Press Releases and Newsletters
General Assembly to wrestle annexation laws this year (Wilmington Star-News)
Wholesale changes to the state’s longstanding annexation laws may be coming from the General Assembly this year, a high-ranking state official says.Such changes could hinder or prohibit cities like Wilmington from moving forward with controversial plans to expand their boundaries into unincorporated areas.
Exactly what shape any new legislation – which would replace laws enacted a half-century ago – would take remains unclear.
But incoming state Senate leader Phil Berger, R-Rockingham, said in an interview with the StarNews that the state’s annexation laws are “in dire need of substantial change.” And in a General Assembly now controlled by Republicans, the issue is more likely to get full consideration when the Legislature returns to Raleigh later this month.“The question, in my view, is not if, it’s when,” said Berger, who is expected to take the reins of the Senate when the legislative session begins Jan. 26. “I think you are going to see changes. …I don’t know what it’s going to look like, but I know it’s going to look different.”
Policy outdated?
Berger said the circumstances that existed when the legislature drafted annexation laws decades ago were far different than they are now. Today, he said, the biggest change annexed residents see is the “doubling of their taxes,” rather than an array of new services and perks. And, he said, annexed residents have little say in the process. Involuntary annexation is “contrary to what I believe is an appropriate thing for government to do,” Berger said.He said a significant number of state senators feel the same way. That includes the two Republicans recently elected to represent parts of Southeastern North Carolina. In interviews last week, Sens. Thom Goolsby, R-New Hanover, and Bill Rabon, R-Brunswick, said putting an end to involuntary annexations would be among their top priorities during their first terms.
“I look forward to sponsoring, working on those bills to stop it,” said Goolsby, a Wilmington attorney who represents New Hanover County in the 50-member Senate. “That’s a very big one for a lot of local people.”
He referred to the estimated 27,000 residents of unincorporated parts of New Hanover County targeted by the Wilmington City Council for future annexations, as well as some recently annexed residents.
Wilmington leaders recently endorsed a plan that calls for the annexation of small areas of the county every other year for the next two decades. They say it’s the fairest way to grow the city’s property tax base and keep the tax rate down for city residents, while ensuring that people who use city services, such as roads and parks, pay their share to maintain them.“I think it’s been a good public policy,” said Wilmington Mayor Bill Saffo, who guided the city through the recent annexation of the Monkey Junction area.
Cities fight back
The city’s wish list for state legislators this year includes the protection of cities’ annexation powers.
“Annexation has proven to be an essential tool to promote the growth of cities and their surrounding regions, as well as the state’s economy,” according to Wilmington’s state legislative agenda.
Lawless Bean, assistant to city manager Sterling Cheatham for legislative affairs, said the city is aware that the new General Assembly isn’t as keen on annexation as the old one, and it’s no surprise that the topic will be debated this session.“Hopefully we can find something that’s going to work for everybody,” Bean said.
The N.C. League of Municipalities, the main lobbying force for N.C. cities, acknowledges problems with existing annexation statutes. It has proposed a 20-point plan to update the laws, while retaining cities’ powers to extend their boundaries. The plan, if enacted, would provide more safeguards to residents in proposed annexation areas, including requiring cities to provide more upfront information to affected residents and ensuring cities have the financial ability to pay for services to the new area.Paul Meyer, chief legislative counsel at the League of Municipalities, said legislation would be introduced this session on the league’s behalf that includes its 20-point plan, which was rolled out during the last legislative session.
“Whether people know it or not, those 20 proposals would have significantly overhauled the laws of city-initiated annexations,” resulting in fewer and smaller annexations across the state, Meyer said.
Saffo said annexation has kept North Carolina cities, like Wilmington, healthy, while those in other states have withered from the inability to grow. The mayor also said he anticipated that cities across North Carolina would put up a strong fight against any proposal to greatly limit or eliminate cities’ annexation powers. “I can’t imagine the city not putting up some type of defense to that,” Saffo said.
And if the General Assembly does away with annexation, it must find some other way to help the cities, Saffo added.
But Goolsby said he believes the controversial practice of involuntary annexation should be banned in North Carolina. Annexation, he said, should be reserved only for those who seek it.
