REM ad said MSN house members 799 PM, we appreciate the ESI 2/9 SFREMAM 5 YNE 5 El Sayed said Lines NL CNN Atty. Cheryl from the senate sergeant moms who generally a preset you doing here to help S ILS 4997 two KENNS from a prolonged 22nd at the unsanitary 560 SFMAC approved a threatened by their ms are further conversation regarding that issue is not that standard grey of disarray acknowledge officials say I MSN said hard shell said he had any comment from realize from the chairwoman 4:00 PM from this attack got you are making SNP shear UAIDDCFMS woodland NBL Board late for a Wall Street of people all . (SPEAKER CHANGES) Call for more call 44 four one thing you have further down the road to one half, and the storms measurement of Beijing for a performance measurement and RE-regulation review and for lectures with the department of commerce doing no one else is some economic development grant proposals so long and very happy to have her she can say on the ms matter call 45 economic from Purdue and there's some certifications and community and research and teaching that comes forward whenever you on the server which are carefully Charleston Air from the Turkish approach for program of a waiter beyond that don't require while he's working for her work with the auction program calls analysis your recount will only work than(SPEAKER CHANGES) I did on a previously worked with them the North Carolina State auditor's office user manager in a performance audit selection and he's got over 15 years of experience doing performance on the and a PR work for the chief financial officer of the slave floor was a Captain George Waller name from Seattle overture is a graduate of the United States naval academy and has an MBA from case western reserve economics making , Joshua well as our publications coordinator is responsible now for reviewing all over reports assuring your talk all they also our web site a communications and leave the office from virtually messy work from North Carolina wildlife resources commission of the song nine by the publications she worked with patterns manner which prefer messenger worker for 10 years she was a freelance journalist who broke the news of an observer page four original musical revue publications Dallas Myers Lyon village wars as an ms from chapel hill the NBA coach from chapel hill and used in research assistant two from Burma protection agency because city workers and medical intern for Rex hospital director of the home family of little leaguers brightest and structural faculty of North Carolina State university is just four days BHD in public administration is a graduate of Campbell university universe to North Carolina grades firm his own this masters degree there are long. He has a background souls ideal for a firm work he's been studying for quite awhile performance measurements taken local government and the two worked briefly as a research assistant from social research division here from tools to solve also the new staff members and one we're like, MA ??..............
...we are our other staff and we look forward to them being as productive as they can be. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Folks from the chairs and the committee we welcome you on board and we're very glad to have you. Buckle down because we have a lot of hard work that we have to do in this committee. We appreciate you being here. Sarah, Chuck, Joshua and Brent. We're glad to have you on board. Our next item is Department of Public Instruction, and update on the driver's education program. Maria Martin and do both of you ladies want to come together? Maureen Burner? You can come up here if you'd like to, please. If you'll just identify yourself and push the button until the green light comes on and we'll take it from there. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Good afternoon to all assembled. I am Maria Pitre Martin and I'm the State Director of K-12 Curriculum and Instruction at the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction. With me today is Dr. Maureen Burner, who is with the University of North Carolina's School of Government. Today we will both be presenting to you on the work of driver's education and certainly the work that has been done, as well as the work that we are planning to do moving forward. Certainly, as we have prepared to present to you today, there are several documents that you should have in your possession. Starting off, of course, with a PowerPoint presentation and then also, copies of the driver's education strategic plan, should also have been provided to you, as well. As well as the University of North Carolina evaluation report that Dr. Burner should speak about very shortly. So all of those things should certainly be in your possession as we go through today's presentation. We also have a performance matrix that should be, it's a one page document, that should be included, as well. We'll be referencing those things as we continue on. Just to give a brief history of the work that has been done before Dr. Burner presents the evaluation report, we know that going back to November of 2010, the Office of State Business and Management presented information on driver's education and the efforts to move forward with some reform efforts around driver's education. Also, there was a review given to this body back in December of 2010. So much of what you will see today is in response to some of the changes recommended at that time. Also, we know that we had driver education reform. That certainly was presented in State statute and then we also have additional reports that have come to fruition in this work from September of 2012, as well as January of 2013. As I said before, today we will report on the UNC School of Government study and Dr. Burner will be stepping up shortly to do that report. Then I will continue on to discuss the driver education strategic plan. Before Dr. Burner comes up to the podium, just as an update, we know that the pilot program, which was an online pilot program involved five of or school districts, our local education agencies across the State. That particular project took place between February of 2012 through June of 2012 with 30 hours of computerized instruction. It solely was based on that computerized instruction. We have 532 students enrolled and currently we have about 358 students who have completed that work. At this time, I will ask Dr. Burner to step forward and she will go into more specifics regarding the results of the study. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Again, I'm Maureen Burner, I'm a professor of public administration and government at the University of North Carolina School of Government. In 2012, the School of Government was approached by the...
