NC Permitting Efficiency Act of 2017.
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when HB 794 moves — a committee vote, a floor vote, or a signature. Nothing else.
Free forever · unsubscribe in one click.
Your answer was recorded either way.
Which district are you in?
Your ZIP is all we need to match you to your own representatives — so we can tell you how they voted on HB 794.
You're tracking HB 794
We'll email you the moment it moves.
HB 794 — NC Permitting Efficiency Act of 2017.
Last action — Regular Message Received From House
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
3Passed House
-
4Passed Senate
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill died with 2017-2018 Session. It reached “Passed House” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.
Bill Text
What changed in the latest version
264 added · 347 removedPlain-language change summary
The latest version of House Bill 794 has updated its introduction date and removed some redundant language about future construction activities. These changes help streamline the bill for clarity and ensure that it aligns with the legislative process. This refinement matters because clearer wording can make it easier for lawmakers and the public to understand the intentions and implications of the bill.
GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 2017 H 21 HOUSE BILL 794 Committee Substitute Favorable 6/14/17 Short Title:
Representatives Stone, Saine, Bradford, and Torbett (Primary Sponsors).
For a complete list of sponsors, refer to the North Carolina General Assembly web site.
State and Local Government II, if favorable, Regulatory Reform, if favorable, Finance April 13, 2017 A BILL TO BE ENTITLED AN ACT TO IMPROVE EFFICIENCY OF CONSTRUCTION PERMITTING BY REMOVING REDUNDANCIES IN REVIEWS AND APPROVALS BY STATE AND LOCAL AGENCIES, IMPROVE ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY OF REVIEWING AGENCIES, AND MAKE NORTH CAROLINA A NATIONAL LEADER IN PERMITTING EFFICIENCY, WHICH WILL ENCOURAGE INVESTORS TO CHOOSE NORTH CAROLINA TO CREATE JOBS.
The following shall apply to construction permits issued by a county, relatedincluding tobuilding sitepermits construction and land use permits:
(1)*H794-v-1* AllGeneral standardsAssembly orOf North Carolina Session 2017 (1) All requirements for the issuance of a construction permit shall be included in aan written policy, standard, procedure, or ordinance adopted or *H794-v-2* General Assembly Of North Carolina Session 2017 authorized by the governing body, and the written policy, standard, procedure, or ordinance shall be available for public inspection.inspection in the same manner as other ordinances.
(2) A county mayshall denynot require a completepermittee constructionto permitreserve applicationland, onlydedicate ifrights-of-way, theadhere permitteeto failsplanning toor meetland theuse standardsconditions, or requirementsmake establishedaccommodations byfor future construction activities, including the countyinstallation asof prescribedfuture infrastructure, unless the requirement is included in thisan subdivision.ordinance adopted by the governing body.
IfAn theordinance countymay deniesinclude aformal completeland permituse application,maps, thecapital countyimprovement shallplans, notifyor thefiscally permitteeconstrained ofroad theimprovements areasestablished ofby noncompliancethe withDepartment specificof notationTransportation. regarding which written policy, standard, procedure, or ordinance was deficient.
(2)(3) AThe countygoverning body shall notadopt requirean aordinance permitteeestablishing toor reserveauthorizing land,county dedicatedepartments rights-of-way, adhere to planningestablish ora landschedule usethat conditions,shall orbe makeused accommodationsby forcounty futuredepartments constructionin activities,reviewing permits, including the installationmaximum number of futuredays infrastructure, unless the requirement is included in which a writtencounty policy,department standard,shall procedure,have orto ordinanceapprove authorized or adopteddeny bya thepermit. governing body.
AThe writtenschedule policy,shall standard,be procedure,published orin ordinancethe maysame includemanner formalas landother usecounty maps,ordinances capitaland improvementshall plans,be orpublished fiscallyon constrainedthe roadcounty's improvementsWeb establishedsite, byif theone countyis oravailable. Department of Transportation.
