not in favor of this bill. So I want that out front. the reason this bill was before us today is because of the concerns raised by citizens manly in south Ashful. The people in south Ashful can't remember the last time they had a representative on city council. >> If you look Mr. Chairman can we get the map up. >> Absolutely we are have asked our staff to get that done. The chairman would, point out that members do have maps before them and the chair would acknowledge we are having a technical glitch. >> Just fine I would just continue on as they have them brought. If you look at the maps. you'll see clearly every member of the current council lives in Central or North Asheville. The best way to remedy the situation was to create a districting system for the Asheville city council. Eight of the 10 most popular cities in North Carolina use some type of districting system to elect their city councils. Asheville would become the ninth. This method is not new or novel. It is commonplace and considered a best practice across the state for ensuring geographic diversity of representation throughout a city. This map was not drawn based on creating political advantage. If you survey the political statistics associated with the map, you will see every district has elected more democrats than Republicans. The map was drawn to create geographic diversity. The balance population according to the legal requirements and to keep precincts together when possible. I've being asked to consider allowing a referendum on the plan I will not and there's a simple reason why. If Asheville allowed a referendum I have no doubt that the current counsel will work to defeat it. The current counsel status is is satisfied by a system that suits your political interest while denying people who don't live in central Asheville a voice in the

counsel. This is merely a test on in 2019 a new plan will completely go into effect for one election cycle. If the counsel and the people of Asheville decide that prefer to return to the old system. They may do so after the return of the 2020 census. The system also is not unique six counties including Buncombe are currently under a modetorium on changing their form of government that will expire upon the return of the next census. This bill is an attempt to ensure that all people of Asheville have representation on their city counsel it adds Asheville to the overall majority of cities it's size who already use a similar system of election. It applies to one election cycle after that the people of Asheville are free to remake their form of government. I hope those future choices will be made by all people, and not a select few to live in favored parts of town. This bill will make that possible and I ask for your support Be happy to answer any questions. >> Members by way of announcement the chair was asked to announce to the committee that the city of Asheville through it's representation to the general assembly wanted to go on record as being opposed to this bill. We will now open up for discussion or debate, what purpose does the gentleman from Gaston representative [INAUDIBLE] seek recognition?>> Mr.Chair after I've had time to thoroughly examine the bill the actual bill language it appear that my concern About the time in that district, you must have racing /g is covered in the time lapse of when this would actually be active, so I have no further question on that. Thank you very much. >> Representative Fishe, what purpose does lady seek recognition? >> Just to ask the bill sponsor a question or a series of questions. >> The lady is recognized for that purpose. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator Apodaca, how much development would you say is going on in the southern part of the county of Buncombe compared to the development that's happening in the inner city of Asheville? >> Representing from the outside looking in without that data in front of me, it looks fairly similar with all the development going on all over the whole county. And that was one of the reasons I did this because Asheville grown so much it's kind of hard to have an at large system in my opinion. Follow up. >> Lady is recognized. >> Thank you, senator Apodaca the populations that are contemplated in the maps that have been drawn for the purposes of this bill. Approximately how many residents of this city of Asheville do you represent? >> From my understanding I was told about 14,000 of a total population of 79,000 >> The lady is recognized. >> Thank you, that's all I have for right now chairman Lewis but I was reserve the right to possibly ask another two or more later. >> Representative Stam what purpose do you seek recognition. >> To speak on the bill. >> The gentleman has the floor. >> I have several towns in my district that are all at a large and from time to time there is a discussion about districts and I tell them That when they get up and population is about 40 , 30, 40,000. We should talk about it. In my opinion, when any kind of geographic area is a large population like that. That large representation is a bad idea because it submerges minorities and then doesn't allow their voice to be heard. In fact, if I'm not wrong please tell me but usually the, what's the non derogatory term, progressive groups usually sue over at large districts because they say that it submerges minorities and hurts people's voting rights. So, on the merits of these and at large system makes perfect sense. >> Representative Fisher. >> I meant district. >> The chair would like to remind you the gentlemen on the end which bill we're all- [LAUGH] trying to

