Press Releases and Newsletters
Lawmakers must remember that ferries are vital to our transportation system (Star News)
North Carolina’s ferry system isn’t merely a tourist attraction that transports carefree visitors to the Outer Banks or between Southport and Fort Fisher. It is an extension of the state’s highway system, as essential to some residents as good roads. The Honorables need to consider that point as they ponder changing the fare structure.
They should steer clear of recommendations that would impose steep fares on some routes, especially those that are used primarily by commuters.
One proposal would raise the price of the Southport-Fort Fisher route from $5 one way to $18, for a ride of about half an hour. That’s an enormous jump. That route has a good mix of tourists but also a group of regular riders who use the ferry to cut driving time between southern New Hanover County and Southport.
GOP lawmakers, including Rep. Frank Iler of Brunswick County, say the ferry needs to be more self-supporting. Passenger fares account for only about 5 percent of the system’s operating budget, which is lower than many states. Only three of the seven ferry routes – Southport-Fort Fisher and the two long-haul routes between Ocracoke and the mainland – charge fares.
The rest are free. With the exception of the Hatteras-Ocracoke ferry, which also is used heavily by tourists, most of the short-haul routes are primarily commuter ferries, carrying workers to their jobs on remote fingers of land in eastern North Carolina.
To be sure, the system is expensive. The state spends $40 million annually to staff, fuel, maintain and replace vessels on the seven routes served. A study last summer noted that 10 ferries would soon need replacing, while the state’s budget continues to be tight.
Yet let us not forget that they contribute more to our economy than the fares they collect. Tourists who ride the ferries also spend money – lots of it – on the Outer Banks or right here in the Cape Fear region. In addition to the fares, they are supported by the state gas tax, which also pays for highway construction.
Given the state’s budget predicament and the competition for transportation dollars, a good case can be made for imposing a reasonable fare on routes that are currently free, and for increasing fares on the routes most popular with tourists. Their dollars can help lighten the burden on North Carolina taxpayers.
If the short routes become toll ferries, the state also should offer a discounted monthly pass for frequent riders. But a report issued this past summer suggested a fare of $10 per round trip, or $100 to $125 a month for a commuter pass. Let’s be reasonable.
At the same time the fare structure is under examination, the system’s operations have been under scrutiny. Reducing daily runs, especially after tourist season, may also help the ferry system operate more efficiently.
Iler has suggested raising the fares during the busy summer months and then reducing them during the rest of the year to help ease the burden on local commuters. It’s worth a look.
One thing that mustn’t happen is for the General Assembly to permit out ferry system to deteriorate, either by underfunding it or setting fares so high that people stay away.
Those ferries are too important to our economy – and our transportation system.
Previous Page12Next PageAll rights reserved. This copyrighted material may not be re-published without permission. Links are encouraged.
Published: Wednesday, March 9, 2011 at 8:38 p.m.
Last Modified: Wednesday, March 9, 2011 at 8:38 p.m.
Region’s growing pains may speed up a badly needed road (Wilmington Star News)
The Census Bureau tells us that the Cape Fear region grew like crazy over the past decade. But you already knew that. The housing bust may have slowed growth after 2008, but our three counties reported a population boom, increasing their number of residents by 25 percent to nearly 50 percent in that 10-year stretch. The region is now home to more than 450,000 people.
What do those numbers tell us? We have become a more urban region, and the people who live here require urban services and amenities. We also have more urban problems – among them, traffic.
That breakneck growth has gotten the attention of Gov. Beverly Perdue, who says our region’s population needs a road to handle that additional traffic sooner. She’s moving up the timetable for completion of the Wilmington bypass, one of several “loop” roads in the state that will be built ahead of schedule.
Even with the governor’s pledge to speed up construction by two years, it will be seven more years – 2018 – before the bypass is completed. Until then we can expect gridlock at peak times on the U.S. 17/74/76 causeway between Wilmington and Brunswick County.
Given the limited funds available for construction, however, Perdue’s action signals recognition that Southeastern North Carolina is an important economic region that must have thoroughfares that can handle not only local traffic but commercial and tourist traffic.
