►
From YouTube: House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee - March 17, 2021 - House Hearing Room 3
Description
House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee - March 17, 2021 - House Hearing Room 3
A
Thank
you
clerk.
I
think
I
fail
to
mention
that
this
is
the
house,
agriculture
and
natural
resources
committee.
So,
for
the
record,
I
have
done
that
a
little
housekeeping
here
house,
bill
227,
which
is,
I
believe,
third
on
our
calendar,
has
been
rolled
one
week.
Anyone
with
special
orders
today,
anyone
personal
orders,
anyone
comments,
statements,
seeing
none,
we
will
move
right
into
our
calendar
first
bill
on
the
calendar
is
house
bill
517
by
representative
gantt
representing
against.
You
are
recognized.
I
don't
believe
we
have
an
amendment
here.
Is
that
correct.
C
That
is
correct.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
This
bill
was
brought
to
me
by
the
mayor
of
fayette
county
and
the
chairman
of
the
chickasaw
basing
authority
in
a
recent
sunset
review
of
the
chickasaw
basin
authority.
It
was
questioned
whether
fayette
county
should
be
a
member
of
this
board,
despite
fayette
county's
participation
for
the
past
30
years.
C
A
I
believe
I
did
hear
a
motion
in
a
second,
I
believe
so.
Questions
for
the
sponsor
on
house
bill.
517
questions
been
called
on
house
bill.
517
all
in
favor
will
say
aye
all
opposed,
say
no
eyes
have.
It
goes
to
finance.
Thank
you,
chairman
committee.
Come
back
see
us
next
is
house
bill
729
by
representative
reagan.
D
I've
been
been
here
long
enough
to
remember
the
energy
policy
council,
which
this
body
created
some
years
ago.
It's
been
very
effective,
they've
already
issued
white
papers
and
they've
advised
the
governor
and
other
people
with
interest
in
the
energy
policy
area
on
things
that
they
need
to
be
aware
of.
Most
recently
they've
taken
up
the
question
of
electric
vehicles
and
they're
actively
creating
a
another
white
paper
on
that
that
brought
this
bill.
D
It
turns
out
that
the
public
utilities
people
think
that
they
need
to
have
a
a
seat
at
the
table
when
we're
talking
about
charging
electric
vehicles.
So
all
this
bill
does
is
add
them
to
the
energy
policy
council
so
that
they
can
make
their
contributions.
And
with
that
explanation
I
will
stand
ready
to
answer
questions.
A
A
A
We,
I
believe
we
have
an
amendment
here-
is
that
right
there
we
do.
We
four
six.
Three
five
got
to
get
a
motion
and
amendment
on.
Second,
on
the
amendment
you
may
you
may
proceed,
sir,
on
house
amendment
4635.
E
Thank
you,
chairman
chairman.
This
amendment
was
added
in
sub.
I
considered
a
friendly
amendment.
It's
insta.
We
delete
the
language
from
9
pm
to
9
a.m,
to
go
to
11
p.m
and
to
7
a.m,
which
is
curfew
and
that
that
made
sense
to
me.
So
that's
the
amendment
and
I'd
like
to
add
to
the
bill.
If
I
could.
A
E
Thank
you
chairman,
remember
some
briefly
been
to
the
genesis
why
I
brought
this
bill.
I
I
have
two
lakes
in
my
district
old
hickory
lake
and
percy
priest
lake,
and
ever
since
I've
been
in
the
house
in
2012,
I
started
getting
phone
calls
and
complaints
every
summer
for
what's
called
party
coves,
which
is,
I
think,
is
pretty
much
in
every
lake.
E
And
what
would
happen
is
that
they
would
call
me
up
and
say
being
wake
up
in
the
middle
of
the
night
and
it's
usually
from
stereo
base
and
they
could
hear
it
from
within
their
homes,
and
I
tried
the
met.
