House tentatively OKs purge of boards and commissions

Posted February 28, 2013

House lawmakers tentatively approved Thursday a proposal to make sweeping changes to the state’s boards and commissions.

Senate Bill 10 would eliminate, fire or restructure about two dozen boards and commissions, including the State Board of Elections, the State Board of Education, the Coastal Resources Commission, the Environmental Management Commission, the Wildlife Resources Commission, the Industrial Commission and the Utilities Commission.

The House version of the bill went through a dizzying number of changes in just 36 hours. It was added to Thursday's House calendar without public notice, after additional changes were made in a Rules Committee meeting earlier in the day.

Appropriations Committee Chairman Nelson Dollar urged his fellow House members to support the bill. "When have you seen the General Assembly take a significant number of boards and reduce the size of government?” he asked.

The House bill would eliminate about 160 seats on those boards and commissions. Rep. Pricey Harrison, D-Guilford, pointed out that 97 of those seats are on commissions that deal with environmental oversight. 

Harrison urged Republican leaders to take a more thoughtful approach. "We’ve never in this state taken such a drastic move to wipe out the membership of so many commissions in one piece of legislation,” she said.

Dollar, R-Wake, said the measure is time-sensitive. “You only really get to do this sort of thing at the beginning of a new administration, and you have to do it now because appointments are beginning to be made," he argued.

But Rep. Deborah Ross, D-Wake, said the changes the bill makes to qualifications for many boards would "eliminate people who care about the environment, people who care about the consumer, people who care about the citizen."

"That, to me, isn’t a reform," Ross said. "That, to me, is handing government over to special interests."  

Democrats – and even some Republicans – criticized the rush to pass the bill with little opportunity for public input.

The House version of the measure was available to the public for just 35 hours before its vote Thursday.

Most wouldn't even have known to look for it, though, since the bill's hearing in the House Commerce Committee Wednesday morning wasn't listed on the paper calendars available to the public that day.

"This isn't the will of the people," Minority Leader Larry Hall said. "So whose will is it?"

Commerce Committee Chairman Tom Murry denied a lack of transparency, noting that the committee room was full of people, but none took advantage of the opportunity to comment on the measure at that meeting. 

Rep. John Blust, R-Guilford, took his own caucus leaders to task for moving the bill to a vote without public knowledge.

"The calendar is notice to the public of what we’re doing," he said. "Whether you like it or not, due process means notice to be heard, and at least have your point of view considered.

"I don’t like this idea, 'Well, we have the power. Let’s go ahead and do it,'" Blust said.   

However, Democrats also gave House leaders credit for having moderated many of the more extreme aspects of the Senate bill, including a potentially unconstitutional provision to fire a dozen special Superior Court judges.

The final House version allows the current Utilities Commission members to continue to serve out their terms until 2015. The Industrial Commission members would roll off on a staggered schedule, too.  

The measure passed its second reading, 70-42. All Republicans but two supported it – Reps. Chuck McGrady of Henderson County and Michael Speciale of Craven County.

It will be up for a final vote on the House floor Monday night. It then goes back to the Senate, where it will be sent to a conference committee.

Speaking after the vote, Hall, D-Durham, called on Republican leaders to seek more public input on the changes before the final version of the bill comes back.

"This is not a fly-by-night operation. This is the state of North Carolina," he said. "This is not the way to do business."


This blog post is closed for comments.

Oldest First
View all
  • Mr. Middle of the Road Mar 1, 2013

    'a political enema' Thats a pretty good description of our new republican administration.

  • xxxxxxxxxxxxx Mar 1, 2013

    "Good stuff as long as they don't appoint there buddies to those posts."

    Why do you think they're doing it? They have already said as much.

  • Ripcord Mar 1, 2013

    "I don't know many people who voted in hopes that leaders would gut our environmental protections. "Clean Water" isn't a liberal plan." - bill0

    Nobody is 'gutting environmental protections'. They're simply cutting the fat (read: unnecessary personnel) out of some bloated areas of state government. It doesn't mean your water is going to turn into sludge so you can turn off the Drama Machine.

  • teleman60 Mar 1, 2013

    All the wonderful people that voted the repubs in can stand back and watch this fascist makeover of NC. Most of them seem completely freaked out that McCrory and company are turning down millions of federal dollars and creating scenarios that will allow hundreds of lawsuits by people who should have been covered by insurance BUT WILL NOW BE ON THEIR OWN.

    God forbid someone gets sick and dies who could have been covered but wasn't because of McCrory and Co.

    Why do you think so many Repub governors signed up? They are not as arrogant and ignorant as our newly elected juveniles...

  • hjeck32544 Mar 1, 2013

    Dont forget the turnpike authority!!!!

  • Karmageddon Mar 1, 2013

    Clean them all out....it's time for a CHANGE

  • goldenosprey Mar 1, 2013

    wildpig & william, Dems got more actual votes than reps. Only your ridiculous gerymandering nullified the popular vote in the GA. Hardly "resounding" vote. Koch-backed McCrory had a 5-1 funding advantage.

    If you want to see a political enema you will in November 2014.

  • xxxxxxxxxxxxx Mar 1, 2013

    "I don't know many people who voted in hopes that leaders would gut our environmental protections. "Clean Water" isn't a liberal plan."

    I certainly didn't! The news coming out of Raleigh gets worse every day. It's sickening.

  • aightCPA Mar 1, 2013

    Good stuff as long as they don't appoint there buddies to those posts.

  • bill0 Mar 1, 2013

    "I would say that our representatives are doing exactly what they have been asked to do"

    I don't know many people who voted in hopes that leaders would gut our environmental protections. "Clean Water" isn't a liberal plan.