North Carolina Department of Public instruction while conducting an investigation of the different teaching methods used in driver's education in North Carolina. We defined different teaching methods as traditional class room instruction, traditional classroom instruction augmented with various technical tools, often referred to as blended instruction, or completely we-based instruction such as the pilot program just mentioned. We agreed to conduct an evaluation, and we did so in several parts. We conducted a literature report review to see what other organizations or universities, or researchers had done reports on driver's ed., educational teaching in particular with on-line teaching, and what had already been done. We gathered data and compared the quality of the teaching mode of these different teaching ways using various measures of performance using student test scores and pass rates. We tried to obtain and compare cost information for the different teaching mods, and we gathered information on the use of the optional driver's education fee. The data we used include the reviewing the reports that were currently available nationally, looking at data that included test scores, the school that was attended, and related teaching scores for students who took the DMV driver's test from July 1st, 2010 to July 31st, 2012. We ended up shortening our data set to ensure that we included compare able students within our very large data set, that we initially started with. And our final data set, after cleaning, included information for almost 274,000 students state-wide from all different parts of the state. Part of the information we used was obtained from a state-wide survey of schools. That survey had an 81% response rate, or information from 338 schools, these are the schools that would be included in driver's education, not every school, obviously. Finally, we had information from interviews from officials and contractors in other states who dealt with on-line driver's education programs. I want to thank DPI and DMV for working together to provide the raw data for analysis, and assisting in conducting the survey. To my knowledge, the resulting data set, which ties information about the students with their actual test scores from DMV, does not exist in any comparable form in any other state. So, to go to our findings. Firstly, we were unable to find other similar evaluations that specifically focused on how driver's education is taught. There simply, at least, from the time that is spent, simply no other evaluations or research available targeting how driver's education is taught and in comparing quality or performance measures related to that. So in terms of overall, there doesn't seem to be a lot of research out there on this topic. On-line programs have been described recently, in a report by the National Highway Transportation Safety Association of the US Department of Transportation, they provide some descriptive information about these programs, but do not evaluate them. In our analysis of our data, however, let me turn to looking at the actual test scores and pass rates for the students, we found little difference in the performance across the teaching modes as measured by overall test scores, pass rates, or test frequencies. That is how many times a student has to take a test before they finally pass. There was very little difference between students who took traditional driver's education in a traditional classroom, versus in a blended classroom. Unfortunately, we were unable to include in these comparisons, the completely on-line pilot, because the earlier graduates of that program have not yet taken the DMV test at the time that we pulled together our data. And so, while a number of students have already finished that on-line test, they may or may not have actually gone to the DMV and taken the appropriate test, and they were not included in the data set that we had available when we did our analysis.