“We have to help these folks because I really view it as taxation without representation, and it’s just fundamentally not right,” Goolsby said. Rep. Susi Hamilton, D-New Hanover, who begins her first term in the House this month, acknowledges that changes should be made to the old laws, but she wouldn’t support an all-out ban.“I am not inclined to eliminate a city’s purpose and right to annex,” she said. “It’s what’s kept our city strong.”
Other members of the House from the Wilmington area – including Rep. Danny McComas, R-New Hanover – oppose involuntary annexations.Chrissy Pearson, a spokeswoman for Gov. Bev Perdue, said in an e-mail that Perdue believes affected residents should have a clear opportunity to express concerns about a pending annexation. But annexation reform, she said, is not one of Perdue’s legislative priorities as she focuses on job creation and education.
As for any talk about vetoes, “It’s much too early,” Pearson said.
By Patrick Gannon
Patrick.Gannon@StarNewsOnline.com
Published: Saturday, January 15, 2011 at 3:30 a.m.
Last Modified: Friday, January 14, 2011 at 8:36 p.m.
GOP-led N.C. Legislature opens; budget, maps ahead (AP)
RALEIGH (AP) — The General Assembly returned to work Wednesday for the first time since a seismic shift in North Carolina politics brought Republicans to power in both chambers.
The gavels fell in the House and Senate at noon for the new two-year session. GOP lawmakers, who will be in charge of both chambers for the first time since 1870, were expected to vote as a bloc later in the day to elect Rep. Thom Tillis as House speaker and Sen. Phil Berger as Senate leader.
Republicans held an 11-seat advantage in the Senate and 16 in the House, ending Democratic control of one or both chambers continuously since 1898. The new legislators arrived with high expectations, but they face painful budget choices and a difficult job redrawing district boundaries that could aid Republicans as they try to retain their new advantage for another decade.
Berger’s likely ascendancy to Senate president pro tempore ended a record 18 years of power for Sen. Marc Basnight, D-Dare, who resigned Tuesday from the Senate. Rep. Joe Hackney’s successor as House speaker was expected to be Tillis, who in only his third House term climbed the ladder quickly as minority whip and helped knock more than a dozen Democrats out of office on Election Day 2010.
The new leaders can expect a difficult job closing a budget gap for the third straight year, the result of tax collections slow to rebound as the state recovers from a recession that has kept the unemployment rate close to 10 percent.
The projected shortfall for the year starting July 1 is $3.7 billion — nearly 20 percent of the current year’s budget. Members of both parties and Gov. Beverly Perdue have said trying to close it will probably lead to state employee or teacher job layoffs and cuts to services. Federal stimulus money has dried up and Republican lawmakers pledged in the fall campaign not to extend a pair of temporary tax increases approved by the Democratic-led Legislature and Perdue in 2009.
“We intend to keep the promise that the Democrats made two years ago when they said that they were temporary taxes,” Berger said earlier this week.Perdue said Tuesday she’s unsure if her budget proposal to the Legislature will extend or end the taxes. But in the new reality at the Legislative Building, the views of a Democratic governor matter less. Republicans are within four votes of having the luxury to send veto-proof legislation to Perdue’s desk.
Still, Perdue and Republicans leaders are cautiously optimistic about working on some issues.
“It would be very disingenuous of any of us before the new session even starts to say there are these things that I’m absolutely going to veto,” Perdue told reporters Tuesday.One thing she can’t veto are bills that change the boundaries of legislative and congressional districts. GOP leaders in charge of the maps say they’ll draw fair districts, but Democrats aren’t so sure.
Wednesday, however, was about ceremony and celebration for the Republicans. Family members of newly elected lawmakers and GOP party activists filled the hallways of the Legislative Building to take in a day of history. Former Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory, who is mulling a second bid against Perdue after losing to her in 2008, was a last-minute replacement to lead the pledge of allegiance in the House.
Other GOP activists attended small receptions or watched the proceedings from the galleries or overflow seating. About a dozen members of the Carteret County Republican Women were in the front row of the Legislative Building auditorium an hour before noon to watch the Senate proceeding by closed-circuit TV.
