Press Releases and Newsletters
Metro areas are likely redistricting winners (Charlotte Observer)
The fastest-growing congressional district- Mecklenburg’s 9th-is likely to be split
The single fastest-growing districts in North Carolina’s congressional, state Senate and state House are in the Charlotte area.
Congress
The 9th District, which includes southern Mecklenburg and parts of Gaston and Union counties, grew almost 38 percent – more than any of the state’s 12 other congressional districts.Lawmakers could put slices of the district represented by Republican Sue Myrick in neighboring districts represented by Democrats Mel Watt and Larry Kissell.
N.C. Senate
No Senate district grew more than District 35, which includes Union County and part of southern Mecklenburg County. It grew almost 57 percent.
The heavily Republican district will probably be split, giving the state’s fastest growing county more Senate clout.”It doesn’t surprise me based on what we’ve gone through,” said Sen. Tommy Tucker of Waxhaw. “Union County is a great place to live and work and raise a family.”
N.C. House
Freshman Rep. Craig Horn of Weddington represents more people than any lawmaker in the House. That’s because his District 68 in Union County grew 99 percent, more than any in the House. “It means that the new lines are going to impact me more than they’re going to impact anybody in the state,” said the Weddington Republican.
North Carolina’s political clout will shift to its exploding metro areas as lawmakers use new census numbers to redraw voting districts from Congress to the statehouse.Census figures released Wednesday show that Wake and Mecklenburg counties stand to be the biggest legislative winners, with each poised to add to already sizable delegations.
And the state’s two fastest-growing congressional districts centered in those metro areas almost certainly will be split, which will probably change the political calculus in a handful of districts.”It tells us once again that political power is increasingly concentrating in our big metro areas, with particular emphasis on the Research Triangle and Mecklenburg areas,” said Ferrel Guillory, a UNC Chapel Hill political analyst.
Wednesday’s numbers kick-start a process that will play out for months as lawmakers rearrange the state’s 289,000 census blocks. For the first time in more than a century, districts will be drawn by a Republican-controlled General Assembly.
Republicans, who often criticized what they called Democratic gerrymanders, say federal law and a series of recent court rulings will help ensure a fair process.”There’s been so much litigation on past redistricting plans that it really provides us a good platform on which to build fair and legal districts,” said Rep. David Lewis, a Harnett County Republican who chairs the House redistricting committee.”We’re concerned with (districts) being fair and legal much more than we are in trying to manipulate the data to our own advantage.”
Democrats are wary.
“North Carolinians expect to see a fair and open redistricting process,” said Senate Minority Leader Martin Nesbitt, D-Buncombe. “Democrats will accept nothing less than legislative and congressional districts that are fair, legal and representative of all of North Carolina’s people.”
Redistricting will reflect population changes that saw 12 of the state’s 100 counties – mostly in urban and suburban areas – grow by more than 28 percent.The biggest growth – nearly 63 percent – came in Union County, reflecting Charlotte’s sprawling suburban growth. Four of the 12 fastest-growing counties are in the Charlotte metro area; another four are in the Raleigh metro area.
New districts will reflect the changes.
No congressional district grew faster than the 9th District, represented by Charlotte Republican U.S. Rep. Sue Myrick. It grew nearly 38 percent. The next fastest-growing was the 4th District, represented by Chapel Hill Democrat David Price. It grew almost 34 percent.Lawmakers could transfer thousands of Republican voters from Myrick’s district into the 8th, a swing district represented by Democrat Larry Kissell of Montgomery County.
Wake County could gain two seats in the state House while Mecklenburg gains at least one. Each county also could pick up a state Senate seat.Urban political gains could come at the expense of counties that have seen negative or relatively stagnant growth. Many of those are in the east or in counties such as Richmond and Scotland hit hard by economic reversals.
“Fourteen counties have half the voters in the state; the other 86 counties have the other half,” said John Davis, a Raleigh consultant who tracks state politics.”That means that half the state Senate and half the state legislature are going to be from those 14 counties. What we’re seeing is the consolidation of political power in this state in urban areas.”
