Waching daily Apr 27 2017

IPPS-A is coming to the Army National Guard.

Are you an Army National Guard Service Member?

Are you a unit Readiness NCO?

Are you a Commander or in a leadership position?

Then it's important that you know what the Army is working

on to make your life easier.

It's the Integrated Personnel and Pay System - Army.

A cutting-edge, online Human Resources

information system that includes personnel and pay

capabilities that will be rolled out to the Total Force.

And the Army National Guard is leading the way for IPPS-A

for the Army.

For the first time ever, one comprehensive Army personnel

system will streamline transitions between Active, Guard

and Reserve service.

IPPS-A is being developed to eliminate manual data entry

into multiple systems and reduce the manual workarounds for

HR service providers, meaning they can focus on taking care

of Guardsmen and their Families.

The system will also be able to track Guard Soldiers when

they transfer to different units in other states, meaning

when they move, their records will seamlessly transfer with

them.

From the first day of a Guardsman's career to the very

last, IPPS-A will be with them, through their entire

career.

Every step of the way.

Thanks to input from all the 54 states, territories and

the District of Columbia, IPPS-A will be implemented by

fielding groups to make the rollout as smooth as possible.

The Army is committed to developing and deploying a system

that is secure, efficient, comprehensive, and mobile to

improve your military quality of life.

To keep up on the developments of IPPS-A and when you will

start benefiting from it, go to ipps-a.army.mil

For more infomation >> IPPS-A Is Coming to the Army National Guard! - Duration: 1:57.

-------------------------------------------

09 verdades & 1 mentira de uma GRINGA no Brasil! This video is in ENGLISH! :) - Duration: 6:49.

Hello and welcome.

Today's video is going to be a little bit different because I'm going to do the entire video in English.

Okay.

So if you want to watch this video with subtitles

Make sure to turn on your subtitles in your YouTube configurations.

Alright.

So last week I posted 10 sentences with some information about me.

Nine of these sentences were true and one was a lie.

So today I'm going to tell the story behind these 10 sentences.

So, the first sentence that I posted was

And this story is true! Can you believe it?

When I came to Brazil, for the second time, I went to the Federal Police to ask for an extension

on my tourist visa

But, I got there one day late.

And they stamped my passport that I was illegal and I needed to leave immediately

Well, I had already bought my plane ticket back

So I decided, ya know, I'm gonna stay.

And when I went to the airport to actually leave, about 3 months later

When I went to check in, the woman looked at my passport full of stamps

saying that I was illegal and needed to leave

and she sent me upstairs to the Federal Police where they did a spontaneous deportation

And then I had a police escort to the airplane

I knew that I had done something wrong.

I knew I overstayed the allotted time

So, I was never upset about being deported.

It was a very fair thing that happened to me.

So, yes. I was deported from Brazil while 8 months pregnant.

This is also true.

I did an exchange program in Spain while I was in college.

And a very, very good friend of mine and I decided to get a little tattoo as a souvenir, a permanent souvenir

of our time in Spain.

So, it's just a little symbol of Sevilla, the city that I lived in.

This one is false.

I never lived in the same building as Michael Jordan.

I did, however, see his kids at the swimming pool.

And I did live in a building with a lot of baseball players.

The building that I lived in was very close to Wrigley Field, where the Chicago Cubs play.

So there were a lot of baseball players living in my building.

This is true.

Not exactly cheerleaders, we called it the Pom Pom squad, but for those of you in Brazil, it's pretty much the same thing.

It's like a dance team with these pom pons.

But I know the idea of being a cheerleader and playing football and things like that is something very American.

So, I thought it would be something funny for you guys.

This is also true.

I am a naturalized citizen of Switzerland.

My mother's family is Swiss

I have a Swiss passport

So if I ever want to go to Switzerland, I guess I can.

Okay.

I think this is true.

But maybe it's something that I think I know how to do, but I really don't.

I will let you guys judge.

But be honest with me.

This is also true.

I think I was like 15 or 16

Maybe even a little bit younger

But there was one day and we were looking for some funny things to do

and I decided to ride the horse through the McDonald's drive-thru

But they wouldn't serve me. Can you believe it?

So, again this is also true.

So, my father...he had a farm with lots of exotic animals.

Buffalo, elk, rheas, emus,

different kids of parrots, fish, lizards, horses, cows, goats,

snakes, mice, chickens... I don't even know.

It was really, really fun...a great, great childhood

This is also true. We are...

There are some really cool things coming your way. So stay tuned.

That is it, you guys!

I hope you liked this video of telling some funny stories.

And remember, if you have any questions, you can always Ask Jackie

Bye-bye!

For more infomation >> 09 verdades & 1 mentira de uma GRINGA no Brasil! This video is in ENGLISH! :) - Duration: 6:49.

-------------------------------------------

What is Yom Ha'atzmaut: Israel Independence Day - Duration: 3:39.

David Ben Gurion declared an independent State of Israel on May 14, 1948 and a new chapter

of Jewish history began.

The British had controlled Palestine under the British Mandate but that expired at midnight

and so the early Zionists declared a new nation.

Some of them had lived in the land for generations and some were new arrivals from Nazi Europe.

For a couple years, May 14th was a day for mourning lost soldiers.

Then in 1951 Israel decided to split the day into two parts - Yom Hazikaron - Remembrance

Day - and Yom Haatzmaut - Independence Day.

It is celebrated on the 5th of Iyar, or one of the days right around it.

In 1953, Yom Ha'Shoah, Holocaust Remembrance Day, was also added to this period, happening

eight days earlier.

Yom Hazikaron begins at night with a minute long siren where the whole country stops and

stands in silence.

Another siren, the next morning, kicks off the official memorial ceremonies as well as

private ones where people remember their loved ones.

As night falls, the memorial mood shifts quickly as Israelis move into party mode and Yom Ha'atzmaut

begins, starting with the formal State torch lighting ceremony on Mount Herzl in Jerusalem

to fireworks over Rabin Square in Tel Aviv, to street parties everywhere!

As the night goes on, the party gets more raucous of course, and the next day, while

possibly nursing an Arak hangover is all about a barbecue on the beach or at the park...with

absolutely everyone else.

Around the world, Jewish communities join in solidarity with those in Israel by wearing

Blue and White to celebrate the Israeli Flag, eating classic foods like hummus, falafel,

watermelon-feta kabobs and of course, Bamba.

Folk-dancing is a fun old school tradition, and lots of communities host big parties featuring

Israeli rock bands, artists and nonprofits.

In synagogues, some communities say the psalms of praise called Hallel or the prayer for

miracles - Al Hanissim.

Why?

Because for some Jews, the founding of the State was a religious historical event, the

fulfillment of a Biblical promise to Abraham and Sarah that the land they walked would

one day be home to their children's children.

There is some difference here about who says what but the basic idea for these Religious

Zionists is that Yom Ha'atzmaut is a modern holy day.

Not so for secular Zionists, who remember and celebrate, but without the religious overtones.

Some Jews differ very strongly and see the founding of the State as heresy.

These Haredim, or Ultra-Orthodox Jews, say that the promise to Abraham and Sarah was

to be fulfilled by God, not by people.

