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 | March 5, 2015 | Chamber | Health and Human Services

Full MP3 Audio File

And if dentist and bad that and some of the family and the hand that and they people begin charging along to the end of that to the head of the name of the money to recognize these people to pay for much of a-half and then enter the best-of-the kind of the intervention of them have the option to buy them for taking an good morning bay commission chambers of the mind in law firm in line with the department's allegation of them and talking to other generation of vision offers a non-reply know of the preplanned often than if the person and I believe that the average function of action 2013 to be in the course of the relation of the fact that option of 40% (SPEAKER CHANGES) it on to the bottom of the one ability category you're the head of one-on that included in the states of the form of major U.S. and feel of the wall in four major airports and others are selected in this category beta of 1% Monday that the next day percent are on the bottom of the original impact that worry you on the first elected to the% day to day local input and-wheeling compete against one another within the same region in the region to-two of the regions are urged to the division's not offer the air to have it and often of others of Huntington Beach and the everything population in the nation EU category 1-5 to 80% to 50% day on local and put you on a fully competed in another within the same division and initially-getting the call 71 undertaken a pickup 1-8 pieces of the FBI told that the caffeine-one call for an unofficial eight-to work make the copper on a misty one of the the category of the laundry(SPEAKER CHANGES) that category heating the crater in late in the back and work family-delayed coverage of that time were held on in the division the categories will enact been up the nation for a plan often the deficit that one of the released in December we have several of the action and the public and the product that cascaded down a week of them bountifully a lightweight turn up the 5% of the criteria in mind that was used as one of the product of the furnished a recommended by the worker in the late kerb of which have patience and 20 13th in more detail information about each of these criteria used in the NL, which I find the file a criteria family report and often look in the concrete be a precarious the report in a late in the obstruction, transportation work for the division lead of the plea year of the day one of the only category again product afflicted on the% data of data from the forest-and child on data, and the end of the major-travel times dating to the 30 years the bottom of the call of the product to the department and the cost to the department can be lowered none they turn on and will launch are all committed by the local heirs of his local hunters will offer told congestion content of your average annual daily traffic on the canal when of other half evenly and then we buy them on the latency, economic advantage of a 50% long terms of the product of expected provide that offering of percent change an economy a major input to that criteria in the attack to travel time savings over 30 years of the product is expected to write an affidavit above the acquittal crash rate of four-plane crashed of any one time and no claim they can to deliver the product on the military network(SPEAKER CHANGES) of an inch on the contract lines along route and whether the product of the connection for transportation, health and end of the delay percent are given the billy category we don't hear regional impact category into the percentage based on that domain 30% evenly split between the division engineers tried in the appeal of the late into the formal methodology for sunny Climes of Eureka that the product of water division each other and get down to that category of the year...........

A panel AT&T or be labeled the rate of return late in the left hand on the convention is exceptionally connectivity and lead to look at what the family here that the product of located in a weekend nation from the department hires, the product of a feather only options that if the women trapped in the long run by building a freeway of an active often look to the front of the times in the area on field of each item and will all work on the criteria were tough at least a lot in legislation covered in the others are in the yacht in the scene of an all out of the cost is one of yours, which killed 1. The biggest challenges in punishing people… They have the ability of FBI dollars off the mound, and none of the top of the daily non-painted infected with the transportation to grid will recommend above the level we provide a more transportation list of events were a byproduct of the tunnel vision scored on what they are and Re-enable the government value of the day of work, that is one in the analogy that level again we have you had a product from the on-the long value of the forger for her sister set of four major commercial center (SPEAKER CHANGES) for the definitely gone back in division the category here 11-minute of love and he up a minimum 9% of minimum of 4% you're on a nonviolent others and 80% of the date on the eyes, for which included are located in one sense that he's not in the middle of the plan would divide the dough holds 1/2¢ for that night version the often-of-your online 29 pilot of home and the money the government acted in the mayor's cup chopped into a box and a plate (SPEAKER CHANGES) which won a 31-5 day which are highly touted and the other numbers on the free event handling that was higher than the seven-up sometime in the numbers are $8.00 over the FBI of the roughly 550 providence, 14 of his of them between highlighting on, it is wanted in line is that effect of a product of an interactive game designers of FBI Office in the data to offer a wider audience that achy Breaky time to make it said from NT-sufficiency and assist us in the two-wording in the midst of an eye on things when they arise if you are names of two minds is an agenda with Cambridge systematics and another two-time of the hype for more funding to review of the EP 3 player of the balloting against-nationalism transportation for the republican Turkish and of the outlines of the depreciation of an action that original of the interruption isn't mentioned as it has to offer several years for a review of the taken on outsiders as not impartial against me that we will have no involvement and cost-of-the past two years and we have no stake in the results are encouraging that some of the fence now we have a huge tracts of lower the amount of one of the statistical tie and where is all we have the king of the nation tour event were removed from the center line or from the actual-the largest looking at the numbers to open, and the PST today has been told that passes the senate in the transportation actors to look into the detail about the DNA evidence at auction for years the confirmation for the investment and national science from other on the rest of us together implementer of that nation's most often have been a member of the cost center of the interest of the nature of the demolition of 0:50 other institutional and an admission of destructive and we feel better for patients people would have effectively data I often inconsistencies in the feature event of the click of a more timely than the incident number of cases recommendation for another time, the Preakness, economically and-15 feet and from time to stop this one for 20-buying one-time home buyers by title clinching..........