confined their remarks to exactly what they're trying to say. What purpose is from the lady [INAUDIBLE] >> To ask representative Stam a question if you would be willing to entertain one. >> I'm certain he's willing to entertain one. >> Be glad to. >> Thank you, representative Stam. >> I don't know if entertain is the right word. [LAUGH] And I'll be glad to answer it. >> Thank you. I noticed in the very first part of your statement that you said that when populations get to a certain point in different towns that we should talk about it. And I'm wondering if you were aware of the fact that non of the rest of our delegation in the house were asked to talk about or the city asked to talked about it before this Map came up? >> Rhetorical question so, I understand your, rhetoric >> Thank you. >> Representative Harris what purpose this lady seek recognition? >> To debate the legislation, the lady has the floor for that purpose. >> Thank you Mr chair, and thank you Senator Apadoca for presenting this, obviously you all this committee debated this type of legislation for the city Greensboro. And the city of Greensboro and almost all of city counselors were opposed to the legislation in Greensboro. And it's just my sunset this body ought not to be imposing city council districts on a city against its wishes. I don't think that's the purpose of the state government. I think the local government is ought to be able to decide and I do think that if we were going to this we ought at it a minimum provide a referendum opportunity for this citizens. I just don't think this what we should be doing and I'm urging you vote no, thank you. >> Representative [INAUDIBLE] what purpose For what purpose does the gentleman seek recognition? >> To make a comment please. >> The gentleman has the floor to comment on the bill. >> I like this and I have kinfolk who live in Asheville and they've lived there for 50 years and they are saying this is badly needed because of their representation they have had none in their neighborhood and some other kinfolk That live on the other side of the city feel the same way and they are excited about this hopefully to finally get some representation for the neighborhood who it hadn't been represented in a long long time, thank you. >> Further discussion or debate? Representative Fisher, for what purpose does the lady seek recognition? >> To speak on the bill briefly. >> The lady has the floor for that purpose. >> Thank you Mr. Chairman ladies and gentlemen of the committee I obviously object to this and I would like to just tell you a few reasons why. One Of them is that when we talk about diversity of representation on the city council in the urban core of the city of Asheville we have been blessed I would say with a diverse Representation on our council for quite some time. The idea that people feel that they have not been represented by the City of Asheville by the members who have served seems a little off to me because in a system Where anyone can run from anywhere in the City of Asheville. It seems kind of false to me to say that the plan as it has been has prevented people from running. I believe that A person, who wants to run for office has every right and should be able to run for office no matter what the office is, from anywhere that they live they should be able to run and the qualification for city council is that you live in the city limits of Asheville. No one has ever been prevented from Running, no one has ever been discouraged from running, people have run and lost and that is something that I think you have to personally overcome and we all do that every two years. And The idea that the way the city is drawn now prevents people from running, is just a fallacy to me. You have to be inspired to run for office, you don't need to be drawn into a district to make you run for office. And I would suggest to you That drawing maps you could draw maps all day long that you will not likely get much difference from what you have now in terms

of representation, you will have people who have a sincere desire to serve, who put themselves up for election. But the one thing That will happen with this is that you will create an atmosphere that results in tough terms where instead of representing the city as a whole and for the good of all of the people, all of the residents that live in the city you'll be creating a situation where people say this is my section Of the city and I don't care what the rest of the city wants or needs, I'm only representing my section because I ran for my district. I think its really incumbent upon us as the creators of cities and counties Not to come off as authoritarian in our parenting of our cities and counties. And this is an instance where I think we are going too far in the direction of not allowing input from the citizens of Asheville and, We are bending way over backwards to prevent people from running rather than say all people are welcomed to run. There is no need for this. I know that I live in West Asheville and there was a Republican, furniture store owner who served on city council for years and years and years. No one had any problem with that until they did have a problem with it and then someone else came and ran for that seat. It works well As it is. This is really not necessary and it is really based in a lot of falsehood. I won't go in to all of that right now but just suffice to say, this bill is based in untruth and I would Ask this committee to really carefully consider the freedoms that you are limiting by drawing lines and vote no. Thank you. >> Representative Mitchell what purpose does the gentleman seek recognition? >> I've got a question and I think it would be for staff. [BLANK_AUDIO] >> The General will suspend, does the bill sponsor wish to speak