And the next step, looking at cost per student, we were unable to assess cost per student across the 3 teaching modes because there are concerns over the comparability of availability cost information. When we got down into the details of the cost information, we did not feel comfortable at the School of Government drawing conclusions from the information we had, because we weren't sure we would be comparing apples to apples. And the information was not in such a state that we could make really good cost comparisons across teaching modes. Finally from our survey we can report, that among those that responded to the question about the optional fee, the majority of schools do require the fee, and of those, most require the top allowable amount, or $45. I'm happy to answer any questions at any time. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Questions from the committee, Senator Hise. [SPEAKER CHANGES]My biggest question on this, as I look through some of the results on the findings, given that the individuals to be in the blended course are a self-selected group, and when you look at them as a whole, they have a variance, for 300 students, that is much smaller than the variance that exists in a 200,000 students, kind of looking at overall. What kind of look have you done as seeing what is innately different in the populations that would be done by the selecting of the course, and not necessarily, and not exclusively to the teaching methods of the course? [SPEAKER CHANGES]Ms. Burner. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Let me try to answer as best I can, but then I may also refer to DPI in terms of some of the specifics of how that classroom's techniques actually work. The determination of whether or not a school as a whole was offering blended instruction or not, just to be clear in my understanding of your question, it's not necessarily the student's choice as to whether or not they're in, but whether the school chooses to offer it in a blended format in that classroom. And there are a much smaller number of schools who reported, self reported, that they were using a blended teaching method. Out of the schools that responded to our survey, 42 reported, the schools, 42 schools reported that they offered blended instruction, 178 offered traditional. The rest of the schools who responded to the survey did not provide sufficient information for us to tell exactly which pot they fell into. So in the end, when we were comparing the test scores, we narrowed it down to folks that clearly had self identified themselves as one or the other. Now, in terms of differences with those schools that chose the blended, we did not look at the specific school characteristics that might say that they may be different systematically from the rest. But certainly, by choosing themselves to offer blended, that in itself is a systematic difference compared to the others. Hopefully, in general, the students are not systematically different, there would be a wide variety of students within those schools. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Follow up, Senator? [SPEAKER CHANGES]Follow up. And I think, when we look at the, particularly the on-line students, that's going to grow to even a bigger concern is that students who would chose to take one on-line tend to have internet access and these types of things coming forward, do you plan to continue this study and repeat it when you have the data and information available for the on-line students completed and their ability and their results from the test scores. [SPEAKER CHANGES]We have no firm plans at the moment, but we're more than happy to be accessible to DPI to continue the study. Certainly there would be interest nationally, given that no other state really has been able to follow it this way, so there at least would be some effort to share these results because it would be of interest to a larger community. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Senator Hise, are you asking, are you making that in the form of a request? [SPEAKER CHANGES]I could make that in the form of a request is something I think we delve into this looking at what is the difference between
online education. We kind of discovered the blended method along that way moving forward and so I think we really need to have a look at what is the online results. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Note to our staff, we will do a follow up on that. Senator Hartsell. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you madam ???. The pilot project was undertaken from, I believe, February to June 2012. You may, or DPI may know. In the fall of 2012 or currently in this semester of school is there still an online presence? I mean, are there any school systems using the online version and do we have an identification of who they are or where they are or what's happened since June of 2012? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ms. Martin, would you like to address that please? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, we are definitely aware of school districts that have continued to use the online portion but they have not been considered part of that pilot and we can certainly get that information to you of the specific districts that have continued on to use some of that work, yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up Senator [SPEAKER CHANGES] Did any systems beyond the five you indicated were participating in the pilot participate in the fall or actually the spring of this year. I mean, did any other systems participate besides the five. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And how was that selection made? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. And actually we do have with us today, with your permission, Reggie Flythe who is our day to day operations person at the Department of Public Instruction who could certainly speak to those specifics if you would, certainly I'll ask permission. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Absolutely. Sir, if you would give us your name for the record and identify your position. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. My name is Reginald Flythe. I am the driver education consultant for the Department of Public Instruction. This particular study, the data that you saw in the slide with the 358 students that completed, that information was through February of this year. What the locals did is some of those students that did not finish the online course, they took them back into the classroom to finish them to make sure that they could go through the process for whatever reason they did not complete the online only portion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up Senator [SPEAKER CHANGES] That's not my question. My question is did any systems beyond the five who were a part of the original project elect to utilize the online product. As in the fall of 2012 or thus far the spring of this year? [SPEAKER CHANGES] May I? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To my knowledge, no sir. The study ended at the end of the semester. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Were they offered the prospect of utilizing the online product? Or any system beyond the five that were there, was anybody else offered the prospect of utilizing the online product? [SPEAKER CHANGES] In North Carolina 30 hours of classroom instruction there's part of it, and a part of this pilot program. No system that I know of sir does that. This is part of the pilot for that particular point in time, I don't know of any that does online only education. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes I think we could ask for some input from Larry Yates, a member of our staff. Mr Yates? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes ma'am. Larry Yates, program evaluation. I believe that there are some schools as we got into the review previously there was discussion with other DPI staff that there are some schools out there doing online or mixed trainings, matter of fact. Unfortunately I do not have that list that was that was developed and gathered within the DPI network. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Hartsell. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I think, madam chair, what I'm going to ask is, what you just asked me.