Legal challenges delayed N.C. elections in 1998 and 2002. And no congressional district in the country has been litigated more than Democrat Mel Watt’s 12th, the source of four cases that went to the U.S. Supreme Court.
N.C. Sen. Dan Blue, a Wake County Democrat and former speaker, is from one of the fastest-growing districts in the state. He said the continuing shift toward urban areas heightens the responsibility of legislators representing urban and suburban areas to think about what’s best for rural areas lagging in growth – and clout.
“You can’t pit rural versus urban,” he said. “We have to remember there is still an obligation to the entire state.”
By Jim Morrill
[email protected]
Posted: Thursday, Mar. 03, 2011
Lynn Bonner of the (Raleigh) News & Observer contributed.
Annexation (THE INSIDER)
The House gave final approval Wednesday to two bill repealing local annexations approved by town councils in Kinston and Lexington. The bills, approved in votes of 71-46 and 70-46, now move to the Senate for consideration. Rep. William Wainwright, D-Craven, raised objections to the bill for a second day. Citing a state constitutional provision prohibiting the legislature from enacting certain local or special acts, Wainwright said legislators would be violating their oath to uphold the constitution by voting for the bill.(THE INSIDER, 3/03/11).
Revenue Estimates (THE NEWS & OBSERVER)
North Carolina’s budget problems are due in part to the state overestimating its potential revenue, according to a new study. The study by economists at the Pew Center on the States and the Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute found that North Carolina had one of the least-accurate estimates of any state in 2009 – projecting revenues that were more than 25 percent over what it actually took in. It wasn’t alone: Arizona, New Hampshire and Oregon were also off by equally wide percentages. The report studied revenue projections from 1987 to 2009, a 23-year span that covers three recessions and three stretches of economic growth. The study looked at state estimates for three major revenue sources: income taxes, sales taxes and corporate taxes. “The three taxes our study examined generated $15 billion in revenue for North Carolina in 2009,” the study states. “A 3.5 percent error equates to $524 million. That is 15 percent of North Carolina’s spending on higher education, 43 percent of what it spends on corrections and nearly nine times what it spends on public assistance.”
According to the report, the volatility of those sources, which are 71.4 percent of North Carolina’s total tax revenue, caused the inaccuracies. And those inaccuracies contributed to the state’s current fiscal problems, with the state creating new programs reliant on revenues officials thought were going to come in. The state had been looking a budget shortfall of as much as $2.7 billion until last month when Gov. Beverly Perdue said the state would actually bring in an estimated $600 million in additional tax revenue next fiscal year – more than what forecasters had predicted in April. Barry Boardman, who does economic forecasts for North Carolina in the General Assembly’s Fiscal Research Division, told Pew researchers that forecasters were took a cautious approach when looking at revenue for the state’s 2012 budget.(Dome, THE NEWS & OBSERVER, 3/03/11).
Video Gambling (THE ASSOCIATED PRESS)
Lawmakers were sending mixed messages on video gambling with two bills filed Wednesday. Rep. Bill Owens, D-Pasquotank, filed a measure that would legalize video poker, creating a centrally operated video terminal system that offers casino-style games. Proceeds would go to college scholarships and higher education building repair and construction. Another measure, filed by Rep. Ray Rapp, D-Madison, seeks to make clear that sweepstakes games are banned in North Carolina. For the past decade, lawmakers have tried to stamp out the games, first banning video poker and later the video sweepstakes games that popped up in their place. A trial court judge threw out a portion of the current ban on sweepstakes games last year. The case is being appealed. Gov. Beverly Perdue considered trying to revive video poker this year but decided against it.(THE ASSOCIATED PRESS, 3/02/11).
Broadband Access (THE ASSOCIATED PRESS)
The House Public Utilities Committee has approved legislation that would make it harder for cities and towns to build their own broadband data systems. The bill is the latest in a series of efforts by telecom corporations to keep local governments out of the broadband business. Cable and phone companies argue municipalities aren’t subject to several taxes they pay, and have other financial advantages when building the high-speed Internet systems. Towns and cities say Big Telcom isn’t extending super-fast Internet at reasonable prices. The telecom companies are opposed by the politically influential North Carolina League of Municipalities and corporate giants Google and Intel. They argue that crimping municipal broadband could stifle economic growth in a wired age.(THE ASSOCIATED PRESS, 3/02/11).