If only there were similar good news about other critical transportation needs in the Cape Fear region. As Perdue has pledged to make one project go more smoothly, Republican state Sens. Thom Goolsby and Bill Rabon have introduced a bill that would make it harder for traffic planners to preserve corridors for future roadways. The bill would permit governments to restrict development in proposed corridors for up to 18 months, half the current allowable three-year moratorium.
The bill was filed at the request of the development and real estate industry, who say the three-year window is too long. They can’t use their property during that time, and the state doesn’t have to buy it. But it does give road planners time to ensure the most logical and cost-effective route doesn’t become overrun with new homes and businesses before right-of-way purchase can begin.
The danger of passing is that roads will be far more expensive to build, or that they simply won’t be built – leaving drivers to navigate existing traffic-choked roads. It costs the state far more to buy right of way when there are homes and businesses there than if the land is vacant.
Landowners have a point that they should either be able to do something with their property or have the state pay up front for needed right of way. That would require a significant change in the way the state funds highways or in how roads are planned.
Eighteen months may seem like a long time, but it can take longer than that to do the required preparatory work. Time may run out and if it does, development may make some badly needed projects too expensive to undertake.But the senators know, as do most residents of this area, that the state must come up with a better way to pay for new roads.
With $65 billion in needs and only $10.5 billion in projected revenue over the next 25 years, our future roadways may begin to resemble the parking lot at Walmart.
Especially if we continue to experience double-digit growth.
Published: Tuesday, March 8, 2011 at 5:38 p.m.
Hold the ‘cuffs (News& Observer)
In a way, it’s the perfect tea party issue. Trying to put annexations by cities to a vote of communities affected would likely stop annexation in its tracks. For one thing, it’s easier to muster opponents than it is proponents. And on its face, annexation and the fees and higher taxes that come with it look like a bad bargain for residents who might be annexed. Vote myself some more taxes and pay thousands of dollars in hook-up fees, etc., to get city utilities? You think that’s a turnip truck in the driveway?
But conservatives who now rule the General Assembly after the Republican takeover tend to see forced annexation as an infringement on individual rights. So there’s a movement on Jones Street to freeze new annexations until July 1 of next year, after which a new and presumably weaker annexation law could be established.
Such a move already has passed the state Senate and the issue is headed to the House. Previous attempts to curb annexation have been flummoxed, but there are different sheriffs, and deputies, in town now when it comes to the legislature, and the small-government, anti-tax tea party movement has a voice.
Growing pains
The advantages of annexation laws that allow a city to bring a community within its jurisdiction are many, but they include letting cities, which are economic engines for the entire regions of which they’re a part, grow population and neighborhoods and business opportunities in an orderly, unified way. That gives birth to suburbs, schools and businesses that enjoy city services. And it helps cities and their residents afford those services, by spreading the cost burden around.
The problem with allowing individual communities to say “no” is that many if not all of their residents enjoy nearby city amenities – parks, kids’ recreational areas, shopping venues, a street network – for which they do not pay. And unfortunately, many of those in such communities like it that way, and boast of having all the advantages of living in the city without – here it comes – the taxes. What a difference a few yards can make. “City address, county taxes,” the real estate listing will proclaim.
If cities cannot expand, and fund their expansion with additional tax revenue from new residents, they’ll be stifled in size and opportunity. New businesses or those looking to move to a business-friendly climate (and North Carolina ranks highly in that category) want places that are vibrant, with a beating pulse and ambition to be better and yes, with it, bigger.
And potential
Size and the potential for growth are part of a city’s draw. If businesses are looking for opportunity, they will look askance at a city that has leveled in population or even diminished.
An annexation moratorium in Virginia has stunted urban growth. Ellis Hankins, a pro-annexation person as director of the N.C. League of Municipalities, notes that the actual city of Richmond has a smaller population now than it did 50 years ago.
Finally, why is it that the new majority in the General Assembly seems preoccupied less with fixing what’s broken (meaning coming up with creative ways to preserve and create jobs, for example) than with taking apart policies that have served the state well? Can annexation laws be improved? Probably. Are there occasional problems that people who are being annexed should at some point be empowered to address? Yes, for example, when a municipality attempts an annexation but fails to deliver services (sewer, water, etc.) in a timely manner. In such a case, those being annexed have a right to raise objections.
