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 | August 26, 2014 | Committee Room | Education

Full MP3 Audio File

Speaker: Everybody please take your seats so we can ge started when i was teaching school i can got Michael ?? i have really had it made ?? where is bob rosy ?? i told them we had three sheets stand out and a lot do them they tel me i didn't tell them truth our pages fro today ?? from Cleveland county Tim Moore sponsor clay ?? from Wilfred county john buzz the sponsor Hayley carter from Dave Howard is sponsor chase cross from Davidson ?? is sponsor Nico George from Wayne county doctor ?? is the sponsor we appreciate you all being with us today we are gonna start with house bill 831 education services fro children P R T S Ben paneling that bill this is PCS can i have a motion and i we have the PCS force all on favor say aye all oppose no thank you, Speaker Changes: thank you me chairman members of the committee I'm gonna take couple of minutes to explain why this bill is in front of you and i ask staff to go through it and you'll be ask any questions to clarify what is all about we have facilities in the sate reffed to act in to P R T S and then those psych ?? residential treatment facilities and these are for our children and the children in these facilities off course are pulled out of their schools and not receiving their education and there have been issues raised about the lack of the education received while they are here and what has been happening is that here is there is no formal plans fro education dollars state dollars to follow the children to these facilities and a number of these facilities have taken up themselves to fund the education part of the children time there and my personal feeling is we are trucking our responsibility because awe are responsible for educating the children of the state and this comes to you through a lot of negotiation and talking and meeting which actually isn't over we git lot of fine points to work put between very detailed process and procedures and i want first of all thank department of public instruction department of public health and service fro their co operation and their work as well as with number of providers and advocacy group that has helped us reached at where we are and this is our first step I'm not sure how long or walk but I'm confident with the co operation we had so for an understanding and agreement where everybody is gonna really happy and everybody is gonna really not happy and that's a good bill and that's our objective and this time me chairman i recognizes fro passage of technical legislation and education, Speaker Changes: tell you are ready make, Speaker Changes: yes thank you Representative , Speaker Changes: your own, Speaker Changes: thank you if you wanna look at your bill summary and or section 1 if you look at the page 1 of the bill we are adding lines 26 through 30 and this department grants permission to the department of heath and human services so that they may share information with local schools,


The due process right of children with individual, individualized education programs. The new language continues to specify that a PU or TF that has been approved by GPI as an exceptional children's program and the ones that are documenting that they are going to have to deviate from educational programatic requirements when it's nes, medically necessary those who are the P or TFs that will be eligible for the state funding for the educational services. Sub-section 'C' which begins on line 16 of page 4 that talks about how funds are gonna be transferred from the Department of Public Instruction into division then will help in how these funds will be held in the P or TSs will build for their educational services. In Sub-section 'G' if the Department of Health and Human Services receives notice from DPI that the P or TF is not providing educational services, they would withhold funding until they receive that is again the P or TF is providing these services, P or TFs will come forward with all audit and accounting procedures if any, publicly funded agency. So I'm in line 31 page 4 that PCs talks about information sharing so within 3 business days of admission into a P or TF, the P or TF is going to notify DPI of the child be in place there, also going to notify the local school administrated unit in which that child was last enrolled in that information is known. Our understanding is that the children move around a lot in that sometimes they don't really know exactly which was the last school that child was enrolled in and but they are gonna work together to try to get the best information possible so, that the P or TF can implement the IP in any other educational services. Upon this starts the P or TF is gonna work with receiving LEA so the school system where the child will go back and be enrolled to develop the transition plan and update the individualized educational program the IP is necessary. At the bottom of page 4, you will see that the state board of education and DPM they are directed to offer training to P or TFs on how to comply with special education modules, DPIs are going to maintain the list, current list of the children so that they would be a better idea where the kids are located, then DPI and the State Board will ensure the due process right so children with indualized education programs and that they are going to develop an important roles to make those happen. Okay, page 5 of the PCS, Section 6 is basically a grand father class so that P or TS are already licensed to serve children would have 6 months and then some additional time for DHHS to work with them so that they can become certified as non-public certified childrens programs. Section 7 is also a grand father class saying that for the P or TS that already has signed educational agreements with education agencies local system that they also can quality for the educational funding to meet any unmet needs than dianim. Section 8 grants the State Board of Education authority to adopt emergency role so that the implementation of this time will not be delayed. Section 9 is requiring the department of health and human services and department of public instruction working with other interested agencies is cord to jointly record about how many children are being served and how many hours of education they are receiving cause any recommendations on how to improve this process. Then Section 10 outlines the budgetary process of funding that would go to the PI and then DPI would transfer that money over the DHHS to provide these educational services and P or TS and then finally section 11 at bottom of page 5 in on the back of your view of page 6 you will see that department of public instruction will process the applications on number 4 of section Number first and