(3)If Thethe governing body shallauthorizes adopt a written policy, standard, procedure, or ordinance establishing or authorizing county departments to establish a schedule thatas shallprovided be used by county departments in reviewingthis permitsubdivision, applications, including the maximumgoverning numberbody ofshall daysapprove inthe whichschedule abefore countyit departmentimplemented shallfor haveuse toby approvethe orpublic. deny a complete permit application.
The(4) scheduleEach maycounty allowdepartment responsible for extenuatingissuing circumstancespermits whichshall, makeon adherencea impractical,quarterly asbasis, determinedsubmit byto the county,governing butbody thesea report detailing the department's compliance with the schedule exceptionsestablished shouldunder besubdivision noted(3) inof this section, including the reportingnumber asof definedpermit reviews that were completed within the time periods specified in subdivisionthe (4)schedule, the number completed prior to the expiration of thisthe section.time periods, and the number completed after the expiration of the time periods.
The scheduledepartment's report shall be madepublished availablein forthe publicsame inspectionmanner as county ordinances and shall be published on the county's Web site, if one is available.
If(5) theAn governingordinance bodyshall authorizesnot countyrequire departmentsa topermit establishbe areviewed scheduleonly asafter providedanother inagency thisor subdivision,department, theincluding governinga bodyState shallagency approveor thedepartment, schedulehas beforeconducted itits isown implementedreview forof usethe bysame or another permit related to the public.same project.
(4)Ordinances Eachadopted countyby department responsible for reviewing construction permit applications shall, on a quarterly basis, submit to the governingcounty bodyshall arequire report detailing the department's compliance with the schedule established under subdivision (3) of this section, including the number of permit application reviews that werepermits completedissued withinby the timecounty periodsshall specifiedbe inreviewed theconcurrently schedule,with theother numberpermits completedrelated prior to the expirationsame ofproject. the time periods, and the number completed after the expiration of the time periods.
The(6) department'sIf reportthe shallcounty beuses madean availableonline forpermit publicreview inspection and shallapproval beprogram, publishedevery ondepartment or agency of the county'scounty Webauthorized site,to ifreview oneand isapprove available.permits shall use the online program.
The county mayshall, presentwhere thefeasible, datamake inits theonline formatprogram ofaccessible itsto choosingoutside providedlocal itand isState inagencies, complianceand withthose thisagencies section.shall use the online program to review and approve permits.
(5)(7) AWhere writtenfeasible, policy,a standard,county procedure, or ordinance shall notmake requireits aonline construction permit bereview reviewedand onlyapproval afterprogram anotheraccessible agencyby ormunicipalities department,in includingthe acounty Stateto agencyfacilitate orconcurrent department,review hasand conductedapproval its own review of thepermits. same or another permit application related to the same project.
Written(8) policies,A standards,county procedures,may orestablish ordinancesa adoptedfee byto cover the countycost shallof requirecreating thatan constructiononline permitspermit issuedreview byand approval program, but the countyfee shall not be reviewedmore concurrentlythan withthe otheranticipated permitsfirst relatedyear's toactual cost of establishing and implementing the sameonline project.program, and the total cost of the program shall be evenly distributed to all permit applicants.
The(9) requirementA forcounty departmentsshall ornot agenciesrequire toa reviewpermittee concurrentlyto doesconstruct notoff-site applyimprovements, ifincluding theimprovements projectrelated is proposed to beutilities constructedor intraffic, phasesunless whichthe makeimprovements aare concurrentnecessitated reviewby impractical,the ordirect ifimpact of the permitteepermittee's requestsdevelopment. non-concurrent reviews.
Page 2 House Bill 794-Second794-First Edition General Assembly Of North Carolina Session 2017 (6)(10) IfA thefee countyin useslieu anof onlinepayments constructionrelated permitto applicationoff-site reviewimprovements andauthorized approvalby program,law whereshall feasible,not everyexceed departmenttwenty orpercent agency(20%) of the countyestimated andactual Statecosts agenciesassociated authorizedwith tothe reviewdirect andimpact approveof permit applications shall use the onlinepermittee's program.development.
