Press Releases and Newsletters
Summary of Billboard Bill S183
Senate 183 Billboard passed out of House Commerce and Job Development/ Business and Labor
Audit: N.C. loses millions in uncollected fines (News & Record)
RALEIGH (AP) — North Carolina is leaving millions of dollars on the table in uncollected fees, fines and restitution from traffic and criminal cases, according to an audit released today.
The report by the Office of the State Auditor says that antiquated computers and administrative processes are part of the problem. But the audit also says the state Judicial Department isn’t using all of the methods at its disposal to collect the court-ordered funds.
As a result, the audit says, the state didn’t collect roughly $40.2 million in cases from 2008, the most recent year for which data is available.
“Due to the department’s lack of accountability and use of limited collection efforts for the recovery of court-ordered fines, fees and restitution,” the auditors wrote, “the state, local governments, crime victims and other beneficiaries may not receive the full amounts owed to them.”
Judge John Smith, director of the Administrative Office of the Courts, disputed the findings and conclusions, saying auditors set an unrealistic goal of collecting close to 100 percent. He also said there’s no evidence to suggest that employing other collection methods would boost the recovery rate, and said the General Assembly has repeatedly failed to provide funding that would allow the department to upgrade its technology.
“Given our high compliance rate, impressive estimated collection rate and large amount of money actually collected (especially given the population from whom we collect), your staff could have complimented the Judicial Department instead of criticizing us with unrealistic and unattainable expectations,” Smith wrote in a letter to State Auditor Beth Wood.
According to the audit, the department’s computer systems are seriously flawed and unable to produce reports with basic information such as how much money courts have ordered in fees and fines, how much has been paid and how much money is left to be collected.
State workers can find that information only after going through court records and using multiple computer systems, the audit found.
“Even then this process is prone to error because amounts owed are not located on a single document” in the paper file, auditors wrote.
The audit also faults the department for not using more techniques at its disposal to bring in the money, such as hiring third-party collection agencies and assessing a special fee for amounts past due more than 30 days.
Tuesday, June 7, 2011 (Updated 1:21 pm)
By Tom Breen
Coming our way – more billboards and less greenery (Gaston Gazette)
Currently the North Carolina Legislature is moving ahead with legislation being pushed hard by the Outdoor Advertising industry (House Bill 309 and Senate Bill 183). The liberalization of existing rules would greatly increase the amount of vegetation and trees that could be cut away around billboards. It’s hard to offer any reasonable justification for the legislation since much of our highway greenery will be the victim. Changes to billboard spacing are also proposed.
In most cases permits would be issued by the DOT allowing them to be much closer together. For the citizen driving along our once green highways there may be a nearly continuous parade of billboard pollution. What I’ve seen appearing on billboards on my business travels around the state the last several weeks is hardly necessary or important. I came across billboards for most brands of beer, for Cancer Cure centers, for low interest auto loans, chewing tobacco and, of course about a dozen for the JR Cigarette Outlet. These are surely not aids to travelers that the sponsors of the legislation advocate but just distracting highway pollution.
One of the most controversial provisions is to eliminate any control towns, cities and counties have to deny a permit. If the legislation is passed “local governments are prohibited from regulating vegetation cutting, trimming, pruning on state and interstate highways” that run through their jurisdiction. They have always had this enforcement tool in the past. This change means there are few measures left for the control of clear cutting. The very powerful outdoor advertising industry looks like it will get its way as the legislation (Edition IV) is moving quickly through the House and Senate in Raleigh.
The simplistic justification the sponsors of the legislation give us is that it will create jobs. This is hardly the case. Keep in mind most new billboard installations are completed from start to finish in two weeks. The “aids to tourists” argument is also nonsensical. If out of state tourists come for a North Carolina vacation it is because of the beauty of our countryside, the rolling meadows, the majestic mountain vistas and the highway greenery. ‘
The bill intends to add to our lean state treasury as permit fees double from $200 to $400. This sounds good until the details are inspected. The burden to be placed on the DOT in the normal permit review and sign placement process will likely be a multiple of the fees collected from the billboard owner. So who will benefit from the new laws? It will be almost entirely the handful of billboard companies that monopolize North Carolina’s outdoor advertising.
The legislature is getting hoodwinked in several directions. First the name of the bill euphemistically calls the bill “Statuary Legislation for Selective Vegetation Removal.” This benign title ignores the portions of the bill that strip away local powers for billboard control and decimate reasonable billboard spacing standards. What are they (our legislators) thinking!