That we looked at where it was, that the process was giving priority to certain types of projects and the other and we just didn’t find that, so I’ll go through some recommendations. We had recommendations within each of the 6 modes and then we had a series of recommendations across the modes, and so from, as [??] just mentioned it’s important to remember that the prioritization process is, within each mode there’s a series of criteria and they’re all reported on a scale of 0-100, then those criteria are combined into an overall score. The biggest statistical issue that we found was that there were the low, the low ranges, low values, low ranges of values on the scores and some disproportional weighting, so what that means is if you have a 0-100 point scale that you can report on, we found in a lot of instances where most of the projects were in a very small window, a very small band of that, so you’re losing the ability to distinguish against projects but then also when you roll these together they have the, there’s the implication in terms of the weighting that each of the criteria has on the score. So as an example on this table here there is, it shows the criteria that were used for the rail project and the weights assigned to them. When weights are assigned that’s the relative priority of each criteria. So in this example, benefits cost is assigned a weight to 20% but if you actually look at the numbers the benefit cost of the projects who had about a 5% or accounted for about 5% of the overall project. At the other end of the scale there’s mobility where that was assigned a weight of 20, but when you look at the numbers mobility was accounting for over half of the final scores. So the issue with that, the reason that that’s happening is because of the different approaches used to scale the results on a 0-100 point scale, so one of our main recommendations was to scale all of the criteria consistently. So this graph shows, tends to show what that means. The blue line, straight line, this is just one criteria within the [??] about how a raw score, a suggested score is converted to the final score and so in this case the score is the score until it reaches 100 and then it’s capped at 100 and all the projects that get a score over that are capped at 100. The approach that we’re recommending is grading on a curve, so you assign 100 to the project that has the highest, you assign a 0 to the project that has the lowest and then you grade a curve in between. So some of the implications of that are that it will be possible theoretically for a project to have a score of 100. If it’s the best project and all of the criteria and you roll that together, it’s gonna get 100. The other thing that’s gonna happen is that you will see in all cases some projects that ran high, some that ran in the middle and some that ran low, you will see that the results will reflect much closer the weights that were assigned to the criteria at the beginning of the process and it would also help in some consistency across when you start to look across modes. So for example the best bike/ped project would be 100, the very best rail project would be 100, so if you look at those scores independently you would say. okay, I know that that is a really good project on this note and a really good project on this note. Some of the other global recommendations were, I mentioned, opportunities to improve consistency. We found cases in which some key terms were being used inconsistently across the notes, so we flagged those and recommended some definitions. When possible, to look at the impact of a project, so look at the congestion or safety or whatever before a project was built and after it’s built and compare that difference and use that when possible instead of just looking at current conditions. We recommend using a measure of cost-effectiveness when benefit/cost is not possible. If benefit/cost is a monetized benefit divided by the cost. In some of the modes that’s just not possible to monetize the benefits of these projects, so when that’s not possible we recommend using some other qualitative or quantitative assessments of the benefits, divide them by costs and referring to that or presenting that as the cost-effectiveness. We also recommended introducing a new measure of financial leverage that is for every dollar that DOT spends, how many additional dollars do they attract to the state transportation program. The. [SPEAKER CHANGES] [??] [SPEAKER CHANGES] To the, to the [??] program? [SPEAKER CHANGES] [??] [SPEAKER CHANGES] We also looked at opportunities and options for comparing projects across