But as of now, no huge abuses have been demonstrated in annexation laws that have worked for the betterment of cities, and the outlying communities that exist because of them.
Published Thu, Mar 10, 2011 02:00 AM
Modified Thu, Mar 10, 2011 05:10 AM
NC State Senator Proposes Ending Gas Tax (NBC17)
NC State Senator Proposes Ending Gas Tax (NBC17)
RALEIGH, N.C. — A state senator wants to eliminate North Carolina’s gas tax to help consumers deal with skyrocketing prices. The state’s gas tax is 32.5 cents per gallon, the highest it has ever been.
That money goes to the state’s Highway Transportation Fund. “I hate the gas tax period to begin with,” said Sen. David Rouzer, a Republican who represents Johnston and Wayne Counties.
“This is one thing that we could do to directly impact businesses and help them, and that’s right there in their pocket book, by suspending this 32 cent gas tax,” said Sen. Rouzer. Rouzer thinks the state could find money for transportation improvements elsewhere.
Specifically, he wants to end some of the exemptions in the state’s tax code, which total $5.8 billion, according to a 2009 report from the North Carolina Department of Revenue. Rouzer would not say exactly which tax exemptions he would like to end.
“The point of the legislation is to direct people to the fact that we have $5.8 billion in exemptions on the books and to have that debate,” he said.
“It certainly would help,” said Mike Peace, a local driver. “Any improvement in the price of gas would be a benefit to those of us who have to have it.”
Marion Wright, another area driver, added,“We all could use a break because groceries are high. Everything is high.”
But some drivers aren’t sure they’d want to see the tax go.
“I’d rather pay the tax if it’s for the roads,” said Billy Oltman as he filled up at the Raceway station on South Saunders Street in Raleigh.
Charlene Adams agreed. “If the roads are tore up. It’d cost more money to keep our cars together ’cause you’ve got to get the brakes fixed, struts fixed and stuff from potholes in the streets,” said Adams.
Although the gas tax is supposed to go to road maintenance, some of it is used for other purposes, according to the CIVITAS Institute. • Ferries – $41 million • Drivers Ed for teens – $31 million • Bike paths – $1.1 million • Visitor centers – $400,000 annually
Although getting rid of the gas tax has some appeal, some drivers said they wouldn’t bet on its disappearance.
“It’s a good idea, but it probably won’t happen,” said David Napier.
Lawmakers have to address the issue of the gas tax by this summer. A minimum rate of 29.9 cents passed two years ago and expires on June 30.
Gas Tax (WRAL)
With fuel prices on the rise, GOP lawmakers are considering capping the state’s tax on gasoline again. Two years ago, lawmakers eliminated the cap and set a minimum tax of 29.9 cents per gallon. The gas tax, which is tied to the wholesale price of fuel, is set every six months and is now at 32.5 cents per gallon. The rate is expected to increase by 2 to 2.5 cents in July. The price of gas has been climbing steadily in recent weeks and is at a two-year high, averaging $3.51 a gallon nationwide. North Carolina’s gas tax is the highest in the Southeast, and lawmakers said it might be time to rein it in to help both consumers and retailers statewide. “I think we need to fix the gas tax because people are crossing the border to Virginia and South Carolina (to fill up),” said Sen. Neal Hunt, R-Wake.
The gas tax is the largest revenue source for the state Department of Transportation, and officials said the agency would lose $1 billion over the next decade if the tax is capped. “It is a lot of money, particularly when you look at all the needs we have in this state, to take care of our aging infrastructure and to take care of the congestion problems we have in the state,” said Mark Foster, chief financial officer for the DOT. Seventy-five percent of the gas tax funds road maintenance projects, and the DOT estimates that 18,335 miles of pavement statewide wouldn’t be resurfaced if the gas tax is capped at its current level. Hunt said DOT can simply shift money slated for new projects to maintenance. “Stop projects that aren’t needed. Put the money back in maintenance programs,” he said. Foster and other DOT officials argue that there is little correlation between the gas tax and the actual cost at the pump. Whether a station in Raleigh charges $3.47 or $3.59 a gallon, the tax is the same, they said.(Bruce Mildwurf, WRAL NEWS, 3/08/11).