What did the pilot prove? Or did he prove anything? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ms. Martin did you want to address that question or do you want to defer it to someone else? [SPEAKER CHANGES] No actually I’d like to respond to that particular question because based on the last couple of comments that were made in Dr. Burner’s presentation and actually I’m going to switch to the next slide that we have in or presentation. I think we know that the work that was done in the pilot we know that there are students that have been brought back to actually complete that pilot and then if we have other school districts who are not a part of that pilot but have chosen to use that particular information. We need to certain that we know who whose school districts are and how we can include that information. So to answer the question that I think that was asked earlier about, what additional information can we bring to the table to continue the study? That is what needs to be done at this point to really get at the question that’s been asked regarding what have we found out from this particular study. And I think Dr. Burdum might conclude as well that more information needs to be gathered and I don’t know if she wants to speak directly to that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes ma’am. [SPEAKER CHANGES] As mentioned, when we did our analysis in 2012 the students involved in the online program had not reached the point at which they could actually take the DMV test so we couldn’t bring them into our large statistical analysis. It is certainly possible that at this point, DMV may have test data for those individuals that we could bring in and do a comparison. Although it is a small number of students and we’d have to go back to DMV and bring that in again. One thing I will note in terms of research done in other of the description of the online programs in other states, we were able to speak, we started with Pennsylvania and Colorado in terms of asking about their experience. We also spoke with individuals in California, Georgia, Florida, Indiana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas and Virginia and the most significant issue that they had followed in terms of online education was concern of incompletions or folks who do not finish eh online course once started. But at this point there’s not the data from the online study to analyze in hand. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I thought that was the objective. Representative Hurley. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Madam Chair. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I don’t know which one to ask this. But do you know why these were not completed on the 174, do you know why they didn’t complete or any analysis on that? [SPEAKER CHANGES] The 174 if I want to make sure I’m understanding your question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hurley would you repeat your question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] On page 2 it says 532 students enrolled in the pilot 358 completed so I think that leaves 174 that we do not know anything about. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I’m sorry we have not tracked or gone back to interview students or discuss with the schools why they did not complete the online. We at the time that the school of government was doing the analyses, those programs the students were either still actively within the online program, and then there is a gap between when they finish and when they may actually go to DMV to take their test scores. Which is what we were basing our large scale analyses on. So there was a time gap. We have not gone back to the students in that online ilot and discussed anything with them directly. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Comment from the Chair. I don’t believe we’re ready to accept the report. Because the objective of the report was to get the pilot, get the information from the 5 pilots and to determine several things, one being how many of those students completed and how many passed their exam. So I’m going to ask with.