the approval to the PRTS no later than Dec. 1st of 2013. Thank you Rep. Langdon. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Patsy. Outstanding. Rep. Avila? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Before we start questions, if you will look at the front page and the title, you will see how intense that this has been by the fact that we're on version 42 of this legislation. And what has happened is version 36, one group's happy, version 40, somebody else is happy, version 26, somebody else is happy, so the objective is going to be to take all of these versions, and all of these still not quite right there, and work it out for a 2 year period because literally we don't know what the situation is for a lot of these kids in this state. Simply because they have been moved from one facility to another facility, and unfortunately we may have lost track of some of them. So one of the objectives over the next 2 years is to find out what is the situation with our children who go into PRTFs, how long do they stay there, what kind of services do they receive, and have a much better picture both of the process that we go through with them as well as the cost that's involved so that we don't ask any one entity to bear an uncomfortable burden of funding responsibility that rightly lies with the state, and I would ask for your support of the legislation proposed. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rep. Cleveland. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman. Actually, I have a point of inquiry and probably for staff. I see no referral on here to appropriations or finance, yet we're dealing with some financial matters in here. Should there be a referral for this bill? [SPEAKER CHANGES] They're shaking. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Will they tell us where? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Appropriations. Rep. Fisher? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman. I first of all want to applaud this effort, I think it's important that we meet all the needs of all of the children in North Carolina, and I like the idea that the Dept. of Public Instruction and DHHS are working together to accomplish this goal. My question is, and it looks like you're going to hear a whole lot of information that you don't really have the answers to yet, in terms of how many children, how long are they staying. My question has to do with how many are- how many PRTFs are there in North Carolina? I mean I have several questions, but that's the first one. How many are there in North Carolina, presently? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Do we have an answer? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I believe it's 42, but I can ask staff to verify. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We do know that we have 521 licensed beds in PRTFs that are not hospitals, and I'll count out real quick to find out how many facilities that is. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And regarding the number of students, we've heard a number between 6 and 900, and that gives you a broad range, so it's- there are short term, longer terms, so it's not like you can pinpoint that this one's going in, or everybody's going in for a prescribed period of time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rep. Fisher? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Is there or has there been before this legislation any kind of per people expenditure going out to the ?? for their education once they leave the public school? [SPEAKER CHANGES] The only 2 that I know of that any state funding has gone to in any way, shape, or form has been organized as a charter, and then one in the Winston-Salem ?? county area that actually is under contract with its local LEA. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And then one more follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You may. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Once this is established, what kinds of requirements for meeting achievement levels would be required for this nonpublic entity once it's established? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rep. Avila? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I would assume that the answer would better come from people involved in the education. This is another one of those situations I find myself in, with no background or experience. But I think first and foremost, we have to