to that last point? >> I'll need a word Okay the General from Durham is recognized for- >> Yeah this is probably for staff Mr Chairman because- >> The General may state he has inquiry. >> Looks like same type of legislation for Greensboro. What is the situation with the Greensboro it was in federal court as a matter of fact they have injunctive relief on that Bill in Greensboro. >> Representative Msher/g I'm not sure of the status of that litigation but I do believe for the 2015 elections that bill was not implemented it was stayed. >> Thank you that's what I wanna know, thank you. >> Representative Dickson what purpose does the gentleman seek recognition? >> Thank you Mr chair to debate the bill. >> The gentleman has the floor for that purpose. >> Thank you Mr chair members of the committee the initial Part of Representative Fisher's argument is something that I experienced about four decades ago in Dublin County. And I recognized that we are talking about a municipality in this city here, but in Dublin County several decades ago when as a result of the civil rights act of course Duplin county sued, and the white people in Duplin county made the same exact argument that representative Fisher is making now well anybody can run we're not discouraging anybody from running. Any body can run. It was just that the system was so stacked against the opportunity for a black to get elected in Duplin County we went under a court order to create districts. To create fairness and that's not exactly apples to apples representative Fisher, but I think it does have some,

bearing on the situation, so I'm gonna be supportive of this bill. [BLANK_AUDIO] >> Representative Speciale what purpose does the gentlemen seek recognition? >> To speak on the bill. >> The gentleman has the floor for that purpose >> I'm looking at the numbers and everything seems legitimate and everything seems reasonably fair. I would think that the purpose of this committee here is to determine if the stuff is fair. The philosophical difference is about whether or not this should be done. In my opinion better left to the floor, but I don't see anything in here where the districts are skewed, whether they they are leaning towards one race to another or towards one group of people or another or the numbers are not balanced. I don't like staff like this coming up the last minute. However it's here, it's in front of us. And since I don't see anything out of the norm here, it does sound legitimate that they should have representation by district. I think what we need to do is my opinion. is that we should be looking at it in that content and leave the philosophical discussion to the floor, about whether or not we do this or not. And so for that reason I'm gonna vote to support it. >> Representative stam. What purpose gentleman seek recognition. >> Speak on it >> Gentleman has the floor for that purpose. >> If you turn to page 3 of 9. And this elaborates on what representative Dixon said. I'm gonna transcribe I think representative Fishers remarks and use of the next time we have a vote and rights case, because if you look at page 3 of 9, if you take the city as a whole it's and this is like the forth column its 12% African American but under this new plan there will be two districts that are 21% which is a big advantage to, and it doesn't matter who happens to be there now this is for the future. In other words as representative Dixon says representative Fishers argument would say that we should throw the voting rights act out because we support portions of it that require where you could you have either a majority or depending what the spring court say is next a reasonable number of minorities by race in order to comply with the voting rights act. So we'll be calling representative fisher the next time they accuse us for trying to do that. [BLANK_AUDIO] >> [INAUDIBLE] representative Mitchell is recognized. >> You're absolutely right I think representative Representative Stam has Skewed the situation here a little bit. It's not a question is whether or not I know what you pointing at, but there are those who have been elected had large also. That's why when voting rights has applied in North Carolina only applied to 40 counties because there were others that were not necessarily involved that is number one. Number two is you want a minority to have an opportunity to elect a person of their choice not of their ways, but their choice. >> Members the only other two members of the chair seem seeking recognition of Warren Martin and, Conrad and then the Chair intends to take a motion on this bill. The Chair does intend to put the question no later than 9:30 this morning. For what purpose does the gentleman [UNKNOWN] seek recognition? >> Thank you Mr. Chair I support the measure here but I just was curious about two things. Number one >> An inquire >> I was curious of whether or not the area designated as region six or district six was a result of poor sanitation at some point. And the second thing is procedural what may it never happen, but what would happen in the event that no one in the district files to run is that, does that revert to at large run in with what is provision, to that? >> That's a good question. [BLANK_AUDIO] >> Representative Warren the Chair will take that while staff verifies, it would be treated exactly as any other vacancy was. Which I believe the city charter would provide that the remaining members of the city council would fill the seat by majority vote. Did I answer your questions representative If the chair is wrong staff please interject on that. Representative Martin, fr what purpose does the lady seek recognition? >> Question for the bill sponsor.