The county shall, where feasible, make its online program accessible to outside local and State agencies, and those agencies shall use the online program to review and approve permit applications submitted to those agencies.
To ensure technology security, the county shall utilize a Web-based program or portal, or provide a secure login option, if an outside agency will have access to and utilize the county review and approval program.
(7) Where feasible, a county shall make its online permit review and approval program accessible by municipalities in the county to facilitate concurrent review and approval of permit applications.
(8) A county may establish a fee to cover the cost of creating an online permit application review and approval program, but the fee shall not be more than the anticipated first two years' actual cost of establishing and implementing the online program, including maintenance, upgrades, security features, and software licensing fees, and the total cost of the program shall be evenly distributed to all permit applicants, based on an estimated number of expected annual applicants for that county.
(9) A county shall not require a permittee to construct off-site infrastructure improvements, including improvements related to utilities or traffic, unless the improvements are roughly proportionate to the impact of the permittee's development.
(10) A fee in lieu of payments related to off-site improvements authorized by law shall not exceed twenty percent (20%) of the roughly proportionate impact of the permittee's development, unless otherwise agreed to by the permitee.
The following shall apply to construction permits issued by a city, relatedincluding tobuilding sitepermits construction and land use permits,permits: but not to include permits or approvals related to subdivision of land or zoning of land:
(1) All standards or requirements for the issuance of a construction permit shall be included in aan written policy, standard, procedure, or ordinance adopted or authorized by the governing body, and the written policy, standard, procedure, or ordinance shall be available for public inspection.inspection in the same manner as other ordinances.
(2) A city mayshall denynot require a completepermittee constructionto permitreserve applicationland, onlydedicate ifrights-of-way, theadhere applicationto failsplanning toor meetland theuse standardsconditions, or requirementsmake establishedaccommodations byfor future construction activities,including the cityinstallation asof prescribedfuture infrastructure, unless the requirement is included in thisan subdivision.ordinance adopted by the governing body.
IfAn theordinance citymay deniesinclude aformal completeland permituse application,maps, thecapital cityimprovement shallplans, notifyor thefiscally permitteeconstrained ofroad theimprovements areasestablished ofby noncompliancethe withDepartment specificof notationTransportation. regarding which written policy, standard, procedure, or ordinance was deficient.
(2)(3) AThe citygoverning body shall notadopt requirean aordinance permitteeestablishing or authorizing city departments to reserveestablish land,a dedicateschedule rights-of-way,that adhereshall tobe planningused orby landcity usedepartments conditions,in orreviewing makepermits accommodationsa forschedule futurethat constructionshall activities,includingbe theused installationby ofcity futuredepartments infrastructure,in unlessreviewing permits, including the requirementmaximum isnumber includedof days in which a writtencity policy,department standard,shall procedure,have orto ordinanceapprove authorized or adopteddeny bya thepermit. governing body.
AThe writtenschedule policy,shall standard,be procedure,published orin ordinancethe maysame includemanner Houseas Billother 794-Secondcity Editionordinances Pageand 3shall Generalbe Assemblypublished Ofon Norththe Carolinacity's SessionWeb 2017site, formalif landone useis maps,available. capital improvement plans, or fiscally constrained road improvements established by the Department of Transportation.
(3)If Thethe governing body shallauthorizes adopt a written policy, standard, procedure, or ordinance establishing or authorizing city departments to establish a schedule thatas shallprovided be used by city departments in reviewingthis permitsubdivision, applications, including the maximumgoverning numberbody ofshall daysapprove inthe whichschedule abefore cityit departmentimplemented shallfor haveuse toby approvethe orpublic. deny a complete permit application.