March 8th Update
I have a number of updates for you today, so be sure to read all the way through.
First, the Joint Transportation Appropriations Committee met today and heard presentations of varying levels of cuts to the NCDOT Aviation and Ferry Divisions. The Committee will continue on Ferries tomorrow, hear from the Rail Division, and then hear from Public Transportation. In advance of the hearing on Public Transportation the Metro Mayors Coalition sent a letter to the members of the Joint Transportation Appropriations Committee members this afternoon. We asked that they limit cuts to operating expenditures (SMAP) and that they spread any cuts to capital and technology programs/purchases over a two year period and/or defer the expenses.
We are preparing letters to communicate the resolutions you voted to support at the Coalition meeting in Greensboro last month. We sent a letter to President Obama yesterday asking him to consider North Carolina when reallocating any high speed rail funds. We are working on the others and will send you links as we get those out as well.
Speaker Tillis met with the NC County Commissioner Association leadership last week and indicated his interest in having an earnest discussion with the counties about responsibility for secondary roads in the future. This issue continues to percolate out there, so be sure you are sending copies of any resolutions on the issue to your delegation and the legislative leadership (and me).
SB 27 Involuntary Annexation Moratorium passed third reading in the Senate last night and is headed to the House.
Analysis of the census numbers continues in newspapers across the State. Here is an excerpt from an Associated Press story today: “Political power is going to follow people,” said Ferrel Guillory, director of the Program on Public Life at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. “Whether you’re talking about congressional districts, of whether you’re talking about legislative districts, these two big counties and the areas around them … are going to be like giant magnets.”
The billboard bill (S183) is generating stories across the state. I pulled this excerpt from the Charlotte Observer piece that resonated with me: “It’s another sign, if you’ll pardon a bad pun, that the 2011 General Assembly takes a dim view of local decision-making by duly elected and appointed members of city councils. The legislature is moving toward reversing municipal annexations in Kinston and Lexington, an intrusive action that goes beyond preaching and gets into serious meddling. For a legislature controlled by Republicans for the first time in more than a century, many members show a remarkable affinity for a powerful central government rejecting orderly decision-making by local officials.”
The Governor is getting more use of her veto stamp. Over the weekend she vetoed her third bill, H2 Protect Health Care Freedom. Rep. Hackney said today that he believes the House Democrats will be united in supporting the veto. With three vetos in a month and a half and only nine bills having been sent to the Governor for her signature she has a batting average of .333.
Lawmakers have dim view of local control (Charlotte Observer)
Billboard bill another sign of disdain for municipal decisions.
Two things are troubling about Onslow Republican Sen. Harry Brown’s proposed Senate Bill 183, purporting to establish standards for “selective vegetation removal” and erection of outdoor advertising.
It does a few other selective things, too, such as allowing private interests to remove roadside trees and bushes that might impede the view, and undermining the ability of local governments to slow down the proliferation of electronic billboards.
It’s another sign, if you’ll pardon a bad pun, that the 2011 General Assembly takes a dim view of local decision-making by duly elected and appointed members of city councils. The legislature is moving toward reversing municipal annexations in Kinston and Lexington, an intrusive action that goes beyond preaching and gets into serious meddling. For a legislature controlled by Republicans for the first time in more than a century, many members show a remarkable affinity for a powerful central government rejecting orderly decision-making by local officials.
But it’s not only Republicans who support bills making it easier to erect electronic billboards. A co-sponsor of the bill is Sen. Clark Jenkins, D-Edgecombe. And don’t forget: It was then-Sen. and now Lt. Gov. Walter Dalton, a Democrat who presides over the Senate, who sponsored legislation several years ago limiting local governments longtime ability to ban billboards by requiring them to reimburse billboard owners if they did so and if they didn’t already have billboard control ordinances. Previously, billboard owners were allowed a number of years to keep the signs up and earning before they had to be removed.