him permission. the committee that we have you ladies come by and join us again and complete your work in the will be ready to set your final report. I keep a much fairness on the agenda. I recommend Jerry regarding refugee artisans center parts of [SPEAKER CHANGES] this is in line with actually. Legion, but also the price on your job will I would like to move it. we imagine please consider amending the two thousand thirteen fifteen CE one. so that we might conduct a formal PED evaluation drivers education, including online method programs and effectiveness. what this is John suggested this and the problem is both timing and implementation of the programming itself. we're trying to find out the answers to questions and would like to at least pursue as I would like is for the full-motion information aforesaid paydown that comment on that motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Hollings on and agree with Bush saying I think nothing is important medicine is the statement going forward on effectiveness is more than passing a test in DMV. the curriculum is more than the piston DMV. the main are buying about covers it experiences. students see things on drunk driving and texting while driving, and none of those are measured by this is one component of it, but I destroy them in the component were talking about effectiveness of the programs are we doing much deeper than how well they can answer thirty multiple-choice questions that qualify themselves in certainly restates a reduced time to find something smart and that was the only one we had at the time, animation, the force said hearts would you like to repeat that motion. fully ninety; [SPEAKER CHANGES] sorry if Senator Clark that I just wanted to be clear with adding this item to the work plan have a negative impact on any of the other items we have a work plan, we may end up having to drop something also be combined. there is a DPI portion of Berger 's item will not work on involving reviewed PPI. I would assume it would be incorporated within that e-mail is a follow-up here were on this check out the item lists and list them here. you just got it off and was so manager chairman. the boy will approach the project is to do a complete review of the history of drivers in North Carolina, including the above answer the last couple of years that the committee has been focusing on the school of Government dpi on to answer your question specifically server Clark on it won't have a negative impact on our work plan some about to tell you a couple of projects on our work planet have been approved to him looks like in the Senate budget. I have other studies of the same faith, so that our depending on the will send budget budget. ultimately, we may not have to do two reviews letter layer and so what I would recommend is that we just put this project in. I will sport a look on the bottom of the list. we can do simple lunar work were director operations review of DTI that will be doing but no, we do need some time to focus on this project and because I think it's a sort of unfair to the apartment and school grammar dependent back and forth back and forth, and I feel responsible for that manager because that's the way we've we've been handling this. your dog. for the answer surgery on prices, concern and the snowfall we've heard a lot about process of drivers education. the immediate outcome of drivers education is like server highs describe you have students taking the completing
A coalition of any of those students completing the course that successfully passed a driver's education and to let us parents are you so the summary tax were out there with perks of the program is used to teach for your teenagers of drive safely and provincial which are more bricks and we sleep here so much about some that do not know if the literature contains a studies of efficacy of driver's education the one time we heard it from the national relationship 20 driver's education and safe driving in fact reduction threat against them injuries and deaths in property damage and theft and you can contribute back to traverse a odd that is what will the new rule will cover blowfish crew, process the homeland when the curriculum that isn't to talk about today and effectiveness of the program and how we can do this ugly welfare kingdom to work when we do make adjustments like this and four from time to cinch Clark-set by the seven other, moody (SPEAKER CHANGES) preceded the statewide upfront with objective of the project was thanks are giving information that forests are all in favor of the testing the word plan to include the driver's education and from ms is NPM 5 FSAI to a location L a BS unanimous Mr. Kerr, and they come to the warplane and 5¢ you save the NMS PM to four that I could have that share numbers you have before you won't miss presentation copies of this presentation and objects to the presentation and this memorandum hour to us at this morning listing the projects that would be affected more heavily influenced by the fall TV reports in the past enjoyed committee project is the last page of the of the slide in the addition to that you should have the song from back in the home 20003200050 work when subject to jail feels so your committee for home and you will recall lifted several meetings we had them with work planned project with the last one of the committee expressed third parties of the committee and one now the project was to what to say and Friday night in each and contradictory this meeting on this result of the workers, the last minute to say something that needs to be amended either in terms of the home projects that were pending your which are listed only daily list of the projects and more of the ladies achieved a rush on the story from the party that this committee had collectively , so we can say for example you say so for most Russians, for a very highly of the terms of troll for each word to 1° and mouse is so strong suit for special wiring commission is that the very end all we do have the capacity to Wal-Mart Eastern work when home. (SPEAKER CHANGES) This. On . For the textures that were more work were zone to work as a joint effort of the slept in your committee now we've got that of an initiative that the five projects are listed up your UC System administration feasibility of local governments model OK through 12 education that is the most county Colorado, that is a very interesting project the event was down a Colorado has a long a unique way of mood of the school district in celebration of capturing all students of all kinds of gifts county home school private school of contracts school's charter schools and traditional case for 12 and one of the interest that some partial or watching or foolish for this project you want us to see if any of that experience was useful and would be reckless and could we replicate your North Carolina the dangers of dissonance on the third project department of construction operations were four to look into the park: role, from five probably break that down into ??.......