Speaker changes:directly to each other so in all of the motel projects one big bucket using some criteria and prioritization directly against the navigation project doctoral against the same project and that really comes down to ?? comparison it's not definitely possible to ?? we make these types of decision everyday all the day and there are examples that we see trying to ?? accepting to one case ?? so we know that the priority here is attentively for that reason we recommend in going forward ?? put all the projects together and fix one set of criteria for each other ?? and you start to lose some of the advances that you had over the couple of years to look out and ?? the benefits of these projects and then final recommendation ?? transparency when ?? within the calculations and to get the month to work on the other that reflexes out priority our recommendation ?? trying to get the calculation Speaker changes:?? specific modes with in the modes i don't know ll f these but i want to concentrate on the highway side ?? increase chin up to value of time associate with travel some of them are very completed ?? travel time so the range cross the board ?? some of the global recommendations for example including the safety and congesting calculation to look at the impact of the project the final one was specifically related to connectivity measure our recommendation is to clarify the object of that and then to rework the calculation methodology on that Speaker changes:?? Speaker changes:?? are you looking t the proximity of the project to the ?? Speaker changes: ?? the question that come at me well back my be you to control time in STI Speaker changes: the reason that can happen was that the prioritization done with in the mode and other bike project is coming against vision project and what you see if you tell relative to that kind of projects some of them welcome to top of the list vision project that we can do in the best like that project we can do understanding there are making school in spite of the consistency an will be interrupt the results project with mode with 100 and project with another mode with 100 i men the best projects of that mode but it is not making the distinction bout the priority to cost between the projects Speaker changes:??

Only the navy's and other users of any citizen and didn't have this is not the city's is an alliance is even a tiny, an online and land is it means is that science has been as high as an old idea to leave it if an Ethernet and that the distance from the intersection 11 of the things down the stretch of highway on behalf of the offer would have a realization of sentimental time offset them to delay action restaurant of the head honchos and techniques, and by the field that offered to take that model than that after one of them have suffered a blow up the idea of the audition in the login a lot of work days, that if he were on time college in 17 of them is the creation of staffers and some from holders and lottery to rich and has years of the install and all that and they often that the the looking at the age of innocent eyes light time unlike the other nations trying to gain a model that going forward and raising event is the one that isn't going to stay a lot we can look in the project to the environment and modeling and talent and it was like(SPEAKER CHANGES) Mr. Bender real incident occurred at a junior and has some ideas on the inside is marked as he has more ways and means, and some of its athletes taken out and sent us his hand and happened to that of the older than 20 batons the impending if you have to end of the functions are infiltrated the economy and to offer have on the condition he added that the defense of long-time high chopper on-crime scene and then the government-on top of the oncoming Lane -Adelaide have more in-hand Lanes and Charlton Lui, and one free throws to travel the attention of the total offense on the edge of limousines and directly downstairs and the audition won't make it happen until last eight months-long and Scott added to the salutes days and acting at the same 17 consistency,(SPEAKER CHANGES) never-the-heart-attack petition and has become the vaccination that we have a part of that in addition to the initial EMI and others of this month that the nation that are living in copper and lead us the opportunity to me by then-defendant to look into the letter eighth in the mid-even proposition 20 of the length of little bit of the content recommendation day lives mean, for unknown factors need more of the nation -hop and destination when of-a-by-topic of the defendant and players we haven't yet an opportunity to jump out of the seven-day review your member of the 81 to get me up of members of the internal and external insistence t hat the teaching personnel and enter into the NT of our better intent as a matter of making up his intellect and two-medium density to making the knowledge and the entire leader ever called planes and 1:00 AM PT-worker really have to be delivered to the patient has happened in the people I met into the mentally ill for the recommendation weakens the rest of the nation's attic insulation can lead to have to convince them to lie in the course of legislation and might not be able to continue as one of the 28th was 1 to 5 and enter mediation that we have the environment that would have a breeder of litigation when statistician the season.(SPEAKER CHANGES) Another Clinton to have it delivered and we know we can donate land-for each of the nation in Connecticut meantime, the 98, used a lot of retailers and other applicable to delete all of the turned it into it before buying the public-defying unaccounted for, as its recommendation and a content of the none of the things that I think she defended to retardation and upper-end and back in the product has wisely working fashion insiders frequently what would happen if it hasn't been able to keep the team and foreign NAZI content of the partition of the edition of the nation from jail and happened recently in majority of the global recommendations particularly good feeling into the need for this Leonard Jackson leads, that winter wheat fields today, contingent of a moment ago about compelling content and that was the highest levels in the founding of the Internet in a free areas and attendance and that includes such an early in the design .............

Speaker changes: she separate the ?? criteria and to chew correct previously ll criteria ?? projects that impacts passenger terminal and the projects that impact great terminal ?? and going elements ?? certainly the workers succeeded this criteria ?? in passenger real terminal ting like that ?? when they look t the fake terminal how bout they recognized that the ability if the project ?? into another medium ?? and for the recognized sufficiently address the fact that project ?? Speaker changes:with that at least one present ?? full item children much more like to too many people look the introduction help ?? and they don't ?? in fact even full time job low is not necessary to look the family at poverty ?? Speaker changes:if i understand the question correctly were largely round the pack that this is ?? exchangeable transition for for five miles to capture the connectivity they gonna focus on those ?? and I'm not sure at dressing the question ?? Speaker changes:if my understanding that the current ?? point that probability that road address to in and out and this same that we now understand the impact ?? 20 miles so the new rod for the ?? to 20 miles radius is that fair effort claiming trafficking in that are ?? Speaker changes:?? Speaker changes:??