Opponents of the bill point out several troubling provisions. The bill would allow electronic billboards every 1,500 feet on each side of interstate and primary highways. It would allow billboard owners to convert existing signs to digital billboards that can convey more images. It would increase the zone in which billboard interests could cut vegetation from 250 feet to 400 feet. And it prohibits local governments from regulating the trimming of trees and plants on interstate or primary highway rights of way.
As we noted when the Federal Highway Administration began allowing electronic billboards that flash several messages a minute, safety experts have warned that it’s unsafe for drivers to be distracted for more than two seconds at a time. Billboards with messages that can change every eight seconds or so will surely distract some drivers in adverse ways. It also seems at odds with the federal Highway Beautification Act, which discourages signs with flashing lights.
We knew the federal government’s approval of changeable digital billboards meant they soon would proliferate in North Carolina. With Sen. Brown’s bill allowing conversion of regular billboards, legislators should think twice about the messages they are sending. The one about highway safety is about to get run over.
Posted: Tuesday, Mar. 08, 2011
Senate putting the pause button on some annexations (M2M Politics)
The Senate has taken another step toward hitting the pause button on involuntary annexations.
Senators by a 36-12 vote gave their final approval to a bill that would place a moratorium on involuntary annexation until July 1, 2012. The bill now goes to the Senate.
The bill, sponsored by Sen.Andrew Brock,R-Davie, would not affect voluntary annexations.
It’s one of a number of bills aimed at forced annexations in the General Assembly this year. The House has already approved bills repealing annexations in Kinston and Lexington. Other bills, repealing annexations in Goldsboro and Fayetteville, have also been introduced.
Meanwhile, some House members are working on a broader annexation bill aimed at giving people targeted for annexation a more direct voice in whether they’re taken in by a municipality.
The bill that passed the Senate Monday night now goes to the House.
March 7th, 2011, 8:00 pm ·posted by Barry Smith
NCACC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETS WITH TILLIS, BERGER (NCAAC Weekly Update)
The NCACC Executive Committee, consisting of President Joe Bryan (Wake County), President Elect Kenneth Edge (Cumberland County), First Vice President Howard Hunter III (Hertford County), Second Vice President Mary Accor (Cleveland County) and Executive Director David F. Thompson, met separately with Speaker of the House Thom Tillis (Mecklenburg County) and Senate President Pro Tem Phil Berger (Rockingham County) on March 3 to discuss county legislative priorities and the state budget. Both Tillis and Berger told the Executive Committee that they did not support shifting costs and responsibilities to counties as a way to balance the state budget. First Vice President Hunter told both Tillis and Berger that the items contained in the budget proposal from Governor Beverly Perdue would force Hertford County to raise property taxes by at least 5 cents.
Speaker Tillis and Sen. Berger each indicated that their chambers were likely to approve the repeal of the local-option land transfer tax that was granted to counties as part of the 2007 Medicaid swap. Speaker Tillis said he would like to have an earnest discussion about responsibility for secondary roads with counties in the future, and Sen. Berger reiterated his desire to have counties involved with the annexation reform discussions.
Cumberland’s slow growth could mean less political power in Raleigh (Fayetteville Observer)
RALEIGH – Census data released this week suggest that Fayetteville will lose political power at the state capital to North Carolina’s faster-growing major metro areas.
Meanwhile, politicians and political observers are examining the data to figure out how the numbers will translate into new or lost power for the Republican and Democratic parties in Raleigh and in Washington in next year’s elections.
The new census data show that Fayetteville grew more slowly than Raleigh, Charlotte and other major metro areas over the past 10 years. By law, a new census is conducted every 10 years to make sure the nation’s residents are equally represented. Areas with greater population get more lawmakers, and those with smaller populations get fewer.
Fayetteville and rural communities have had slower – and sometimes stagnant – growth, the census data show. Some areas, including parts of Fayetteville, lost population.
Cumberland County had 319,431 people in the April 2010 national census, a 5.4 percent increase over 2000. Other parts of the state saw much more rapid growth.
The state’s 9.5 million people are served by 50 state senators, 120 state House members and 13 representatives..
Cumberland County has five state House members and two state senators. The new numbers indicate that Cumberland County is entitled to only four House members.
