►
Description
House Banking & Consumer Affairs Subcommittee House Hearing Room 3
A
A
A
If
not
just
a
few
administrative
items,
item
number
three
has
been
taken
off
of
notice.
Item
number
8
has
been
taken
off
a
notice
item.
10
has
been
taken
off
a
notice
and
item
6
has
been
rolled
one
week
all
right.
Well,
let's
go
ahead
and
get
started
here.
First
up
is
house
bill
771
by
leader,
lamberth.
It
looks
like
representative
hasting
is
going
to
be
running
that
do
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
on
this
bill.
We
have
a
motion.
We
have
a
second
chairman
hasting.
You
are
recognized.
Thank.
A
C
Thank
you.
The
amendment
makes
a
bill.
This
administration
bill
seeks
to
improve
the
registered
apprenticeship
system
in
tennessee
by
establishing
a
state
apprenticeship
agency.
This
will
help
improve
our
registered
apprenticeship
system
by
streamlining
the
application
process
and
increasing
completion
rates.
Simply
put
it's
hard
to
be
what
you
can't
see
the
more
apprenticeship
opportunities
we
can
create
the
more
students
we
will
see,
reach
their
career
goals.
With
that
I'll,
be
glad
to
answer
any
questions.
A
A
I
know
we
have
some
folks
here
that
could
testify,
but
I'd
rather
I'm
not
if,
if
the
committee
doesn't
need
to
hear
them
so
the
question
has
been
called
on
the
amendment
members.
We
are
voting
on
amendment
4900,
all
in
favor,
say
aye
all
opposed,
say
no,
the
eyes
have
it.
The
amendment
is
on
the
bill
chairman.
You
recognized
if
you
have
any
additional
explanation
on
the
bill.
A
Question
on
the
bill
has
been
called
without
objection:
we're
voting
on
house
bill,
771,
ascended,
full
commerce,
all
in
favor,
say
aye,
all
opposed,
say
no
bill
passes
and
your
bill
is
on
its
way
to
full
commerce.
Congratulations!
Thank
you,
mr
stearman
members.
Next
up
we
have
house
bill
1064
by
chairman
curcio.
A
A
D
D
As
we
continue
to
reform
our
criminal
code
as
we
separate
who
we're
mad
at
versus,
who
we're
afraid
of,
we
want
to
make
sure
that
these
folks,
that
that
yes,
they've
made
a
mistake
but
they've
paid
their
debt
to
society
could
come
out,
and
so
this
approach
really
is
not
is
not
so
much
focused
on
that
former
offender.
It's
more
focused
on
the
somebody
who
may
own
an
apartment,
complex
who
says
look.
I
would
take
a
chance
on
a
guy,
but
I
don't
want
to
have
a
target
on
my
back
from
a
liability
suit.
D
A
Members
you've
heard
that
explanation
on
the
amendment.
Are
there
any
questions
for
the
sponsor
sponsor?
I
do
have
a
question
just
to
clarify.
I
know.
We've
we've
had
several
conversations
around
this,
but
this
is
this
is
offers
additional
protection
protection
to
the
landlord.
This
is
not
necessarily
requiring
them
to
to
rent
to
any
sort
of
prior
felon,
or
anything
like
that.
This
just
gives
them
a
little
bit
more
protection
or,
if
they
choose
to
do
so,
that's
correct.
Yes,.
D
Sir,
mr
chairman,
that's
exactly
right.
Nothing
in
this
bill
would
would
compel
anyone
to
do
anything.
We
just
we
just
wanted
to
provide
that
additional
level
of
protection
if
it
was
needed.
I
was
remiss
if
you
don't
mind.
I
forgot
to
say
that
the
the
bill,
as
amended,
is
also
endorsed
or
supported
by
the
tennessee
apartment
association.
B
E
D
So
the
the
the
protection
does
not
apply
when
the
landlord
had
actual
knowledge
of
a
person's
prior
conviction
for
a
violent
offense,
as
as
defined
in
40
35
120
b,
which
is
where
all
the
violent
offenses
are
listed,
or
a
violent
sexual
offense,
as
defined
in
40
39
202..
So
these
are,
these
are
non-violent
low-level
type.
Folks
and
again,
nothing
would
would
compel
anyone
to
rent
to
them,
but
if
they
do,
you
just
won't
be
held
liable
solely
basis
on
that
fact.
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
A
Members
do
we
have
any
more
questions
for
the
sponsor?