“It’s a big occasion,” said Ellen-Brent Boone, 76, of Morehead City. “It’s the first time in over 100 years. We worked hard.”
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
(Updated 12:53 pm)
By Gary D. Robertson
Associated Press
Roads, Bridges, High-Speed Rail Are at Top Obama’s Transportation Agenda (Bloomberg)
“We will put more Americans to work repairing crumbling roads and bridges,” President Barack Obama said.
Barack Obama said he will intensify efforts to repair the nation’s roads, bridges and mass transit systems, calling the work necessary to create jobs and compete with nations that have made those investments.
In his State of the Union address yesterday, Obama said he will look to attract more private capital for big projects. Details on the spending and programs won’t be provided until the budget is released next month, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said before the speech.
The White House said in a summary that the president will unveil a six-year transportation plan in his budget that will include his previously stated idea to create an infrastructure bank to help pay for projects.
“We will put more Americans to work repairing crumbling roads and bridges,” Obama said. “We will make sure this is fully paid for, attract private investment and pick projects based on what’s best for the economy, not politicians.”
Higher spending on highways, bridges and railroads may benefit companies including construction-equipment makers Caterpillar Inc. and Terex Corp., railroad equipment maker Wabtec Corp., and investment advisers Lazard Ltd. and Blackstone Group LP.
Finding the Money
The federal Highway Trust Fund, which pays for road and transit projects from sales taxes on fuel, is on course to run out of money by 2014, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
House Republicans have ruled out raising the federal gasoline tax, as called for by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Obama’s deficit reduction commission.
“The short mention during the speech hints at the challenges we’re going to face as we try to implement our infrastructure policy,” said Robert Puentes, an analyst with the Washington-based Brookings Institute, a nonprofit public- policy organization. “The biggest challenge, of course, is financial. With the fiscal situation the way it is, without a way to pay for it, these ideas could languish,” Puentes said.
High-Speed Rail
The administration’s transportation plan calls for more investment in high-speed rail.
“Within 25 years, our goal is to give 80 percent of Americans access to high-speed rail. This could allow you go places in half the time it takes to travel by car,” Obama said in the speech. “For some trips, it will be faster than flying – without the pat-down. As we speak, routes in California and the Midwest are already under way.”
House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman John Mica, a Florida Republican, said in an interview after the speech that Obama’s high-speed rail target is “a laudable goal, but it doesn’t meet the reality of what the administration has proposed.” Mica has criticized Obama’s high-speed rail spending for not focusing on the corridor between Washington and Boston, where Amtrak’s Acela trains run.
Obama also reiterated a previously stated goal of having 1 million advanced technology vehicles on U.S. roads by 2015.
The White House said in its summary that the president in his budget will propose improved consumer rebates for electric vehicle purchases, research and development spending, and programs to encourage communities to invest in electric charging stations.
Congressional Reaction
U.S. drivers bought 274,628 hybrids, electric and fuel-cell vehicles in 2010, according to manufacturers’ sales data compiled by Bloomberg. More than two-thirds of that total was Toyota’s sales of its eight gas-electric hybrid models, including the Prius. Representative Sander Levin, a Michigan Democrat, praised Obama’s call for boosting electric vehicle sales, saying it is “not just imaginary.”
“The million is an important goal,” Levin said in an interview after the speech. “We’ll be proposing legislation tomorrow to help carry that out.” Mica said he is pleased that Obama is encouraging public- private partnerships and said he wants to work with the president on that.
He noted that Obama, who rebuffed a Democratic proposal last year for a six-year highway and transit bill, didn’t say how many years his plan would cover. ‘‘In order to get people working and start restoring the country’s infrastructure, you’re going to have to make a serious six-year commitment,” he said.
‘It’s About Time’
Representative Nick Rahall of West Virginia, the top Democrat on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, praised Obama’s plan for long-term surface transportation funding, including its focus on public-private partnerships. ‘‘It’s about time,” Rahall said in an interview before the president spoke. “If we want to rebuild our nation instead of rebuilding others, I’m all for it.” Rahall said he also supports Obama’s call for more high- speed passenger rail spending as long as Amtrak, the U.S. long- distance passenger railroad, doesn’t get left behind.