Keep in mind why these children why these children are where they are. It's not for an education. If it was they'd be in their local schools. These children are in these facilities because they have serious mental illness and that in terms of what we should be taking care of is the top priority. And we just don't want the fact that they're there and getting behind and behind because the objective is to get them back into their community school. And we're just exasperating the situation if we send them back way behind. The objective is to keep them up with their classmates so that when they return to a classroom they would be on equal footing and we wouldn't be creating additional problems. [SPEAKER CHANGES] One last comment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You may. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well again I appreciate this effort and I will look forward to hearing more about how it works down the road and how the responsibilities are shared between the two departments. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Whitman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chair. I commend the concept. I have a question and I'll leave it to Representative Avila as a discretion whether you answer it or you refer it to DPI. On page five section ten it talks about there is appropriated to DPI and it's got the figures of 1.6 million for the upcoming school year and 3.2 for the following year to then be transferred to HHS. Sounds like we've got a little bit of some unknowns in terms of total numbers. From a standpoint of when we do this, if that's not enough, question one is it does say to be appropriated so that's good. We're not just simply finding the money in a department. What do we do if it far exceeds that? And I apologize for the opening question but if you want to run with it or at your discretion please.[SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Avila. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Actually, that's going to be a question for the budget drafters in 2015 because what we'll be using this money for is pretty much as I stated earlier. The PRTF's have been funding, on their own, any education services that they've been providing for the student. That includes any kinds of supplies. It includes any kind of personnel needs. We've not been helping out any at all. So anything that we can help out during this two year period as we try to get a handle on what are the costs? While these children are in the PRTF's to what level do we continue their education that they would be receiving if they were in the LEA? And really trying to determine what the financial impact is. And that is going to be for 2015. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Luke ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES]This is just to follow representative Whitmire I mean two other points and representative Avila has understated I think the negotiations that have gone on here. I'm planning to recommend her to the White House to go to the middle east after this is done. But I do think you raise a really legitimate point. One thing we should all know is that we've got a lawsuit pending. There is litigation that's been stayed in the Wake County Superior Court pending this legislative session to respond to this. At least as to one set of providers in a very kind of defined area. But we really do have a requirement now pending on us to create appropriations for these children in some way. The second thing is, I think in the appropriation that's in here representative Avila has been working with representative Dollar and I think is going to try to figure out the match of what additional monies are going to have to be there versus what's taken from existing funding based on formula kinds of concepts and the numbers that we do know for right now. And I think that remains a little bit of an open question to try to figure it out. Also depends on how many kids who are in these PRTF's are coming from an LEA so that there's some way to do that versus they're coming from private situation where they were never in an LEA. I think that creates a different kind of calculation. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Lucas [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chair. I want to commend representatives Avila and Glazier for tackling this complicated issue. We already recognize that the need is there and we must address it. We've failed thus far to do that. So again I commend you for attempting to tackle this. The question I have is and I know that this is a difficult answer to reply to. I think representative Whitmire stabbed at it a little bit. Do you feel like the

...?? recommended funding is going to be adequate to get us off the ground. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Aliva. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I think so. Just in the fact that we are making an effort where we haven't done it before I think is going a long way to moving us through this process. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] In your 36 to 42 versions of trying to address this issue, have you been able to satisfy all of the stakeholders, or most of them? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To a degree. Everybody has, of course, their budgets they're concerned about. Everybody has the area of, when things go wrong who has responsibility and those are the fine-tuning and the rubbing off the raw edges that we're still working with, but like I said earlier, the manner and attitudes which these various groups have come forward to discuss and work on this has been, the reason that it has come as far as it has. And I just feel like that they're committed as we are to make sure that these children get taken care of in an appropriate way by the State. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chair, a motion at the appropriate time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] OK. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Sheppard? [SPEAKER CHANGES] For a question, Mr. Chair. Representative Aliva, and maybe I didn't read it in here, so my understanding this to mean that the local LEA's will be responsible for those facilities that are in their districts or is this something that will be taken care of by DPI at this level? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Currently as it's written, the LEA responsibility is going to be the PRTF and that is one of those areas of discussion that we still have, you know, what is the proper level of oversight. And it will be up for further discussion and fine-tuning as to which entity will be best able to monitor and guarantee that the services would be equivalent to what the child would be receiving if it was in the home LEA. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Lucas? [SPEAKER CHANGES] For a motion? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion for a favorable report to the PCS, unfavorable to the original and that we refer it to appropriations. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You've heard the motion. All in favor to the motion say aye, all opposed no. Ayes have it and the motion is carried. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Tucker? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate Bill 168. And there's a PCS. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I need somebody, OK. Representative Warren moves that we have the PCS before us. All in favor say aye, all opposed no. The ayes have it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate Bill 168. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. The last time I brought an irrigation bill before you and it was quite an opportunity to receive 46 questions from the House committee that day on irrigation. Now we're in education. I'm a little bit apprehensive about standing up here before you. And if any of you have ever presented anything in the Senate bill, whenever you see Senator Tillman do this, that means it's going to move so if you review the bill, you're welcome to do that, it won't offend me at all if you want to move the bill. This Senate Bill 168 kind of was my bill. Senator Tillman's had some, a bill like it. Representative Whitmire, Representative Martin had a bill. This bill became a all-inclusive bill for that. And so Senate Bill 168 would repeal several of the reporting requirements for the State Board of Education. And it would reorganize teacher licensure and the education program statute. I have Denise Adams from staff to begin to go through the bill with you if that's your pleasure, Mr. Chair? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Denise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] She can be pretty quick with it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Section 1 of the bill would repeal the annual report required for the evaluation of the disadvantaged student supplemental funding initiative and low wealth initiatives, which began in 2005. The evaluation was eliminated several years ago but the reporting requirement remains, so this is just a clean up. Section 2 of the bill would eliminate the requirement that the State Board of Education periodically review and report...

