Is the Mayor Doing Her Job or Improperly Receiving Evidence?

Mayor Juanita Beasley was stuck in the checkout lane at the supermarket. She was wondering why she always managed to pick the slowest line when she felt a tap on her shoulder.

She turned to find her old high school friend Clara Edwards smiling and leaning in. After a quick exchange of pleasantries, Clara says, ”Juanita, you know that store they’re talking about putting in across the street from me on Raleigh St.? The one that’s up before the town council next week.  A couple of folks from the neighborhood are getting together at my house Sunday afternoon to talk about it and it would be so nice if you could stop by and join us. We’d sure like to share our thoughts and see what you can do to help us.”

“Well, Clara, I’d be delighted to stop by. You know I always have time for you. And what good’s a mayor who doesn’t take time to find out what on her constituents’ minds? What time should I come by?”

Juanita knew exactly what project Clara was talking about. After a couple of quiet years, development was beginning to stir in Maycomb. The town had received a special use permit application for a new 24-hour drug store on Raleigh St. The hearing on the permit was coming before the town council next week. Juanita was more than a little familiar with the site proposed for the store. Although she now lived on the other side of town, she had grown up just a couple of blocks away from the proposed site and had seen firsthand how that neighborhood had changed over the years.

A couple of folks had already called Juanita to raise concerns about the traffic and noise the new store would bring to the old neighborhood. While Juanita was generally inclined to vote for a project that would bring jobs to town, she was concerned that this site might have some real problems. She had driven by the site just yesterday to take a look at how traffic moved during the evening rush and had made a mental note to drop by the planning office to chat with the staff about what conditions could be added to prevent this store from making things worse.

In all of this is Juanita being a good public servant, dutifully checking into the matter and meeting with folks to help get a good resolution of a community controversy? Or do we have a problem brewing? Read more »

County Funding for Charter Schools: Sugar Creek Charter School, Inc. v. State of North Carolina

Recently, the General Assembly enacted S.L. 2011-164 (SB 8) to remove the 100-school cap on the total number of charter schools that could be authorized in the State. Before its enactment, SB 8 went through a number of iterations. Several versions of the bill included provisions that authorized counties to provide funding to charter schools for capital outlay funding. None of these provisions were included in the final bill.

So what, if any, responsibility does a county have to fund charter schools located within its jurisdiction and/or charter schools that students located within its jurisdiction attend? Under current law, the answer is none (at least no direct funding responsibility). In fact, counties are not statutorily-authorized to appropriate monies directly to charter schools for operating or capital expenses.

And, in a recent opinion, the North Carolina Court Appeals held that charter schools do not have a constitutional right to county funding for capital outlay expenses (or a right to even request local funding for these expenses). See Sugar Creek Charter School, Inc. v State of North Carolina, No. COA10-965 (N.C. App. Aug. 2, 2011). This post summarizes the current local funding scheme for charter schools and discusses the recent court of appeals’ decision. Read more »

2011 General Assembly, Act 3 Coming Up: Constitutional Amendments

The 2011 General Assembly completed its second session last week, the contentious redistricting and veto-override session, and has scheduled its third session of the year for September 12th.  At the top of the list of approved topics for the fall session are constitutional amendments.  Let’s look at what it takes to pass a constitutional amendment and at the proposals currently on the table. Read more »

Water and Sewer Extensions “At No Cost” – Analyzing the New Annexation Law

As summarized in this post, the new annexation reform law requires cities to extend water and sewer services to annexed areas if the owners of a majority of properties in the area request service. The law requires the city to offer to each eligible owner of real property the opportunity to obtain water or sewer service, or both, “at no cost other than periodic user fees.” G.S. 160A-58.56(b).  The new law also restricts the amount that may be charged to property owners who request service after the annexation occurs (assuming that the city extends water and sewer to the area either voluntarily or as mandated when a majority requests it). G.S. 160A-58.56(d). During our recent legislative webinars, there were several questions about what can be charged under these new provisions. This post addresses those questions.

Read more »

The First Amendment and Facebook Rants: A Case Example

First Amendment analysis of government employee speech is seldom a precise exercise.  The law is complicated.  The courts are firm in their notion that the cases turn on their facts and hard-and-fast rules are not really available.

Let’s look at a real-life North Carolina situation and see how the free speech issues might play out.  The names have been changed to protect me.  In fact, I just completely made them up.  But the circumstances really happened. Read more »

Tax Foreclosure Tips

As the economy continues to drag, more and more local governments are relying on foreclosures to improve their tax collections.  I’ve blogged previously about the foreclosure process here and here.  Today’s post responds to a couple of interesting questions attorneys and tax officials have raised in recent weeks.   But first, a few general observations and reminders.

Foreclosure is available as a collection remedy for property taxes that are liens on real property and for any obligation owed to a local government that can be collected as property taxes, including solid waste fees (when billed with property taxes), ambulance and EMS fees, special assessments, nuisance abatement costs, and minimum housing standard enforcement costs. Read more »

New Requirements for “Owner-Contractor” Building Projects

One of the bills enacted by the General Assembly this session imposed new requirements for “owner-contractor” building construction projects.  S.L. 2011-376 (HB 648) is summarized in the Purchasing and Contracting Legislative Wrap-up blog post and the 2011 Purchasing and Contracting Legislative Summary.  Since the law’s enactment, a number of questions arose about these new requirements.  This post answers those questions and others that might arise as local governments and property owners comply with these new requirements, which went into effect on July 27, 2011. Read more »