SB 109: Spending Cuts for the Current Fiscal Year (Civitas)
Filed in response to Gov. Perdue’s veto of Senate Bill 13, this bill would grant the Governor discretionary power to find $538 million in available funds for the current budget year. The bill would allow Perdue to reduce spending and transfer funds from “non-General Fund accounts” in order to arrive at the $538 million. The only exemptions for funding sources are the Judicial Branch and Legislative Branch. Finding the additional funds in this year’s budget will allow these funds to be carried over to next year’s budget availability, helping to shrink the anticipated $2.4 billion budget gap.
Posted on February 23, 2011 by Civitas Staff
GOP leaders: Spend $100 million more for road paving and maintenance (News and Observer)
In their proposal today for LESS state spending — more than $2 billion less than Democratic Gov. Bev Perdue’s proposed budget — Republican legislative leaders mention one area that deserves MORE spending: highway maintenance and repaving.
Instructions to the House and Senate transportation appropriation subcommittees (attached below) include this call for a $100 million maintenance boost:
Strengthen the maintenance of transportation infrastructure. For many years, North Carolina has inadequately funded the maintenance of pavement, bridges, and other transportation infrastructure. Please develop a plan to increase the budget for maintenance and contract resurfacing by at least $100 million through a combination of savings, efficiencies and the reallocation of resources.
Perdue also has recommended more maintenance spending this year.
Last summer, when Democrats ran the legislature, they cut highway maintenance by $4.4 million for fiscal year 2010-11. Perdue’s budget proposal recommends increasing maintenance spending by $83 million in FY 2011-12 (to a total $976 million), and by $105 million in FY 2012-13 (to $998 million).
Ted Vaden, a DOT deputy secretary, said DOT is ready to work with Republican leaders on infrastructure improvements.
“If you look at our annual report, we have identified repavement and bridge repair as high priorities for the department,” Vaden said. “Their focuses are similar to ours.”
Other transportation spending suggestions from the Republicans:
* Update the spending priorities and allocation formulas set in 1989 when the legislature created the Highway Trust Fund. “We believe this model needs to be evaluated to determine whether funds, given current budgetary constraints, are flowing to the right transportation programs in appropriate amounts, and whether funds within these programs are going to the most meritorious projects,” the GOP report said.
* Consider outsourcing more DOT engineering and maintenance work.
* Curb land and equipment purchases.
Submitted by Bruce Siceloff on 02/23/2011 – 16:38
We Checked it Out: What do groups representing local government do? (Times-News )
For more than 100 years, the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners and North Carolina League of Municipalities have advocated policies for local governments to state lawmakers.
Alamance County Manager Craig Honeycutt and Burlington City Manager Harold Owen said these advocates are vital in making sure that local issues are heard and understood by state lawmakers. All 100 counties statewide are members of the NCACC and there are 545 municipalities that are members of the NCLM. Both the NCACC and NCLM charge their members an annual fee.
The Times-News decided to ask questions about the two groups after a call from a reader with questions about the groups.
Burlington paid a $24,875 fee to the NCLM for 2010-2011 for its services, while Alamance County paid a $14,462 fee to the NCACC for the same period.
These fees help ensure that Burlington and Alamance County can participate in the process and local issues are advocated for in Raleigh on their behalf. Honeycutt and Owen said it’s important for local governments to continue their working relationships with NCACC and NCLM.
“We tell them what our goals are and they widen the goals on a state level,” Honeycutt said.
Alamance County participates in the NCACC’s Debt Setoff Program, which allows local governments to submit outstanding debts of at least $50 to the state Department of Revenue and attempts to match the debt with an income tax refund. Alamance County has collected more than $1 million in unpaid debt through the Debt Setoff Program since it started in 2002.
The NCACC has a board of directors with 18 districts. All counties are allowed to have at least one member from their county represented in a district. The voting board is not weighted by counties’ populations so larger counties don’t have more influence in making policy recommendations.