They don't mark the Founding of the State - even if they choose to live there.

Finally, about 20% of the state is not Jewish at all - they are Muslim, they are Christian,

they are Druze or they are foreign students and workers of different religions.

They see the day differently.

Some feel - despite their religious difference - a patriotism and respect for the Holy Land

as a Jewish and democratic state.

Others mark the day with protests and memorials on behalf of the Arabs who fell in battles

or fled the land in 1948.

Taken together, Yom HaShoah, Yom Hazikaron and Yom Haatzmaut constitute a week that is

sometimes called the Israeli High Holidays.

Donniel Hartman writes:

The sadness of Yom Hazikaron does not give new meaning to Yom Haatzmaut; rather it gives

it gravitas.

It reminds us of the price we paid and, as a result, the care, responsibility and duty

we have to build a great country and to live and to give our lives special meaning.

For more infomation >> What is Yom Ha'atzmaut: Israel Independence Day - Duration: 3:39.

-------------------------------------------

House File 1538 is debated on the House Floor - Duration: 37:04.

>> HOUSE SPEAKER:

THE NEXT BILL ON THE COUNTER FOR THE DAY HIS HOUSE

FILE 1538 THERE IS AN AMENDMENT AT THE DESK. THE CLERK WILL REPORT THE AMENDMENT. >> CHIEF CLERK: HOUSE FILE

NUMBER 1538;

NUMBER FIVE ON THE CALENDAR FOR THE DAY AND ACT RELATING TO REAL PROPERTY

FIRST ENGROSSMENT. >> HOUSE SPEAKER:

REPRESENTATIVE SMITH

>> REPRESENTATIVE SMITH GOING

VERY PROUD OF THIS BILL.

I'D LIKE TO THANK EVERYONE

IN THIS YEAR AND HAVE ODYSSEY OF WORK AND

I'M VERY HAPPY WITH THE SUPPORT US

INCLUDING REPRESENTATIVE NELSON

AS CO-AUTHOR

. I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO THINK THE CITIES

OF SUPPORT THAT ARE

PROVIDED RESOLUTIONS BEING HANDED OUT RIGHT NOW

. INCLUDING; BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE CITY OF

BLOOMINGTON; CHANHASSEN; YOU DINER; GOLDEN

VALLEY; HOPKINS; MAPLE

PLANE; NEWPORT; ST.

ANTHONY VILLAGE; ST. LOUIS PARK; AND WOODBERRY.

ADDITIONALLY; MEMBERS;

MINNESOTA HOUSING OPTIONS COALITION ARE SUPPORTING THIS BILL AMERICAN INSTITUTE

OF ARCHITECTS; ASSOCIATION OF

GENERAL CONTRACTORS;

ASSOCIATION OF

METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITIES

THE BUILDERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA.

THE BUILDERS ASSOCIATION OF

TWIN CITIES. MINNEAPOLIS

DOWNTOWN COUNCIL. MINNESOTA ASSOCIATION

OF REALTORS AND

THE MINNESOTA STATE BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION

TRADES COUNCIL.

THE FULL RANGE OF

HOUSING OPTIONS ARE CRITICAL FOR THE WELL-BEING OF MINNESOTA.

SINCE THE END OF

THE RECESSION CONSTRUCTION OF HOMES HAS

INCREASED DRAMATICALLY.

YET; NOT THE SAME FOR CONDOS

AND TOWNHOMES. IN 2007 23% OF

THE MARKET WERE TOWNHOMES. IN 2015;

ONLY THREE. 3%. SIMILARLY;

SINCE 2007-2015 HOMES ROSE 80%

. TOWNHOMES DECREASED 70%.

THIS LEGISLATION SEEKS TO ENCOURAGE

CONDO AND TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT

BY REDUCING THE RISK

OF LITIGATION

ASSOCIATED WITH THESE TYPES OF

CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS.

IT ENCOURAGES ALL THE PARTIES TO RESOLVE

THEIR DIFFERENCES THAT ARE DEFECT

DISPUTES THROUGH NEGOTIATIONS

OR MEDIATIONS. WITHOUT

IMPACTING OWNERS

WARRANTY RIGHTS. I ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT. >> HOUSE SPEAKER:

REPRESENTATIVE HILSTROM OFFERS THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENT.

>> CHIEF CLERK: HILSTROM MOVED

TO AMEND HOUSE

FILE 1538 FIRST ENGROSSMENT AND THE AMENDMENT

IS CODED

A- TO >> HOUSE

SPEAKER: REPRESENTATIVE HILSTROM TO INTRODUCE YOUR AMENDMENT

>> REPRESENTATIVE HILSTROM: WHEN THE TROUBLING PARTS ABOUT

THIS PROPOSAL

IS THAT IT REQUIRES A MAJORITY OF THE

PROPERTY OWNERS TO VOTE IN FAVOR

OF THE BEGINNING OF A SUIT.

NOW; MEMBERS JUST AS WITH

STOCKHOLDERS OR STAKEHOLDERS IN

OTHER AREAS;

WE USUALLY REQUIRE THERE BE SOME NOTICE AND

WE REQUIRE THEY BE

TOLD WHEN A LAWSUIT IS GOING TO BE

VOTED UPON BUT WE USUALLY GIVE

THE BOARD

THE AUTHORITY TO ACTUALLY TAKE THE BOAT

ON WHETHER OR NOT TO FILE A LAWSUIT. SO WHAT'S

IN THIS STATUTE PROPOSAL CURRENTLY

REALLY IS

A LARGER BURDEN THAN WE PLACE ON MANY OTHER ENTITIES.

ALL I AM ASKING FOR IN

THIS AMENDMENT IS T

O SAY; YOU MUST NOTIFY ALL THE PROPERTY OWNERS. MUST TELL THEM THE DATE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO VOTE

; THE BOARD IS GOING TO VOTE ON WHETHER OR NOT TO FILE A LAWSUIT YOU MUST TELL THEM AT LEAST 30 DAYS IN ADVANCE;

BUT ONCE THAT IS DONE; IT REALLY IS THE BOARD

WOULD MAKE A DETERMINATION ON WHETHER

OR NOT A LAWSUIT SHOULD

BE FILED.

MEMBERS; THAT'S THE AMENDMENT AND ASK FOR

YOUR SUPPORT. >> HOUSE SPEAKER:

REPRESENTATIVE SMITH >>

REPRESENTATIVE SMITH: I OPPOSE

THIS AMENDMENT. PART OF THIS A VERY GOOD AND I SUPPORT

BUT IN A WHOLE I ASK FOR A

NO; VOTE. THE ENTIRE BILL WHEN THE

MAIN COMPONENTS

IS WHETHER THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS IS VOTING OR WHETHER THE MEMBERS FOR THE ASSOCIATION ARE VOTING FOR

IT IS TRUE THE RULES FOR

THIS BILL FOR THESE ASSOCIATIONS

IS DIFFERENT THAN

A CORPORATION. SUCH AS 3M.