What should be proposed is the elimination of (over time) billboards. At present even the Federal Highway Administration has proposed an elimination program that fairly treats the billboard owners via a process of investment amortization as a way to get them gone. North Carolina needs sunset laws on our billboards.
Is anyone also noticing how now billboards are being stacked one on top of another? Have our legislators noticed how the size and (colossal) height of billboards has increased? Four states have now banned billboards entirely and so have over a hundred cities such as San Diego, Houston, Little Rock, Jacksonville and Mobile.
This is bad legislation. Our roadside beauty is being compromised for no good purpose. Ask your N.C. senators and representatives to review the pros versus the cons.
Benson lives in Mathews.He has owned and operated businesses in several areas of North Carolina since 1980. Currently he is chairman of Morningstar Properties of Matthews, a North Carolina-based self-storage and marina company.
June 02, 2011 7:20 PM
Former Gov to Current Mayor: Keep up Billboard Fight (News and Observer)
Mayor Bell got this letter from former Gov. Jim Hunt last week:
Dear Bill,
I am delighted to see the City of Durham fighting hard against the relaxation of our roadside billboard regulations.
Keep it up and try to have all the cities and towns possible join you.
All my best.
Jim Hunt
Governor of North Carolina
(1977-1985, 1993-2001)
Submitted by mschultz on 05/25/2011 – 12:25
Perdue, fans, foes on broadband bill decision (Wral)
Gov. Bev Perdue announced today she would not veto H129, a measure making it more difficult for local governments to offer municipal broadband service to their residents.
But, she stressed, she didn’t like the bill: “I’m very unhappy with the concept.”
After an appearance at Lenovo today, Perdue talked about her decision to allow H129 to become law without her signature.
“You can’t compete with government. That’s what the Umstead Act is about,” she said, referring to a state law that bans government from competing with the private sector. “But I happen to be from a part of the state that has a real need for higher-speed broadband access. I don’t believe you can expect businesses to grow in either the mountainous areas or the very rural northeast without having technology.”
“So I have decided I’m not gonna sign the bill. I’m writing a strong signing statement about why I’m not doing that that I hope will force, pressure, coerce, encourage the private sector to do what they need to do in these rural areas.”
“If the private sector’s not gonna do it, then we need to look at the law again,” Perdue said.
It’s worth noting that the measure passed the House and Senate by veto-proof margins (and then some), so a veto would almost certainly have been overturned, which would have been a politically unfavorable outcome for Perdue.
Reactions:
Time Warner Cable, the bill’s foremost advocate, sent out the following statement from regional VP Jack Stanley: “We are pleased with the Governor’s decision and her recognition of the need for rules and a level playing field when local governments choose to enter into direct competition with existing service providers. We will continue to do our part in making high quality affordable broadband available to North Carolina citizens.”
On the other side of the fight, H129 opponents promised political payback.
“I appreciate the fact that the Governor does not like the bill, but the only folks putting today’s technology in the ground in NC are the cities,” said Jay Ovittore, lobbyist for SEATOA, a public telecom group. “We had hoped that the Governor would lead our state in the right direction with a veto of H129, but to politically sidestep a controversial bill just does not do that.”
“As for the Democrats who supported this bill, you should be ashamed of yourselves for putting a for-profit company (Time Warner Cable) ahead of your constituents’ needs,” Ovittore said in his emailed statement. “Elections will hold them accountable, and you can be sure I will remind their constituents time and time again until election day.”
By Laura Leslie
May 23, 2011
Billboard bill should be nixed (Op Ed by Mayor Bellamy) (Asheville Citizen Times)
Billboard bill should be nixed (Op Ed by Mayor Bellamy) (Asheville Citizen Times)
3:03 PM, May. 13, 2011
Written by Terry Bellamy
Nearly 80 percent of North Carolinians are opposed to the removal of more trees so billboards can be visible for a greater distance, according to a poll released by the N.C. League of Conservation Voters.
I am part of that 80 percent, and I believe that our citizens would agree. Trees and green spaces are more valuable to our community than increasing the prominence of billboards. Protecting our neighborhoods’ appearance reflects the values of our citizens and the message we want to project to our businesses and our visitors. That belief is a testament to our pride in our city and our commitment to its future.
In fact, our city and most in North Carolina have local ordinances to preserve trees and to limit billboards. Those rules are implemented with great care and thoughtfulness about the impact to our community, our roads and our economy. As a local government, we take great care to listen to our citizens when making these policies.