Federal law also requires portions of the state, including Cumberland County, to comply with the federal Voting Rights Act – certain areas that have a history of racism in its election practices must have districts designed so a racial minority has a viable chance of winning a seat.
GOP stands to benefit
In practice, the population shifts and the drawing of the new districts gives the party in control of the legislature – the Republicans, this year – a chance to help itself and hurt its opponents.
Voters can be packed into some areas or spread across other districts, based on their partisan voting habits, with an eye to affecting majority control in Congress and the legislature.
Ten years ago, the Democrats were in control of the legislature and the map-making. They drew maps designed to make it harder for Republicans to win seats in the legislature and in Raleigh, and to make it easier for Democrats.
North Carolina has seven Democratic representatives and six Republicans. The Republicans may attempt to adjust district lines, based on voting tendencies in various areas, to reduce the total number of Democrats in Congress. They also could attempt to weaken support for Democratic legislators.
But Republican legislative leaders this year have said they would be fair in designing the districts.
If they choose to use political motives in their map-making process, they may target Democratic Congressmen Brad Miller of Raleigh, Mike McIntyre of Lumberton and Larry Kissell of Biscoe. They also may attempt to add Republicans to the district served by newly elected Republican Renee Ellmers of Harnett County – she defeated an incumbent Democrat in an extremely close election.
McIntyre, Kissell and Ellmers represent Fayetteville, and Miller grew up in Fayetteville.
There is no guarantee that new lines will help the Republican Party, said political science professor Andrew Taylor of N.C. State University.
“Yes, we have a 7-6 Democratic majority at the moment, but that might have as much to do with incumbency effects and the kind of Democrats that are running for U.S. House in North Carolina than any kind of currently Democratic bias in the map,” Taylor said.
In the state legislature, Cumberland County has seven lawmakers. It likely will lose one.
Redistricting rules
The map-making rules for the legislature must comply with the Voting Rights Act, the one-man, one-vote rule and a concept called the whole county provision: As much as is practical, a legislative district must not cross county lines.
In practice, the state is divided into clusters to make all those rules work together. Following those rules likely will cost Cumberland County one of its legislators and may drastically shift the territory of another.
Cumberland County has almost exactly the number of people needed for four state House members, down from 4.5 10 years ago. As a result, it could lose Rep. William Brisson of Dublin. Cumberland County shares him with Bladen County.
Brisson this week filed bills on behalf of people in the Cumberland County portion of his district. One bill would help a neighborhood stop Fayetteville from annexing it; the other would make it easier for a public school to build a shelter for a pet goat for its students.
Brisson said Wednesday he likes his district. But if he has to shift, he would work with that during the elections in 2012. He said he had friends in other neighboring counties.
Cumberland County has too many people for a single state senator, but not enough for two. So it shares one of the two senators who represent it, Republican Wesley Meredith of Fayetteville, with Bladen County.
Cumberland and Bladen County, under the new population data, combined don’t have enough people for two senators. An adjustment will have to be made.
Meredith said Thursday that he prefers his current district and serving Bladen County along with Cumberland, but with his rural upbringing and his landscaping business, he’s prepared to represent any of the rural counties that border Cumberland County.
The population figures suggest that Cumberland County would most easily be paired with Sampson County to the east. Cumberland and Sampson could form a two-county cluster with almost the exact number of residents required for two state senators.
That creates a problem for the Republicans: Sampson County has a Republican incumbent, Brent Jackson. Both Jackson and Meredith defeated strong Democrats in the 2010 elections.
The legislators in control of the map making generally are reluctant to force incumbents of their own party to run against each other, although sometimes the rules make that unavoidable.
Cumberland County also is served by Democratic state Sen. Eric Mansfield of Fayetteville. Mansfield’s district is a Voting Rights Act district, designed to help minorities win seats in the legislature. It’s likely impossible under the rules to combine it with Sampson County, so Jackson and Meredith could find themselves in a Republican primary in 2012.
“I would not be opposed to a primary, if that’s what it comes to,” Jackson said Thursday. “I’ve met Eric and I like Eric, and I like Wesley, and we would work it out in a congenial way, I’m sure.”
Published: 07:39 AM, Fri Mar 04, 2011
By Paul Woolverton