I
would
call
the
local
police
in
this
case
metro
and
they
could
not
give
tickets
on
on
the
lake.
Obviously
t-w-a-r-a
could
not
give
local
metro
tickets.
I
even
did
a
joint
operation,
one
time
to
where
metro
was
with
twra.
E
So
finally,
senator
hill-
and
I
came
up
with
an
idea
of
of
creating,
what's
called
a
quiet
zone,
to
give
twra
the
authority
to
to
create
these
zones,
and
so
what
this
bill
would
do
was
create
zones
from
as
amended
11
pm
to
7
am
if
a
quiet
zone
is
established,
a
person
shall
not
operate
any
audio
emitting
device,
so
it's
audio
only
other
than
a
device
of
a
signal
of
an
emergency
at
a
volume
level
that
can
be
heard
within
a
residential
structure
located
adjacent
to
the
water.
E
A
Well,
we
might
want
to
do
this.
First,
we
have
somebody
that
wants
from
the
audience
that
wants
to
speak.
Why
don't
we
go
out
of
session
and
let
that
happen
and
then
and
then
we'll
go
to
questions
so
so
we'll
stand
out
of
order
right
now,
mr
richardson,
would
you
like
to
come
forward?
Please.
F
F
F
I
do
have
some
concerns
that
this
program
on
a
statewide
basis
could
could
be
popular
from
from
homeowners
around
the
lake,
and
we
could
get
a
lot
of
calls
and
and
things
to
to
establish
these
quiet
zones,
which,
quite
honestly,
will
create
some
some
work
for
us
to
do
to
establish
them
through
the
rule
making
process,
but
we're
accustomed
to
that
from
the
no
wake
zone.
The
way
we
establish
no
wake
zones,
it
would
essentially
be
the
same
thing
here.
G
The
last
thing
we
need
to
do
is:
give
you
guys
more
authority
to
promulgate
new
rules.
So,
for
that,
I
will
I'm
going
to
be
in
opposition
to
this
bill,
not
against
you
or
your
organization,
but
just
on
the
principle
of
it,
because
we've
got
to
make
sure
that
we're
doing
things
right,
and
I
just
that.
That's
where
I
am
from
for
me
in
the
district
77
that
I
represent.
H
Todd,
thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
guess
I
want
to
ask
a
question
first,
so
what
does
the
agency
charge
to
do
just
broad
sense.
F
Certainly
on
the
boating
side,
which
I
think
is
is
where
we'd
be
focused
on
this
topic
in
title
69,
our
charge
is
recreational
boating
safety
and
and
the
laws
and
statutes
in
the
books
with
that
are
contained
within
title.
69
are
all
aimed
at
keeping
people
safe
on
the
water.
H
Todd,
thank
you,
sir,
and
that's
what
I
had
thought
because,
mostly
as
I
sat
here
and
look
back
at
the
different
things
that
I
know
you
guys
enforce,
it
generally
is
around
safety.
H
Certainly
when
it
comes
to
boating-
and
this
is
not
a
safety
issue-
and
I
could
see
especially
with
the
caveat
that's
built
into
this
amendment-
that
folks
are
going
to
probably
have
a
false
sense
of
satisfaction
with
this
law
if
it
were
passed
because
the
agency's
not
going
to
be
able
to
to
justify
for
whatever
50
fine,
if
that's
what
it
is
to
go,
put
the
manpower
on
the
water
and
the
the
equipment
and
go
to
these
homes
check
it
out,
because
you've
got
to
establish.
H
There
was
an
offense
first
and
you've
got
to
hear
that
sound
inside
that
closed
house
and
then
go
back
out
and
address.
Whoever
may
be
creating
that,
and
I
don't
see
that
as
a
safety
issue
and
that's
really
what
I
wanted
to
vet
out
with
you
and
make
sure
I
was
on
the
right
track
with
with
the
thought
process.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Thank
you,
chairman
todd.
I
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
and
mr
richardson.