The(4) scheduleEach maycity allowdepartment responsible for extenuatingissuing circumstancespermits whichshall, makeon adherencea impractical,quarterly asbasis, determinedsubmit byto the city,governing butbody thesea report detailing the department's compliance with the schedule exceptionsestablished shouldunder besubdivision noted(3) inof this section, including the reportingnumber asof definedpermit reviews that were completed within the time periods specified in subdivisionthe (4)schedule, the number completed prior to the expiration of thisthe section.time periods, and the number completed after the expiration of the time periods.
The scheduledepartment's report shall be madepublished availablein forthe publicsame inspectionmanner as city ordinances and shall be published on the city's Web site, if one is available.
If(5) theAn governingordinance bodyshall authorizesnot cityrequire departmentsa topermit establishbe areviewed scheduleonly asafter providedanother inagency thisor subdivision,department, theincluding governinga bodyState shallagency approveor thedepartment, schedulehas beforeconducted itits isown implementedreview forof usethe bysame or another permit related to the public.same project.
(4)Ordinances Eachadopted cityby departmentthe responsiblecity forshall issuingrequire constructionthat permits shall,issued onby a quarterly basis, submit to the governingcity bodyshall abe reportreviewed detailingconcurrently the department's compliance with theother schedulepermits establishedrelated under subdivision (3) of this section, including the number of permit application reviews that were completed within the time periods specified in the schedule, the number completed prior to the expirationsame ofproject. the time periods, and the number completed after the expiration of the time periods.
The(6) department'sIf reportthe shallcity beuses publishedan inonline thepermit samereview mannerand asapproval cityprogram, writtenevery policies,department standards, procedures, or ordinancesagency andof shallthe becity publishedauthorized onto thereview city'sand Webapprove site,permits ifshall oneuse isthe available.online program.
The city may present the data in the format of its choosing provided it is in compliance with this section.
Show all 98 changed lines (58 more)
(5) A written policy, standard, procedure, or ordinance shall not require a permit be reviewed only after another agency or department, including a State agency or department, has conducted its own review of the same or another permit related to the same project.
Written policies, standards, procedures, or ordinances adopted by the city shall require that permits issued by the city shall be reviewed concurrently with other permits related to the same project.
The requirement for departments or agencies to review concurrently does not apply if the project is proposed to be completed in phases which make a concurrent review impractical, or if the permittee requests nonconcurrent reviews.
(6) If the city uses an online permit review and approval program, where feasible, every department or agency of the city authorized to review and approve permit applications shall use the online program.
ToHouse ensureBill technology794-First security,Edition thePage city3 shallGeneral utilizeAssembly aOf Web-basedNorth programCarolina orSession portal,2017 or(7) provideWhere feasible, a securecity loginshall option,make ifits anonline outsidepermit agencyreview willand haveapproval accessprogram toaccessible andby utilizethe county in which the city is located to facilitate concurrent review and approval program.of permits.
(7)(8) WhereA feasible,city may establish a cityfee shallto makecover itsthe cost of creating an online permit review and approval programprogram, accessiblebut by the countyfee inshall whichnot be more than the cityanticipated isfirst locatedyear's toactual facilitatecost concurrentof reviewestablishing and approvalimplementing the online program, and the total cost of the program shall be evenly distributed to all permit applications.applicants.
(8)(9) A city may establish a fee to cover the cost of creating an online permit review and approval program, but the fee shall not berequire morea thanpermittee theto anticipatedconstruct firstoff-site twoimprovements, years' actual cost of establishing and implementing the online program, including maintenance,improvements upgrades,related securityto features,utilities andor Pagetraffic, 4unless Housethe Billimprovements 794-Secondare Editionnecessitated Generalby Assembly Of North Carolina Session 2017 software licensing fees, and the totaldirect costimpact of the programpermittee's shalldevelopment. be evenly distributed to all permit applicants, based on an estimated number of expected annual applicants for that city.