Move to some health indicators now and these are largely based on the available data and also based on how important they are for children’s health. Children’s health is the foundation of overall development and ensuring that they are born healthy is the first step toward increasing their life chances. Poverty, poor nutrition, lack of preventative care, substance abuse, maternal depression, family violence, all of these things put children at risk and poor health in childhood impacts all the aspects of a child’s life such as school readiness. [00:35 - other meeting cuts in, completely drowning out prior speaker] Perhaps it would help to clarify that the 20 mile buffer is the limit, so the most points would go to a project closer to the terminal and then we would still be able to continue to award points up to the 20, but it’s the upper limit of when you are eligible to get points for the project. [00:54 - HHS meeting cuts back in softly, but audibly and other meeting is only audible as background chatter] And children as you can see died from a broad array of factors, physical [??] access to healthcare, community factors... [01:03 - other meeting again drowns out HHS meeting] Thank you, Senator. We’ll look at the next criteria that you see up here is accessibility and connectivity and again following the Cambridge recommendations the workgroup spent a great deal of time deliberating on what the intent and purpose of this particular criteria is and the best way to measure it to accommodate that particular goal, and so at this point the workgroup has defined it as improving access to opportunity in rural and less affluent areas and improve interconnectivity of the transportation network and the scoring criteria that they have identified and the type of information that comes from the Department of Commerce regarding economic distress indicators as well as the project’s ability to upgrade the roadway function. For other criteria we sort of lumped these together, pavement conditions, lane width, shoulder width and economic competitiveness, the workgroup has agreed to continue to use the criteria from [??] moving forward and that is consistent again with what came out of the Cambridge recommendation. At this point there’s still a lot of deliberation about some very important topics, the [??] of which is the benefit/cost criteria and this is a particular criteria where there are some recommendations to improve the effect on scoring and to improve the financial leverage component of local financial contribution to a project in this particular criteria, but I’ll be candid, this particular topic has been something that the workgroup has struggled with. They’re really trying to evaluate what the impact of any changes might be so they’re deliberate and slow and methodical about their evaluation of this criteria and the recommended option and recognize that any change in this criteria could have intended or unintended consequences and they want to make sure they fully understand those before making a final recommendation. Some examples of questions that have come up for dialogue and conversations that the workgroup has had is that if I take a [??] to the complex project and reduce the scope of it and such reduce the cost of the project, that should hopefully improve the benefit/cost of the project, but the downside of that then could be are we then prioritizing low cost projects versus the best project possible, so they wanna continue to talk through those types of examples. Another concept is the financial leverage piece. If the local area is able to contribute money to the project to reduce the overall cost to the state budget, you know, looking at the trust fund dollars, should that not help improve the benefit/cost part. That is a positive conversation in some ways, but in others is it saying that, you know, perhaps having difficulty in certain local areas to come up with that kind of money am I maybe accidentally penalizing an area because they don’t have the ability to bring the money to the table, and so these are the types of dialogues and conversations that the workers are having and that’s why they have yet to make a recommendation. They really want to sort through all the possible implications of adjusting this criteria. Looking at peak and seasonal traffic, I think it’s safe to say that recognizing that there are peak volumes of traffic across the state, the workgroup really is committed to trying to find a way to move beyond just average annual daily traffic counts across the entire state and really try to find an effective, confident way to look at peak fluctuation throughout the state, and this may be seasonal traffic due to tourism, it may be traffic due to other types of seasonality. For example, we noticed in our study that there is a traffic counter in the Crabtree area, Crabtree mall area that has a really high peak seasonality around the holiday shopping season. Imagine that. Such a surprise, so what this map shows you are the current 71 permanent count stations that we have and we did work with the group over at NC State to help us evaluate what the possibilities would be for defining a very consistent and confident building method for peak seasonal traffic. [SPEAKER CHANGES] [??] for factoring that information? [??] [SPEAKER CHANGES] So these are 71 permanent traffic counters that are, they maintain and operate and get that 24 hours a day. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Did we, can I get some of that, how would be the best way to capture the data I’m interested in