>> The lady has the floor for that purpose. >> Thank you Mr. Chair. Senator Apodaca I just wanted to clarify in your description about the timing and looking at the senses to make sure I have this clear. This just allows that it cannot be changed again prior to the census, but without additional action, these new districts would stay in place. And part of the description would stand like it's a trial and they would have to come back and do something. But that is not the case, it just would , more action would be required if we were to implement this and then, they didn't like it and after the census they could come back, but we would have to bring up another bill is that correct ? >> Yes ma'am that is correct. >> Thank you. >> And representative Conrad what purpose does lady receive recognition? >> [INAUDIBLE] >> The lady has the floor to debate the bill. >> Having come from local government myself the city of does have districts and then I served as a County Commissioner and we had districts too. I would take issue with the concept that was discussed that that creates some turf term where the elected official is only interested in issues within in their district. I find that quite the opposite. But city usually have a mayor which creates an umbrella where everyone comes together and everyone feels that there is fair representation. And then on Commissioner electing a chair and vice chair. And those kind of positions pull everyone together to work for the common good. I think this is a very fair system and Mr.Chairman I'm happy to make the motion at the appropriate time. >> And Mr. Chairman I'd like to call for the aye's and nos on this as well. The Chair is going to accept that Representative Conrad has moved the Senate Bill 897 be given a favorable report. The Chair is going to accept the call for that as the No's. The Chair is going to now say further discussion, further debate for purposes of gentleman from Guilford Representative Hardister for secret. >> Mr. Chair I would like to briefly debate the bill. >> The gentleman has the floor for that purpose. >> Yeah, I just wanted to share a few thoughts I have on this matter. We had issue in Greensboro related to redistributing Greensboro City Council Representative Mitchel. I referred to that a few moments ago. As far as districts are concerned personally I like the idea of having a district system better and I'll tell you why. First of all I believe you can hold an elected official more countable in the district than you can at large. So if you think about it if you have a city to I believe representstive Stam said maybe around 30 or 40,000 population, if you get above that It can be very difficult to hold an out large number countable. Whereas in a district the area's smaller and I believe you can develop a more personal relationship with the person who represents you in the council. And also you balance it out more because in the situation where I believe we're looking at Asheville the all six members are elected at large and so that means that it could be possible that the three or four members could all be elected from the same geographical area. But this way it's more balanced and therefore I think this is a good plan. [BLANK_AUDIO] >> >> Senator Apadacha to comment on the Bill. >> Mr Chairman and I wanna thank Representative Fisher for making the case for turt/g of them. if I may if you look at this map right here, well okay let me get it out this is the city map of Asheville right here Is where the current city council lives. All of them in this little area right here. So we have to [UNKNOWN] and here it is. >> Members prior to placing the vote, the chair didn't want to state for the record that the map that Senator Apodaca asked to be placed on the screen for members and public to see that has been done the map is now on the screen. Chair will point out that maps are available for the public at the real of the committee room. Is there further or debate? >> One last >> The lady from Buncombe is recognized to debate the bill. >> Thank Mr Chairman, Ladies and gentlemen I would just say to you that, this is something that can happen to you and if you care about your city, and the fact that the legislature can come along and tell your city what to do at anytime for any reason. I would hope that you would vote against this bill. Thank you. >> Further discussion further debate? Seeing none The question before the committee is the motion by Representative Conrad to give Senate Bill 897 a favorable report. The aye's and no's haven't been called for the Chair would direct that Members wishing to support the motion would vote aye when their name is called, or vote no no if they do not wish to support the motion will vote no when their name is called. The Clerk will call the role. Representative Michelle. >> No. >> Michelle, no.

Representative Szoka. >> Aye. >> Representative Szoka aye. Representative Warren. >> Aye. >> Representative Warren aye. Representative Blust. Representative Brody >> Aye . >> Reopresentative Brody aye. Representative Brown. >> Aye. >> Representative Brown aye. Representative Brian. >> Aye. >> Representative Brian aye. Representative Burr. >> Aye. >> Representative Burr aye. Representative Conrad. >> Aye. >> Representative Conrad aye. Representative Cotham. >> No. Representative Cotham no. Representative Davis. >> Aye. >> Representative Davis aye. Representative Dixon >> Aye, >> Representative Dixon Ayw. >> Representative Faircloth Aye, representative fisher >> No. >> Representative fisher representative Floyd No, representative George Graham, representative George Graham No. Representative Ford. >> Aye Representative Ford aye, Representative Hadister >> aye, >> Representative Hadister aye. Representative Harrison No, Representative Hunter No, Representative Iler aye, Representative Jackson No, Representative Susan Martin Representative Susan Martin Aye. Representative Bobby Richardson. Representative Bobby Richardson No. Representative William Richardson. Representative Ridell. Representative Sane. Representative Speciale. >> Aye. >> Representative Speciale aye. Representative Torbett. Representative Willingham. Representative Jones. >> Aye. >> Representative Jones, aye. >> Mr Chair Mr Chairman did they forget me. >> Representative Stam. >> Yes. >> Representative Stam aye, that was not a rhetorical question Representative Stam. >> Correct, aye [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] Members were 17 members voted in the affirmative and 9 members of the negative, the motion to give Senate Bill 897 is adopted, Senator we are glad that you were with us this morning do you have any closing remarks or any Words of wisdom? >> Well the good news is this is probably my last house committee- >> [LAUGH] >> In my legislative career. I know you all are disappointed [LAUGH]. >> Thank you for being with us this morning sir. Members on behalf of Chair of chairman Jones I wanna thank each of you for your time and for your service this year, wanna express my sincere gratitude to the very capable staff that has given their time and talents to help us reach. our goals and objectives this year. I do not anticipate that this committee will meet again and with that there being no further business this committee will stand adjourned.