►
Description
House Business and Utilities Subcommittee - March 2, 2022 - House Hearing Room 3
A
A
A
That
concludes
our
administrative
business.
So
let's
go
ahead
and
get
started
on
the
calendar
and
is
chairman
curcio
in
here.
Is
he
running
a
bill
so
we're
going
to
roll
him
to
the
to
the
hill
and
we
will
go
ahead
and
get
started
on
item
number.
Six
that
is
representative
vital
representative
bottle.
You're
recognized.
C
Boyd
good
afternoon,
everyone
I
bring
before
you
senate
joint
resolution
954,
which
celebrates
the
centennial
of
the
jones
act
created
in
the
early
1920s
by
the
u.s
congress.
The
jones
act
requires
vessels
carrying
cargo
on
american
waterways,
including
the
tennessee,
cumberland
and
mississippi
rivers
to
be
built
in
america
and
crewed
by
american
mariners
and
owned
by
american
companies.
C
The
maritime
industry
is
key
to
tennessee's
strength
and
security,
and
maritime
laws
ensure
a
level
playing
field
for
all
tennessee
businesses,
tennessee's
950
mile
long
network
of
navigable
waterways,
makes
it
a
critical
hub
in
the
nation's
transportation
system.
Tennessee
is
home
to
over
20
thousand
maritime
jobs
and
supports
1.24
billion
dollars
in
workers
income.
C
A
Thank
you
representative
for
that
explanation.
Members.
You
have
heard
the
explanation
of
senate
joint
resolution
zero.
Nine
five
four.
Do
we
have
any
questions
for
the
sponsor
questions
being
called
without
objection.
We
are
voting
to
send
senate
joint
resolution
954
to
full
commerce,
all
in
favor,
say
aye
aye,
all
opposed,
say
no,
the
eyes
have
it
and
your
resolution
is
going
to
full
commerce.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Thank
you.
Members.
A
It
looks
like
he
is
in
another
committee,
so
we're
going
to
roll
that
to
the
hill
and
keep
moving
next
up
is
item
number
nine.
That's
house
bill
2811
by
representative
hardaway,
looks
like
he's
absent
we're
going
to
roll
down
to
the
hill
and
keep
moving
item
number
10.
That's
house
bill
2246
by
our
chairman
vaughn.
A
D
It
hard
out
here
for
a
fella
good
afternoon,
mr
chairman,
and
in
my
fellow
committee.
A
Chairman
vaughn
looks
like
we
have
an
amendment
on
this
one.
What
drafting
code
are
you
showing
on
that.
A
D
And-
and
I
believe
the
the
amendment
makes
the
bill
so
if
you
want
to
get
it
attached
or
we'll,
however,
you
want
to
handle
that.
Mr
chairman,
thank.
A
D
You,
sir,
this
bill
was
in
response
to
critical
infrastructure
needs
across
our
state,
we're
seeing
now
how
we
have
issues
with
our
supply
chain,
particularly
with
due
to
international
events.
D
Sometimes,
we've
had
interruptions
in
supply
chain
due
to
shutdowns
malware
attacks,
other
things
we've
seen
with
the
colonial
pipeline,
but
what
this
bill
will
allow
us
to
do
in
and
hey.
I
know
that
these
days,
preemption
is
a
word.
That's
not
looked
favorable,
but
this
bill
would
preempt
localities
from
creating
zoning
laws
that
prohibit
the
creation
of
of
critical
infrastructure
such
as
pipelines
through
their
communities.
What
it
does
not
do
is
it
does
not
restrict
their
zoning,
but
it
does
allow.
D
D
This
is
vital
to
our
nation's
infrastructure,
and
so
what
we're
trying
to
do
here
is
to-
and
I
think
the
words
in
the
ordinance
or
the
the
bill
are
particularly
critical-
that
I
want
to
to
read
so
that
y'all
understand
what
it
is
that
we're
proposing
it
says.
A
local
action
of
a
political
subdivision
is
preempted
and
void
if
the
local
action
directly
or
indirectly
is
or
acts
as
a
de
facto
prohibition
of
the
sighting
a
restriction,
prohibition
of
impairment
or
construction
expansion
or
maintenance
of
energy,
industrial
or
related
transportation
infrastructure.