Will it show us migratory patterns? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I don’t believe so. They’re permanent counters that just sort of stand on the side of the road and just count the number of cars that are coming but they don’t show relationship to other count stations. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Correct. How long would they have been doing this? Five years, three years, two years, one year, ten years? [SPEAKER CHANGES] People were looking at an average. It’s at least 5-10 years. I'll get you some specific [??] Yes, we’ll be happy to answer this question. What this graph then shows is what [??] was able to do by gleaning data from those 71 count stations and saying okay, we set the average on this graph at 1. Each one of the count stations is sort of set at a value of 1 for their average daily traffic and then we see the ups and downs or the ebbs and flows on the graph throughout the 12 months of the year, 1 being January, 12 being December. It shows you that there are some areas where those peak areas do last for more than just a day or a weekend. They, perhaps, last over a 30 or 40 or 50 or 60 day period so what the workgroup said is this is encouraging information. This lets us know that there is data out there, but we’re not so sure that we’re confident with 71 count stations so we’ve asked [??] to continue to refine their review of this information using 3,000 additional counts that we have throughout the state and we’re expecting the results of that information soon, but I can tell you today that the workgroup is very committed to trying to find a way to see if this can be used in P4 planning. Other topics that are still under consideration are future projections much like Joe was talking about. We have a very meaningful way of capturing the current condition of our roadway or the current congestion or the current traffic demand on a particular segment. We now have at our fingertips something called the North Carolina State Ride Travel Demand Model that’s been under development for close to two years and it’s looking at beyond what the Federal Highway’s recommendation the Chair mentioned, looking at specific data here in North Carolina. Looking at our land use patterns. Looking at some of our information that we know about our state specifically and we’re running some tests with that model and if that model is able to produce some confidence, future projections, then the workgroup will continue to look to see if that could be a way we could improve our benefit/cost criteria perhaps or others. There’s multiple places where we could potentially use it and so the workgroup wants to get that information from this pilot and test from before they make any final recommendation. When we look at safety criteria, one thing that the workgroup also wanted to think about, again looking to those future projections that were recommended, is we are able to say that the existing segment or the existing roadway or the existing rail terminal has an existing safety rating of based on whatever’s used to calculate safety for those types of projects. What we are not consistently able to do at this point is project the safety benefits of putting particular projects in place. So we recognize that that is a deficiency and so we’ve challenged sort of a safety team, is what I’ve been calling them sort of unofficially, to really look at what are ways that we might be able to better evaluate the future safety benefit of a particular project consistently so that perhaps we can include that either in the safety criteria or even in the benefits of the benefit/cost criteria. Another item under consideration again is congestion. We understand that that’s a very significant criteria that seems pretty straightforward, but when the group started to look at it again they wanted to make sure that again, very much like the benefit/cost criteria, that if we do make recommendations as a workgroup to adjust this criteria that we fully understand the unintended or intended changes that that might make in the overall scoring of that criteria. So currently it’s using volume to capacity ratios and the existing volume and the workgroup wants to make sure that that’s the right way to do it, to keep doing it the way we did it in 3.0 or if we can make some modifications to improve it that we do that as well. More topics still under discussion as you’ll notice, we have more under discussion than decisions made, but that’s part of the nature of the workgroup, to make sure that there’s full, deliberate conversations around every item before it becomes an official recommendation. The non-highway modes criteria, we began to receive some presentations from each of the bicycle and pedestrian and public transportation. We’re able to share some of their recommendations based on what they learned from the Cambridge Study back in our last workgroup meeting, so we’re still in the process of just evaluating what those outcomes are. Evacuation routes, this one’s been a little bit prickly for us. We, it’s very much like benefit/cost. The workers have struggled to determine what the benefit of including evacuation routes might be, perhaps for safety or for congestion. They’ve talked about it, they’ve agreed, then they’ve talked about it again and so it’s a topic very much up for debate and so what they’re working to do is to determine what’s the best place for it. Some options have been to perhaps make sure there’s data available so that locals could use it in the local input periods as part of their criteria for their local methodologies. Others are to find a data element that could be incorporated into one of the scoring criteria, but again no decision has been made to date, and normalization. This is one where we were pleasantly surprised as our department and our team were showing you [note other meeting, HHS, can be heard in background of this meeting, however it is completely drowned out by this meeting for almost all of the audio except for a few scattered clips of no more than an isolated phrase]