BUT THESE UNIQUE THINGS HAPPENING IN

THIS INDUSTRY THAT THE LIST

OF SUPPORTERS THAT I

PREVIOUSLY RECOGNIZED

. MANY OF YOU HAVE PERSONAL STORIES ABOUT

THIS SITUATION

. THIS IS DIFFERENT. I ASK FOR YOUR

KNOW; VOTE. >> HOUSE SPEAKER:

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE A-

TO AMENDMENT? SEEING NO

FURTHER DISCUSSION - EXCUSE ME -

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY; AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES.] OPPOSED; NAY.

THE MOTION DOES NOT PREVAIL. THE AMENDMENT IS NOT ADOPTED.

>> [GAVEL] >> HOUSE

SPEAKER: REPRESENTATIVE DEHN

>> CHIEF CLERK:

DEHN MOVED TO AMEND HOUSE FILE 1538 FIRST ENGROSSMENT AS FOLLOWS

AND THE AMENDMENT IS CODED

A- 70-0380. >> HOUSE

SPEAKER: REPRESENTATIVE DEHN

>> REPRESENTATIVE DEHN; I BELIEVE THERE'S A AMENDMENT TO

THE AMENDMENT >> HOUSE SPEAKER:

THERE IS AN AMENDMENT AT THE DESK. THE CLERK WILL REPORT THE AMENDMENT.

>> CHIEF CLERK: DEHN MOVED

TO AMEND HIS AMENDMENT TO

HOUSE FILE

1338; FIRST ENGROSSMENT; AS FOLLOWS AND

THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT IS CODED R MINUS

A 17

009. >> HOUSE SPEAKER:

MEMBERS AS A POINT OF CLARIFICATION

REPRESENTATIVE DEHN

OFFERED - EXCUSE ME - PRE-FILED

AN AMENDMENT THAT WAS CODED A- 17-

038. WHICH CONTAINED A

TECHNICAL ERROR. HE HAS

SINCE BROUGHT AMENDMENT CODED R-009.

PURSUANT TO HOUSE RULES

3.33 PARAGRAPH

E THE PRESIDING OFFICER HAS MADE A DECISION TO

ALLOW THAT CORRECTION SO WE ARE

ON THAT AMENDMENT THAT HAS THE

TECHNICAL CORRECTION AND TO INTRODUCE THAT AMENDMENT

REPRESENTATIVE DEHN

>> REPRESENTATIVE DEHN:

THANK YOU FOR ACCEPTING THE TECHNICAL CHANGE. IT WAS A

CRITICAL CHANGE IN THE AMENDMENT TO

THE AMENDMENT. WHAT THIS DOES IS IT

CHANGES THE IMPLEMENTATION DATE

FOR PROJECTS

THAT WERE CONSTRUCTED AFTER

CONSTRUCTED AFTER JULY 1; 2014.

WHY THAT DATE WAS ARRIVED AT

IS THERE'S A LOT OF

PROPERTIES OUT THERE THAT CURRENTLY THE PURCHASERS OF THOSE PROPERTIES

HAD BOUGHT THEM UNDER CERTAIN

CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS. IN PURCHASING

THEIR PROJECTS. AND THERE CONDOS AND BUILDINGS. WITH

THE UNDERLYING ORIGINAL

BILL DOES IS IT ACTUALLY GOES

BACKWARDS COMPLETELY TO SORT OF REMOVE

THEIR CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS

THROUGH PURSUING DAMAGES

AND CLAIMS AS PART OF

THE ASSOCIATION. BY CHANGING THE

THIS DATE

WHAT I'VE DONE IS TRY TO MEET IN THE MIDDLE.

MY ORIGINAL AMENDMENT HAD IT

BEEN TOTALLY PERSPECTIVE

MOVING FORWARD. SO

THOSE INDIVIDUALS TO PURCHASE UNITS ARE KNOWING

-THOSE THAT HAVE ALREADY PURCHASED THOSE UNITS WOULD NOT

BE CHANGED THEIR ACTUAL PURCHASE AGREEMENT THEY HAD

WITH

THE DEVELOPER AND THE ORIGINAL BUILDING OWNER.

BY CHANGING IT TO JULY 1 WE

SORT OF COME IN THE MIDDLE AND

REALIZED THAT EARLY ON AFTER WE

BEGAN CONSTRUCTION

THERE WERE SOME PROJECTS TO

MOVE FORWARD AND MOST THOSE PROJECTS

THE DEFECTS

HAVE ALREADY BEEN FOUND OUT. THEY'RE ALREADY OUT THERE.

SO WHAT THIS DOES IT GOES BACK

AND ALLOWS A FEW YEARS

AND ALLOWS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR SOME DEFECTS AM I NOT BEEN DISCOVERED

YET TO BE CONSIDERED INTO THE

NEW BILL. I APPRECIATE THIS

BILL BECAUSE WE DO HAVE

AN EXISTING DIFFICULTY WHAT'S CALLED THE CONDO MARKET.

THAT'S HAVING AN ADVERSE AFFECT ON THE HOUSING MARKET AS WELL.

AT THE SAME TIME; I DON'T WANT TO STRIP ANY OF THOSE OWNERS OF

THE RIGHTS THE PREVIOUSLY

ALLOWED THEM TO MAKE CLAIMS

AGAINST BUILDING DEFECTS

AND PROBLEMS. I FOR THIS AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT. I WOULD

HOPE THAT THE BODY WOULD

SUPPORT THAT.

THANK YOU. >> HOUSE SPEAKER: DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION TO ADOPT THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT CODED

R-17 009. REPRESENTATIVE SMITH

>> REPRESENTATIVE SMITH: I APPRECIATE THE OFFER

AMENDMENT AND THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT AND WORK ON THIS BILL.

THIS IS BEEN A

COLLABORATIVE EFFORT AND THERE'S BEEN

A SERIES OF COMPROMISES WITH

A MYRIAD OF PEOPLE INVOLVED

IN THIS.

I'M GOING TO ASK FOR A NO; VOTE ON THIS AMENDMENT I

FEEL THAT IN ORDER

TO PROPERLY GET THIS MARKET BACK TO WHERE

IT WAS; WE NEED TO GO BACK TO

THE ENTIRE

10 YEAR STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS. NO ONE'S RIGHT" IS

BEING ELIMINATED. NO ONE'S RIGHT ARE BEING TAKEN AWAY.

INSURANCE COMPANIES ARCHITECTS; THEY NEED THE INSURANCE

THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD IN THIS MARKET

IN A WAY THAT GIVES THEM THE TYPE OF PROTECTION THEY NEED TO GET THIS MARKET BACK.

I ASK FOR A NO; VOTE. THANK YOU. >> HOUSE SPEAKER:

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE AMENDMENT TO

THE AMENDMENT? SEEING NO

FURTHER DISCUSSION

BALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY; AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES.] OPPOSED;

NAY. THE MOTION DOES NOT PREVAIL AND THE AMENDMENT T

O THE MOMENT IS NOT ADOPTED >> [GAVEL] >> HOUSE SPEAKER: WERE NOW ON THE UNDERLYING A- 17 AMENDMENTS.

