Evolution of NC license plate bill included apparent preference for sole vendor

But the story behind House Bill 211 is much more complex, especially for a bill that moved almost unanimously through the legislative process. For example, it's possible someone tried to use the measure to stick a guaranteed contract for one company right into state law.

House Bill 211 started its life as an agency bill, a roundup of changes the Division of Motor Vehicles requested in state code. Agency bills often run long, touch lots of different sections of the code and pass easily, with the imprimatur of a large state bureaucracy giving lawmakers comfort in the language.

But as this agency bill moved from one House committee to another earlier this year, a new idea was added.

Why not have the state better define standards for the reflective coating used to make license plates stand out at night and show up for toll plaza cameras? And why not require replacement every seven years, since the reflective sheeting has a limited lifespan?

In March, someone persuaded legislators to add meticulously detailed specifications for the reflective coating to the bill. This language was eventually dropped, and it doesn't appear in the final bill the legislature sent to Gov. Roy Cooper's desk.

Instead, the bill requires the seven-year replacements and says the DMV will "develop standards for reflectivity that use the most current technology available while maintaining a competitive bid process."

The earlier language would have locked the state into buying a certain product from a certain company, according to executives from two competing vendors.

"It was specific to a 3M proprietary product," said Scott Chapman, a spokesman for Avery Dennison.

3M's media team in Minnesota didn't answer WRAL News questions for this article. Their chief lobbyist in North Carolina, Chris Hollis, said he wasn't empowered to speak for the company.

Asked whether he or someone else on 3M's behalf asked for the specifications to be added to the bill, Hollis declined to say.

Avery Dennison and 3M are two of the few companies that make reflective sheeting for license plates, and there is some disagreement whether Avery Dennison also offers sheeting that fits the specs laid out in the now-defunct language.

Chapman said the company offers something similar, but only in South America, and he said it wouldn't work well in North Carolina because of all the custom options and images used on plates here.

At any rate, the state reached out to Avery Dennison when the specifications were added to the bill in March, and the company recommended against it.

"We reviewed that, told the state we did not think it was in their best interest," Chapman said. "They wouldn't have had the advantage of competitive bidding."

Avery Dennison has the current North Carolina contract to provide reflective license plate sheeting to Correction Enterprises, a division of the state Department of Public Safety that uses prison labor to make license plates and other products.

That contract used to be with 3M, but it was re-bid last year, and Avery Dennison and 3M were the only two bidders, DPS spokeswoman Pam Walker said Friday.

Avery Dennison won, but the deal fell apart when the company failed to provide requested samples quickly enough, and the contract was bid again, Walker said.

This time, there was only one bidder: JR Wald, a Pennsylvania company that partners with Avery Dennison. The contract is worth between $500,000 and $750,000 a year, depending how many plates are ordered, according to DPS.

Walker said 3M expressed frustration that it wasn't told about the re-bid last year, but she said it's not protocol to reach out to vendors, who are expected to monitor bidding announcements.

JR Wald Chief Executive Eric Pizzuti said Friday that House Bill 211, as it existed in March, would have locked future contracts in for one company. But unlike Chapman at Avery Dennison, he wouldn't name that company.

“I really shouldn’t say," Pizzuti said.

“It was highly unusual to see a piece of legislation that singled out a particular technology for the reflective sheeting," he said. "Only one material ... it becomes a virtual monopoly.”

This bill passed the House Transportation committee on March 12 without the specifications in it.

That language was added March 18 as the bill was voted through the House Rules committee. Several committee members, including the chairman, told WRAL News Friday that they have no memory of it. Rep. John Torbett, R-Gaston, who chairs House Transportation and is a vice-chairman for House Rules, said he had only partial recall.

"There’s been a lot of water under the bridge," he said.

As Torbett remembers, there was talk of enhancing license plate reflectivity to make the plates more visible for law enforcement. As the language evolved, Torbett said he heard that only one company could meet the specifications. Then he was shown something from another company's website indicating that they sold the material as well.

Torbett said he thought that second company was Avery Dennison, but he wasn't sure. He did recall the company's explanation: They sold it only outside the United States.

Torbett, who was involved in final negotiations on the bill, said he's not sure who wrote the language. He also said didn't "recall anything about 3M slipping anything in" the bill. The specifications cleared House Rules and easily survived votes on the House floor, where the bill passed unanimously.

The language was dropped after the bill crossed over to the Senate.

Other legislators and state agencies involved in the bill failed to add much light. Rep. Phil Shepard, R-Onslow, the bill's primary sponsor, said in a brief telephone interview that he heard only one company made some of the material involved, but he wasn't sure of the company's name without looking at his files.

Shepard didn't respond to subsequent calls seeking more information. Bill co-sponsor Rep. Frank Iler, R-Brunswick, didn't respond to an interview request, which his legislative aide agreed to forward him.

The General Assembly is in session, but lawmakers went on a break Thursday and won't return en masse to Raleigh until Sept. 30, making them harder to reach.

The bill's final language emerged from negotiations between "conference committee" teams for the House and the Seante, which negotiated away differences between the versions that passed each chamber.

Torbett, Shepard and Iler handled negotiations for the House. From the Senate it was Sens. Jim Davis, R-Macon, Tom McInnis, R-Richmond, and Bill Rabon, R-Brunswick.

None of the senators responded to a WRAL News interview request last week, except Davis, who suggested asking House members. Pat Ryan, a spokesman for the Senate Republican majority, confirmed only that "the Senate passed a different version of the bill with changes based on feedback we received."

"We think this is a good example of the legislative process working," Ryan said in an email.

The two state agencies involved, the DMV and DPS, referred questions about the bill's evolution back to lawmakers.

"Please know the Department of Public Safety did not craft this piece of legislation," DPS spokesman John Bull said in an email.

The bill almost certainly would have escaped media scrutiny if not for Rep. Pricey Harrison, D-Guilford, who questioned the new requirement – still intact in the final bill – that drivers replace their license plates every seven years.

Harrison raised the issue on the House floor Tuesday, and after a brief discussion, the measure passed 114-0. WRAL began asking questions the next day, focusing on the 7-year replacement requirement before reviewing, then questioning, the bill's evolution.

The DMV says the new replacement requirement won't produce any additional costs for customers.

Torbett said he didn't think anyone tried to take advantage of the lawmaking process.

"Not that I’m aware of," he said, then paused. "Well, I will say this: No more than usual.”