That’s why I am urging our legislators to reject the “Billboard Bill,” Senate Bill 183.
This legislation would dramatically expand the allowable cutting of trees along public roadways in front of billboards and allow clear cutting in front of existing billboards in our communities. In addition, it would limit our ability as cities and citizens to protect the appearance of our communities.
Specifically, trees and vegetation could be cleared in a 380-foot zone around billboards outside of cities and a 340-foot zone in cities along interstates and freeways, an increase from the current 250-foot cut zone.
The bill would prohibit enforcement of local tree ordinances in front of billboards along interstates and federally assisted highways. In addition, it would override the local enforcement measure of withholding electrical permits for noncompliant signs.
A number of organizations are also working to educate legislators about the pitfalls of this legislation. The bill is strongly opposed by neighborhood associations across the state, N.C. League of Municipalities, N.C. Association of County Commissioners, N.C. Metro Mayors Coalition, N.C. Planning Association, N.C. Sierra Club, and Preservation N.C.
We are asking legislators to protect the scenic beauty of our state and enable citizens to make their own decisions about their community appearance. We want them to fully understand the implications of the Billboard Bill, which would trade trees and beauty for large roadside billboards. Our citizens would not only lose a bit of pride in our community but their voice in shaping its future. Visitors’ impressions of our city and others across North Carolina would be damaged, threatening our $17 billion tourism industry and our ability to attract new industry. We all would lose.
I hope you will join me in contacting our legislators and encouraging them to vote for our city’s values and against the Billboard Bill.
Terry Bellamy is Mayor of Asheville.
Appearance, local control (Op Ed by Mayor Bell) (News and Observer)
Appearance, local control (News and Observer)
Our roadways and highways are the front doors of our community. But legislation currently before the General Assembly would make those entrances to our community less inviting. The “Billboard Bill” would remove trees and greenery from roadways and increase the prominence of billboards. In addition, it would limit our ability as local governments, cities and citizens to protect the appearance of our communities.
The revised version of the legislation, Senate Bill 183, would dramatically expand the allowable cutting of trees along public roadways. The legislation would also prohibit enforcement of local tree ordinances in front of billboards along interstates and federally assisted highways. In addition, it would override the local enforcement measure of withholding electrical permits for noncompliant signs.
These kinds of local ordinances are implemented following significant public input and comment; discarding them means ignoring our citizens and their desire to preserve our neighborhoods. In fact, many of our cities have worked with the billboard industry to develop commonsense regulations that allow advertising while protecting trees, scenic spaces and vistas. Those cooperative agreements would also be nullified.
This legislation is not right for the Triangle or North Carolina. Our legislators must protect the scenic beauty of our state and enable residents to make their own decisions about their community appearance.
Bill Bell
Mayor, Durham
The writer is chairman of the N.C. Metropolitan Mayors Coalition.
Working on rail (News & Observer)
Just wondering: If the General Assembly weren’t making noises about rejecting more federal funds for improved rail service, would Washington have been more generous in its latest allotment?
After all, Gov. Beverly Perdue’s administration was seeking $624 million to boost North Carolina’s part of the Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor. It wound up with $4 million. We can imagine how proud those rail skeptics in the legislature – Republicans who don’t want Democrats such as Perdue or President Obama to get credit for much of anything – must be. They might have protected the state from being showered with $620 million, which would allow scads of people to be hired and help give travelers another attractive option! Nice work, guys!
The money we didn’t get was part of a $2.4 billion pot for high speed rail that was supposed to go to Florida. But that state’s Republican governor turned it down. Other states swooped in to try to take advantage of the Florida foolishness.
California scored big, for a high speed project ultimately to connect Los Angeles and San Francisco. Chicago, a vital rail hub, will get better connections, and the heavily used Northeast Corridor will benefit from improvements that could allow trains to reach 160 mph.
North Carolina, meanwhile, chugs along with plans to upgrade the spine of its rail system between Raleigh and Charlotte, aiding passenger and freight service alike. That’s well and good.
But there’s no reason for the state to back away from its plans for the high speed rail corridor, which would extend north from Raleigh. The $4 million would allow preliminary work to continue on a Raleigh-to-Richmond leg that would give North Carolina a better connection to the northeastern rail network.