Representative Peter DeFazio, an Oregon Democrat, said he was disappointed that Obama didn’t provide funding specifics. “We got a nod,” DeFazio said in an interview. “We need a lot more than a nod. We need the investment to rebuild.”
Richard Trumka, president of the AFL-CIO, the largest U.S. labor federation, said in an e-mailed statement about Obama’s infrastructure remarks that “working people are ready to work with him and hold him to his promises.”
By Jeff Plungis and Angela Greiling Keane – Jan 25, 2011 11:40 PM ET
Lawmakers set to convene for ’11 session (Handy one page chart)
http://www.timesnewshosting.com/docs/LegGraphic012511.pdf
Raleigh Prepares For Plug-In 2011 Conference (AutoTrends Magazine)
The start of the conference is still six months away, but organizers are working diligently to ensure that Plug-In 2011 meets expectations. That’s important because the conference, now in its fourth year, has moved to Raleigh, North Carolina, for 2011. California hosted the first three conferences and now Raleigh has the chance to showcase to the world that the city has its “green on” and is doing its part to advance environmental sustainability.
Simply Electric
As the conference name suggests, Plug-In 2011 is all about electric vehicles and other forms of cutting-edge transportation and related technologies. The conference will be held July 18-21, 2011, at the Raleigh Convention Center with exhibitors given the chance to showcase their products on Tuesday and Wednesday.[2]
Workshops and breakout sessions will be held all throughout the conference with a “ride and drive” scheduled for Monday afternoon. Attendees will be given the opportunity to drive various electric (EV), plug-in hybrid electric (PHEV) and other fuel efficient models including, perhaps, some which are being considered for production.
EPRI Initiative
The conference is organized by the Electric Power Research Institute which describes itself as, “…an independent, non-profit company performing research, development and demonstration in the electricity sector for the benefit of the public.” EPRI represents companies who provide more than 90 percent of the electricity produced and delivered in the United States in addition to participants from more than 40 countries. EPRI works with scientists, engineers, industry and academic experts to “…help address challenges in electricity, including reliability, efficiency, health, safety and the environment.”[2]
Local organizers are Duke Energy and Progress Energy, a pair of companies who are in the news right now as they seek to merge into one company. That announcement has already resulted in lawsuits filed by Progress Energy shareholders who contend that Duke Energy is not paying enough for their stock. Typically, these suits are filed whenever a mega merger is announced as shareholders seek to maximize the return on their investments according to the Herald Sun.[3]
Public Showing
The conference will be open to the public for four hours on Tuesday night with a gala event scheduled on Wednesday night. Speakers will be announced in May with additional conference details forthcoming. We will be publishing updates in the coming months, so please subscribe to our feed and follow our newsletter reports.
Submitted by Matt Keegan on January 20, 2011 – 6:15 am
Governor opposes privatizing NC liquor operations (AP)
Gov. Beverly Perdue won’t pursue selling the state’s liquor operations, saying Thursday that the one-time windfall from privatizing government-run stores would hardly quench North Carolina’s fiscal needs unless alcohol regulations were loosened.
A consultant hired by the state Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission said the state would gain roughly $300 million in one-time money by selling licenses for private businesses to run the state warehouse and stores at a profit. The amount is little more than what state and local governments gain annually through the system.
Perdue said if the state wanted more money — such as $1 billion or more — it would have to ease the controls placed on liquor for more than 70 years at the more than 400 ABC stores statewide, and she’s unwilling to do that.
Easing regulations could mean expanding greatly the number of stores, lengthening their hours or allowing store advertising.
“I do not believe that the privatization of our ABC system is the right business decision for North Carolina,” Perdue said at a meeting of the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners — a privatization opponent and recipient of local store profits. “The juice just is not worth the squeeze for the people of this state.”
The Democrat’s decision doesn’t prevent the new Republican majority at the Legislature from considering privatizing the state’s Alcoholic Beverage Control system. Top GOP leaders said soon after her announcement they still would examine the possibility as part of a larger effort to make government more efficient and trim a $3.7 billion budget gap expected this summer.