REPRESENTATIVE DEHN >> REPRESENTATIVE DEHN: SO

WITHOUT THIS DATE BACK TO

JULY 1 I AM ASSUMING THAT A- 17 WILL

NOT BE ABLE TO BE ADDED

TO THIS; BUT I JUST WANT TO

CAUTION MEMBERS THAT CLEAN UP

THE MARKET IS A GOOD THING

TO DO. BUT HOW WE DO THAT IS

ALSO IMPORTANT. I MEAN IT'S

VERY IMPORTANT.

BECAUSE WE ARE ABOUT TO TAKE AWAY THE

CONTRACTUAL RIGHTS OF MANY INDIVIDUALS

THAT HAD PURCHASED UNITS

UNDER A PROVISION OF LAW DURING

THE TIME THEY PURCHASED THEIR

CONDO UNITS. SO; IN VOTING AGAINST

THIS AMENDMENT AND VOTING FOR

THAT BILL; WE

ARE VOTING TO TAKE AWAY

THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE THAT PURCHASE PROPERTY

. SOME OF THEM AT A TIME WHEN THE MARKET

IS NOT QUITE

BACK YET. SOME OF THOSE AT A TIME WHEN

THE MARKET WAS BACK YET. WE WILL BE

-WE WILL BE; IN ESSENCE;

NULLIFYING THE WAY IN WHICH THEY PURCHASED THEIR UNITS TO

THESE CHANGES. SO I WOULD ASK THAT

MEMBERS VOTE IN FAVOR OF

THIS AMENDMENT.

THANK YOU. >> HOUSE SPEAKER:

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE A-

17 AMENDMENT?

REPRESENTATIVE SMITH >>

REPRESENTATIVE SMITH: I ASK FOR A NO; VOTE.

THANK YOU. >> HOUSE SPEAKER: SEEING NO

FURTHER DISCUSSION ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY; AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES.] OPPOSED; NAY.

THE MOTION DOES NOT PREVAIL AND THE AMENDMENT IS NOT ADOPTED >> [GAVEL] >> HOUSE SPEAKER:

THERE'S NO FURTHER AMENDMENT AT THE DESK AT THE CLERK WILL GIVE THE BILL THIRD READING >> CHIEF CLERK: THIRD READING HOUSE FILE 1538 >> HOUSE SPEAKER: THIRD READING >> [GAVEL] >> HOUSE SPEAKER:

DISCUSSION ON HOUSE FILE 1538?

REPRESENTATIVE

LESCH >> REPRESENTATIVE LESCH:

REPRESENTATIVE SMITH;

THERE ARE CONCERNS THAT A BEEN STATED

MULTIPLE CONCERNS ABOUT THE BILL AS WRITTEN AND

I'VE HEARD FROM VARIOUS FOLKS THAT THEY

THINK THAT DESPITE

THOSE CONCERNS

THIS BILL IS KIND OF BEING SOLD AS A PANACEA FOR THE

LACK OF CONDO BUILDS THAT WE

ARE SEEING.

THE FOLKS THAT I TALKED TO ABOUT THIS

SEEMED GENERALLY SINCERE IN THEIR

BELIEF THAT

THIS BILL WILL SOLVE A PROBLEM. I CAN TELL

YOU; MEMBERS IS

MY 15TH LEGISLATIVE SESSION NOW AND

THERE'S A LOT OF BILLS

THAT COME THROUGH HERE THAT ARE SOLD

AS PANACEAS; AS CURE-ALL'S;

OR HOW IT'S GOING TO SOLVE A PROBLEM. I THINK THERE MIGHT BE ONLY ONE I REMEMBER THAT DID THAT REMEMBERS THE

PUTTING SUDAFED

BEHIND THE COUNTER TO STOP METH LABS? ANYONE

REMEMBER THAT?

SURE ENOUGH; MET HOUSES IN THE

YEARS AFTER PRETTY MUCH DISAPPEARED.

WHICH FLORIDA I THOUGHT IT WOULD WORK I DID NOT THINK IT WOULD WORK THAT WELL BUT

LOOKING AT THE PERSPECTIVE A PROSECUTOR IN

LAW ENFORCEMENT

I WAS VERY IMPRESSED WITH THE RESULTS OF THE NOW SINCE THEN OF COURSE

MARKETS HAVE CHANGED BUT IT'S BEEN PRODUCED IN OTHER PLACES AND STILL SEND HERE SO BUT

IT STILL DRASTICALLY REDUCE

THE NUMBER OF MET HOUSES WE HAD

; FARMERS GETTING STUCK

STOLEN OUT OF THEIR FIELD.

MY QUESTION; MY FIRST QUESTION

I HAVE REPRESENTATIVE SMITH;

IS REGARDING THE REQUIREMENT

THAT YOU HAVE TO GET HOMEOWNERS WHO

CONTRACTED THIS TO HAVE TO GET

THEIR AGREEMENTS

TO TAKE LEGAL ACTION TO PROTECT

THEIR RIGHTS. WOULD YOU SUPPORT A

SIMILAR PROVISION FOR

CORPORATIONS MINNESOTA TO

ACQUIRE CORPORATIONS TO GET THE

SAME AMOUNT OF CONSENT FROM

THEIR SHAREHOLDERS PRIOR TO TAKING

LEGAL ACTION

TO PROTECT THEIR RIGHTS OR INTEREST?

>> REPRESENTATIVE SMITH:

WE HAD A LONG DISCUSSION ABOUT

THIS BILL

IN CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE. I UNDERSTAND YOUR POSITION.

I WOULD ASK YOU TO GET OUT YOUR CALENDAR AND MARK TODAY'S

DATE DOWN BECAUSE THIS MAY BE THE

SECOND TIME

IN YOUR LONG AND DISTINGUISHED LEGISLATIVE CAREER

THAT THIS BILL WILL SOLVE PROBLEMS IN THE MARKETPLACE.

IN REGARD TO YOUR HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION I WOULD NEED TO SEE

THE LANGUAGE BUT MY

ANSWER REPRESENTATIVE; IS THAT THIS IS

UNIQUE PROBLEM; A

UNIQUE INDUSTRY. WE NEED TO ACT.

WE DEAL WITH PROBLEMS

IN DIFFERENT INDUSTRIES THROUGHOUT OUR

BELOVED STATE

EVERY TIME WE MEET AS A BODY. THIS IS ONE OF

THOSE

TIMES THAT I BELIEVE WE NEED TO COME TOGETHER AND SOLVE

THIS PROBLEM THIS

[INAUDIBLE] THIS LIST OF SUPPORTERS ALL SAVE YOU ALL READING THEIR NAMES AGAIN

IT'S LONG. IT'S BEEN A VERY LONG DISCUSSION OF

THIS BILL GETTING HIS

IN THE SHAPE IT'S IN. FOR THOSE WHO THAT A PARTICULAR INTEREST IN

THIS BILL; YOU MAY KNOW

THAT THE VERSION IN THE SENATE

IS DIFFERENT.

THIS BILL IS GOING TO GO TO CONFERENCE COMMITTEE.

THE DISCUSSIONS

FOR COMPROMISE MODIFICATIONS; WILL CONTINUE.