D
D
As
long
as
that,
local
action
facilitates,
to
the
greatest
extent
possible
the
sighting
and
construction
and
expansion
of
the
infrastructure
that
we're
discussing,
and
then
it
also
does
not
create
or
excuse
me,
it
says
that
the
section
does
not
prevent
a
local
action
that
perfect
affects
facilities
for
the
collection,
conversion
and
use
of
solar
energy.
So
anyway,
it
does
not
expand
or
alter
the
jurisdiction
of
a
governmental
entity
charged
with
oversight
of
public
utilities,
and
then
the
win
facility
bill
that
we
passed
a
few
years
ago.
D
This
does
not
affect
this
does
not
address
that
at
all.
So,
mr
chairman,
that's
what
this
law
does?
It's
looking
to
stabilize
and
protect
the
ability
for
goods
and
services
to
be
moved
across
the
the
particularly
energy
goods
and
services
across
our
state
via
pipeline
systems
and
other
other
subject:
energy
infrastructure
requirements.
So
that's
that's
what
we're
doing
here.
A
E
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
wanted
to
ask
because
I
know
you're
familiar
with
this
issue
because
we
live
in
the
same
county
but
the
the
the
bahalia
pipeline
last
year.
It
was
going
through
low-income
areas
adjacent
to
to
neighborhoods,
and
there
was
an
uproar
and
a
an
ordinance
to
prevent
that
by
the
city
of
memphis.
D
I'm
not
sure
that
it,
it
would
have
prevented
that
from
happening
because
I'm
not
sure,
I'm
not
sure
the
state
of
those
ordinances.
I
know
there
was
discussion
of
ordinances
and
zone.
What
this
would
do
was
this
would
be.
D
That
would
be
how
this
doesn't
mean
that
the
city
of
memphis,
or
whoever
couldn't
put
requirements
on
how
they
allow
pipelines
to
operate
within
there,
but
it
does
prevent
a
de
facto
provisioning
and
just
for
the
record
representative
thompson,
that
pipeline
wasn't
just
going
to
run
through
low-income
neighborhoods
in
memphis.
It
was
also
coming
stretching
across
shelby
county
and
coming
out
near
the
collierville
area.
So
it
was
not.
E
Okay,
yes
excuse
me-
and
I
do
remember
that
now
another
major
uproar
was
going
through
southwest
memphis,
though
I'm
you
know
without
knowing
this
bill,
without
really
understanding
it
right
now
I'll
I'm
just
going
to
pass
on
the
bill
and
and
study
it
further,
and
we
can
discuss
it
further
in
in
full
if,
if
it
reaches
that.
D
And
we
can
I'll
be
happy
to
discuss
it
with
you
offline,
because
what
this
is
doing,
more
than
anything,
is
making
sure
that
energy
and
industrial
products
can
move
across
our
state
without
one
local
one
locality
deciding
that
it's
going
to
intervene
and
or
interrupt
the
entire
flow.
D
D
This
is
not
necessarily,
I
think,
if
anything,
the
memphis
situation
alerted
those
folks
in
this
industry
and
to
what
could
happen
if
planned,
enter
planned
projects
in
input
for
throughput
can
be
interrupted
by
municipalities
somewhere
along
the
way,
and
so
that's
that's
what
this
is
approaching
this
again,
it's
not
a
step
on
the
not
to
step
on
the
toes
of
local
zoning
ordinances.
Representative.
E
Thompson
well,
thank
you
for
the
explanation,
yeah.
We
we
possibly
should
discuss
this
in
the
interim,
but
and
I'm
I'm
really.
I
understand
what
you're
saying
and-
and
I
agree
with
you
to
the
to
to
a
large
extent,
I'm
also
thinking
we
should
be
sensitive
to
to
neighborhoods
to
people
as
well
and
know
that
sometimes
we
can
work
through
compromises,
but
I
think
both
both
the
individual
neighborhoods
and
the
overall
need
for
energy
being
transported
in
a
proper
way
are
both
important.
Thank
you,
chairman.
A
C
A
The
eyes
have
it
house
bill.
2246
is
on
its
way
to
full
commerce.
Chairman
vaughn,
you
were
recognized
on
item
number
11..
Actually,
we
need
a
house
bill.
2608.
We
have
a
motion,
we
have
a
second,
you
are
recognized
on
your
bill
and
chairman
vaughn.