“It’s one county one vote,” NCACC spokesman Todd McGee said.
The NCACC met earlier this year during a conference to develop 54 legislative goals for the General Assembly to consider. McGee said the goals are designed to keep Raleigh from pushing more state costs down to the county level.
“We are advocates for counties at the General Assembly,” McGee said. “The North Carolina Association of County Commissioners’ priority is to help counties find ways to save money and keep up with trends.”
Founded in 1908, the NCACC was established to partner with county governments to help the state better provide services. The association employs a professional staff to run the day-to-day operations and to provide expertise to counties in the areas of lobbying, fiscal and legal research, communications, intergovernmental relations, information technology, field visits and risk management services.
NCACC also works at the federal level on behalf of the state’s 100 counties to promote their agenda. McGee said the public is sometimes confused about the association’s role.
“People think we are a type of police agency for the county boards,” McGee said. “We get calls from citizens about something their county board has done and want us to do something about it.”
McGee said the NCACC doesn’t encroach on how county commissioners do their jobs.
“We work for them,” he said.
NCLM was also founded in 1908 as the Carolina Municipal Association by 22 cities including Greensboro, High Point and Winston-Salem. The name for the organization was changed in 1922 to North Carolina Municipal Association.
The NCMA adopted a new constitution in 1934, which named the organization the N.C. League of Municipalities. In 1935, the league helped generate $500,000 in direct state aid for state gasoline tax revenues for streets inside municipalities.
During the past few decades, the league has helped secure local option sales tax authority for local governments, helped lead national efforts to reauthorize general revenue sharing, won more home rule provisions for cities and towns in electing and structuring their governing boards and led efforts to get several clean water bond issues passed.
“The league represents cities in the General Assembly from the cities’ viewpoint,” Owen said. “We are represented on a number of issues.”
Owen said the league was instrumental in helping present Burlington’s concerns about the Jordan Lake Rules. In 2009, the General Assembly passed a law requiring governments in the watershed feeding the Jordan Lake reservoir to reduce levels of nitrogen and phosphorous flowing into the Chatham County lake that provides water for several communities in the Triangle. Some local leaders have said the Jordan Lake Rules are too restrictive and don’t allow enough time for compliance.
“The league has the ability to unite cities on similar issues,” Owen said. “If we have a problem, we can call them.”
Owen said the league doesn’t make policy decisions since that is left up to local elected-officials but the league does have the power to establish a framework for policy discussion based on its members’ needs.
NCLM spokesman Matt Lail said the league provides consultation and lobbying services for its members. Lail said there are several misconceptions about the NCLM.
“Some people think that we are a shadow government run by the legislators,” Lail said. “That is so far from the truth.”
Lail said that some also believe that the NCLM has hundreds of lobbyists working one block from the General Assembly. The NCLM’s entire staff is fewer than 100 workers and the agency’s governmental affairs staff has 10 lobbyists who work on behalf of its members.
The NCLM recently held a conference where it established 25 goals for the General Assembly this year. The NCLM will hold its annual town hall meeting on May 4 in Raleigh for its members.
“We will provide a brief on what is happening with our legislators,” Lail said. “Our charge comes from what our members want us to do.”
Lail said some believe that the NCLM is unwilling to budge on annexation reform. The General Assembly discussed last month issues about cities’ power to implement involuntary annexations and whether a moratorium should be placed on these types of annexations.
According to Lail, the NCLM has provided at least 20 suggestions over the past two years on how the state’s annexation reforms should be implemented. Lail said the NCLM is opposed to a moratorium on annexations.
Two of the 25 legislative goals established by the NCLM included enhancing the authority of cities to own and operate broadband systems for their residents and for cities to establish vacant housing receivership programs to help rehabilitate structures not meeting the minimum housing standards.
Another service the NCLM provides Burlington is consultation on personnel matters, Owen said. Owen said the city makes all its decisions on hires but the NCLM provides expertise on how to best implement hiring processes if there are any questions. The NCLM also offers insurance coverage for its members for workers compensation, health, property and liability.