SO REPRESENTATIVE; PLEASE;

GET OUT YOUR ACCOUNT THIS MAY BE THE SECOND ONE. THANK YOU. >> HOUSE SPEAKER:

REPRESENTATIVE LESCH >> REPRESENTATIVE LESCH;

HEY; LISTEN REPRESENTATIVE SMITH I'M OPEN TO THE PROVEN WRONG. IT

HAPPENS BEFORE BUT I

JUST THINK-I'VE BEEN HERE 15 YEARS AND LIKE I SAID; A LOT OF

-I'LL MARK MY CALENDAR

REPRESENTATIVE SMITH AND MAYBE

IT'S THE SECOND TIME IN 50 YEARS ON PROVEN WRONG ON THAT. HOWEVER; REMEMBER

THIS A PRETTY DRASTIC MANEUVER WE ARE TAKING AT THE

-TO SUGGEST IT'S GOING TO SOLVE A CONDO

BUILD PROBLEM. WE ARE INTERFERING WITH PEOPLE'S RIGHT

TO CONTRACT WE

ARE INTERFERING-WE ARE LEGISLATIVELY

ABROGATING THEIR DUE

PROCESS RIGHTS. THOSE ARE TWO PRETTY BIG

CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS I'M SURE SOME OF THE

TEA PARTY IS OVER THERE WOULD CARE ABOUT QUITE A BIT ESPECIALLY THE RIGHT TO CONTRACT. BUT; YOU BROUGHT UP-

REPRESENTATIVE SMITH

; YOU BROUGHT UP THAT LIST OF FOLKS

; OR THE MUNICIPALITIES

THAT SUPPORTED I THINK I SAW JEN

HASSAN BLOOMINGTON; MIGHT BE A

COUPLE OTHERS. WERE THERE

-DID YOU RECEIVE OF HER LETTER OF SUPPORT FROM LOCAL FROM ANY LOCAL UNITS OF GOVERNMENT OUTSIDE THE METRO IN SUPPORT OF

THIS BILL? >> REPRESENTATIVE SMITH:

THERE IS NOT ANY DOCUMENTED SUPPORT FROM OUTSIDE THE METROPOLITAN AREA BUT I KNOW THERE IS SUPPORT. I KNOW THAT YOUR CITY OF ST. PAUL REALLY

IS INTERESTED IN THIS BILL

THERE'S A DEVELOPER DOWN AT THE OLD

PORT LANDS PEOPLE ARE VERY ENCOURAGED ENCOURAGE OF THIS BILL BECOMES LAW TO HELP OUT YOUR BELOVED CITY. THANK YOU.

>> REPRESENTATIVE LESCH:

THAT'S GOOD TO KNOW BECAUSE I'M NOT TALK TO ME ABOUT IT.

NO ONE FROM ST. PAUL

HAS TALKED TO ME ABOUT IT. HERE'S WHAT I

KNOW. I'VE HEARD MINNEAPOLIS CAME

IN TESTIFIED FOR IT.

REPRESENTATIVE ANDERSON IS

NOT HERE

SO SHE WON'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT MY WIFE AND LIVES IN MINNEAPOLIS BUT I DON'T MINNEAPOLIS TESTIFIED IN FAVOR OF IT. I UNDERSTAND THE REASONS

BEHIND WHY

SOME OF THESE FOLKS WANT TO GET IT. IT'S JUST CURIOUS YOUR CAUCUS

IS STATED YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE CARE OF

GREATER MINNESOTA AND

I'M SEEING A WHIMPER FROM GREATER MINNESOTA ABOUT HOW THIS CAN HELP FOLKS OUT THERE BUT IF

REPRESENTATIVE SMITH WHEEL TO A

FINAL QUESTION?

REPRESENTATIVE SMITH; CAN YOU TELL ME

HOW IS THE HOUSING MARKET DOING OVERALL

IN MINNESOTA RIGHT NOW?

OUR HOMES BEING BUILT OR ARE

WE STAGNATING?

>> REPRESENTATIVE SMITH:

THE HOUSING MARKET IS IN A

PERIOD OF RECOVERY SINCE THE GREAT RECESSION AND THINGS

ARE IMPROVING BUT WHAT'S

MORE IMPORTANT TO YOUR QUESTION IS THAT WE NEED TO HELP OUT THE CONDO AND TOWNHOMES

DEVELOPMENTS. TOWNHOMES AND

CONDOS FOR THE LOW INCOME AND

MIDDLE INCOME

; THEY ARE HURTING. THEY NEED

WE NEED REVISIONS IN THIS AREA THOUGHT TO HELP THEM. THAT MARKET IS

SUFFERING GREATLY.

>> REPRESENTATIVE

LESCH: I'LL TELL YOU HOW IT'S DOING REPRESENTATIVE SMITH IT'S BOOMING. IT'S BOOMING.

MAYBE NOT FOR CONDOS; BUT

THE SUGGESTION BY PROMOTERS OF THE

BILL THAT THAT'S BECAUSE

INSURANCE COMPANIES

AND DEVELOPERS DON

'T WANT TO BUILD SOMETHING WITH HER EXPOSED TO LIABILITY IN THIS WAY; I

DON'T KNOW

. MAYBE IT'S THE MARKET THING. NOW I'M A GUY WHO SUPPORTS HOUSING DENSITY. THERE

ARE BILLS THAT

I VOTED ON YOUR SIDE OF

THE CAUCUS ON IN THIS YEAR AND

YEARS PASSED AND REPRESENTATIVE NASH KNOWS THIS

TO ENCOURAGE HOUSING DENSITY TOWN HOSE AND CONDOS ARE GOING TO GET YOU

TO DENSITY WERE SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES ARE NOT. I COMPLETELY SUPPORT THE PRINCIPLES OF HAVING THOSE CONDOS AND TOWNHOMES BUILT

WITHOUT SINGLE-FAMILY ARE GETTING BUILT BUT I'M JUST HARD-PRESSED TO BELIEVE THAT THIS IS THE WAY TO GO ABOUT IT

AND I CAN TELL YOU; THIS IS A

BANNER YEAR

FOR INSURANCE COMPANIES AT THE

MINNESOTA CAPITAL. A BANNER YEAR

. YOU DIFFER IN FAVOR OF WHAT INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE SAYING

. YOU SWALLOW WHAT THEY'RE TELLING YOU HOOK LINE AND SINKER

. INSTEAD OF SUPPORT

ING YOUR CONSTITUENTS CONTRACT RIGHTS AND DUE PROCESS RIGHTS. I COULD BE PROVEN WRONG REPRESENTATIVE

SMITH EMMA MARK THE DATE ON

MY CALENDAR. TO TALK TO YOU IN TWO

YEARS; TO; AND MAYBE YOU

ARE RIGHT AND QUITE FRANKLY; I HOPE YOU ARE RIGHT. I JUST DON'T THINK THIS IS THE BILL

IS A WAY TO GO ABOUT DOING IT. I'M GOING TO BE VOTING; NO. >> HOUSE SPEAKER:

REPRESENTATIVE DEHN

>> REPRESENTATIVE DEHN:

TO REPLY TO ONE OF

REPRESENTATIVE SMITH'S COMMENTS; MY A MOMENT WOULD'VE MADE ST. PAUL

JUST FINE.