Care to Julia and frank A owned by the end, the time that thank you and you find a badly that. I am report that I'm a part of the different for different people at a time reported replied that he can find an integral part of a rally A employees find anything are no longer deemed appropriate by the king of England time to time , and decor, EESP but I'm not have the backing down like to thank it L. Clyde the glide an important part of a great personality and time-PAC bell and the court of appeal for during the corresponding quarter, and at the time that they would not make him a mission to prove it, not let that local fiction and if the DC I'm late, and the house and feed and play and the Yankee era via two conflicting day that were coming in and of a given a couple of the fact I'm the day: the error in the public can anyone wishing to recover more including time and had to have a more technical correction improvements on Monday with a part of all the time of the women and the time the one where they got that it would more than money and get time that they have thank you and god? The Bay of Bengal Island and the time it will be in a week or two PP of the advent of a long time and money for the burden and older will be reported in the time the only way that much time, gets on an amendment that would one of the armed the economy and having a body had waited and even had time to grow only 41 story want to live in an all time you read about the war should allow time to pack your concern about one for the time for the mission where you live in respond, and, with one can only get the time . The judge to time the ball and that of the day time until onions and welcome to the level in eight in the dark paneling and that their time finding at A and the cleanup a good time and FM bond until 9:00 PM nine and 10 fell to nine when the value of legal and validated time we had to be impacted by or perhaps I can respond in the time the report a program that way for wartime control for the long bond measure the terminal. The Only a day and time we opted to play time ??............

The funding stopped. The reportings continued to be required. The disadvantage and low-wealth has kind of been replaced by PEP, is that a fair statement, Ms. Adams? [SPEAKER CHANGES] PEP is still required; this would just eliminate the reporting requirement to Joint Oversight. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Bell? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just was concerned. Most of the time whenever LEA’s ask for reports, people like us, we’re the ones who usually request this information. We want to know what is going on here, there and everywhere. And I was just wondering who would determine what should be eliminated and what reports should be required and all of that? And who had been finding all this to be a problem, other than just a teacher, someone who’s not wanting to do a report. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Can I have staff respond to Representative Bell’s question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] A number of the requests for the elimination of these reports came from DPI. The information will still be available; it’s just not coming to the Joint Ed Oversight committee. [SPEAKER CHANGES] It’s still there. A few requests ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chair… [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Bell, if you request it for your area to see what’s going on, you certainly still will have that information available to you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] What I wanted to know if the information was going to still be there, because it’s vital information. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Just the report- Excuse me, Mr. Chair? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] May I respond? Again, I’m being redundant. Just the Oversight’s not going to get that report. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Luebke? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I guess my question- Over here, Senator. My question on this is really along the lines of the others just a moment ago, Representative Bell, Representative Adams, and that is in Section 2 it seems like we’re taking away the report on the progress of students who have been identified at risk of academic failure. We’re no longer requiring that that SBE report be sent to Joint Educational Oversight. And I guess the question is, why not, would we not want to know how well we are doing with children who have identified at-risk? I guess I don’t- And if I’m missing something, maybe staff or Senator, you can explain it. It would seem to me to be useful to continue to have that report on how at-risk children are doing in the schools. Why is that taken out, I guess is a more correct way- [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator, Senator. ?? you want DPI to assist? There’s been some of this. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, sir. That’ll be fine. Yes, sir. That’ll be fine. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Please state your name and who you work for. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, sir, Mr. Chair. Rebecca Garland, Chief Academic Officer, Department of Public Instruction. The report that is referenced in this statute is simply that superintendents have been required to certify to the department that PEPs, Professional Education Plans, are in place within the schools. And the only way that we at the department have had to be able to ensure that PEPs are in place is to ask superintendents to have their principals to certify that they’re in place, because to monitor it would require us to be out in all the classrooms to see that they are done. We certainly do monitor the performance of disadvantaged students. We get annual reports to the State Board of Education on the progress of each subgroup, it’s in our annual report that we get on testing results from across the state. We have a District and School Transformation group that works with all of our disadvantaged schools in the state where we go out and monitor student performance and provide technical assistance. So it really is only the elimination of a report from the superintendents to the Department of Public Instruction that certifies that PEPs are in place, when the statute already says that those PEPs have to be in place.   [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] It eliminates certification… [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] …by the superintendent and the principal. Representative Luebke. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you.