(9)(10) A cityfee shallin notlieu requireof apayments permitteerelated to construct off-site infrastructureimprovements improvements,authorized includingby improvementslaw relatedshall tonot utilitiesexceed ortwenty traffic,percent unless(20%) of the improvementsestimated areactual roughlycosts proportionateassociated towith the direct impact of the permittee's development.
(10)The Aestimated feeactual incosts lieushall ofbe paymentscalculated related to off-site improvements authorized by lawa shalllicensed notprofessional exceedengineer." twentySECTION percent1.(c) (20%)This ofsection thebecomes roughlyeffective proportionateOctober impact1, of2017. the permittee's development unless otherwise agreed to by the permittee.
TheSECTION estimated2.(a) actualChapter costs136 shallof bethe calculatedGeneral Statutes is amended by adding a licensednew professionalArticle engineer."to SECTIONread: 2.
Chapter 136 of the General Statutes is amended by adding a new Article to read:
(a) The purpose of this Article is to delegate to certain municipalities the authority to issue construction permits and approvalsapprove associatedestablished withstandards for State-maintained roads located within the municipality and the municipality's extraterritorial jurisdiction.
The authority delegated under this subsection includes the authority to approve plats, issue driveway permits,permits and inspect and approve construction activities andor encroachment within the Department's rights-of-way.
A(b) municipalityThe may,authority byof makingmunicipalities ato requestreview ofand theapprove Departmentpermits Divisionor Engineer,establish declinestandards delegated authority for certainState-maintained roads orin infrastructureits andmunicipal otherboundary elementsexists asonly providedto inthe thisextent section,explicitly butprovided thatin requestthis doesArticle notor declineotherwise delegatedgranted authorityby forthe allBoard. State-maintained roads.
(b)(c) TheNothing authority of a municipality to review and approve construction permit applications for State-maintained roads in itsthis municipalArticle boundarymodifies and the municipality'sDepartment's extraterritorialresponsibility jurisdiction exists only to theperform extenttypical explicitlymaintenance providedactivities inon thisState-maintained Articleroads orand otherwisebridges. granted by the Board.
(c) Nothing in this Article modifies the Department's responsibility to perform typical maintenance activities on State-maintained roads and bridges, or modifies bonding requirements.
(e) A municipality may request the Department review permit applications, construction activities and encroachments, or inspections, for certain specific State-maintained roads, certain types of State-maintained roads, bridges, or provide technical services, which may be outside of the municipality's expertise.
The manner by which the services requested by the municipality are provided to the municipality by the Department shall be consistent with current practices or in a manner mutually agreeable to the municipality and the Department Division Engineer.
(f) A municipality may request a modification of a Department standard or policy by submitting the request to the Department Division Engineer.
The modification request must include the basis of the request and a detailed description of how the modification will not House Bill 794-Second Edition Page 5 General Assembly Of North Carolina Session 2017 adversely impact safety, road maintenance, or traffic flow to the State-maintained road network.
(g) A municipality may, as part of its delegated review function, approve a minor site-specific deviation from a Department standard or policy if, in the opinion of the municipality, the modification will not adversely impact safety, road maintenance, or traffic flow to the State-maintained road network and is necessitated by a minor site-specific condition.
When a municipality approves a minor deviation from the Department standard or policy, the municipality shall notify the Department through a process established by the Department Division Engineer and the municipality.
The municipality is not required to obtain the Department's approval of the minor deviation but may seek the Department's approval or guidance related to the deviation from the Department's standard or policy.
(h) Delegation of authority to municipalities to issue construction permits and approvals associated with State-maintained roads located within the municipality and the municipality's extraterritorial jurisdiction shall not apply to any of the following:
(1) Interstate highways, including ramps and interchanges.
(2) State-maintained roads which have high traffic volumes.
For the purpose of this Article, a road with high traffic volumes are those sections of road with annual average daily traffic (AADT) of 50,000 as presented in the Department's most current AADT volume maps.
