Mecklenburg reaches ‘inflection point' as NC legislators file transportation tax bill
The bill filed Monday is Senate Bill 145. Its primary sponsors are Sens. Bill Rabon, David Craven and Vickie Sawyer, whose district covers part of northern Mecklenburg County. Rabon and Sawyer also are chairs of the Senate Transportation Committee. Craven is a chair of the Senate Finance Committee.
If passed, Mecklenburg County could ask voters as early as this year whether to add a 1-cent sales tax to pay for roads and public transportation. SB 145 requires 40% of proceeds to go to road projects and 60% to go to public transportation.
The measure already received support from all Mecklenburg cities and towns, except Matthews, which proposed a higher tax to ensure a light rail line extends there. The Charlotte Regional Business Alliance, the area's most prominent business advocacy group, added its endorsement Monday by saying Mecklenburg County's 'outstanding quality of life is threatened by increasing congestion.'
'This region is at a remarkable inflection point,' CLT Alliance Chair David Longo said in a news release. 'We have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to invest in our future.'
The bill's introduction came on the same day Republican General Assembly leaders visited the alliance to discuss the legislature's 2025 session. Sawyer has cautioned the bill's passage remains uncertain in the GOP-dominated chamber.
Senate leader Phil Berger and House Speaker Destin Hall remained mum Monday on their opinions about the transportation tax effort. But Berger praised Charlotte-area leaders for collaborating on the tax referendum package, and Hall offered a dash of optimism about its chances.
'I cannot over emphasize how impressed I've been with the willingness of local governments and local officials to work together to come to this point,' Berger said.
Key parts of Senate Bill 145 include:
▪ Allowing the Mecklenburg County Board of Commissioners to direct election officials to put a sales tax referendum on the ballot that asks voters whether they are 'for' or 'against' a 1% sales and use tax in addition to other existing taxes.
▪ If voters approve the referendum, the tax can only start if the N.C. General Assembly creates a new public transportation authority for the county. A draft bill from local leaders last year called for an authority with 27 members appointed by Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, the county's towns and state leaders to govern the Charlotte Area Transit System. Berger told reporters Monday the authority would be introduced as a separate bill for procedural reasons.
▪ Tax revenue for roads would be distributed to each city and town in the county using a formula outlined in the bill.
▪ The public transportation revenue could be used for buying, building or operating a public transportation system, but the bill says no more than 40% of the total tax revenue can go to rail projects over any 30-year period. And the new public transit authority must complete at least 50% of the Red Line from uptown to Lake Norman towns before completing any other rail project. There's an exception for unexpected events such as natural disasters.
▪ CATS leadership in January presented four scenarios that are affordable with the 40% cap on rail. All four options fully fund the Red Line, an expansion of the Gold Line streetcar system and overhaul of CATS' bus system. They also lay out options for completing all or some of the Silver Line light rail project to the airport and Blue Line expansion as light rail or bus rapid transit.
▪ The authority can use its money to reimburse the city of Charlotte for buying train tracks from Norfolk Southern for the Red Line. The Charlotte City Council voted last year to spend $74 million to purchase 22 miles of rail corridor from Norfolk Southern and an additional $17 million for 1.6 acres of land along Graham Street near the Gateway Station.
The bill would provide for 'unprecedented funding for roads, transit and bus systems that will have both immediate and long-term impacts for our commuters, residents, and visitors,' the managers of Mecklenburg County, Charlotte and every town in the county but Matthews said in a joint statement Monday.
In a separate statement Monday, Charlotte Mayor Vi Lyles said the bill 'will help secure a more prosperous and better future' for the region.
'We still have a lot of work to do, but having a bill filed is an important milestone — one that we have been working towards for years,' she said. 'I look forward to the work in front of us, with our partners, to deliver on a future that will make a difference for all of us because it will make a difference in the quality of life for our region.'
Lyles added in her statement she wants the governance structure 'that the city, county, and majority of towns agreed to remain intact.'
Berger and Hall spoke at the CLT Alliance's uptown headquarters Monday, addressing a crowd that featured local elected officials, members of Mecklenburg County's legislative delegation and business leaders. Neither took questions from the crowd, but they addressed the transportation bill in their remarks about the 2025 session.
Hall became House speaker this year after Tim Moore won a seat in Congress. He told Monday's crowd the transportation tax bill is 'heading in the right direction' because 'both sides of the aisle' and the business community 'explained the need for the investments and how you're really spending money to save money and create growth in the area.'
'It doesn't mean it's going to be easy,' Hall said. 'I imagine it's going to be a bill that's well litigated through the General Assembly among the various committees in the chambers, and maybe something that it takes most of the long session to get to a good place on but, but I know that there are a number of folks who are committed to doing something on it.'
Hall pledged to review data about the most efficient ways to move people and 'grow responsibility.'
Berger lauded local leaders for reaching a compromise deal, but cautioned that changes could be made as the bill makes its way through the legislative process.
'The rest of the news is that we ain't there yet, and so we will see how to get us and get you from where we are at this point to where you all want to go,' he said.
Speaking to reporters after the event, Berger said he's encouraging members of the Republican caucus 'to look at the proposal and understand the reasons for it.'
'They'll have to make their individual decisions on what they're going to do,' he said.
Sawyer has cautioned it won't be easy to get through the General Assembly.
An advocacy group posted portions of email exchange with Sawyer earlier this month in which she said the bill was 'a long way from being palatable to have enough votes to even get to the floor.' She told the Observer at the time 'nothing really new has changed' but the bill remains 'very difficult' to pass in a Republican-dominated legislature generally averse to tax increases.
The CLT Alliance noted in its statement Mecklenburg voters will decide whether to increase taxes if the legislature allows it to be put to a vote.
'Investments in transportation infrastructure are critical for the region's long-term competitiveness, success, and quality of life for all. The CLT Alliance will continue to deliver the business perspective on this critical topic and is committed to working with stakeholders across the region to make progress on transportation solutions,' interim President and CEO Andrea Smith said.
Alliance Chief Advocacy Officer Joe Bost said 'it's premature' to pick a cut-off date for the referendum to make the 2025 ballot.
Developer Ned Curran added the business community has already started working with other community groups and elected officials on efforts to educate both legislators and the public about the bill and the potential referendum.
'We're shooting for it to be on the ballot in November 2025,' he said.
Lyles told WCNC that if the region fails to get a referendum on the 2025 ballot, the city would try again in 2026.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
As Democrats wage national redistricting war, Republicans may have the upper hand
WASHINGTON — As California legislators begin the process of reconfiguring its congressional districts and creating a more Democratic-friendly map in next year's midterms, the party could be pushing itself into a national redistricting war — and one that would likely hold them at a disadvantage. The California Legislature will work to pass its proposed version of the state's congressional map this week, which would give Democrats an advantage in five additional House seats in the state. After that, the revised map will be on the ballot in November when California voters participate in a special election for municipal races. That means Democrats' attempt to thwart Republican redistricting efforts in other states, namely Texas, where President Donald Trump is pushing for Republicans to draw more GOP-friendly districts, will come down to whether California leaders can convince enough voters to support the gambit. And that may be easier said than done. Even if California is successful and counteracts the five seats Republicans say they'll flip in the Lone Star State, it could ignite efforts in other states to redraw their maps for partisan leverage. Doing so would be an easier fight for Republican-led states than those led by Democrats, largely because of the laws put in place by party leaders to avoid this exact situation. Democrats face more obstacles than Republicans in redrawing maps As state leaders threaten a redraw of their maps, Republicans have an advantage over their Democratic counterparts due to local laws impeding partisan gerrymandering attempts. Most redistricting efforts are completed through state legislatures and more easily accomplished in states with single-party control, meaning one party controls both chambers of the state legislature and the governor's mansion. In that category, Republicans have the trifecta advantage: There are 26 states under complete GOP control compared to just 15 under complete Democratic control. Once you factor out the states that don't have split congressional representation — for example, Utah, which only has Republican seats so a map redraw wouldn't do anything to change the calculus — you are down to 15 red states and eight blue states with seats available to flip. Even then, at least four of those Democratic-led states require independent commissions (or some hybrid system with state legislators) to change congressional maps in the middle of the decade. That complicates their efforts while the Republican states would only require their legislatures to do the heavy lifting. 'Even if (Democrats) are hell bent on doing this, I don't think it's going to be a very easy thing for them to do as a matter of their various state laws,' John Malcom, the vice president of the conservative Heritage Foundation's Institute for Constitutional Government, told the Deseret News in an interview. 'It's not going to be easy for them to do, and they have less room to maneuver because they've already done a remarkably effective job of redistricting (some states) in a way that … dilutes Republican votes.' California gambles with those obstacles in place Unlike a majority of states, California hands the power of map-drawing not to state legislators but instead to an independent redistricting commission that is meant to draw nonpartisan boundaries based purely on population data. The commission was first enacted in 2010 and is made up of five Republicans, five Democrats and four voters who are not affiliated with either of the major parties. California is mandated by its state constitution to utilize the commission only once a decade, and it already did so in 2021. In order to work around this, California Gov. Gavin Newsom announced last week he would introduce a constitutional amendment circumventing those laws. The catch: California voters, who largely support the independent commission, have to approve throwing away the panel's nonpartisan maps until after the census is taken again in 2030 and new maps are drawn for the 2032 election cycle. A recent Politico/Citrin Center/Possibility Lab survey found 64% of voters support keeping the independent commission, compared to just 36% who said state lawmakers should draw the maps. But some members of the commission who drew the current boundaries support throwing out the map, with the agreement that the panel will be reinstated later. But even with that endorsement, Republicans plan to fight back with accusations that Democrats are defying the will of the voters. 'I think that it will be seen as a negatively partisan thing if they try to go back on what the voters only recently approved,' Malcolm told the Deseret News. 'But you know, Gavin Newsom is making it very clear that the lane he wants to run for president in is the 'I'm the anti-Trump guy.' And so being nakedly partisan is not something that Gavin Newsom is going to shy away from.' Still, Democrats could have some luck as nearly half of the state's voters belong to the party compared to just 24.7% who are registered Republicans, according to the Public Policy Institute of California. Another 21.9% identify as independents. California and Texas could set off firestorm in other states With Texas expected to approve its new map as early as this week and California moving full steam ahead on its proposal this fall, the boundary battle could elevate to an all-out war encompassing several states across the country. More than half a dozen states are publicly considering changes to their congressional maps next November in an attempt to gain leverage — especially as it becomes likely California will simply neutralize Texas and neither party will benefit. Democrats in New York have openly suggested they would look at ways to change congressional maps to squeeze out GOP lawmakers in vulnerable districts while Florida Republicans are considering the opposite in the Sunshine State. But other states are slowly entering the conversation, such as Indiana, where Republicans already hold a 7-2 advantage to Democrats. All seven of those House Republicans came out in support of redrawing the map on Monday after President Donald Trump began looking to the state as another opportunity to secure his majority. 'Now, with President Trump and the entire Hoosier Republican Congressional delegation expressing support for Congressional redistricting, the General Assembly should act swiftly to get the job done,' Rep. Marlin Stutzman, the first Indiana Republican to announce his support, said in a statement to the Deseret News. 'Hoosiers deserve Congressional districts that ensure voting records are reflected accurately in their Congressional districts.' Despite uphill battle, Democrats say they can't give up Although Democrats face more obstacles than Republicans, the redistricting battle is emerging as a war they must wage, strategists say — lest they risk an unenthusiastic base that has already expressed frustration the minority doesn't do enough to thwart Trump's agenda. 'The way I look at it, you have to fight fire with fire,' Brad Bannon, a Democratic strategist based in Washington, D.C., told the Deseret News. 'You just can't let the Republicans gerrymander their way to a House majority that they're going to have difficulty protecting.' Republicans currently hold a 219-212 majority in the U.S. House of Representatives, a historically slim margin that has often made it difficult for the party to advance legislation even with a Republican trifecta. With control of the White House and Senate, Republicans have enjoyed total control of Washington — something that is at risk next November. Historical trends show that the party of the sitting president typically loses control of the House during midterm elections. If Democrats manage to flip the House, it would deal a massive blow to Trump and likely thwart his agenda for his final two years. As a result, Trump is pressing state Republican leaders to deliver additional seats through redistricting — which some strategists say is a sign of political desperation and should motivate Democrats not to let up. 'Democrats have an opportunity to take back the House, and it won't stop the abuses in the Trump regime, but it will slow them down,' Bannon said. 'Democrats will have the opportunity to call hearings and investigations into the Trump administration, and I don't think we can afford to let that opportunity go by. So I think Democrats should go full steam ahead.'
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
9/11 victims' fund architect slams changes to New Hampshire abuse settlement program
CONCORD, N.H. (AP) — An attorney who helped design and implement the 9/11 victims' compensation fund says New Hampshire lawmakers have eroded the fairness of a settlement program for those who were abused at the state's youth detention center. Deborah Greenspan, who served as deputy special master of the fund created after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, recently submitted an affidavit in a class-action lawsuit seeking to block changes to New Hampshire's out-of-court settlement fund for abuse victims. She's among those expected to testify Wednesday at a hearing on the state's request to dismiss the case and other matters. More than 1,300 people have sued the state since 2020 alleging that they were physically or sexually abused as children while in state custody, mostly at the Sununu Youth Services Center in Manchester. Most of them put their lawsuits on hold after lawmakers created a settlement fund in 2022 that was pitched as a 'victim-centered' and 'trauma-informed' alternative to litigation run by a neutral administrator appointed by the state Supreme Court. But the Republican-led Legislature changed that process through last-minute additions to the state budget Gov. Kelly Ayotte signed in June. The amended law gives the governor authority to hire and fire the fund's administrator and gives the attorney general — also a political appointee — veto power over settlement awards. That stands in stark contrast to other victim compensation funds, said Greenspan, who currently serves as a court-appointed special master for lawsuits related to lead-tainted water in Flint, Michigan. She said it 'strains credulity' to believe that anyone would file a claim knowing that 'the persons ultimately deciding the claim were those responsible for the claimant's injuries.' 'Such a construct would go beyond the appearance of impropriety and create a clear conflict of interest, undermining the fairness and legitimacy of the settlement process," she wrote. Ayotte and Attorney General John Formella responded by asking a judge to bar Greenspan's testimony, saying she offered 'policy preferences masquerading as expert opinions' without explaining the principles beyond her conclusions. 'Her affidavit is instead a series of non sequiturs that move from her experience to her conclusions without any of the necessary connective tissue,' they wrote. The defendants argue that the law still requires the administrator to be 'an independent, neutral attorney' and point out that the same appointment process is used for the state's judges. They said giving the attorney general the authority to accept or reject settlements is necessary to give the public a voice and ensure that the responsibility for spending millions of dollars in public funds rests with the executive branch. As of June 30, nearly 2,000 people had filed claims with the settlement fund, which caps payouts at $2.5 million. A total of 386 had been settled, with an average award of $545,000. One of the claimants says he was awarded $1.5 million award in late July, but the state hasn't finalized it yet, leaving him worried that Formella will veto it. 'I feel like the state has tricked us,' he said in an interview this week. 'We've had the rug pulled right out from underneath us.' The Associated Press does not name those who say they were sexually assaulted unless they come forward publicly. The claimant, now 39, said the two years he spent at the facility as a teenager were the hardest times of his life. 'I lost my childhood. I lost things that I can't get back,' he said. 'I was broken.' Though the settlement process was overwhelming and scary at times, the assistant administrator who heard his case was kind and understanding, he said. That meeting alone was enough to lift a huge burden, he said. 'I was treated with a lot of love,' he said. 'I felt really appreciated as a victim and like I was speaking to somebody who would listen and believe my story.' Separate from the fund, the state has settled two lawsuits by agreeing to pay victims $10 million and $4.5 million. Only one lawsuit has gone to trial, resulting in a $38 million verdict, though the state is trying to slash it to $475,000. The state has also brought criminal charges against former workers, with two convictions and two mistrials so far. The 39-year-old claimant who fears his award offer will be retracted said he doesn't know if he could face testifying at a public trial. 'It's basically allowing the same people who hurt us to hurt us all over again,' he said.
UPI
2 hours ago
- UPI
Immigrant detention center "Cornhusker Clink" to open in Nebraska
1 of 3 | Governor of Nebraska James Pillen speaks during a statue unveiling ceremony for American Writer Willa Cather, known for writing about America's Great Plains and the pioneer experience, at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC on Wednesday, June 7, 2023. Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI | License Photo Aug. 19 (UPI) -- The Trump administration unveiled plans Tuesday for the "Cornhusker Clink," its latest project to expand immigrant detention centers in partnership with state authorities. The center will be located within the Work Ethic Camp, a minimum security state prison, located in McCook, a small town in Nebraska of about 7,000 people. The Cornhusker Clink will add up to 280 beds to house immigrants captured by Immigration Customs Enforcement agents as part of the Trump administration's plans for mass deportations. The facility is the third of its kind, and is part of a partnership between Republican governors and federal authorities. Like two facilities unveiled earlier, the name of the Cornhusker Clink makes the same use of alliteration and reference to local touchstones as Florida's Alligator Alcatraz and Indiana's Speedway Slammer. "I'm grateful for President Trump to say, 'It is important that we find the criminals, the bad people and remove them," Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen said at a press conference. "And so we're on the team." Pillen said that in addition to the new detention center about 20 members of the Nebraska National Guard will provide administrative support to ICE officials. He also said that the Nebraska State Patrol will also participate in a federal program that will allow them to work with ICE agents. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said in a post on X that the project would "help remove the worst of the worst out of our country." Trump's immigration crackdown has been criticized for disregarding civil rights and due process, while targeting immigrants who have not committed crimes. In Nebraska, not everyone was happy about being home to the Cornhusker Clinker. State Sen. George Dungan told KETV that he was "incredibly concerned" that the governor made the move without consulting the legislature, especially when immigration is a federal issue. He pointed to Trump's role in scuttling a bipartisan immigration reform bill last year before taking office. "It's really concerning to see President Trump creating a problem and then our governor stepping up and saying, 'we are going to fix this problem that was created by the federal government,'" he said. "I don't see how this is the Nebraska taxpayer's problem." The Nebraska Democratic Party responded with a post on X, saying that Trump and Pillen have "thrown due process out the window, all to appease their base." "They have promised to go after criminals and instead have locked up hardworking moms and dads who contribute their skills to our agricultural economy," the party wrote.