Representative Whitmont. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chair, classic example of centralized control, decentralized empowered execution, and that's why we have professionals in the field that are conscientious and do this. Power school, which replaces the NCY is another tool to ensure that our students are properly tracked and the information goes there. And with that, I move that we find this PCS favorable, unfavorable to the original, and I commend the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You've heard the motion. All in favor of the motion say aye, all opposed say no. ayes have it the motion's carried. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Tucker, I apologize for demoting you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] That's okay, I've been called worse. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Fact, I probably did. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate Bil 231, Senator Davis. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay. Representative Graham is going to present the bill for us. Thank you Mr. Chairman, we do have a PCS. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We need a PCS. Representative Horne moves that we have the PCS forced. ALl in favor say aye, all opposed no, ayes have it the motion is carried. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, Senator Jim Davis and I have worked on this bill. He and I both serve on the North Carolina ?? education advisory council. And as a result of serving on that council, we have had some communication with the reporting of the advisory council. And this bill basically modifies that report, which is an ?? report. And it strengthens the reporting that's made by the advisory council. And this bill addresses those issues that's important to the purpose of that council. Just to review a couple of those items in the bill. If you'll look at item 3, in that bill, the modification actually strengthens the duties of the board. It requires the board to come out with an action plan at the end of that report, to report their findings and have a stronger action plan for the services for those children. And actually it will benefit and improve the quality of education for our American-Indian students here in North Carolina. It also, if you'll look at section 4, the report will improve consultation among the state board of education, department of public education, and the American Indian tribal communities. As you know, in this state we have 8 tribes, we have 7 sate recognized tribes. We have the Cherokee tribe which makes the 8th tribe. And we have four tribal organizations. So communication, to the parents, to the educators, to make sure that our children who are the most deprived some of the most deprived children in our state, and some of the most under achieving students in our state. We're looking at their educational needs and the advisory council certainly over the past 25 years has done a great job tracking those students. reporting their progress of those students or the lack of progress. And not only at the state level but at the national level. And this bill strengthens the duties of that council and makes the performance of the council a much better council and one that we can track the growth of those children at the end of the year. And I would be glad to entertain any questions at this time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Any questions? We have no questions, I'll accept the motion. Representative Carne. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman. I would move for a favorable report to the proposed committee substitute for senate bill 231 unfavorable to the original. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You've heard the motion. All in favor of the motion say aye, all opposed no. Ayes have it the motion is carried. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman members of the committee [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Graham. Senate Bill 243. Senator Alrad. Somebody gon' to run that bill? Representative Gill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Need a motion for a PCS. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Lucas moves that we have the PCS forced. All in favor say aye. All opposed, no. Okay, representative Gill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman. This is a very, I won't say simple bill, but it's cut and dry.

The Department of Health and Human Services have sent a memo out indicating that there's a shortage in supplies required to provide tuberculosis tests, so they are asking that we give local school boards or superintendents the authority to defer certification of these tests for teachers upon their initial employment or reemployment, and this will be effective. As you know there's been quite a few breakouts of tuberculosis and they're testing all of the students that have or all of the people that have been in contact or exposed to that disease. So this is just a defer. They are asking us to defer it until they can revamp their supply and make the necessary changes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman, just one question and then a comment. Representative Gill, do they predict when the vaccination may be made available in enough amount so that the teachers can get them? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I don't think that all teachers, all of the ?? are going to be affected by this. These are counties in which the Social Service Department notified the superintendent that there is a shortage, so it's not in all of the counties, just those that have a shortage. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman for a motion at the appropriate time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] OK. Anyone else wish to speak on the motion? Representative ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Gill, thank you Mr. Chairman. Do you know what counties are affected by this? [SPEAKER CHANGES] No, I'm not sure. I know that Wake County is one of them, but we have someone in the audience that may be able to give us that information. [SPEAKER CHANGES] ?? have an answer to that? OK, Leanne? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Good morning, I'm Leanne Winter with the North Carolina School Board Association. We were contacted by the attorney for the Wake County Board of Education about this. They had received a letter from their local health department. We made the-- We did not go out to survey who else had gotten a similar letter, but assumed that if Wake got it, then there was probably instances in other places and also that it could happen again. The main issue is if you go actually to the bill itself. On the second page you will see in existing law, if a teacher did not receive this before being employed, that's actually a misdemeanor offense. That's what raised the real concerns for Wake County public schools, that if they complied with the letter at the request of the local health department, that then somebody would be in criminal violation of the statute and that's why they asked for this. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Leanne. Representative Collins? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Sir, I'm no expert on this topic, but I just have two ?? in this bill that trouble me a little bit. Number one is that I don't see any specifics in this bill. I mean, are deferring it forever, or are we deferring it for six months? I don't see any specific time frame in here. The other thing is, to me it seems like a little bit of a backwards approach. If we're having outbreaks of TB, rather than ignore testing or defer testing, it would seem to me we'd be doing everything within our power to try to find some-- to come up with materials to do the testing or something. It just seems to me that we're kind of running from a problem. We're acting like it doesn't exist, and trying to fix an issue of making sure teachers can be there, whether those teachers have tuberculosis or not, rather than fighting the tuberculosis outbreaks. I'm just a little bit concerned with how we're going about this with the fact that I don't really see any specifics in here about what we're actually allowing the schools to do. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We're going to let Staff assess the information on that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The requirement in the statute is actually upon initial employment or reemployment, teachers are required to go get a test to see if they have tuberculosis. It's a standard, even if you're not showing any symptoms or have not been in any contact. What DHHS has suggested, is because of the shortage that they would prefer to hold the supplies for people who are showing symptoms or signs--