THEY WOULD'VE BEEN JUST FINE MOVING FORWARD. ALL THE UNITS GOING TO BE BUILT THERE

THEY WOULD'VE BEEN JUST FINE

WITHOUT AMENDMENT

BUT YOU CHOSE TO VOTE IT DOWN AGAIN; THIS IS

GOING BACK AND REALLY

GIVING INDIVIDUALS THE OPPORTUNITY

TO CHANGE THE

PLAYING FIELD THEY BUILT THEIR

PROPERTIES ON. I'M A BIG SUPPORTER OF THE

ARCHITECTURE PROFESSION I'M

A BIG SUPPORT OF GENERAL

CONTRACTORS; BIG SUPPORTER OF ALL THOSE FOLKS AND YET

I LOOK AT THIS BILL AND THERE SEEMS TO BE A LOT OF DISSENSION

YET. WE ALL CAN ROLL OUT

LONG LIST OF PEOPLE THAT ARE SUPPORTERS AND

I THINK THAT IS

IMPORTANT TO DO THAT; BUT AT THE SAME TIME;

IT'S NOT JUST A ONE-SIDED ISSUE. THERE'S TWO SIDES TO

THIS ISSUE. IF REPRESENTATIVE

SMITH; CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO THE

BODY EXACTLY WHY MAKING

THIS RETROACTIVE

FOR A 10 YEAR PERIOD IS GONNA SOMEHOW FREE UP

THE MARKET THAT CURRENTLY IS

DOING OKAY IN HOUSING?

IT'S ACTUALLY DOING REALLY REALLY WELL IN APARTMENTS

BUT HOW IT'S GOING TO IMPACT THE

CONDO MARKET?

>> REPRESENTATIVE SMITH:

PART OF THE GENESIS OF THIS BILL

WERE

FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS THAT ARE BEEN GOING ON AND THE

LAST YEAR OF THE TENURE STATUTE

OF LIMITATIONS

FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS ARE BEING BROUGHT FORWARD.

THIS BILL WILL PROHIBIT

FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS FROM GOING FORWARD

. THE PEOPLE INVOLVED IN

THE CONSTRUCTION; THE ARCHITECTS;

THOSE PEOPLE;

INCLUDING PEOPLE IN THE TRADE COUNCIL;

THIS BILL WILL GIVE THEM REASSURANCE THAT

MOVING FORWARD

THESE FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS WILL STOP

GOING FORWARD AS WELL IS GOING BACK

I WANT TO POINT OUT A LETTER

OF SUPPORT THAT SOME YOU MAY NOT

HAVE SEEN IT IS FROM

HARRY OLANDER FROM THE MINNESOTA STATE

BUILDING CONSTRUCTION TRADES COUNCIL DATED APRIL 26; 2017.

THIS BILL WILL BE BENEFICIAL TO ALL OF MINNESOTA

. THIS IS A GREAT BILL. THANK YOU. >> HOUSE SPEAKER:

REPRESENTATIVE DEHN

>> REPRESENTATIVE DEHN:

I DON'T THINK YOU REALLY TOLD US HOW IT'S GOING TO AFFECT THE MARKETS.

I MEAN I WOULD VENTURE TO GUESS THAT WE WILL SEE A LOT

MORE DEVELOPERS MOVING INTO

THE CONDOMINIUM MARKET

AND I THINK IT'LL BE REALLY REALLY GOOD FOR THEM MOVING FORWARD

. WHAT THIS BILL IS ACTUALLY GOING TO DO; IT'S A FREE

UP CAPITAL BECAUSE IT ALLOWED MORE CAPITAL TO

COME IN IT WILL ALSO MAKE

INSURANCE RATES

; MAY BE BETTER; MAYBE NOT BUT WE ALWAYS GET PROMISES FROM INSURANCE COMPANIES THAT THE THINGS WE DO HERE WILL IMPACT OUR INSURANCE RATES THEY SEEM TO NEVER REALLY DO THAT.

BUT IT WILL DEFINITELY RELIEVE THEM OF

ANY LIABILITY THAT THEY CURRENTLY ARE CARING

FOR THE PAST 10 YEARS

AND AGAIN; I'M REALLY DISAPPOINTED THAT YOU WERE NOT WILLING TO

SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT I BROUGHT FORWARD

BECAUSE I THOUGHT

THAT WAS TRYING TO FIND THAT AREA OF

MIDDLE GROUND AND

I THINK THAT FOR THIS BILL COMING BACK FROM

CONFERENCE COMMITTEE IT'S GOING

TO CHANGE; OR IT'S NOT GOING TO

COME BACK WE'VE SEEN THAT HAPPEN WITH OTHER BILLS THAT

YOU HAVE

REPRESENTATIVE SMITH HAVE CARRIED TO CONFERENCE COMMITTEE IN THE

PAST. IF THIS BILL DOES NOT COME BACK;

WE ARE GOING TO BE LEFT IN THE SAME PLACE WE ARE TODAY.

THAT'S NOT TO HELP ANYBODY. ALL THE PEOPLE

THAT ARE SIGNED ON TO

SUPPORT THIS;

THEY'RE ALL GOOD TO BE IN THE SAME PLACE THEY WERE TODAY.

NOT IN A PLACE THAT THEY

COULD BE BY WORKING TOGETHER WITH

BOTH SIDES TO GET TO THAT POINT

WHERE

SOME PEOPLE MIGHT BE A LITTLE

BIT UNHAPPY BUT IT'S GOING TO BE PEOPLE ON

BOTH SIDES THAT CAN BE A LITTLE

BIT UNHAPPY AND I ACTUALLY BELIEVE

THE AMENDMENT AND THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT WOULD

HAVE HAD THE SAME EFFECT OF FREEING UP

FINANCIAL CAPITAL; PUTTING

INSURANCE COMPANIES SOMEWHAT AT

REST ALTHOUGH

NOT COMPLETELY AT REST; WHICH WHAT'S BEEN GOING ON IN THE PAST FEW YEARS.

AND I THINK THESE LISTS THAT YOU

HANDED OUT OF I GUESS IT'S ABOUT 11 CITIES

MIGHT BE SITTING IN THE SAME SITUATION THEY ARE TODAY. SO I WOULD

ENCOURAGE YOU WHEN YOU GO TO

CONFERENCE COMMITTEE TO NOT

BE DOGMATIC

OF THIS BILL AND WHERE IT'S AT TODAY BECAUSE MY GUESS

IS GIVEN THE

-GIVENS WHAT'S PASSED IN THE SENATE IF YOU

ARE DOGMATIC IS BILL WON'T

BECOME LAW. I ASKED FOLKS TO VOTE; NO. >> HOUSE SPEAKER:

REPRESENTATIVE HILSTROM >> REPRESENTATIVE HILSTROM:

REPRESENTATIVE SMITH; COULD YOU CLARIFY FOR ME

IF I PURCHASE A UNIT IN ONE OF THESE COMMON

INTEREST PROPERTIES;

AND THERE IS A DEFECT IN MY UNITS;

AND ONLY IN MY UNIT;

SO BUILDING DEFECT IN MY UNIT; IN ORDER

FOR ME TO FILE A LAWSUIT FOR THE

BUILDING DEFECT IN MY UNIT

; WOULD I HAVE TO GET 50% OF THE PEOPLE THAT OWN OTHER UNITS

TO AGREE TO ALLOW ME TO SUE ON

THAT BUILDING DEFECT?