(3) Sections of State-maintained roads located within 2,000 feet of an interstate interchange as measured from the limits of the right-of-way of the interstate.
(4) Sections of State-maintained controlled access roads.
For the purpose of this Article, controlled access roads which will be excluded from delegated authority will be those considered "full control of access" or "limited control of access" as defined by the Board.
The Board shall only approve an application upon determining the municipality's review staff hashave adequate experience and technical expertise related to the review of transportation design and construction activities.
Page 4 House Bill 794-First Edition General Assembly Of North Carolina Session 2017 "§ 136-166.53.
(a) The Department shallmay establish review guidelines that a local government shall follow in its review.
These guidelines shall be consistent with existing permitting standards,standards including those followed by the Department, and of a technical nature.
(b) If the Department determines a municipality is failing to adequately administer or enforce a local program, it shall notify the municipality in writing and shall specify the deficiencies of administration and enforcement.
The review is limited to technical elements only and the Department may not request modifications to reviewed plans based on conflicting Page 6 House Bill 794-Second Edition General Assembly Of North Carolina Session 2017 policies established by a municipality that has been delegated authority to approve local programs.
(1) Adopt written policies, standards, procedures, or ordinances and regulations necessary to establish and enforce transportation review programs established in accordance with this Article.
AAn written policy, standard, procedure, or ordinance shall at least meet, but may not exceed, the minimum requirements established by the Department for State-maintained roads.roads, unless the requirements are consistent with those established for locally maintained roads of similar capacity and nature.
(3) CollectEstablish fromstandards the Department the amounts necessary to administer and enforceordinances thisfor program,roads not to exceedmake theroad actualdesign costsconsistent towith thelocal municipality,roads, takingincluding intolandscaping accountrequirements, feeson-street collectedparking, bysignage, theand municipalitysignalization. pursuant to G.S.
136-166.55.
AExcept as otherwise allowed under subsection (e) of this section, a municipality shall disapprove a plan if implementation of the plan would result in a violation of federal and State laws, regulations, rules, and standards.
(e) If a municipality with delegated authority under this Article establishes a technical standard for a State-maintained road that is different than the State standard, the municipality House Bill 794-First Edition Page 5 General Assembly Of North Carolina Session 2017 shall notify the Department in writing of the details of the modification or exception and the reason for the modification or exception.
Unless there is a compelling reason for a change in a technical standard, such as implementation to local land use objectives, public safety goals, local development standards, or site-specific conditions, the municipality shall refer to State standards when reviewing construction plans which have activities within State-maintained rights-of-way.
An ordinance adopted by a municipality may establish a fee for the review of a transportation-related or right-of-way impacting construction plan and related activities,activities. except as limited by provisions of G.S.
160A-296.However, if the local government already performs reviews of the same construction plans under this Article, it may not establish an additional fee for review of a construction activity impacting a State-maintained road or its right-of-way." SECTION 2.(b) This section becomes effective October 1, 2017.
However, if the local government already performs reviews of the same construction plans under this Article, it may not establish an additional fee for review of a construction activity impacting a State-maintained road or its right-of-way." SECTION 3.(a) Chapter 143 of the General Statutes is amended by adding a new Article to read:
State and local government agencies that have the authority to review and approve construction permits shall maintain published records that present a summary of adherence to their published review schedules with data on frequency of reviews that were not performed within the established time lines, as well as those reviews performed ahead of schedule.
This data shall be published on the agency's or municipal government's public Web site.
House Bill 794-Second Edition Page 7 General Assembly Of North Carolina Session 2017 State and local government agencies that have the authority to review and approve construction permits shall make accommodations to incorporate and facilitate access by staff of other agencies, departments, or local governments so that all entities can utilize the system concurrently and collaboratively.
For municipalities that have separate local governments with separate areas of responsibility, such as a county review of stormwaterbuilding permits and a city with review authority of site plans, but both are reviewing the same construction project, the municipalities shall coordinate their review processes so that submittals and reviews are done online through the same online system andor process.portal.