My
question
was
kind
of
along
that
same
line.
I
know
just
from
a
local
government
standpoint.
Noise
ordinances
are
really
tough
to
enforce
and
they're
really
hard
to
prove,
and
so
that
was
my
thinking
as
well.
What
are
the
legit?
What
would
be
the
logistics
of
enforcing
that
from
twra,
because
the
assumption
is,
do
you
come
to
the
scene
in
a
boat,
then
you've
got
to
go
into
the
home,
get
back
on
the
boat
and
and
then
enforce
that
on
the
wall.
I
F
You
representatives,
thank
you
chairman.
Certainly
any
regulation
could
have
its
challenges,
but
I
agree
that
in
this
situation
it's
kind
of
a
new
realm
for
us
and
in
the
sense
that
we
we
do
get
significant
authority
to
make
rules.
We're
gonna
have
to
figure
out
the
best
way
to
to
craft
those
rules
that
make
things
the
most
the
the
easiestly
enforceable,
but
but
certainly
the
provisions
that
require
the
sound
to
be
loud
enough.
F
As
you
all
know,
if
you've
been
on
the
water,
you
can
hear
voices
across
water
for
hundreds
of
yards,
even
even
speaking,
in
a
normal
conversational
volume
and-
and
so
it
was
important
to
us
in
working
with
the
sponsor
to
to
create
some
level
of
of
noise.
That
is
substantial
enough,
and-
and
certainly
we
worked
with
him
to
come
to
the
idea
that
it
has
to
be
audible
from
within
one
of
these
residences.
F
But
that
is
going
to
be
challenging
because
anytime,
you're
you're
talking
about
a
misdemeanor
infraction
with
a
law
enforcement
officer.
They
have
to
actually
perceive
that
in
order
to
issue
those
citations.
So,
in
some
sense,
I
think
we
would
have
to
be
within
the
house
to
hear
the
sound
first
hand
to
then
be
able
to
go
act
on
a
ticket
which,
which
certainly
could
prove
to
be
somewhat
challenging
from
a
from
a
administration
standpoint.
J
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
chris.
I
agree
with
you
100
on
my
boat.
I
have
a
tower
with
jbl
speakers
on
it.
I
have,
I
think,
four
up
top
and
like
six
in
the
bottom
and
if
I
just
turn
that
up
a
little
a
little
bit
just
to
hear
it
in
the
boat
over
water,
you
can
hear
it
down
the
hall
just
at
a
normal,
because
it
carries
that
much
over
water.
So
that's
if
a
person
is
out
on
the
the
dock
I
mean
on
their
porch.
Does
that
consist
of?
F
Mr
richardson
certainly
represents
travis,
I
think
the
the
intent
of
the
bill
and
the
language
of
the
bill
requires
that
the
sound
be
audible
from
within
the
structure.
So
I
don't
believe
the
way
I
read
it.
I
don't
believe
somebody
outside
on
a
porch
or
on
a
deck
them
being
able
to
hear
the
music
would
would
constitute
a
violation
it
would
have
to
be
from
inside
the
walls
of
that
house.
J
But
in-
and
I
agree
again
because
at
my
home
right
now
that
I
sit
on
a
hill
and
I'm
high
and
there's
a
a
restaurant,
a
mile
and
a
half
away
from
me
across
the
water-
and
I
can
hear
their
music
inside
my
house
at
night.
I
mean
it's
not
a
lot,
but
I
can
still
hear
it.
F
It
certainly
is
a
challenging
situation
in
in
just
the
way
sound
does
carry
over
water
and
and
those
folks
that
live
on
the
lake
certainly
are
exposed
to
kind
of
more
more
sounds
and
more
noise
than
than
if
they
weren't
on
the
water.
Sir.
K
So
not
seeing
that
here.