>> REPRESENTATIVE SMITH:

REPRESENTATIVE; NO.

>> REPRESENTATIVE HILSTROM:

REPRESENTATIVE SMITH COULD YOU PLEASE; CLARIFY WHY IT IS BASED ON THE LANGUAGE OF YOUR BILL

. BECAUSE IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THE ASSOCIATION WOULD HAVE TO SUE ON MY BEHALF

AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO GET A MAJORITY VOTE OF

THE OWNERSHIP.

>> REPRESENTATIVE SMITH:

IF THE ASSOCIATION IS BRINGING THE

LAWSUIT FORWARD

THEN THE RULES WITH A 51% AND THE

OTHER OUTLINE NEED

TO TRANSPIRE IF YOU'RE BRINGING THE SUIT FORWARD

FROM YOU; THE PERSON AS

YOU ORIGINALLY

ASKED HER A QUESTION; THAT ONLY YOU YOURSELF WOULD BE

BE IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT.

>> REPRESENTATIVE HILSTROM:

REPRESENTATIVE SMITH COULD YOU TELL ME THEN IF 10 PEOPLE H

AD PROBLEMS WITH THEIR UNITS

BUT NO ONE ELSE DID; COULD

THOSE 10 GET TOGETHER AND FILE

LIKE A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT TO DEAL

WITH THE DEFECTS OF

THE CONSTRUCTION; OR WOULD THAT

BE PRECLUDED B

Y THESE PROVISIONS IN THIS BILL?

>> REPRESENTATIVE SMITH:

IF THERE LISTED INDIVIDUALLY;

WHETHER ONE AT A TIME OR AS

A GROUP;

ALONG IS ARE NOT A PART OF

THE ASSOCIATION THAN THEY CAN BRING THAT SUIT FORWARD WITHOUT THE 51%.

>> REPRESENTATIVE HILSTROM: SO

REPRESENTATIVE SMITH;

SAY; EVERY SINGLE PERSON THAT OWN

THE UNIT WANTED

TO SUE BECAUSE THERE WAS A DEFECT

WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF IT.

WITH THIS PRECLUDE THEM FROM

GETTING ALTOGETHER

AND DECIDING TO SUE NOT AS THE ASSOCIATION; NOT

AS THE BO

ARD OF DIRECTORS; BUT INDIVIDUALLY THEY COULD ALL SUE THE CONTRACTOR EVEN IF IT'S

EVERY SINGLE UNIT THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AT ALL?

>> REPRESENTATIVE SMITH:

IF THEY WERE LISTED INDIVIDUALLY AND THEY WERE ISSUED

IMPACTING THEIR INDIVIDUAL UNITS THAN THEY COULD DO THAT. IF IT'S FOR

COMMON AREAS THAN THE ASSOCIATION WILL BE NEED TO

BE INVOLVED. >> REPRESENTATIVE HILSTROM:

SO THAT'S WHAT I WAS GETTING TO

NOW. REPRESENTATIVE SMITH;

BASED ON WHAT YOU SAID; WHAT

YOU JUST COMMENTED ON THE FLOOR;

IF; FOR EXAMPLE THE ROOF OF THE COMMON AREA LEAKS OR

IS DEFECTIVE; AND THEN IT DAMAGES

MY UNITS; THE ASSOCIATION WOULD

HAVE TO FILE

THAT SUIT AND THAT COULD ONLY HAPPEN IF 50% OF

THE OWNERS OF THE UNITS

VOTED TO DO THAT. IS THAT CORRECT?

>> REPRESENTATIVE SMITH:

IT DEPENDS ON HOW THE CLAIM

IS WRITTEN.

>> REPRESENTATIVE HILSTROM:

SO MEMBERS; I'D LIKE TO

BUILD THINGS. I USUALLY VOTE IN FAVOR

OF HOUSING. I

SUPPORT HOUSING BUT I ALSO BELIEVE THAT PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO

FILE CLAIM WHEN THEY RIGHTFULLY

HAVE ONE AND ONE OF THE THINGS

THAT HAPPENS SOME OF THESE PROPOSALS

IS THAT FOR THE GOOD OF OTHERS;

SOME PEOPLE LOSE THEIR RIGHTS.

THEIR PROTECTIONS. MEMBERS; THIS BODY HAS

TAKEN A PRETTY STRONG STANCE FOR

PROPERTY RIGHTS. WHAT THIS BILL SAYS NOW

IS THAT

YOU; AS AN OWNER OF ONE OF THESE UNITS; IF

YOU'RE HARMED BY THE OTHER; THE

COMMON AREA;

YOUR PROPERTY IS DAMAGED; YOU HAVE TO GET 50% OF THE PEOPLE THAT OWN THE BUILDING

; THAT OWN OWNERSHIP

TO DECIDE TO LET YOU DO THE RIGHT THING.

SO MEMBERS; THAT'S REALLY WHERE THIS STARTS TO GET TO BE

A PROBLEM.

WHEN YOU PLACE THE BURDEN SO STRONGLY ON 50% OF

YOUR NEIGHBORS TO COME TO

THE MEETING TO HEAR THAT YOU HAVE

A PROBLEM; FIRST YOU HAVE TO GET

THEM OUT THEY HAVE TO ALL VOTE

TO AGREE TO A SUIT OR 50% OF THEM HAVE TO AGREE TO A SUIT

YOU END UP LIMITING SOMEONE ELSE'S PROPERTY RIGHTS.

SO REPRESENTATIVE SMITH I HAVE ONE

LAST QUESTION.

REPRESENTATIVE SMITH; THESE COMMON OWNERSHIPS

INTERESTS

ARE ALLOWED TO PLACE THINGS IN

THEIR CONTRACTS WHEN THEY SUE THE PROPERTY.

THEY ARE ALLOWED TO DECIDE

WHO IS GOING TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SNOWPLOWING WAS CAN BE

RESPONSIBLE FOR

GENERAL MAINTENANCE AND PURCHASERS

CONTRACT FOR THAT WHEN

A BUYER. WOULD THIS PROVISION PROHIBITS

THE BUYER AND SELLER FROM PLACING LANGUAGE IN THE BILL

THAT

WOULD SAY; YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE 50%

TO FILE A LAWSUIT ON BEHALF OF THE INTERESTS IN

YOUR PROPERTY; OR WOULD THAT BE PRECLUDED BY THE STATUTE

AT PURCHASE?

>> REPRESENTATIVE SMITH:

COULD YOU RESTATE YOUR

QUESTION; PLEASE?

>> REPRESENTATIVE HILSTROM: THE

QUESTION IS;

REPRESENTATIVE SMITH WE ALLOW PEOPLE

WERE GOING TO BUY AND SELL PROPERTY

TO CONTRACT FOR WHO'S GOING TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR

DIFFERENT PROVISIONS. WHEN YOU BUY

THE PROPERTY

YOU GET TO BE THE CONTRACT ABOUT WHAT YOU'RE ALLOWED TO DO AND WHAT YOU'RE

RESPONSIBLE FOR.