I
do
see
an
amendment.
What
drafting
code
do
you
have.
A
D
Thank
you,
sir.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
and
committee.
This
bill
is
a
is
an
opportunity
to
seek
the
most
bang
for
our
buck
out
of
our
broadband
investment
dollars.
Initially,
this
bill
was
had
taken
the
form
of
not
just
a
broadband
sales
sales
and
use
tax
exemption,
but
also
had
been
crafted
in
such
a
way
that
it
was
also
going
to
expand
the
footprint
of
co-op
electric
co-ops.
D
D
It
has
been
done
before
to
a
lesser
extent,
but
this
will
allow
us
to
fully
utilize
the
money
that
we're
out
there,
and
I
do
realize
this
has
a
significant
fiscal
note,
and
what
I
would
ask
this
committee
to
do
is
to
pass
us
along
to
get
us
into
shape
with
so
we
could
go
to
the
finance
subcommittee
and
discuss
it
with
them.
The
the
merits
of
it,
but
that's
all
this
bill
does
at
this
point.
A
A
All
right
members,
you've
heard
the
explanation.
We
are
voting
on
the
amendment.
That
is,
amendment
number
zero
one.
Three,
seven,
four,
two
we're
voting
to
put
that
on
the
bill,
all
in
favor,
say
aye
all
opposed,
say
no
guys
have
it.
The
amendment
is
on
the
bill
chairman
vaughn.
Do
you
have
any
further
explanation
for
your
amended
bill.
A
A
F
A
A
F
And
thank
you,
mr
chair
committee,
honestly,
so
this
bill
and
I
did
work
with
cosmetology
board
on
this
bill.
So
what
it
does
is
this
right
now
under
law,
you
can
go
and
get
your
instructor's
license
as
a
barber
or
you
can
get
your
instructor's
license
as
a
cosmetologist
two
separate
licenses.
F
What
this
does
is
allows
an
option
of
combining
both
licenses
because
it's
the
same
thing
being
taught
in
the
instructor's
classes,
they're
only
teaching
how
to
teach
they're,
not
teaching
you
necessarily
the
techniques
of
cosmetology
or
the
techniques
of
barbering,
and
so
what
this
does
is.
If
you
become,
if
you
become
an
instructor
in
cosmetology,
you
can
go
back
and
pick
up
the
differences
in
the
classes
between
barbering
and
cosmetology,
which
I
think
is
straight
razor
and
barbering
that
cosmetologists
don't
get
in
their
instruction.
F
F
A
A
If
not
we're
voting
to
add
amendment
zero,
one,
two,
nine
three
one
to
the
bill,
all
in
favor,
say
aye
all
opposed,
say
no
eyes
have
it.
The
amendment
goes
on
the
bill
representative
parks
and
do
you
have
any
further
explanation?
I
can't
sell
it
any
more
than
that
members.
We
are
voting
to
send
house
bill
2697
to
full
commerce,
all
in
favor,
say
aye
all
opposed,
say
no
eyes
have
it
parkinson
your
bill
is
on
this
way
to
full
commerce.
Thank
you.
F
A
A
G
You
chairman,
and
thank
you
committee
members,
I'm
here
today
to
talk
about
private
property
rights
and,
as
as
they
pertain
to
short-term
rentals,
and
I
don't
think
I
need
to
explain
what
short-term
rentals
are,
but
in
case
anybody's
been
living
under
a
rock
for
the
last
15
years.
No
I'm
kidding
they
are.
This
is
where
you
can
rent
out
your
home
on
a
short-term
basis
or
a
home
that
you
own
on
a
short-term
basis
on
various.
You
know
social
platforms,
to
be
able
to
do
that.
G
What
we're
seeking
to
do
here
is
to
provide
some
stability
and
some
clarity
for
property
owners
and
we're
really
talking
about
two
buckets
of
owners.
So
basically,
if
you
think
about
somebody,
who's
bought
a
home
in
an
area
that
they
think
this
will
be
popular
and
they're,
renting
that
home
out
on
these
various
platforms
as
a
way
to
make
money,
that's
kind
of
one
bucket
of
owners.
G
A
second
bucket
of
owners
are
people
who
own
their
own
property.