One being the financial operation of the department, the other being the programming part of the department. From time to time the journal assembly needs to take a look at what the department is doing as a whole. There's a lot of confusion about the role of the department of public education, public instruction. These would be what the local school boards do. Number four, fire rescue and emergency management service funds. The state has grant programs coming from the insurance premium tax. We will look at how those handled, what they're for. There have been some reports of some book keeping problems in way the department is handling those funds. Nothing fraudulent, I might say very quickly, but just some concerns about timeliness of book keeping and since it is to some extent a pension program, there's always an interest there in any unfunded accrued liability that might be occurring there. Number five the unused unutilized surplus property, that is, real property and those are underway right now. There is a bill now that is in process that would require formal reporting of the states real property by the agencies back to this division and to the ?? committee and to some other committees. Those are all underway as we speak. The projects that are pending, I'm not going to go down all of those, but I will mention a couple of them. Project number six, Senator Clark, that was one of the projects you wanted. The senate budget bill has an identical project and is requiring the chief information officer in the ITS department to conduct an identical study. It's possible that this committee could either defer this project pending the outcome of that CIO review or you could totally strike our project and just look at the results coming from CIO and accept that. The other one, Community Care of North Carolina, same thing, the senate bill requires DHHS to do an effectiveness study. There's been some criticism of that study from some researchers and scientists that have questioned the validity of the ?? studies that have been done, showing that it does indeed save money and avoid medicaid costs. The state auditor recommended such a study and you committee wanted us to do it, but now the senate bill has the DHHS doing that study. Same thing, you could either defer our study pening the DHHS or you could strike that study in its entirety from the work plan. The rest of the are listed there and in the interest of time I won't go over all of the individually. We went over all of those at the last meeting. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I just wanted to point out, number 10 the ?? program for overnight ?? the governor recommended continuing those funds after the ?? project and the senate budget expands that project now state wide that's moving forward. We may want to look at reviewing what we were only doing with six counties now that we've, how we want to do that now that we've expanded it state wide depending on how that comes through. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We'll do that. I thought you might look at the timing, the staging of these projects that are underway plus the two that we're going to start following those. One of them being we had planned the ?? IT projects. Again, depending of what committee wants to do that. Let me back up a bit. You may want to defer action on deferring the project until the house acts on the budget and the budget's signed by the governor and it's not overridden and there's no complications about that. The budget's always subject to amendment. We won't launch that project unless there's some definition there. So I won't ask the committee to deal with that right now or until the budget is settled. Those projects that are listed there, we have project teams on all of them. The last box shows when the reports should come out. We're also going to do two reports on the rural fire departments grants and pensions. That covers three or four different program areas.
going over the rim of the bill last night and this morning. staff also been a good thing the Senate bill does not add anything to the studies we do not have any projects or going around this committee 's work plan as yet once again, as I was saying before the pins on what the final outcome of the budget process is a mission. the Seattle study I mentioned the DHS. a study of community care, North Carolina. interestingly, the Senate budget authorizes the legislative service officer. my boss to assign or to allow our own all of our/ to assist in that North Carolina can your project that is a statewide efficiency study of state government Senate budget sets aside two million dollars to be used by officer state budget and management to contract with a consulting firm or firms and to put together an inter agency team to review to review all of state government look for cost savings opportunities. it's broader than that the Senate bill itemizes some particulars about what the scope of that study will be. I have some discussions with Mister Pope, who is number two budget director he's very interested in using our reports. reports of the state are others that are done and done by other agencies and staff in this effort on so that's a possible of workload impact fire, but I do not believe that that will be too burdensome. now if the request is for us to take some of our staff members and put together a team and work on that him places I would remember from my window,forcing that time on. also mentioned are the units are some hand out is attached to the slide presentation here. I did look specifically at that looks like this look specifically at the Senate bill for any recommendations on some of our reports are from this committee, or both, but show up somewhere in the center 's budget proposal and their storm. the budget includes twenty seven million dollars to start repaying the escheat fund loan for global transport bottles on my lungs, Change Speaker: thirty nine million Change Speaker:, including accrued interest twenty seven will address the entire amount. okay, but a way that that's a good thing we recommended that some repayment schedule start. I wouldn't say they decided that because of our recommendationlegislators and lawyers Association minor regret and