Representative Andy Mayberry
Speaker names can be wrong. Names are identified automatically through voice matching and may contain errors. Always verify speaker attribution against the video before citing it.
Committees
- Boys State
Recent Meetings
Recent Transcript Excerpts
Okay, and my other question is a little bit off from that, but just help me for my own clarification. Some of the water sources that we're talking about here, if I understood correctly, maybe like dried up streams or stream beds, is that correct? Well, the water, they
EPA would go along with the universal removal and that you didn't think that the EPA would allow the data that we're talking about here versus the readily available. Have you or anyone with your agency actually spoken with representatives of the EPA about these particular issues? MS. Yes, sir. We have. Actually, Representative Davis, the
you, Representative Wilkins. Representative Mayberry. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Director Marks, for being here and for your testimony today. Two questions, if I may, Mr. Chair. One, you had mentioned a couple of different times about that you didn't think that the
meeting, Thursday, 10 a.m. Representative Wilkins, you recognize. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Tomorrow morning, 7.30, special language. Representative McLean,
Question? You recognize. Representative Clemmer, I know we had some similar legislation in the last session that came up regarding this particular program. And in that legislation, it removed some criteria. This does not do that. Is that correct? Essentially, in
that something seems simple and it gets complicated along the way. This did, and Representative Hammer did yeoman's work on this to be able to bring all the parties together, and certainly I would ask for a favorable vote. Does anyone wish
for the bill. Very briefly, members, I had looked at very similar legislation. When I found out that Representative Hammer was working on this, I was more than grateful that he was willing to carry the torch on this and to allow me to be a co-sponsor on it. I will say what seemed like a very simple bill on the front end, many of you know how that is,
Your recommendation. I very much like the intent of the bill, being able to help the folks out in their time of need. Have you had an opportunity to visit with any of the human resources individuals at the different agencies to see what sort of administration issues there might be with this? I mean, is this going to be a difficult thing for them to be
Well, that actually kind of goes to what I was about to ask. Given the lengthy agenda for today, would it be appropriate to limit debate at this point? I'd like to make a
the playing field. And in this particular situation that we're talking about, it doesn't appear to me, and I would ask if you agree, that any fewer dollars were spent and put into the local economy and circulated and helped create productivity, it's the same number of dollars either way, correct? But in the end, the taxpayers have more or would potentially have had more to show for what they spent.
your bill, do you believe, address some issues with regards to that?
given the same amount of budget, and the private contractor who had devised the original plans wound up being the one who won the bid. And so that person, you know, that bid amount was the same, the contractor was the same, but the facility was considerably smaller, and the taxpayers got a whole lot less for what they bang for the buck, so to speak. Would
and the facility was estimated to be X number of square feet. Once the project got started and got underway, then bids went out and so forth, and for a variety of reasons, but I am told that one of the chief reasons is because of the prevailing wage, suddenly that had to be scaled back more and more and more. And in the end, the county wound up with a much smaller facility than what they had originally planned on doing,
Representative Mayberry. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have witnessed firsthand where a project, a CDBG grant goes to a county to build a specific facility and that on the front end, given the amount of that grant, a budget was developed, a private contractor was asked what size facility can we build with this budget,
to another super project of the type of magnitude that would require us to utilize Amendment 82 funds and then turn around and come back here to the legislature again saying, you know, I know that we just obligated ourselves greatly. We need you to do it again. How does that play into the
And I know that in my mind that's what I had envisioned, and I think that's what a lot of people had envisioned. And so this is a little different from that. If we were to go forward at this point, from what I understand, we've got about $235 million available. We're talking about $125 of it here. That eats into our resources considerably. How does that affect or does it affect our ability to continue to seek out and market ourselves
because whether we decide to approve this or not, it's a great dilemma to have, and a lot of other states don't have that dilemma right now, so thank you. I used to work at AEDC and worked on the committee to help pass Amendment 82, the Super Project Amendment, So I understand that this is a needed economic development incentive tool. And the question is whether this is the right time, the right project. At the time that we were marketing this to the state to pass this amendment, what we used often as an example was an auto manufacturer.
Mayberry, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. First, before I get to my question, I would like very much to thank you and the department and DFNA and everybody else who have brought us this opportunity,
for clarification. MR. Go ahead. Is it possible to ask Senator Raepert if he is agreeable to this before we vote?
blessing and cursing and then he tells us what to do he says therefore choose life that both thou and thy seed
Bills Discussed
No bills found.