It
gives
me
calls
on
on
one
point,
but
then
the
second
question:
if,
if
I
don't
know
that
that's
a
ques,
the
first
one's,
not
maybe
a
question,
but
the
second
one
is
this
new
alignment
of
noise
over
water?
Is
that
relieving
regular
as
if
I
want
to
refer
to
what
the
code
might
be
right
now?
Does
that
let
regular
law
enforcement
off
the
hook
as
far
as
is
enforcing
what
noise
ordinance
might
be
in
place
right
now?
F
Thank
you,
representative,
and,
and
certainly
I
I.
I
don't
believe
that
this
additional
regulation
that
that
we
might
promulgate
through
administrative
rule
would
be
in
any
way
have
any
effect
on
a
municipal
ordinance.
That's
properly
passed
and
duly
authorized.
L
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
I
don't
know,
I
think
I'm
hearing
a
lot
of
presupposing
here.
I
think
just
to
me
a
fact
of
people
knowing
that
they
need
to
keep
the
noise
down
at
a
certain
hour,
is
going
to
solve
more
of
this
problem
than
make
an
arrest.
F
Mr
richardson,
thank
you
representative
shaw.
Certainly,
law
enforcement
presence
can
affect
behavior
and
and
there's
no
doubt
that
an
increased
presence
by
itself,
without
necessarily
an
enforcement,
can
can
affect
someone's
behavior
and
compliance
when
they
know
that
something
is
against
the
law.
F
I
think
this
situation
has
proved
difficult
as
representative
jernigan,
along
with
myself,
have
been
talking
about
this
for
many
years
and
and
certainly
there's
been
some
details
that
have
been
done
between
our
officers
in
metro,
but
it
is
difficult
for
our
officers
to
respond
to
an
issue
that
they
don't
have
any
authority
with
which
to
deal
with
the
situation
if
we
go
out
to
a
very
noisy
boat
currently,
if
there
are
no
safety
violations
or
they
have
their
life,
jackets,
there's
no
problems
in
that
regard.
F
We
just
have
to
say
thank
you
and-
and
we
go
on
our
way,
because
there's
not
a
violation
of
the
law
that
we
enforce
or
can
enforce,
to
to
quiet
them
down.
Certainly,
we
can
encourage
it,
but
but
if
someone
chose
not
to
listen
to
us
at
this
point,
that
would
be
their
prerogative.
L
Represent
thanks,
mr
chairman,
and
this
is
last
comment
of
question-
I
what
you
have
someone
to
enforce
the
law
in
that
area
at
that
time
limit
and
would
not
the
resident
in
the
home
have
to
be
able
to
prove,
without
a
shadow
of
a
doubt
that
that
noise
came
through
the
walls
into
the
house,
and
I
mean
would
that
not
be
a
reasonable.
F
Yes,
sir
representative
show
my
understanding
under
this.
The
legislation
has
proposed
is
we
we
would
the
the
requirement
or
threshold
that
the
music
be
heard
within
the
house
would
would
be
a
critical
part
of
the
prosecution,
so
whether
that
was
done
by
the
homeowner
being
a
witness
or
swearing
out
an
affidavit
in
that
complaint
or
our
officers
were
in
the
home
and
actually
perceived
the
sound
themselves.
That
would
absolutely
be
a
requirement
as
far
as
our
personnel
capabilities.
F
Certainly
we,
we
are
responsible
for
boating
safety
at
all
hours
and
365
days
a
year,
but
our
routine
patrolling
probably
does
not
occur
as
much
on
all
these
waterways
during
that
period,
from
11
pm
to
7
am
so,
I
think,
depending
on
the
nature
of
a
quiet
zone,
or
how
many
of
these
we
established.
F
Certainly,
we
may
have
to
consider
additional
shifts
for
those
officers
and
potentially
additional
part-time
boating
officers
to
cover
those
hours,
because
our
guys,
certainly
during
the
summer
time,
are,
are
covering
a
lot
of
water
for
tennessee
and
to
add
a
whole
another
level
of
enforcement
on
something
that's
somewhat
new
and
certainly
different
hours
than
we're
accustomed
to
regular
patrols.