If reviews are performed through an online system, where feasible, all review agencies and departments shall review using the same online system or portal.
To ensure technology security, the agency or municipal government which hosts the online review system shall utilize a Web-based program or portal, or provide a secure login option, if an outside agency will have access to and utilize the online review and approval program.
State agenciesor local governments, which incur costs associated with the creation or adoption of an online permitting systemsystem, may establish a fee or increase an existing fee for the review, but the new or additional fee shall not be more than the anticipated actual cost associated with implementation including maintenance, upgrades, security features, and software licensing fees distributed equally among all permit applicants over the course of twoone years.year.
The fee, or increased fee, shall be in effect only for the first 2412 months following the initiation of the online permitting process.
The State agenciesor local government shall estimate the anticipated number of permit applications for the program's first 2412 months based on the number of applicants from the previous 12 months." SECTION 3.(b) State agencies which review construction documents and have permit authority shall develop and implement an online system for submittal, review, and approvalapproval, by 2020.
SECTION 3.(c) This section is effective when it becomes law.
ThisExcept actas becomesotherwise effectiveprovided, Octoberthis 1,act 2017,is andeffective applieswhen toit applicationsbecomes filedlaw. on or after that date.
Page 86 House Bill 794-Second794-First Edition
Show all 98 changed rows (58 more)
Action History
-
Regular Message Received From House
-
Passed 1st Reading
-
Ref To Com On Rules and Operations of the Senate
-
Passed 2nd Reading
-
Passed 3rd Reading
-
Regular Message Sent To Senate
-
Reptd Fav Com Sub 2
-
Cal Pursuant Rule 36(b)
-
Placed On Cal For 06/22/2017
-
Reptd Fav Com Substitute
-
Serial Referral To Regulatory Reform Stricken
-
Re-ref Com On Finance
-
Passed 1st Reading
-
Ref to the Com on State and Local Government II, if favorable, Regulatory Reform, if favorable, Finance
-
Filed
Sponsors
- Williams · Cosponsor
- John A. Torbett · Cosponsor
- Saine · Primary
- Bradford · Primary
- Stone · Primary
- Mike Clampitt · Cosponsor
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →3 sponsors · 3 co-sponsors · 173 not signed on · 3 voted No
Sponsors (3)
- Saine
- Bradford
- Stone
Co-sponsors (3)
- Williams
- John A. Torbett Republican
- Mike Clampitt Republican
Not signed on (173)
173 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 173 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 58 | 12 | 0 | 6 |
| Democratic | 13 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Republican | 24 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| U | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 96 | 15 | 0 | 9 |
| % of votes cast | 80% | 13% | 0% | 8% |
How each member voted (120)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| McElraft | — | Yea |
| Michaux | — | Yea |
| Millis | — | Nay |
| Presnell | — | Nay |
| Rogers | — | Yea |
| Szoka | — | Yea |
| Yarborough | — | Yea |
| Zachary | — | Yea |
| Autry | — | Nay |
| Black | — | Nay |
| Boswell | — | Yea |
| Burr | — | Nay |
| Cleveland | — | Nay |
| Conrad | — | Yea |
| Dobson | — | Yea |
| Dulin | — | Yea |
| Earle | — | Yea |
| Farmer-Butterfield | — | Yea |
| Fisher | — | Nay |
| Floyd | — | Yea |