“We will begin with the analysis the governor’s staff has completed, and we will complete our own assessment as we identify areas we may privatize,” said Rep. Thom Tillis, R-Mecklenburg, who is expected to be elected House speaker next week. “It is imperative that we leverage public-private partnerships to put North Carolina on sound fiscal footing.”
But her position certainly would make selling the ABC system, whether the stores, wholesale operations, or both, more difficult to do. It builds confidence among a coalition of opponents that includes liberal advocacy groups and Christian conservatives concerned about excess alcohol’s effects on society, and cities and counties that benefited from $51 million in store profits last year.
“I think the governor has made a wise decision,” said Rep. Edgar Starnes, R-Caldwell, an incoming House Finance Committee co-chairman and supporter of the current system. Starnes said House Republicans are likely divided on the alcohol privatization issue.
“Alcohol is a unique product and it has to be handled differently than Pepsi, milk or bottled water.”
North Carolina is one of nearly 20 states that directly controls wholesale and retail liquor distribution, but it’s the only one where local ABC boards sell spirits. More than 160 local ABC boards essentially independent from state government operate the stores, which generate more than $200 million in tax revenues. Beer and wine are sold by licensed conventional retailers.
A consultant the state ABC Commission hired calculated the state could receive up to $313 million on 30-year licenses sold to outside businesses that would operate the ABC warehouse and the current local stores, according to a Jan. 11 report presented to state officials and obtained by The Associated Press.
The one-time license revenue could rise to $452 million if there was a 25 percent increase in the availability and consumption of liquor, for example, if more retail stores got licenses, the report said. The amount would grow to $588 million if liquor availability and consumption grew by 50 percent. More tax revenues also would be generated through increased sales.
Perdue said the current system has worked reasonably well and has discouraged the societal ills associated with excessive drinking. She received applause from the commissioners when she said she didn’t want to have to go past aisles of liquor with her granddaughter in tow to buy a toy for her.
“I simply don’t want to be the governor — I really don’t — who puts liquor into the big Target/Walmart stores or the local convenience stores,” Perdue said.
Sen. Bob Rucho, R-Mecklenburg, an incoming Senate Finance Committee co-chairman, said liquor would still be highly regulated under privatization and suggested Perdue hadn’t calculated all the revenue options. For example, he said, selling real estate where local ABC stores stand would generate money and place the locations back on the local property tax rolls.
“The real question you ask yourself is whether this is the proper role of government,” Rucho said. “Has she done her proper due diligence?”
Perdue first broached the subject of privatizing the system last year as a way to find new state revenues during difficult budget times while attempting to focus state government on necessary functions, and had mentioned it often over the months. But she said she ultimately decided it’s essential for government to regulate liquor sales closely.
“I actually believe that this is a core service for North Carolina,” Perdue said.
By GARY D. ROBERTSON
DURHAM, N.C.
Perdue Picks Poker Over Liquor (Carolina Journal)
RALEIGH – I had an admittedly unorthodox reaction to Gov. Beverly Perdue’s announcement last week that she would not propose privatizing North Carolina’s government-run liquor stores.
The governor sided with a large, diverse array of interest groups opposing the idea: local politicians who want to keep the revenue and patronage, beer and wine wholesalers who don’t want increased competition for consumer dollars, and cultural conservatives worried about the possibility of increased alcohol abuse and addiction. Perdue also downplayed the potential revenue gains from privatization.
These factors may have played a role in her decision. But I suspect the main reason Perdue said no to privatizing the ABC stores is that she is preparing to say yes to legalizing and taxing video poker. She probably figures, probably correctly, that it would be difficult to pick two big political fights, both with moral and economic implications, at one time.
If the governor was going to choose between the two controversial ideas, it should be no surprise that she picked video poker.
The reason both ideas are on the table in Raleigh this year is that the state faces a $3.7 billion budget hole for 2011-12. Video poker offers the promise of a larger revenue take for state government in the short run, since it would move an industry from the untaxed shadows into the fully taxable light and any proceeds from the sale of ABC stores would have to be shared with localities.