It’s by no means a pipe dream that many more Tar Heel travelers in years hence will find the train to be a competitive travel option en route to cities such as Washington, Philadelphia or New York. The Obama team properly has made better rail service a national priority, and Perdue’s state DOT is on board where it belongs. The next time Washington doles out rail funds, everyone in North Carolina – of whatever partisan stripe – should be eager to take yes for an answer.
Published Fri, May 13, 2011 02:00 AM
Modified Fri, May 13, 2011 04:24 AM
Bill to increase clear-cutting for billboards denies local voice (Op Ed by Mayor Stultz) (Charlotte Observer)
Provision would override local regulations on trees and open space.
As mayor of Gastonia, I take great pride in my connections and interactions with citizens. The input and feedback provided by citizens guide the policies and procedures implemented by our local government. Residents have a direct say in the future of their community, how it operates and its appearance.
That’s why legislation in the N.C. General Assembly to limit local governments’ authority to protect the appearance of our communities concerns me.
The so-called “Billboard Bill” would override local regulations about trees and green spaces, allowing clear-cutting in order to highlight billboards.
Specifically, Senate Bill 183 would expand the allowable cutting of trees along public roadways in front of billboards and allow clear-cutting in front of existing billboards in our communities.
Trees and greenery could be cleared in a 380-foot zone around billboards outside of cities and a 340-foot zone in cities along interstates and freeways, an increase from the current 250-foot cut zone. These changes would affect 21 billboards in Gastonia alone.
The legislation would also prohibit enforcement of local tree ordinances in front of billboards along interstates and federally-assisted highways. And it would override the local enforcement measure of withholding electrical permits for noncompliant signs.
Taking these decisions away from local governments – and our citizens – sets a dangerous precedent.
Citizens ought to have a clear voice in deciding the way their community looks. In fact, our local ordinances regarding trees and green spaces are implemented following significant public input and comment. Abandoning these initiatives means ignoring the will of our citizens and their vision for our community.
In fact, a poll released last month by the N.C. League of Conservation Voters showed that nearly 80 percent of North Carolinians were opposed to the removal of more trees so billboards could be visible for a greater distance.
The “Billboard Bill” is opposed by neighborhood associations across the state, the N.C. League of Municipalities, the N.C. Association of County Commissioners, the N.C. Metro Mayors Coalition, the N.C. chapter of the American Planning Association, N.C. Sierra Club and Preservation North Carolina. I am working with this coalition to inform legislators about the problems with the legislation and call on them to reject it.
As the level of government closest to citizens, we in city governments have a unique connection with those we serve and a unique responsibility. I want to make sure that your voices continue to be heard as we chart the future for our city and our state.
I hope you will also contact your legislators and let them know that this legislation is the wrong choice for your community. Make sure they know that citizens deserve to make their own decisions about their community appearance. Encourage them to protect the beauty and green spaces of North Carolina.
For the Record offers commentaries from various sources. The views are the writer’s, and not necessarily those of the Observer editorial board.
Posted: Friday, May. 13, 2011
From Gastonia Mayor Jennie Stultz:
Going After Gangs As A Public Nuisance (Fox Charlotte)
CHARLOTTE, N.C. — Residents in Charlotte and across North Carolina may soon be able to force gangs out of neighborhoods. They wouldn’t have to be confronted head on. One could just show individuals involved in gang activity constitute a public nuisance. It’s a legal term defined by the courts as an unreasonable interference with a right common to the general public.
“I think, as far as getting rid of gang activity in any neighborhood you gotta have your neighbors really working together,” said Pamela Turr, who is the neighborhood block captain for the Catawba River Plantation neighborhood in Northwest Charlotte. She moved there from the University Area back in 2002, to live in what she considers a safer community. And, she’s determined to keep it that way.
“You have to show criminals that we’re taking a stand within our neighborhood, and that type of activity is not allowed,” said Turr. For people like Pam, the North Carolina Legislature wants to help them fight gangs, by passing a law that declares their activities in a neighborhood a public nuisance.
If gang members live in a house, and they’re causing trouble in that neighborhood, then the city or residents could get a judge to force them to leave, and then seize the property. “If they can pass that nuisance law it would probably be great for all communities because then your crime rate would go tremendously down,” said Turr.
State lawmakers discussed the Street Gang Nuisance Abatement legislation at a Judiciary Subcommittee on Wednesday. Mecklenburg Representatives William Brawley, Tricia Ann Cotham and Rodney Moore are co-sponsors of House Bill 673.
