Ever wonder how those provisions get passed into law that no one seems to know anything about? Suddenly something brings it to the attention of the public and lawmakers are saying, ?Ooops, now how did that get in there??

That has been the recent response from Sen. David Hoyle (D- Gaston) and Sen. Tony Rand (D- Cumberland) over a provision in Hoyle?s Senate Bill 1546. The bill does a lot of things, but the part that has received attention lately, keeps the pension that will be paid to legislators (including former Speaker Jim Black (D-Mecklenburg) now serving time in a federal jail and Rep. Thomas Wright (D- New Hanover) facing criminal fraud charges and possible expulsion from the House) a secret from those paying the bill ? the taxpayers.

How could this have happened? How could a law allowing this get through the General Assembly?

On the very last day of session, late in the afternoon, with dozens of bills on the House and Senate calendars to get through, legislators were presented with an eight page bill that purportedly clarifies the public?s access to state employees? personnel records and changes confidentiality rules of hospital executives? compensation packages. But there was an extra (and difficult to understand) provision that was slipped into the bill that no one now seems to know anything about.

Here?s the language of the bill, found in sec. 4.5 that, believe it or not, exempts legislative pensions from the public record:

Section 4.5 G.S. 126-22 reads as rewritten:
?? 126-22. Personnel files not subject to inspection under ? 132-6.

(a) Except as provided in G.S. 126-23 and G.S. 126-24, Personnel personnel files of State employees, former State employees, or applicants for State employment employees shall not be subject to inspection and examination as authorized by G.S. 132-6.

(b) For purposes of this Article a personnel file consists of any information gathered by the department, division, bureau, commission, council, or other agency subject to Article 7 of this Chapter which employs an individual, previously employed an individual or considered an individual?s application for employment, or by the office of State Personnel, and which information relates to the individual?s application, selection or nonselection, promotions, demotions, transfers, leave salary, suspension, performance evaluation forms, disciplinary actions, and termination of employment wherever located and in whatever form. The following definitions apply:
(1) ?Employee? means any current State employee, former State employee, or applicant for State employment.
(2) ?Employer? means any State department, university, division, bureau, commission, council, or other agency subject to Article 7 of this Chapter.
(3) ?Personnel file? means any employment-related or personal information gathered by an employer, the Retirement Systems Division of the Department of State Treasurer, or by the Office of State Personnel. Employment-related information contained in a personnel file includes information related to an individual?s application, selection, promotion, demotion, transfer, leave, salary, contract for employment, benefits, suspension, performance evaluation, disciplinary actions, and termination. Personal information contained in a personnel file includes an individual?s home address, social security number, medical history, personal financial data, marital status, dependents and beneficiaries.
(4) ?Record? means the personnel information that each employer is required to maintain in accordance with G.S. 126-23.
(c) Personnel files of former State employees who have been separated from State employment for 10 or more years may be open to inspection and examination except for papers and documents relating to demotions and to disciplinary actions resulting in the dismissal of the employee. employee and personnel files maintained by the Retirement Systems Division of the Department of State Treasurer.?

Now I don?t know who knew about this but the rank and file members of the General Assembly didn?t. The hour was late, there were many bills being rushed through, this section of the bill was not explained and is at best, difficult to decipher. I?m sure most lawmakers trusted the bill sponsors, Hoyle and Sen. Walter Dalton (D- Rutherford) to explain the entire content of the bill in plain language before the vote was taken. (By the way, the bill passed 45 ? 0 in the Senate and 110 ? 0 in the House.)

I?m not sure who understood this language and knew this provision was being slipped into the bill, but somebody did and they knew exactly what they were doing.

Ooops indeed.