So
these
are
owner
occupied
homes
and
they
want
to
maybe
rent
out
the
basement,
rent
out
a
back
house
rent
out
a
mother-in-law
suite,
for
example,
some
people
call
them
and
do
that
as
a
way
to
generate
extra
income.
I
know
you
know
we
had
a
lot
of
friends
when
my
wife
and
I
were
young
married
couple
without
any
money
or
prospects
that
would
run
out,
say
the
you
know
spare
bedroom
in
their
house
or
the
upstairs
in
order
to
help.
G
You
know,
make
a
little
extra
income
to
save
up
for
a
vacation
or
something
like
that.
So
you've
really
got
two
buckets
of
owners
here.
You've
got
folks
who've
invested
in
real
estate
in
a
prime
area,
and
they
think
they
can
make
money
off
of
tourism.
You
know
folks
coming
in
and
out
and
then
you've
got
owner-occupied
units
the
mother-in-law
suite
the
basement.
G
You
know
the
back
house
that
kind
of
thing,
so
what
this
bill
seeks
to
do
is
to
to
kind
of
stabilize
the
market
across
the
state
so
that
folks
have
some
stability.
It
also
has
a
section
here
that
protects
transfers.
So
right
now
we're
having
a
problem
in
some
areas
of
the
state
where,
if
I'm
doing
estate
planning-
and
I
set
up
a
trust,
for
example,
my
wife
and
I
own
a
property
that
we've
got
a
short-term
rental
permit
for,
and
we
put
that
into
a
trust
or
into
some
other
legal
instrument.
G
It
has
to
be
retitled.
Well,
that's
that's!
Knocking
us
out
of
that
short
term
permit
in
a
lot
of
cases,
so
we're
seeing
where
those
permits
are
being
deleted
off
the
book
simply
because
we
needed
to
do
something
for
an
estate
plan,
for
example.
I
also
want
to
talk
about
in
this
bill.
We
have
protected
municipalities
who
have
outright
banned,
short-term
rentals.
So
there's
language
in
this
bill
that
we
believe
and
and
we've
we've
checked
to
make
sure
that
that
that
this
does
what
we
think
it
does.
G
But
if
your
city
banned
short-term
rentals
once
upon
a
time,
said
we're
just
not
going
to
allow
them
here.
This
bill
seeks
to
preserve
that.
So
if
you
don't
want
them,
you
don't
ever
have
to
have
them,
but
what
the
bill
goes
on
to
do
is
to
say
if
at
any
point
in
time
you
allowed
a
short-term
rental
permit.
So
I'm
not
talking
about
when
it
happened.
Sort
of
pre-you
know
history,
if
you
will,
in
other
words
back
when
people
were
renting
out
a
room
on
craigslist
before
any
of
these.
G
You
know
social
platforms
existed,
we're
not
talking
about
that,
but
we're
talking
about
if
you
as
a
municipality
met,
and
you
voted
to
create
a
permit
and
create
a
process
for
short-term
rentals.
If
you've
ever
done
that,
then
you've
got
to
preserve
that
property
right
for
those
folks
that
live
in
for
the
folks
that
live
in
your
municipality.
From
now
on
it
doesn't
mean
you
can't
regulate,
it
doesn't
mean
you
can't.
G
You
know,
set
up
reasonable,
permitting
structures
and
require
certain
things
of
those
owners,
but
you
can't
just
outright
ban
it
if
you've
already
allowed
it
see
that
is
there.
We
don't
want
to
pull
the
rug
out
from
under
those
property
owners,
and
especially
you
know,
it's
easy
to
sort
of
think
about.
You
know
okay,
well,
you
know
what
was
me:
you
bought
an
investment
property
and
now
you're
not
able
to
to
make
the
profit
on
it.
G
You
thought
but
think
for
a
moment
about
those
owner-occupied
units
I
mean
my
house
is
my
house
and
if
I
want
to
rent
out
a
bedroom
to
somebody
that
ought
to
be
between
me
and
my
wife
and
them
right
and
so
having
to
go
and-
and
you
know,
beg
some
city
bureaucrat
whether
or
not
my
mother-in-law
can
live
in
my
mother-in-law.
Suite
is
really
not,
I
think
what
anybody
intended.
When
we
look
at
this,
it
certainly
doesn't
meet
the
common
sense
standard.
So
that's
all
I've
got
for
now.