If
not,
we
are
voting
on
amendment
4332
to
put
on
the
bill,
all
in
favor,
say
aye
all
opposed,
say
no,
the
eyes
have
it.
The
amendment
is
on
the
bill
chairman
curcio.
We
are
back
on
your
bill
as
amended.
Do
you
have
any
additional
explanation?
No.
A
A
A
F
You,
mr
chairman,
and
colleagues
house
bill
1044
very
narrowly
drafted.
It
was
brought
to
me
by
the
speaker.
It
increases
the
members
of
the
public
utilities
commission
from
five
members
to
seven,
and
it
also
extends
the
amount
of
time
from
30
to
90
days
to
fill
those
appointments,
and
I
renew
my
motion.
Okay,.
A
A
If
not,
we
are
voting
on
amendment
4984
to
put
it
on
the
bill,
all
in
favor,
say
aye
all
opposed,
say
no,
the
eyes
have
it.
The
amendment
goes
on
the
bill.
Representative
hall.
Do
you
have
any
additional
explanation
on
the
bill
as
amended?
I
just
renew
my
motion.
Mr
chairman
members.
We
are
now
voting
on
house
bill
1044
to
send
it
to
full
commerce,
all
in
favor,
say
aye
all
opposed,
say
no,
the
eyes
have
it
representative
hall.
Your
bill
is
on
its
way
to
full
commerce.
Congratulations
committee.
Thank
you.
A
A
G
G
Secondly,
it
would
require
that
utility
companies
establish
a
policy
on
disconnection
of
service
for
non-payment
of
services
which
most
utility
companies
already
do.
And
lastly,
it
would
require
that
if
someone
pays
a
bill
that
they
are
not
cut
off
for
more
than
24
hours
after
they
pay
that
bill
for
non-payment.
G
I've
spoken
with
a
few
of
you
about
this
bill
and
for
anyone
who
understands
what
it
is
like
to
be
cut
off
on
a
friday
and
have
to
go
72
hours
and
a
whole
weekend
without
service.
You
know
how
hard
that
can
be
hardships
happen
and
I
do
believe
in
good
intent
and
don't
think
people
intentionally
want
to
see
their
utilities
disconnected,
but
it
does
happen.
G
So
if
you
disconnect
me
on
a
friday-
and
I
pay
well
on
that
saturday,
I
should
possibly
be
reconnected,
but
if
at
all
possible,
disconnect
me
on
a
thursday,
so
that
I
have
a
business
day
to
get
funds
from
the
bank
or
get
paid
on
that
friday
to
be
able
to
satisfy
non-payment
and
then
allow
me
to
be
reconnected.
So
I
don't
have
to
go
multiple
days
without
utilities.
G
I
particularly
believe
this
bill
makes
I'm
sure
that
elderly
and
ill
residents
are
not
cut
off
from
vital
resources.
It
will
ensure
that
residents
are
not
without
power.
During
harsh
weather,
it
will
help
thousands
of
tennesseans
who
are
living
paycheck
to
paycheck
time
time
to
gather
up
the
funds
to
pay
the
utility
bill
and
protect
families
who
are
going
through
a
rough
time.
Financially.
G
A
G
A
H
H
So
what
happened
is
that
the
department
and
the
industry
got
together
and
created
this
deal
where
we're
going
to
try
to
increase
the
requirements
for
pyrotechnic
pyrotechnic
training?
Okay,
so
we
can
ensure
that
they're,
safe
okay,
they
don't
want
to
ban
it
or
do
anything
of
that
nature,
because
almost
a
part
of
our
culture,
we
got
a
big
major
football
game
or
or
a
major
deal.
H
So
what
it
does
it
just
simply
tries
to
improve
the
training
they're
working
together
in
hopes
that
we
don't
have
an
additional
incident
like
the
one
that
happened
at
the
titans
game,
and
this
bill
will
take
the
licensures
also
from
two
years
to
three
years,
as
requested
by
the
department.
It
does
not
affect
the
the
municipality
that
displays
during
the
fourth
of
july
or
anything
of
that
nature
and,
for
the
most
part,
also
the
fees
in
the
statute,
there's
no
increase
of
fees
or
anything
of
that
nature.
It
stays
the
same.
H
A
A
I
I
I
I
Many
of
them
are
circumventing
the
law
by
partying
with
the
contractors
that
are
doing
the
job
that
they're
working
on
or
actually
getting
contractors
to
get
their
permits
for
them.
So
we
don't
want
to.
We
don't
think
they
need
to
be
doing
that
they're
missing
out
on
a
lot
of
jobs,
the
most
of
the
time
and
well
really
all
the
time.