Additional services provided to Burlington include contract consulting, networking opportunities, access to attorneys and services to save public funds. The NCLM and NCACC are based in Raleigh offices.
March 01, 2011 5:43 PM
Chris Lavender / Times-News
Prison reform would be smart and save money (Winston Salem Journal)
If legislators cut tens of millions of dollars out of public-safety spending, they’d better do so intelligently.
On the corrections side of the public-safety budget, that means spending what state money will remain after the $2.4 billion budget shortfall is closed on the most dangerous criminals while punishing others more creatively.
The Justice Reinvestment project, a bipartisan, national endeavor already conducted in 12 other states, has just issued its recommendations for North Carolina. We can save millions of dollars and make our streets safer, the researchers determined.
North Carolina’s growing population also has a growing prison population, and we’re running out of space to put the people who get sentenced to both long and short terms. In just a few years, we could be right back where we were before a massive prison-building program began in the mid-1980s. That is, with a prison population bumped up against federal limits.
The project’s ideas, if implemented, would eliminate the need to fill 7,300 beds by 2017, saving $365 million between now and then, $72 million of that alone in fiscal 2013, the second year of the biennium for which legislators are now preparing a budget.
In some cases, the project is calling for tougher responses to criminals. If a probationer misses an appointment or tests positive for drugs, he’d get an immediate short stay in jail, as a warning. But some offenders would get alternative sentences or options to stay out of prison. North Carolina is far too harsh in its sentencing of drug offenders, a counterproductive way to spend scarce tax dollars. It makes much more sense, and costs less, to treat a drug offender for a few months than to lock him up for several years.
There are good ideas in the new report, and the good news is that there is support for the ideas on both sides of the political aisle.
North Carolinians don’t want to spend their scarce revenues on convicts when they could be saving schools. Gov. Bev Perdue and the legislative leadership have indicated a willingness to work together on these ideas.
Some of our prison sentences are too harsh, others too lax and some of our sentencing and imprisonment policies are either out-of-date or counterproductive. Let’s hope that the two political sides learn from this report and get to work making our streets safer and our prisons less expensive.
By Journal Editorial Staff
Published: March 01, 2011
Durham tax on commuters floated, sunk (WRAL)
Durham, N.C. — As many as two-thirds of the people who work in Durham County don’t live there, according to local estimates, and some local officials say those commuters are getting a free ride when it comes to county services.
“(Commuters) don’t really contribute to the tax base in that way, so this is way for us to be able to get a step ahead. We are trying to do everything we can to avoid a property tax increase,” Michael Page, chairman of the Board of Commissioners, said.
Durham County Commissioner Joe Bowser proposed a 1 percent tax to raise revenue. He later took it off the table.
Levying a tax on commuters would need approval from the General Assembly, and state Sen. Floyd McKissick, D-Durham, said the proposal would likely go nowhere in the legislature.
The Durham Convention and Visitors Bureau estimates that more than 100,000 people drive to Durham County every day to work, with many headed to offices and laboratories in and around Research Triangle Park.Stacey Logue, who drives from Johnston County to her job in RTP, said she doesn’t think she should be taxed because she commutes.
“I think it would be awful. I mean, I wouldn’t imagine I’d want to come out and work in this area,” Logue said. “It’s just one more way to get money out of us.”
Casey Steinbacher, president of the Greater Durham Chamber of Commerce, said a commuter tax could cost the county jobs.
“The idea of a commuter tax really is an added cost to businesses in Durham,” Steinbacher said. “We are concerned that, in a regional economic development atmosphere, that additional cost would cause businesses to look at other locations.”
RTP added more than $1.7 billion to Durham County’s tax base last year, officials said, and employers like IBM, GlaxoSmithKline and Cree and their workers have a tradition of supporting local communities.
Durham County resident Charles Eatmon said a commuter tax wouldn’t solve the county’s budget problems.
“It sounds like a good idea at first,” Eatmon said. “It may just be a knee-jerk reaction, and it would be difficult to implement.”
Posted: February 23
Updated: February 24
Reporter: Erin Hartness