A
Thank
you
for
that
explanation.
Members
you've
heard
the
explanation
and
the
amendment
do
we
have
any
questions.
We've
got
chairman
zachary,
you
are
recognized.
H
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
members,
and
I
had
already
discussed
this
with
chairman
curcio.
I
do
have
an
untimely
filed
amendment
that
I'm
going
to
be
putting
on
if
this
bill
moves
forward
next
week
over
the
last
couple
of
days,
based
on
the
the
length
of
and
the
the
length
and
detail
of
this
amendment,
it
has
been
very
difficult
for
some
of
our
cities
to
be
able
to
go
through
and
to
be
able
to
determine
what
kind
of
impact
this
will
be.
H
What
kind
of
impact
this
will
be
to
local
communities,
because
I
I
would
say
you
would
use
the
word
stability
and
clarity.
I
think
right
now.
This
has
done
just
the
opposite
for
many
of
our
smaller
communities
and
I
have
a
an
amendment
with
the
blessing
of
the
following
communities:
collierville
germantown,
brentwood,
franklin
farragut,
which
was
where
I
live:
maryville
sevierville,
pigeon,
forge
gatlinburg,
spring
hill,
alcoa,
goodlettsville,
oak
ridge,
kingsport
and
johnson
city.
That
would
all
be
like
to
be
amended
out
of
this.
H
This
piece
of
legislation
because
of
the
impact
their
legal
representation,
feels
it
will
how
it
will
impact
their
community,
and
so
that
is
a
that
is
an
amendment
that
again
it's
untimely
filed,
mr
chairman,
and
I
recognize
that
so
it's
something
that
we'll
discuss
at
a
later
time,
but
because
of
that,
and
because
of
that
confusion,
my
community
in
particular
farragut.
They
don't
feel
like
based
on
the
language
in
section
section,
six
and
the
date
used.
They
feel
like
because
of
ordinances.
We've
already
passed
that
passed
in
2019.
H
They
feel
like
they're
not
excluded
from
this
because
of
things
they've
done
in
the
past,
and
some
of
those
communities
that
I
listed
are
in
the
same
position,
and
so
I
understand
the
target
of
this
legislation,
but
I
also
understand
how
this
impacts
the
individual
community
and
absolutely
I'm
all
for
property
owners
rights.
But
I
also
understand
too,
there's
a
reason
that
people
all
across
our
state
move
into
a
community
like
a
farragut
or
an
oak
ridge
and
there's
a
reason
I
live
in
farragut
because
I
want
to
live
in
a
community.
H
H
H
This
is
a
this-
is
in
no
way
a
reflection
on
you,
but
this
is
another
case
of
a
piece
of
legislation
being
brought.
That's
targeting
a
particular
area,
that's
brought
by
a
legislator
in
which
it
doesn't
impact,
and
so
that
frustrates
me
and
it
frustrated
me
the
last
time
this
piece
of
legislation
was
brought
by
a
legislator
who
lived
in
who
lived
in
a
community
which
would
not
be
impacted
by
this,
and
so
I
am
in
a
community-
that's
impacted
by
this,
and
so
it's
easy
to
say.
Well,
the
cities
I
mean.
H
Sometimes
the
cities
over-regulate
and
they
do
these
things
in
municipalities,
but
while
my
municipality
is
against
it,
I
live
in
that
community
and
I
don't
support
it,
and
so,
for
those
reasons
I
do
oppose
the
bill
and
if,
depending
on
the
posture
of
this
bill
and
what
happens
moving
forward,
I
do
plan
on
bringing
that
amendment.
On
behalf
of
the
cities
I
mentioned,
depending
on
what
happens
moving
forward.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
committee.
A
Members
before
we
and
the
list
is
growing,
I've
got
a
few
of
you
since
the
bill,
since
the
amendment
actually
makes
the
bill.
Let's
go
ahead
and
get
the
amendment
on
the
bill
and
then
we'll
continue
to
the
debate
here.
So
members
we
are
voting
now
to
add
amendment
0-1-3-6-7-4
to
the
bill,
all
in
favor,
say
aye
all
opposed,
say
no
eyes
have
it.
The
bill
is
amended.
Now
we
are
back
on
discussion
of
the
bill
as
amended
and
next
on.
My
list
is
chair.