It
would
be
something
we
would
have
to
look
at
pretty
hard
to
determine
if
we
had
the
resources
and
manpower
to
to
pull
pull
this
off
before,
we
would
establish
a
quiet
zone.
A
J
E
E
The
lack
of
critical
thinking
of
twra
is
stunning.
I
gave
them
opportunities
to
propagate
rules.
We
talked
about
this.
That
I
said.
Look
all
you
have
to
do
is
say:
okay,
the
homeowner
calls
metro
police,
they
come
out,
they
hear
it,
they
call
it
in
to
their
fellow
law
enforcement
and
then
it's
done
and
we
put
that
in
the
rule
right.
I
didn't
put
it
in
here
because
I
want
them
to
do
it.
E
We
talked
about
buoys,
we
talked
about
signs
just
putting
it
in
the
maps
that
it's
a
quiet
zone
would
defer
people
from
going
there
like
putting
up
a
speed
limit
right.
I
was
giving
them
authority
to
create
all
this,
and
then
I
found
out
now
that
they're
that
they
still
had
concerns,
which
it's
it's
very
unprofessional.
I
don't
like
it,
mr
chairman,
thank
you.
E
Okay,
thank
you.
A
M
Don't
think
my
mic
was
on
there
I
didn't
know.
May
I
say
something
before
we
get
in
the
bail
to
the
chairman
and
members
you're
requesting
dr
kumar
come
in
my
office.
While
I
go
and
he
said
he
got
a
bill
through
because
he
had
his
green
coat
on
and
I
just
thought:
if
he's
all
right,
let
y'all
know.
I
got
my
green
tile
if
it
helped
me
with
my
bail,
so
I'd
appreciate
very
much.
K
M
K
M
You
chairman
and
member,
appreciate
y'all
very
much
for
your
time.
This
bill
here
house,
bill
1230,
is
try
to
help
some
of
our
disabled
people
that
authorizes
tennessee
residents,
who
suffered
an
amputation
of
75
percent
or
more
of
the
lower
lamb
to
obtain
a
permanent
sport
combination
with
hunting
fishing
license
for
a
one-time
payment
of
ten
dollars.
So
appreciate
you
very
much
on.
A
Question
for
the
sponsor
on
house
bill
1230.,
seeing
none
are
you
ready
to
vote
we'll,
be
voting
to
send
house
bill
1230
to
finance
all
in
favor
will
say
aye
all
opposed,
say
no
thanks,
sir
for
being
here.
Thank
you,
chairman
of
members,
and,
I
believe,
last
but
not
least,
on
our
calendar
is
house
bill
1144
by
representative
grill
right.
G
G
A
G
If
hold
on
just
to
the
other,
it
just
clarifies
the
system
of
incentives
that
just
puts
just
a
phrase
system
of
incentives
to
inc.
It's
a
short
just
a
short
amendment.
Just
for
clarification.
G
Well,
this,
ultimately,
what
this
bill
does
it's
from
the
tennessee
home
builders
association
that
want
to
encourage
tdec
to
to
create
a
market-based
incentives
for
specific
wastewater
permits
and
put
the
word
its
system
of
incentives
to
include
regulatory,
flexible
flexibility,
recognizing
increased
environmental
performance
and
enhanced
water
quality
under
specified
permitted
activities
through
permanent
conditions
pursuant
to
duly
promulgated
rules.
A
A
H
Are
recognized?
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
just
wanted
to
announce
that
the
final
calendar
for
the
ag
natural
resources
subcommittee
will
be
on
tuesday
march
30th.
The
deadline
for
bills
to
be
put
on
notice
to
be
heard
this
year
will
be
wednesday
march
24th
at
3
30
p.m.
Thank
you.
Mr
chairman.
You're
welcome,
sir.