WITH THE LANGUAGE IN THIS

BILL KEEP THE SELLER OF THE PROPERTY

FROM PLACING A PROVISION IN THE BILL

WHICH WOULD NOT REQUIRE THE

50% VOTE TO FILE A LAWSUIT ON THESE

KINDS OF CLAIMS?

>>

REPRESENTATIVE SMITH: IT DEPENDS SOMEWHAT ON

EXACTLY THE LANGUAGE YOU ARE SPEAKING TO.

HYPOTHETICALS ARE GOOD FOR

THE DISCUSSION

TO UNDERSTAND THE BILL. IT DOES DEPEND A LITTLE BIT ON THE HYPOTHETICAL.

PROBABLY; NOT.

>> REPRESENTATIVE HILSTROM:

MEMBERS; I WANT TO MAKE THAT

REAL CLEAR. THAT'S THE WAY I READ THE LANGUAGE AS WELL. EAST

ON THE COMMON INTERE

ST OWNERSHIP PROVISION THAT IF YOU PUT IN STATUTE THAT REQUIRES A 50% VOTE OF ALL THE OWNERS

THIS STATUTE WOULD PRECLUDE

CONTRACTORS THE PERSON WHO

BUILDS IT AND SELLS IT; THE PERSON WHO BUYS IT; FROM CONTRACTING FOR THE

RULES TO BE DIFFERENTLY THEREBY GIVING UP YOUR PERSONAL PROPERTY RIGHTS.

>>

HOUSE SPEAKER: DISCUSSION TO THE BILL?

THE CLERK WILL TAKE

THE ROLE. >> [ROLL CALL VOTE].

>> HOUSE SPEAKER: THE CLERK WILL CLOSE THE ROLL. THERE

For more infomation >> House File 1538 is debated on the House Floor - Duration: 37:04.

-------------------------------------------

ALERT: EHDI Is Up for Re-Authorization - Duration: 5:37.

I recently attended several Congressional meetings because

the Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Act of 2017 (EHDI) is up for reauthorization and discussion.

The reauthorization process tends to happen about every five years.

Right now, bills to reauthorize this law have been presented in each of the two parts of the U.S. Congress,

the Senate and the House of Representatives.

The U.S. Congress has two parts, one is the Senate and the other is the House of Representatives.

The Senate has two elected officers for each state, so it has a total of 100 Senators.

The House of Representatives has a different number of representatives per state,

depending on the size of your state's population.

The House has a total of 435 representatives.

Now, back to the bill.

Currently, different bills to reauthorize the EHDI Act have been introduced in each of the two parts of

the U.S. Congress.

The submissions of these two bills took us by surprise because usually a bill is submitted with one part

of Congress at a time, and that allows us to focus our efforts.

Then when the bill passes that part of Congress it goes to the other part, and we can work with the other part

of Congress at that time.

However, this isn't the case right now.

We need to do double duty in both parts of Congress for two bills that are pending at the same time.

Now, why are we concerned?

Senators and Representatives were working on writing their bills before the bills are sent to a committee.

As they thought about what to put in this bill and how to improve the law that provides early services for

deaf and hard of hearing children, they asked audiologists, speech therapists and doctors.

However, they did not ask the NAD or the deaf or hard of hearing community for advice or suggestions

on what to add.

This is not acceptable.

Deaf and hard of hearing people must be involved because this bill

is about deaf and hard of hearing children!

We recommend changes to the law, and we need your support for these recommended changes to improve

how the law benefits deaf and hard of hearing children.

Under EHDI, there has been a long history of situations where families that learn of their babies being identified

as deaf after a screening will go to audiologists for confirmation.

Once this happens, the families get a lot of information that focus on speech services and auditory therapy.

They do not get enough information about sign language or deaf culture information.

You already know that through your own experiences.

We must seize this opportunity to improve the law, and we can do it!

We must contact the Senate and the House of Representatives.

There are three changes that we recommend.

First, EHDI stands for "Early Hearing Detection and Intervention."

However, if you look up "intervention" in an English dictionary, it has a negative meaning that means

to "interfere" with a bad situation, such as stop a fight or provide therapy to resolve a problem.

That does not reflect the need to positively address the needs of deaf and hard of hearing children.

Deaf and hard of hearing children can lead wonderful lives, as long as they have early and rich language access.

So, "intervention" is not what we need for deaf and hard of hearing babies.

We need to use "Early Language Services" instead.

This change will reinforce and remind people who working with deaf and hard of hearing children that

deaf and hard of hearing children need language to succeed.

We all have a responsibility to provide language to deaf and hard of hearing babies.

Currently, in the USA, 85% of families with deaf babies are using spoken language to communicate with deaf babies.

This happens because they get very limited information about the benefits of sign language.

They also get very little support to do so.

Families naturally decide to focus on speaking as it is what they use.

As the deaf baby grows up, the child does not often indicate strong language skills.

Unfortunately, such language gaps are very common as a result and has continued over the years.

The second change is about inappropriate medical terminologies used such as: "diagnosis" which is what

doctors use to explain what is wrong with you; or "treatment" which is what doctors use to determine how

to cure you of something.

Deaf and hard of hearing people are not cured by technology such as hearing aids or cochlear implants.

We still have the experience of being deaf and hard of hearing, whether we use such technology or not.

Instead, we recommend "identification" to confirm that "the baby is deaf or hard of hearing," and

instead of "treatment" we recommend "referral to services."

As for the third recommended change, the EHDI law has a provision that gives

millions of dollars to the Centers on Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), a federal agency,

to study the spread of diseases and how to stop them.

An example is the Zika virus.

That is the purpose of the CDC, and somehow this agency is also responsible for collecting data on deaf babies.

The deaf and hard of hearing community have expressed objections to this

as we do not consider being deaf to be a "disease."

The rationale given for including the CDC in the EHDI Act is that the CDC is well known for data collection.

While it is true that the CDC is designed for data collection, employees of the CDC are not members of

the deaf and hard of hearing community and are not familiar with deaf culture or the language needs

of deaf and hard of hearing babies.

As a result, the CDC is not equipped to properly assess anything beyond identification.

The money given to the CDC should be moved to an agency or entity with expertise in researching

the language acquisition of deaf and hard of hearing children.

These are the NAD's three recommendations for amendments to the bill.

You can help!

Send a letter to your Senators and House Representatives because there is a bill now

in both parts of Congress.

The Senate bill is marked as S. 652, and the House bill is marked as H.R. 1539.

We need to tell them not to support these bills until the bills include amendments from

the deaf and hard of hearing community.

We must let them know now.

We have a sample letter ready for you to use.

You also can send a video of yourself sharing your experience with EHDI.

It can either be a struggle or success story about getting language services.

If you send a video, please include an explanation in English.

We must bombard these Senators and Representatives with our letters!

By doing that, we can influence these legislators to change the law and make sure deaf and hard of hearing

children get the language services they need.

Thank you.