These
signs
are
engineered
and
they're
inspected.
I
So
that
should
be
well
and
good
enough
to
to
put
up
a
sign.
We
believe
that
sort
of
these
sign
companies
when
the
costs
started
going
up
and
they
started
getting
permits
that
was
over
25
000.
They
just
sort
of
lumped
them
into
to
a
contractor's
deal.
I
believe
that's
what's
been
going
on
this,
this
bill
passed
through
the
senate
with
the
30
to
zero
vote.
So
at
this
time
I
just
answer
any
questions.
Anybody's
got.
A
J
Just
to
comment,
I
was
going
to
thank
thank
the
sponsor
for
bringing
this
because
I
think
inadvertently
we
are
getting
in
the
way
of
business
and
we
don't
ever
intend
to
do
that
in
this
state.
So
I
I
think
this
will
do
exactly
what
he
said
and
allow
these
these
folks
to
continue
to
do.
Basically,
the
same
work
they've
been
doing
it's
just
that
cost
increases
our
minimums
or
maximums.
Whichever
way
you
want
to
look
at
it,
just
haven't
kept
up
with
those
cost
increases.
So
thank
you
for
bringing
the
bill.
A
F
A
A
Members
we're
going
to
reconsider
our
actions
on
item
number
five.
That's
house
bill,
390.,
I
think
in
in
an
effort
to
do
that.
Roll
call
count.
We
might
have
got
our
numbers
a
little
jumbled,
so
representative
harris,
you
are
recognized
in
the
well
again
come
back
up
here,
please,
and
so,
madam
clerk,
if
you
will
take
roll-
and
this
is
rep,
this
is
house
bill
390
that
we
voted
on
a
minute
ago
with
a
roll
call
dealing
with
the
utilities
being
shut
off
the
day
before
so.
A
K
K
They
put
a
provision
in
there
boxing
them
in
to
their
jurisdictions,
and
I
opposed
to
it.
I
posed
it
then,
and
unfortunately
it
was
part
of
the
bill
that
passed
and
then
this
bill
also
increases
upload
download
speeds
to
set
a
minimum
that
matches
the
fcc's
definition
of
broadband,
because
right
now
what
we
have
are
in
the
code,
the
numbers
that
we
have
don't
even
meet
that
definition
of
broadband.
K
So
when
we
provide
grants
like
the
governor,
thankfully
intends
to
do
this
year
with
his,
I
think
his
proposed
200
million
dollars,
even
those
that
choose
to
do
that,
aren't
even
required
to
provide
broadband
services
under
that
grant
program
currently
in
the
code.
So
this
seeks
to
address
that
as
well,
but,
as
we
all
saw
this
year
during
the
pandemic,
a
lot
of
students,
I
had
people
emailing
me
from
mcdonald's
parking
lots
because
they
didn't
have
internet
service.
K
Trying
to
get
help
with
unemployment,
we
had
students
across
the
state
of
tennessee
who
couldn't
get
access
to
the
internet
to
do
their
class
work
or
learn
virtually.
They
were
literally
going
risking
their
health
and
safety
trying
to
get
into
libraries
or
working
in
a
car
outside
of
a
restaurant.
That
is
simply
unacceptable
in
the
state
of
tennessee
right
now.
One
regulatory
hurdle-
that's
easy
to
eliminate
is
eliminating
this
jurisdictional
boundary
that
we
created
a
few
years
ago,
and
we
should
be
allowing
these
municipal
organizations
to
provide
these
services.
K
We
have
several
municipal
broadband
providers.
Currently
we
have
epb
bristol
jackson,
clarksville
to
oklahoma,
morristown,
columbia,
irwin,
pulaski,
bright
ridge,
milan,
newport,
union
city,
athens
and
dixon
just
recently
announced
that
they
intend
to
do
this.
This
is
an
opportunity
to
provide
broadband
access
to
parts
of
tennessee
which
are
currently
inaccessible.
With
that,
I
ask
for
your
support.
A
E
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
representative
clemens.
While
I,
I
certainly
do
appreciate
the
sentiment,
and
we
have
had
this
conversation
in
finance
for
the
last.
I
guess
couple
of
months
regarding
broadband
expansion
and
the
governor's
200
million
dollars
he's
placing
the
within
the
budget
and
the
additional
150
million
dollars
he's
placing
within
the
budget
two
things
that
that
I
have
serious
concerns
with
with
the
bill.