figure out global transport. nobody else. so yes to me and the Senate budget also makes a number of recommendations for motorfleet management for her Broadway in many recommendations from Word for Word from our series of reports, including the testing of telematics for monitoring on vehicle use the underground tanks. report redid several years ago I one of the recommendations was that we look specifically at a greater cost sharing by the industry and that is reflected to some extent in the sentence budget tag and title latest report on that is so that requires a DOT and the MP4 and study looking at the rates charged by those contractors looking specifically athow well they're doing the work. the duration of what made the contract agents to compare to what DMV in-house work does our reports look at that found that of the contract agents are generally more time efficient than the DMV workers are doing work and I'm also drivers education is mentioned in their drivers in Caerleon districts are authorized to charge the students,parents forty five dollars to take drivers. it is an option of the Senate bill rises to sixty five dollars that additional funding. of course, when also it will be put back into the program off set some of the state 's contribution will could be put back in the program. this term
any question, or if anyone has any. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Questions from the committee with respect to the amendment of the plan? Or any other questions? Senator Hartsell. [SPEAKER CHANGES]John, the 2 projects that are specifically identified in the Senate budget involving the CIO and the community care, has your staff commenced any work on either of those projects as yet? I saw the schedule, I was just curious. [SPEAKER CHANGES]We have done some background reading, primarily buy low, and the staff has looked at those projects for the purpose of scoping them out for the work planning, so we do have that, but no, there haven't been any entrance conference or formal notice to the department, or stake holders, and we do not have the projects underway as we define it. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Thank you Mr. Tukoff. Representative Hurley. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Thank you, and since I wasn't here last year, I've got a couple of questions, if I may. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Well you're here representing the House, solely now. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Okay. [SPEAKER CHANGES]We appreciate you presence. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Thank you. Well, I did have Representative Moffitt here. I have 2 questions. On the contract tag agents, do you check also about the contractor, the ones you give the contracts to, to see how good they are, authorized to actually be contract agents. [SPEAKER CHANGES]When we did that study, I'll be happy to give you a copy of it. I don't know specifically. we checked to see if they have valid contracts. Does anybody from staff recall that. Karen McGordy was lead on that, Madame Chair. [SPEAKER CHANGES]They all have contracts with the Department of Motor Vehicles. The real issue is that they have different contracts. [SPEAKER CHANGES]And my question was, were they really supposed to be having the contracts with the background check, is what I was checking to see if maybe they had conflicts with dealerships. [SPEAKER CHANGES]I'm not aware of that, what we really focused on was more the process for giving new contract at this point in time. Some of them have had contracts for a very long time. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Okay, my next one was Global Park, where did the policy payments coming from. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Yes ma'am. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Because it was $33 million and then, of course it was more interest. Where did the payments come from to make it back down to $27 million? [SPEAKER CHANGES]Shawn, can you answer that. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Indeed, Shawn Elm for evaluation division. Last year in the short session, the General Assembly took action to make a one-time payment of $17.5 million to the sheet fund, that drew it all the way down, somewhere to just above $25 million, and at the time that it passed it came out to $27 million because of the interest, and this time I believe it's now coming out of the general fund. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Mr. Trukoff, would you like to mention the railroad report. I believe we missed that, and that was quite important. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Oh, my apologies Madame Chair. The recommendations to committee made from our report have all been put into the Senate's version of the budget. The only difference in what the Senate is proposing to do, and our report, is that the real estate that we've identified as being idle, not producing enough income, or not related to railroads, the Senate is having the railroad corporation look at those properties to see if any of them are contaminated, or if there's any problem wit the sale. And the sale, of course, will be, the dividends, I'm sorry, the proceeds of those sales will be dealt with in the future. They're not included in the one-time dividend that we estimated. But, the one-time dividend from cash is $15 million going into the highway fund for rail projects, and a recurring dividend of 25% of the trackage agreement with Norfolk Southern Railroad, that $3 million would also go in the highway fund and be dedicated for rail projects. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Mr. Acoda, I believe that's the Senate budget you're speaking of. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Senate, yes ma'am. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Thank you. Are there other comments from the committee? I believe in the wisdom of the body, the Chairs would suggest
is that we do not make amendments to the work plan at this time and wait for the finalization of the budget to be signed by the governor. Our next meeting will be June the 17th at 4 pm in this room and seeing no further business before us, we stand adjourned.