Furthermore, if I’m right about what Gov. Perdue is going to propose next month, the new video-poker business would end up looking a lot like the current liquor business: monopolized and controlled by the government. If she thinks the current ABC system successfully mixes the goals of maximizing revenue and controlling consumption, she might think a strategy of legalizing video poker, placing it under the tight control of the state lottery commission, and claiming the profits as government revenue would be similarly successful.
This is no idle speculation. I submit that Perdue has been sending signals for months now that she was more willing to consider video poker than ABC privatization as a revenue source for 2011-12. While she has expressed moral reservations about making liquor more accessible to consumers via the privatization route, she obviously isn’t implacably opposed to gambling – as lieutenant governor she cast the tie-breaking vote in the state senate to create the North Carolina lottery – and has said only that if “you are going to have” video poker in the state “it has to be controlled.”
For months, the talk around Raleigh was that the real battle on video poker in the coming year wouldn’t be about whether a legalization plan would be proposed but instead what the plan would look like.
The state’s current video-gambling industry consists mostly of small family-owned businesses or partnerships operating “internet sweepstakes” outlets. The General Assembly has tried a couple of different times to stamp out these private competitors to the state lottery. But the operators have changed their games accordingly. There are also legal challenges underway against the latest prohibition law.
One option would be to repeal such prohibitions and simply have the state and localities regulate the private, competitive industry and reap tax revenue from it. The other option, the one I think the Perdue administration is actively considering, would be to legalize it but exclude most of the current operators by giving the lottery commission a monopoly on video gambling in the state – a monopoly it would likely award by contract to a major national player in the industry.
My own view is that the state should both privatize the ABC stores and legalize video poker – but only if both industries are going to be completely private, with the government’s involvement being only to tax them like any other private business and regulate them like any other private business (to protect consumers against fraud).
But I want to maximize the freedom of North Carolinians, not maximize the size and power of North Carolina government. Perdue and I have different goals here.
By John Hood
January 24, 2011
Hood is president of the John Locke Foundation.
Senate goal: Helping private firms create jobs (News and Observer)
This week marks a new chapter in our state’s history. For the first time since 1870, Republicans will lead both chambers in the N.C. General Assembly. We assume leadership positions at a time of great challenges, tremendous responsibility and with the opportunity to be agents of remarkable change.
The list of important goals for North Carolina’s Senate is long. However, one objective will command our primary attention – we must foster an environment where the private sector can create jobs. Our campaigns emphasized this issue, our promises to voters began with this commitment and the current economy requires it.
The unfortunate reality is nearly one in 10 North Carolinians are unemployed. From 2000 to 2009, North Carolina’s pool of eligible workers grew by 329,012; yet the state’s economy added only 13,806 jobs. Not only did job creation lag, wages fell significantly compared with other states. Without question, we are feeling the effects of the same economic crisis that has affected businesses and working families across our country. In many ways North Carolina faces a sharper uphill battle. Years of unsustainable growth in the size and scope of state government resulted in tax rates that are the highest in the Southeast and among the highest in the nation. These policies are killing jobs and driving employers elsewhere.
Constant overspending, over-taxing and over-regulating have left us with a massive $3.7 billion state budget deficit and a business climate requiring government subsidies for the few jobs created. In order to revitalize our economy, we must fix our budget and reduce the overall size of state government. Our strategy does not include the tried and failed recipe of raising taxes to sustain and grow spending beyond the state’s means or reasonable needs. Just as N.C. families and private businesses make tough decisions to balance their budgets, we will have to tighten our belts and trim expenses.
The 2010 election was a directive from voters to change the course of state government. On behalf of my Senate Republican colleagues, I can assure you that we have heard the voters loud and clear. We will do everything in our power to retain your confidence and will work tirelessly and enthusiastically to get our economy back on track. We will work with all of our state’s elected officials to move our state forward toward growth, greater opportunity and a better quality of life for all North Carolinians.
By Sen. Phil Berger
Special to the Observer
Posted: Sunday, Jan. 23, 2011