E
First
is
the
redefining
the
broadband
services
to
be
perfectly
transparent.
I
don't
care
what
the
fcc
definition
is
based
on
the
real
world
experience
and
the
experience
I
have
working
and
in
all
48
states
providing
broadband
service
to
the
smallest
of
offices,
all
the
way
up
to
some
of
the
largest
fortune
50
companies.
E
When
you
are
dealing
with
areas
that
are
unserved
in
areas
that
are
underserved,
it
is
extremely
important
to
make
the
distinction
between
those
two
and
anytime.
You
were
working
in
an
area
that
is
unserved
like
you,
and
I
probably
have
that
surround
our
districts
in
areas
in
mind
like
loudoun,
county
and
blount
county.
E
If
I
can
go
into
those
areas
and
provide
them
with
10
meg
down
and
one
meg
up,
I've
completely
changed
the
trajectory
of
that
community
and
so
redefining
that
puts
certain
limitations
on
broadband
providers
and
those
communities
that
again
would
absolutely
be
thrilled
with
10
meg
up
in
one
meg
down
and
redefining
that
to
20
meg
and
three
meg
is
a
leap
too
far.
Now,
when
you're
talking
about
underserved
areas
that
may
be
at
six
meg
dsl
or
maybe
an
eight
meg
wireless
connection,
that's
something
that
can
be
considered.
E
But
the
differentiation
between
those
two
are
extremely
important
and
then
the
last
point
that
that
will
bring
me
to
a
no
on
this
bill.
Is
we
set
those
parameters
for
the
municipalities
for
those
broadband
providers
to
operate
the
electric
co-ops
and
the
electric
broadband
providers
to
operate
in
those
areas?
A
K
Yeah,
thank
you.
I
appreciate
that.
I,
I
think,
you're
right.
I
think
if
you
give
somebody
anything
that
they
don't
have
it's
it's
a
step
forward
and
it's
progress,
and
but
right
now
our
bar
is
too
low.
The
the
widely
accepted
definition
of
broadband
is
what
I
have
in
this
legislation
and
that
and
in
that
really
makes
it
a
that
distinction
makes
a
difference,
and
you
know,
while
the
minimums
in
code
right
now
are
great
and
they,
if
you
can
get
that
somebody
fantastic,
but
that
bar
is
too
low.
K
That's
widely
recognized
as
a
definition
of
broadband
for
uploading
download
seeds
that
they're
going
to
choose
the
one
that
has
the
faster
access
hands
down
every
time,
and
so
that
is
important
as
we
are
now
progressing
well
through
the
21st
century.
Technology
is
key,
access
is
key,
so
I
think
I've
got
the
bar
too
low.
With
regards
to
the
funding,
I
understand
private
competing
with
public.
I
understand
that
argument.
K
However,
these
are
self-sufficient,
their
their
budgets
are
bifurcated,
so
these
municipalities
are
paying
to
provide
services
with
consumers,
fees
for
the
services,
so
the
state
it
isn't
we're
pumping
money
into
these
and
they're,
using
that
to
provide
that
service.
That
service
is
paying
for
itself
through
consumer
fees
and
and
and
its
users.
K
So
that
argument-
I
you
know
I
understand
where
you're
coming
from
there,
but
that
that's
that's
a
distinction
that
must
be
made
and
the
reality
is
some
of
these
private
companies,
which
I
love
represent
some
of
them.
You
know
they
big
employers
in
here
in
in
nashville,
obviously
and
across
state
tennessee,
but
if
they
wanted
to
be
in
those
areas,
they
would
be
in
those
areas
they
would
be
providing
service
in
those
areas.
What
we
have
the
opportunity
to
do
is
provide
services
to
a
company,
that's
already
providing
broadband
services.
K
They
already
have
the
infrastructure
and
they're
just
taking
it
out
a
little
bit
further
to
areas
that
nobody's
providing
them
services
in.
So
there
really
is
no
competition
because
nobody's
spending
the
money
to
provide
them
those
services.
So
you
know
it
really
fills
in
a
gap
there,
that's
really
having
a
real
impact
on
local
economies
and
families.
E
Chairman
zachary,
thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Again,
as
I
mentioned,
the
go,
this
is
the
governor
has
an
initiative
to
try
to
get
broadband
to
everybody
through
his
200
million
dollar
initiative.
We
have
150
million
dollars
coming
from
the
federal
government,
and
with
that,
mr
chairman,
I
would
may
I
would
make
a
motion
that
we
roll
this
to
the
first
calendar
of
2022.