Lady
hazelwood.
B
G
G
If
a
natural
person
has
multiple
residential
dwellings
that
satisfy
the
definition
set
out
in
this
subdivision,
then
the
person
may
only
claim
one
residential
dwelling
located
in
this
state.
As
the
natural
person's
principal
residence,
it
is
presumed
that
a
residential
dwelling
is
a
natural
person's
principal
residence.
B
So
would
a
trust
be
a
business
entity
or
a
natural
person?
How
would
a
trust
be
where
would
it
fall
when
you're
looking
at
these
kinds
of
properties,
if
a
property
was
held
in
trust.
G
Chairman
curse
here,
thank
you,
mr
chairman.
My
law
degree
came
from
google,
but
my
understanding
is
that
a
trust
is
a
is
an
entity.
It's
it's
a
person
without
a
heartbeat,
but
it
doesn't
seem
to
me
and
I
don't
think
it's
our
intention.
I
could
be
wrong,
but
the
the
the
trust
language
doesn't
apply
to
that
person's
primary
dwelling.
B
So
just
chair,
lady
hazel,
what
do
you
reckon?
Thank
you
just
to
be
clear.
What
we're
saying
is
that
it
have
to
be
the
the
real
legal
residence
where
I
vote,
where
my
tax
return
comes,
where
the
government
thinks
I
live,
and
I
couldn't
have
multiple
ones
of
those
in
a
community
or
a
state.
Is
that
correct
chairman.
A
Thank
you,
lady.
All
right
next
up
on
our
list
is
representative
manish,
you're
recognized.
Thank
you,
mr.
I
Chair,
I
guess
this
has
been
a
week
of
conflict,
especially
when
it
comes
to
legislation
like
this,
because
and
the
reason
it's
it's.
That
way
for
me
is
my
time
in
local
government,
I
believe
in
local
control,
but
then
I
go
back
and
I
truly
believe
in
property
rights
and
from
an
owner-occupied
standpoint.
I
I
think
that
you
have
a
set
of
property
rights
that
should
be
able
to
control
that
property
and
if
there
are
challenges
within
your
neighborhood
or
your
next
door,
neighbor
those
can
be
handled
in
ordinances.
So
and
the
other
thing
that's
concerning
to
me
is
we
put
things
in
place
and
then
the
rules
of
the
game
so
to
speak,
continue
to
change
and
and
when
those
rules
change
it
could
impact
your
property
values
negatively.
E
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
just
want
to
reflect
my
agreement
with
chairman
zachary
on
this
issue,
and
and
also
that
I
believe
that
the
city
leaders,
the
the
council,
aldermen
or
whatever
at
each
municipality,
knows
the
needs
of
that
municipality
better
than
the
the
general
assembly
as
a
whole
enough
field
that
that
their
their
decision
should
should
be
the
predominant
one
here
so
I'll
be
voting.
Knowing
this.
A
Chairman
curtis
yeah,
sir
chairman
vaughn,
you're
recognized.
D
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
to
my
good
friend,
chairman
zachary.
I
appreciate
you
mentioning
the
two
communities
that
that
I
serve
collierville
germantown,
it's
my
understanding
that
they
that
this
build
already
precludes
their
involvement
in
this,
and
so
I
look
at
it
from
a
different
standpoint
and
being
involved
in
land
use
and
being
involved
in
land
development.
In
my
day
job.
D
There
are
principles
that
are
applied
through
gen.
The
general
land
use
principles
and
one
of
them
is
what's
deemed
a
non-conforming
use
and
a
non-conforming
use
is
a
use
that
was
established
and
another
provision
for
it
is
known
as
grandfathered
in,
and
so
whenever
you
have
a
non-conforming
use
in
an
area.
D
Typically,
you
are
allowed
to
continue
that
non-conforming
use
until
you
choose
to
end
it
or
the
person.
You
sell
the
property
to
decides
to
end
it,
but
you're
allowed
to
expand
it.
You
are
allowed
to
renovate
it.
You're
allowed
to
do
many
things
to
non-conforming
uses
and
that
use
continues
on
until
it
is
concluded.
D
And
in
this
case
I
see
this
this
bill
as
adhering
to
the
principles
of
non-conformity
and
it's
something
that
property
owners
have
to
be
assured
that
the
same
rights
that
they
have
in
one
part
of
our
state
are
valid
in
other
parts
of
the
state.