| Fraley | — | Yea |
| Garrison | — | Yea |
| Gill | — | Yea |
| Henson | — | Yea |
| Hurley | — | Yea |
| Jordan | — | Yea |
| G.Adcock | — | Yea |
| L.Bell | — | Yea |
| DuaneHall | — | Yea |
| C.Graham | — | Yea |
| G.Graham | — | Yea |
| G.Martin | — | Yea |
| R.Moore | — | Yea |
| B.Richardson | — | Yea |
| B.Turner | — | Yea |
| J.Bell | — | Yea |
| BertJones | — | Yea |
| Beasley | — | Yea |
| Holley | — | Yea |
| Hunter | — | Yea |
| Lucas | — | Yea |
| Terry | — | Yea |
| Wray | — | Yea |
| Brawley | — | Yea |
| BrendenJones | — | Yea |
| DestinHall | — | Yea |
| K.Hall | — | Yea |
| Johnson | — | Yea |
| Malone | — | Yea |
| Stone | — | Yea |
| Jackson | — | Nay |
| R.Turner | — | Nay |
| T.Moore(Speaker) | — | Not Voting |
| W.Richardson | — | Not Voting |
| S.Martin | — | Not Voting |
| Boles | — | Yea |
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Bumgardner | — | Yea |
| Collins | — | Nay |
| Dollar | — | Yea |
| Elmore | — | Yea |
| Faircloth | — | Nay |
| Goodman | — | Not Voting |
| Grange | — | Not Voting |
| Hanes | — | Not Voting |
| Hardister | — | Yea |
| Horn | — | Yea |
| Insko | — | Nay |
| Lewis | — | Yea |
| McGrady | — | Yea |
| McNeill | — | Yea |
| Murphy | — | Yea |
| Saine | — | Yea |
| Speciale | — | Yea |
| Steinburg | — | Yea |
| Williams | — | Yea |
| Amos L. Quick, III | Democratic | Yea |
| Becky Carney | Democratic | Yea |
| Cecil Brockman | Democratic | Yea |
| Cynthia Ball | Democratic | Yea |
| Dante Pittman | Democratic | Yea |
| Deb Butler | Democratic | Yea |
| Eric Ager | Democratic | Yea |
| Garland E. Pierce | Democratic | Yea |
| Graig Meyer | Democratic | Yea |
| Joe John | Democratic | Yea |
| Marcia Morey | Democratic | Yea |
| Mary Belk | Democratic | Yea |
| Pricey Harrison | Democratic | Nay |
| Robert T. Reives, II | Democratic | Not Voting |
| Shelly Willingham | Democratic | Yea |
| Carl Ford | Republican | Yea |
| Dean Arp | Republican | Yea |
| Dennis Riddell | Republican | Yea |
| Donna McDowell White | Republican | Nay |
| Donny Lambeth | Republican | Yea |
| Frank Iler | Republican | Yea |
| Harry Warren | Republican | Yea |
| Hugh Blackwell | Republican | Yea |
| Jay Adams | Republican | Yea |
| Jimmy Dixon | Republican | Yea |
| John A. Torbett | Republican | Yea |
| John M. Blust | Republican | Yea |
| John Sauls | Republican | Not Voting |
| Julia C. Howard | Republican | Yea |
| Kelly E. Hastings | Republican | Yea |
| Kevin Corbin | Republican | Yea |
| Larry C. Strickland | Republican | Nay |
| Larry W. Potts | Republican | Yea |
| Mark Brody | Republican | Yea |
| Mike Clampitt | Republican | Yea |
| Mitchell S. Setzer | Republican | Yea |
| Phil Shepard | Republican | Yea |
| Sam Watford | Republican | Yea |
| Sarah Stevens | Republican | Not Voting |
| Stephen M. Ross | Republican | Yea |
| Ted Davis, Jr. | Republican | Yea |
| W. Ted Alexander | Republican | Yea |
| William D. Brisson | Republican | Yea |
| Carla D. Cunningham | U | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- Who sponsors HB 794?
- HB 794 is sponsored by Williams, John A. Torbett (Republican), Saine, Bradford, Stone, and Mike Clampitt (Republican).
- What is the current status of HB 794?
- This bill died with 2017-2018 Session. It reached “Passed House” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
- Where can I track HB 794?
- Track HB 794 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on HB 794
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of HB 794
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →