Altering Local Elected Officials’ Compensation During the Fiscal Year

Newly elected (or re-elected) local officials were sworn-in all over the state on Monday night. As the newly constituted boards settle in and prepare to govern, questions typically arise about the extent to which a board may alter its unit’s budget to reflect new priorities and policies (and, perhaps, new economic realities). As I detailed in a previous post, generally local governing boards may amend the budget ordinance at any time after its adoption to increase or decrease total appropriations or re-appropriate funds for different purposes. There are a few important limitations, though. As amended, the budget ordinance must continue to be balanced and must adhere to all the requirements set forth in G.S. 159-13. And, except under limited circumstances (summarized in the previous post), a governing board may not increase or decrease the unit’s property tax rate(s) during the fiscal year.

What if the new board wants to alter its own members’ compensation? If the board is making difficult budget cuts, it may wish to signal that board members are willing to share in the pain. Or board members may be looking for every last dollar to cover revenue short-falls or to support new initiatives. On the flip side, at least under certain circumstances, board members may want to increase their stipends or other compensation to more fully reimburse officials for their time and efforts. Can a board amend the budget ordinance to decrease (or increase) board members’ salaries or stipends? Read more »

Local Preferences in Public Contracting, Part 6

This is the final post in a series on local preference policies.  (Earlier posts can be found here, here, here, here, and here.)  Once again, we find ourselves listening in on the Emerald City Council meeting where the Council is discussing local preference policies.  The Council has just heard from Mr. Green Apple, a representative from the Lollipop Guild, about why he dislikes local preferences.  The Council had already asked Purchasing Officer Scarecrow to report back to them about whether the preference policies they’ve discussed will achieve the goals they hope to accomplish through those policies, and now they’ve also asked Scarecrow to respond to Green Apple’s comments.  Let’s listen in…. Read more »

Residency Changes by Elected Officials

Two years ago, you won a countywide at-large election to a seat on the board of county commissioners, and now one of your fellow citizens, Mary Anderson, has developed the suspicion that you don’t really live in the county.  She thinks you really live at the big house you just bought on the lake in the next county, not in the little house downtown that your wife inherited from her mama.  Can you continue to serve as a county commissioner?  The answer to that question turns on where the law considers your residence to be. Read more »

Release of Personnel Records: What Rights Does An Employee Have?

In this blog post about the personnel privacy provisions, I described a scenario in which a North Carolina city receives a request under G.S. 160A-168(b)(11) for a copy of the written notice of the final dismissal of former police chief Chris Jones, setting forth the specific acts or omissions that were the basis of the dismissal.  The city isn’t sure how to respond. There is no record that precisely fits the description of what is public under the statute. Jones was an “at will” employee, and there was no hearing or other formal process for the dismissal. The personnel file contains a memorandum from the manager laying out concerns with the chief’s performance, which was sent three months before the dismissal. The file also contains a letter of dismissal, which does not set out any specifics.

Continuing the scenario, let’s assume that in order to avoid a lawsuit in which the city could be assessed attorneys fees, the city is inclined to release both the notice of dismissal and the memorandum with the supporting bases for dismissal. The city is aware, though, that the former employee would not want this information to be made public, and that an argument could be made that the law doesn’t allow disclosure of the memo.  May, must, or should the city notify the former employee prior to releasing the records? Does the employee have any legal recourse to prevent the release of the records? Read more »

Local Preferences in Public Contracting, Part 5

This is the fifth installment in a series of posts discussing the efforts of the City Council of Emerald City, North Carolina, to support its local businesses by adopting a local preference policy.  (You can find the earlier installments here, here, here, and here.)  In the last post, City Attorney Tin Man explained the constitutional issues involved in local preferences to the City Council.  As we rejoin the Emerald City Council meeting, a short man in a bright green suit has asked Chairwoman Glinda if he can make some remarks to the Council.

“You have 5 minutes,” says the Chairwoman.  The man approaches the podium in the center of the room, produces a step stool, steps up on the stool, and pulls the microphone down to bring it closer to his mouth.

“Thank you, Chairwoman Glinda, and thank you, Council, for addressing this very important topic,” says the man.  “My name is Green Apple, and I represent the Lollipop Guild.  We are against local preferences, and I’d like to explain why.” Read more »

Club-A-Gone-Gone?

Do two wrongs ever equal a right in a zoning dispute? Suppose someone starts a business that is not allowed at that site under the zoning ordinance. One wrong. Suppose further that this was done after the town zoning inspector had mistakenly issued a permit for that use. Second wrong. Add the fact that the business is in operation for some time before the errors come to light. Does all of this add up to a legal right to continue operating the business at this site? Read more »

Two-thirds Bonds

On July 1, 2009, Carolina County had outstanding general obligation (G.O.) indebtedness of $32.2 million, revenue bond indebtedness of $7.1 million, and installment-purchase debt totaling $1.5 million. The county used its G.O. bond revenues to fund a new recreation facility and a new police department. It issued the revenue bonds to finance a major water system upgrade. And, the county used its installment-purchase financing to purchase several vehicles and other equipment, as well as to fund the renovation and expansion of some of its existing infrastructure. During the 2009-2010 fiscal year (FY 09-10) the county expended the following amounts on debt service: It retired $1.5 million in principal and $1.7 million in interest on its G.O. debt. It retired $200,000 in principal and $189,000 in interest on its revenue bonds. And, it retired $100,000 in principal and $75,000 in interest on its installment-purchase financings. Additionally, during FY 09-10, the county issued $400,000 in G.O. bond anticipation notes, $1 million in additional revenue bonds for its water system upgrade project, and $200,000 in installment-purchase financing for park land acquisition. In sum, during the FY 09-10 fiscal year, the county retired a total of $1.8 million in principal and a total of $1,964,000 in interest on its outstanding indebtedness. As of June 30, 2010, the county had $40,600,000 in total outstanding indebtedness.

Based on this information what is Carolina County’s two-thirds bond capacity in FY 10-11?

a.         $   266,666

b.         $1,866,666

c.         $1,000,000

d.         $   733,333

What, you have no idea what two-thirds bond capacity is, let alone how it is calculated? Well then, read on… Read more »