And
that's
that's
been
my
whole
problem
with
this,
and
because
hey
I've
been
a
local
school
board
member.
I
want
local
control
and
I.
J
D
Deal
with
local
government
affair
government
bodies
in
the
communities,
I
serve
all
the
time
on
land
use
matters,
and
I
respect
their
control
of
that.
But
there
are
overriding
principles
of
land
use
and
property
rights
that,
in
some
cases,
have
not
been
respected,
and
I
see
this
bill
here
when
it
does
not
cause
harm
to
communities
that
or
does
not
change
the
rules
on
communities
that
follows
the
rules
that
we
set
up.
D
D
I
would
certainly
not
do
anything
to
jeopardize
the
position
of
the
folks
that
I
represented,
but
again
they
played
by
the
rules
and
so
they're.
They
should
be
fine
with
this
with
this
bill,
but
for
those
who
played
fast
and
loose
with
land
use
principles,
then
I
think
that
sometimes
we
have
to
intervene
and
step
in
and
set
things
back
and
that's
what
it
seems
as
if
this
bill
is
attempting
to
do
with
that
I'll
hold
my
comments.
A
A
D
A
That's
the
drafting
code,
zero,
one,
four,
three,
eight
zero.
We
are
perfectly
in
sync
chairman
board.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
What
this?
What
this
amendment,
which
which
ultimately
makes
the
bill
does
is
it
would
require
utilities
in
the
state
of
tennessee
to
develop
and
implement
a
cyber
security
plan
now
cyber
security.
A
This
is
something
that
we've
been
working
on
since
earlier
in
the
year,
but
recently
with
a
lot
of
the
events
going
on
in
ukraine
in
russia,
it
has
moved
to
the
to
the
forefront
and-
and
so
this
is
something
that
I
believe
is
paramount.
Now,
what
we're
going
to
be
doing?
We
don't
actually
need
to
see
a
copy.
A
We
believe
that's
proprietary
information,
but
what
we
want
is
for
the
utilities
to
sign
a
certification
each
year
and
submit
it
to
the
regulatory
authority,
so
that
would
be
private
utilities
to
tpuc
public
utilities
to
the
comptroller.
A
list
would
be
generated
and
that
would
be
given
to
the
general
assembly-
and
so,
mr
chairman,
I'll,
take
any
questions
on
the
amendment.
D
All
righty,
thank
you,
sir,
since
the
amendment
does
make
the
bill.
We
first
I'd
like
to
get
the
amendment
attached
to
the
bill.
Any
questions
on
the
amendment
not
seeing
any
all
those
that
want
to
put
amendment
zero
one.
Four,
three:
eight
zero
on
the
bill,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye,
any
opposed
no
bill
is
on,
and
so
now
we
are
on
the
bill
itself.
D
Anybody
got
any
questions
about
cyber
security
today,
seeing
none,
we
will
vote
on
house
bill
2346,
all
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye,
any
opposed,
no
eyes
have
it,
sir.
You
have
your
gavel
back.
Thank.
A
A
J
Mr
chairman,
with
your
permission
and
the
permission
of
the
the
members,
I
want
to
give
you
an
idea
what
the
bill
is
and
what
the
genesis
was
for
the
bill
and
then
I'm
going
to
ask
to
roll
it
to
next
week.
I'll
be
brief.
J
J
J
I
had
individuals
who
came
to
me
former
law
enforcement
officers,
telling
me
about
the
confusion
that
they
run
into
still
run
into
in
the
streets,
where
they're
not
sure.
If
a
security
guard
is
a
security
guard,
if
they're
licensed
security
guards,
rather
because
they
don't
feel
like
they
can
check
their
id
check
their
license.
J
The
amendment
that
I
will
bring
to
you
next
week
will
suggest
I
would
suggest,
will
require
that
the
applicant
will
submit
a
mental
evaluation,
mental
health
evaluation
and
he
or
she
would
pay
for
it,
and
the
department
would
be
responsible
for
ensuring
that
the
company
or
individual
that
administered
that
evaluation
was
approved
on
an
approved
list.
So,
mr
chairman,
that's
it
pending
any
questions
today
I
would
ask
for
a
road
to
next
week.