So obviously the vast majority of teachers do not have, and are not showing, signs of tuberculosis. If you go to page 2, lines 3 to 5, there is a provision that requires the local board to develop a policy that when supplies are available, that they would resume tuberculosis testing, so during the deferral period those people would be noted and then there would have to be a policy as to how to handle catching up on tuberculosis testing during that deferral period. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This shortage local, statewide, nationwide, I have a problem with the entire concept of not testing when it's required. And I just can't believe that the testing materials, that what's needed for the testing, can not be found someplace in the country. [SPEAKER CHANGES] ?? have an answer for that? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I do not know whether there is a national shortage. VHHS had indicated that North Carolina is having a shortage, and I would assume that might affect other parts of the country, but the memo was specific to this state. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow-up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I think before we proceed much further with this, we should find out if this is a national shortage. If it isn't, the materials are available and they can be gotten. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Glazier. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you very much. I understand the reason and certainly understand the need to, as they're hiring right now, to be able to get some exemption from the criminal prosecution. But I share Representative Cleveland and Representative Collins' concern that we really -- what started with a question by Representative Fisher, and that is that I would be a whole lot more comfortable if this had a short term exemption date when it could then be revisited, even in the interim, by jointed oversight or something that could then move forward. But leave an open-ended exemption when there is an outbreak issue strikes me as not good policy, number one, and number two, a liability problem later on if you're looking at it from a ?? point of view. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We're going to pull the bill. You raised good questions. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate Bill 557. Senator Hise. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This is a PCS. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Dockham moves we have a PCS before us. All in favor say "aye". [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All opposed no. Senator. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman, over to your right. [SPEAKER CHANGES] It's on the back, turn it over. Representative ??, I couldn't find it either. (laughs) [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator, you have the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. We're actually beginning this. This original report that came back originally came from the house and was part of the House's budget proposal in the previous ??. I was looking to be able to determine funding for Pre-K on a classroom basis versus an individual basis, and directed the department in order to do a pilot study. This was passed as part of the last budget. Moving forward to do a pilot project so we get that information and look at that as an option. We're back here again today quite frankly, because the department did not do that pilot or report. As a matter of fact, the secretary refused to submit what she had because The Division of Child Development says ?? Education, the group that works with Pre-K, rather than doing the pilot, had interns in their office model this pilot and submit that information to the secretary to be submitted to this committee. She refused to do so, so we are once again authorizing the pilot with a new...

new report date of January 2014 versus January 2013. [speaker changes] Representative Collins [speaker changes] Just for a motion when you're ready, Mr. Chairman. [speaker changes] Thank you. Any other questions or comments? If not, I'm ready for the motion senator- Representative Collins. [speaker changes] I move to give a favorable report to the PCS for Senate Bill 557 unfavorable to the original. [speaker changes] All in favor of the motion say aye. All opposed no. The ayes have it. The motion is carried. Before we adjourn today, I wanted to thank everybody for all of the emails and stuff, calls while I was out sick and I want you to pay attention now because I've come back and I'm feeling pretty good, but there's one thing for sure. My heart's getting more and more metallic ?? hearted than I've been in the past. So, pay attention. But I really appreciate you. Thank you. The meeting is adjourned.