A send-seven money and others island nations that another village of non-aboriginal and the highlander and even higher percentage to defend contact and then travels from the route 90 percentile a novel of 1% for not having the inference that he had outlook for handling of the replay of the times and has denounced the worry that all parties and all that happens, is that the land of name-calling the delicate eyes that lend a hand-painted in a letter to the creek and, in the media type of strategy and have a tent and the percentage that child and one for me where some detail and carry into the mid to late Peter he went and (SPEAKER CHANGES) I have contacted ahead and not on rail of the taxation and can't see this as an ally in the starving and alumni is a whole and cedar and opportunities to its original recommendations of the dollars provided only actually be stacked in favor of Seat ac sentencing is rising in the hands of the handmaiden of lighthearted national over a hand-held at the age of 17 and the content of the Internet banking activity, that Aided has been in the latest edition of the death get the lead level exceeded that of a percent late in the resource center that (SPEAKER CHANGES) 1 yards ahead after that one cannot live-in distribution of the one we have made of these and all the definition of the crater in first we have been really become a conversation that we will reevaluate all of the percentage traditions for all of the ticket line at the table as the finish and then it has a highly unknown between inter-agency planned machination free play hamlet in the highest paid a penny 100 1980s for at least in this has been under the name of Islam and end-of-the data linking week and has even become a national conversation with relevant cars a day over maybe the kids up to 20% lead over and died in that conversation haven't had a hand-painted on the vacant patience with the determine if any more violently to continue to leave automatic data are free to reach and semi-open in Atlanta and availability and replay of the first time leading up to two large he'll be one of them was the nature of the area had enough an additional 21 to 20 lead in the winter you how to lose families headed out of the DB and file of the for-all of the Internet market in the basement and years of how to redesign the Clinton acknowledged that the youth and the one that leverage and pulling up for best actor in the middle of the file late in life as well and tender at inland again and Leon, CNN anchor mayors have been sitting in a timely and local intranet, she is the data for patience and was in the back of the nation and its latest CD Standard & Poor's one and another on the sidewalks from A fish commission report to me and as for why it's taken me everything, every half-Stuyvesant and I believe that happened to replant I have an innate have been preventing ever in the nation without any information and other information on ballots and years and five eighths, little-known is that describes a vital issues that plays it is a strong economy, and we're not seeing a throng as has been the victim was even greater Washington when the when someone's head this evening to a housing authority that more than seven times the average is an ice and freezing Ruth was not a member of the highest performance by nine by racism by the wayside that an automated data from a major player in,(SPEAKER CHANGES) type leases into a look at the chamber's and enhancing his semiannual of the 49 am trying to remain a 78 oz interactive leader in your home has a sugar, as a red line station by a busy and are hoping to win the war against the idea of vendors middle of the inmates had lived in national and listening lovers as commendation killing at least having the same length carefully and investors in this, and I noticed that the middle of the nation than any of the need for the fidelity every other Monday and that most of them have them and anonymous to me that he can have as an assistant to the holly Anderson in the back of the nation where animals that eat that information from the Internet is not afraid of the nightly news and announcements sterns seasons is sexist and see its wealth of these services analyst said ..............

Speaker changes:likely to thrive so i have on side her describes what's here ?? and the present of children ?? 2009 2013 almost 30 % of our children born and living in ?? 201 we have seen decline in the number of children with the living ?? but to put this number of perspective if you think bout when you put child in every set their teenagers young children if enters sitting in the teenagers lap we have not of ?? 21750 sets ?? some of the at least ?? and in 2012 37% of ?? families had incomes below the poverty ?? is clearly risk factor ?? so what works for healthy children how can we north Carolina communities to share ?? for children do we know bout ?? bout problems public based in particular science based and medicine and we need ?? where we have evidence re implementing those in north Carolina and we are continuing to monitor and evaluate the process s just needed but i have made lot of different challenges so it is difficult to make decisions other states ?? are identifying process to set priorities ?? either interventions out there that re effective and how can we return in terms of investment so part of the ?? so enclosing north Carolina ranks 34th we know that health ?? medicines school ?? religious orientation business and other and we do have examples that successful programs and policies ?? to improving heath administration on time ?? he says that we can ?? certainly have sufficient knowledge to know globally so now 25 years from now our children in our country and state will be health and stronger so lo gin i like to thank you i like at knowledge ?? districts and division of public heath who is so helpful helping us prepare the data and this is my contact information I'm happy to enter questions ?? Speaker changes:?? Speaker changes: Thank you Mr.Chair that was good breathing

I hope we have got time now [speaker changes]so we need to move on. I mean If you have any quick feedback, you can send it out to Daughtry or to Susan. but we do need feedback. [Speaker Changes] We will talk out. Representative Paul [Speaker Changes] Since she is looking for it. I would say if it's the monetary value, not belittling the project to offset the monetary that they would like doing a budget based on that continuation budget if you would. So, If you want ten and you are going to get five, that's not an increase on cut. I am just saying, Let's work with the real hours. someone bring something to the table . I don't think that should be the value and the scoring should reflect that. And that was our at least my understanding from day one that if another entity brought something to the table reducing the cost to the state DFT then that would be a value and that project was right kind of get going. And I have heard nothing contrary to that. [Speaker Changes] One option that you could mind [?? inaudible 01:10-01:44] [Speaker Changes] Follow up [Speaker Changes] Follow up Thank you. Is the responsibility of allowing close proximity municipals to pool or it's going to benefit a general area or rating through municipal school funds. [Speaker Changes] Actually I would say co-ordinate with speakers to get the feedback [Speaker Changes] Thank You Mr Speaker [Speaker Changes] Representative [Speaker Changes] You said there are several things that you feel that we have been silent on . You gave us a couple of examples. Could you go ahead and get a list from the work group's perspective of the things that you feel like you would like have inputs from us and then we can try and develop a process in order to provide that feedback. I am sorry [Speaker Changes] [?? inaudible]. [Speaker Changes] Okay [Speaker Changes] Are you going Representative [Speaker Changes] Well. I want to add something. you mentioned [?? inaudible 02:48-03:05] [Speaker Changes] We can certainly take any recommendations for discussions. Absolutely. Yes, we can talk about that. [Speaker Changes] [?? inaudible] [Speaker Changes] Thank you Mr Chairman. I have a question. Tolling for any of the staff can explain . If a road is built, the local mbo says are we allowing them to use tolling a s a local incentive. So they are not putting any money rather than agree to put a toll on a road. and we are caught in that is to their favor. Okay. thank you [Speaker Changes] All right. would like to recognize our next speakers, Paul Black and Patrick Clanigham [Speaker Changes] Thank you Mr Chair. Good Morning. I am Paul Black. I am the director of the French Broad River mbo up in Ashville. I am also the current president of the North Carolina association of mbo's. And we wanted to present somethings today that have come out of 3.0 and talk about some of our experiences and things we think we might be able to tweak for outside of the purview of the work group and put them in front of you today. So Let me go ahead and Let Patrick introduce himself for the record [Speaker Changes] I am Patrick Clanigham of the Down east rpo . on the executive committee of the North Carolina Association of RPO as well.

Thank you guys for this opportunity. So to start it off just an overview slide of some of the things we’re gonna talk about this morning. Overall, STI, really we thought worked very well. It really helped improve transparency and we got a good mix of projects out of it. Some things we learned along the way, revenue. You know, this is all about revenue and we’re looking at balancing being good stewards with being able to deliver the best projects when we know there’s not enough money to go around. A couple of specific things we wanna ask for, we’d like you to reexamine some of the things with some special pots of money that come to the NPOs. We wanna look at some of the ways we classify regional facilities. We wanna look at the fact that there is no local input on the statewide tier. That was problematic for some of us, and then talk about some of the non-highway modes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] So first of all we really do wanna say that this legislation is a big improvement. We’ve seen that already. It’s improved transparency, the coordination between DOT members, the division engineers, NPOs and RPOs, it has improved. We do still have some work to do on that, but this did bring everyone together and it really is fostering good communication and coordination and then again the spot work that you were just hearing about really continues to be the most effective way of making the small changes and adjusting stuff based on, you know, lessons learned from the previous round and hammering out all those details. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All right, yeah, we talked about revenue and I think one of the things we continue to struggle with is we know we’re not bringing in enough revenue compared to how much people are traveling. People’s vehicles are getting better mileage and so they’re still driving the same mileage they used to but they’re not buying as much gasoline and we really applaud the General Assembly’s efforts. We know that there have been many studies over the years looking at many different options and we really wanna applaud you for continuing to look at ways to fix the revenue picture. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All right, these are the NPO slides. We want to talk about two special pots of money, ths STPDA and TAP funds that come directly to NPOs. We have 10, they’re called TMAs, Transportation Management Areas, they’re scattered around the state. They are in 12 out of the 14 divisions have at least a piece of a TMA and every single one of the funding regions have a piece of a TMA. In terms of NPOs in general, there is only one division, division one does not have an NPO in it. These funds tend to get used on the division tier. They’re used for a lot of different things. There are some eligibility requirements from the feds that we have to deal with. They do get used for bike, ped and transit, they also get used for roadway improvements. There are some safety projects in here. They vary from NPO to NPO, but this is money that the NPOs have a local process that they go through, decide what projects to fund and then we talk to the programming unit at DOT and they program that money for us. They are not exempt from SPI. What this did was it reduced the amount of available money, particularly in the division tier, for the areas outside of the TMAs. Around most of the state it sort of came out of the balance. We had competitive projects, they had competitive projects outside of TMAs and it all worked out, in two divisions in particular, though, divisions 5 and divisions 10, there was such a big chunk of STPDA that came out off the top that it made it very difficult for projects in places like Rocksboro and Indian Trail to compete for that leftover money and just as good neighbors we don’t think that that was right by them and we would like you to reexamine looking at exempting STPDA similar to the way that we currently exempt CMAC and Appalachian Development Funds. We think that will make for a fairer competitive playing field at the division level plot. [SPEAKER CHANGES] So one of the things we’ve looked at is how some of these different elements fell into the statewide regional or divisional tier. So some of the things we’re kind of noticing is not all regional impact roads function as thru traffic carriers and not all division needs roads serve just local traffic, so perhaps there would be a way to look at the federal functional classification of roads. We could help delineate what roads fit best in what tier or something of that nature, but try to really clean that up so that we’re really addressing the needs of how the road functions in the tier that makes most sense, and then another thing that kinda jumped out was the fixed highway transit systems. They’re sort of large populations over large geographic areas and support, you know, non vehicular commuting to employment centers, and this is more consistent with the regional impact tier, so potentially making those eligible for funds out of those regional dollars and then kinda the same thing with the ferry system. All the ferry docks connect regional impact highway routes

The mission the old and new year and one of our own and operate and maintain your of the a half of the hole and then an era of one and known for either of them and then I love them and for an and mid to back the loan of an ion in the of the line happy life at the interim update the up of the anti that and media that he had plenty to be a fine would be happy to read the(SPEAKER CHANGES) letter into that only let the content that you have a lot of women in the eastern half year track and of war in Birmingham of the action involving a long way from long maintained and they're only in the old who has been a calling and they're only on the other in and around a bit of an old and on Monday that one of the one and one of a blatant and may in fact that I own a home where I were old here are among the one who you were there are one of the way the brain called for more were the one or more home and read all of the one and one of a way of not and one of the way they were wrong one of the ball of one of the one among them were wrong and one by one of one of the wrong way one of the home would not work when..............

Speaker changes: and i conclude the presentation ?? any questions from the committee ??, Speaker changes: ?? Speaker changes:i like to think moment of personal privilege here i like to think about lot of funding projects i like to think about recession committee for helping stabilized funding for transportation ?? meeting with the senate but the house ?? house for leadership ??, Speaker changes: ?? any one else in the committee, Speaker changes: with that said the stand adjourned, Speaker changes: ??,

And I would just mention healthy North Carolinians, we used to take a county-wide survey and we know through that survey some of the local factors, but so am I getting at what the next step might be? [SPEAKER CHANGES] So you have a healthy North Carolina 2020 strategic plan which does have some targets for children specifically. You could consider some of this information today and other information’s been presented and do a child’s health 2020 plan if you wanted to do something specific for children. That would be an option. You could look at the counties that have the greatest risk factors based on these particular indicators that you’re focusing on and then assure that you have funds available to local communities for them to address those particular problems. I think what this state has tried to do through the healthy North Carolina 2020 plan is to provide for the variation kind of counties so that counties can identify which targets to work on but then also as a state something like obesity where none of the counties are meeting a target of 5% for preschoolers, a statewide strategy makes a lot of sense, so depending on the particular targets there may be a state wide strategy or there may be locally driven strategies, but in either event there needs to be enough infrastructure through your public health system to assure that the funds are being used in the most impactful way for the populations that are, you know, disproportionately impacted by poor health. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] So let’s assume that we, that one of the directions we wanted to go was to increase our revenue for our local health departments and I understand the state doesn’t really give a lot directly of state dollars. If I remember correctly from my county commissioner days it was about 3% of what’s spent actually comes from state dollars and that may be wrong and it it is I’d like to know, so we could, even if we were to pick an issue like obesity, it would be most effective to do that through our local health departments at the county level. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Your local health departments in this state are your greatest asset in terms of driving improvements at the county level and so investing in those public health agencies I think would be a strategic investment because they’re already at the hub of the community health assessment, the community health improvement plan, they’re already bringing partners together to address these problems, they just don’t have the resources to move the needle, so I think if you’re really hoping to make investments where you’re gonna see results that would be the place to do it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I believe Chairwoman Avila had a follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, and it’s kind of built on the question that Senator Hise asked on page 34 about the ranking of number 34. That’s an overall ranking as I’m understanding you that’s based on four individual factors ranking. Do you have the ranking of each of those individuals? I mean, like are we 12 on one and 52 on another for the 52 states. I mean, just, what are those to get us to the 34th overall. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I do have those, I just don’t have them with me, so I’d be happy to provide that as follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay, thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Members, thank you for your questions. Dr. Silenti, thank you for being here today with your presentation. If we have no other questions we’ll stand adjourned. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you.