News-Record.com

There are two items from me in this Sunday's paper.

The first idea came when I heard President Barack Obama mention charter schools in his speech to Congress last week. North Carolina has charter schools but the legislature seems kind of conflicted about them. From that story:

State law limits to 100 the number of charter schools, which are funded by tax dollars but are run by private boards. That reflects a certain legislative ambivalence toward the schools, which were created under a 1996 law but never fully embraced by the General Assembly's top voices on education.

Despite Obama's call to increase funding and "help create new, high-quality charter schools," N.C. lawmakers remain cautious.

"I don't, at this point in time, support raising the cap on the number of charter schools," said Rep. Maggie Jeffus , a Guilford County Democrat and former teacher who is involved in education policy in the General Assembly. She said some charters she had visited had excellent programs, but others struggled to keep pace with expectations in academics and management.

Click here for the whole thing.

-=-=-=

Next up is an update on the Jordan Lake rules. (Background.) This is one of those subjects we get to write about every so often because it's important, but not one that moves at a terribly fast clip. The real news from the story was that the parties trying to reach some resolution on the rules were on the precipice of negotiation. Or as I used a lot more words to say::

Lawmakers now will have to decide whether rules put forward by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources will achieve their goals or merely cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars during a time they can least afford it.

"I expect it will be contentious because it has already been contentious," said Rep. Lucy Allen, a Franklin County Democrat who chairs the House environment committee. "We hear all of the objections coming from the communities up that way."

Although state law gives opponents of regulations a clear path to appeal to the General Assembly, it gives lawmakers little guidance on how to settle disputes. Allen has filed one of a handful of bills that would wipe the Jordan Lake rules from the books, although few expect that could pass as it is.

Lawmakers like Allen are looking for parties on all sides to come to some accord. At least some of various groups say they're ready to start talking, even if they're not sure when or in what format.

"I'm optimistic," said Steven Levitas , a lawyer and former deputy secretary in the Department of Environment. He has been hired by Durham to help negotiate a compromise and is one of the point people for all the groups opposing the rules.

As described by Levitas and others involved, there have been discussions between various parties one-on-one. The trick now is to get representatives for all concerned in the same room.

Click here if you're trying to cure some sort of sleep disorder.

-=-=-=-=-

And believe it or not, there was even more news in the state last week than President Barack Obama coming to visit. A sampling:

• * Winston-Salem's James Romoser writes about the unborn victims bill and why it has a hard time passing in North Carolina. Some of the reasons will be familiar if you've read up on the gay marriage law recently: both are politically volatile and could lead places counter to the interest of the folks who lead the General Assembly.

• * The federal stimulus money was on people's minds this week, whether those folks are running zoo's that my current N+R colleague Ryan Seals says won't get any help, or the home energy efficient efforts that my one-time News & Record colleague Paul Garber (now of the Winston-Salem Journal) wrote about or the high speed rail lines that the N+O wrote about.

• * Charlotte's Jim Morrill say Gov. Bev Perdue may raid lottery funds to balance the budget.

• * Raleigh's Dan Kane says in his Saturday story that the fees Blue Cross Blue Shield is charging the state for health plan transactions are getting people's attention, and not in a good way.

• * From last week, WUNC's Laura Leslie writes up a news conference with Greensboro Rep. Pricey Harrison on her proposal to ban the use of mountain-top removal coal.

Enjoy your Sunday.

Reps. Dale Folwell and Nelson Cole are getting ready to file a bill (either today or tomorrow) that would allow pictures taken from a school bus stop arm to be used in prosecuting violators who don't brake for school students.

Click here for today's newspaper story.

And click here to read a copy of the bill.

Although it was recommended by the N.C. Child Fatality Task Force, the measure got a recent push by events in Rockingham County. Background here and here.

Presuming the Council of State decides to take a 20-acre gift from Rockingham County during its meeting tomorrow, the N.C. Department of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention will build a Youth Development Center in Wentworth.

Guilford County had been a candidate for the center (and the jobs that come along with it), but neighbors objected. This is from a Jan. 20, 2007 a colleague wrote out of a Guilford County Board of Commissioners meeting:

GREENSBORO - Sandy Camp Road residents made a last-ditch, late-night plea to block the state from building a juvenile jail in their neighborhood.

They won.

Guilford County commissioners on Thursday overwhelmingly turned away the state's permit request for the 32-bed youth prison in the area. Commissioners worried that the jail would hurt property values and lacked enough security to prevent convicted teenagers from breaking loose and terrorizing neighbors.

"We were absolutely humbled by it," said Larry Rayle, a lifelong resident of the area. "This is the first group of people in a year that really sat down and listened to us and discounted what the state was presenting."

Residents have been fighting the state since it revealed plans for the center more than a year ago. Juvenile justice officials promised that the building would look like an elementary school with trees out front along Sandy Camp Road .

The state easily won over the county planning board. But the commissioners, who can be more easily influenced by passionate pleas from voters, said the state failed to meet guidelines for granting the request.

"The surrounding property is all residential," Republican Billy Yow said. "There's not one commercial application out there."

Commissioners said they hoped the state would still build the center in the county. One suggestion has been the county prison farm in Gibsonville, though Chairman Paul Gibson, a Democrat, suggested putting it in an industrial park away from homes.

"It doesn't need to be there in a residential area that's growing," Gibson said.

Kim Yonkers, a spokeswoman for the juvenile-justice department, said only that the state would "evaluate the situation and make a decision on where to go next." The department plans to build five youth prisons across the state as it takes a more community-oriented approach to jailing its youth .

The bill to restore protest petition rights in zoning cases to Greensboro residents has had its vote in the House delayed a day. Rep. Pricey Harrison, a Greensboro Democrat, pulled the bill back from consideration just before it was to be heard. The measure is now scheduled for Tuesday's calendar.

Rep. Earl Jones did not brave the ice, sleet and snow to get down to the General Assembly Monday night as the five other House members from Guilford County did. Jones, I'm told, wanted to make sure he got to cast a vote on the bill, so it was held as a courtesy to him.

The Senate version of the measure is on the Senate State and Local Government committee agenda for tomorrow. However, both bills do not need to pass and in fact it is rare (although not unheard of) for the House and Senate to do their own versions of legislation. Typically, the first chamber to pass a bill gets to have its version passed into law.

Rep. Pricey Harrison, a Greensboro Democrat, has filed H 362, which would require the community college system to admit the children of illegal aliens.

The N.C. Community College System is studying the issue of admitting the children of undocumented workers per a directive by the State Board of Community Colleges. That study is due to be out this spring, although folks on both sides of the issue seem to think the system will largely defer to the General Assembly.

Harrison's is the first bill to allow children of illegal immigrants in as far as I know. Legislation to the opposite effect (keeping children of illegal immigrants out) has been filed by Republicans in the House and by Republican Sen. Phil Berger of Rockingham County in the Senate.

Harrison said she wanted to send a signal to the community college system and others that there were people in the legislature who felt differently from the sponsors of the other bills.

Here is a short (less than three minutes) video of Harrison explaining her bill and talking about some of the push-back that will come with it.

Yesterday, I wrote a post linking to the several bills that have been filed at the N.C. General Assembly regarding whether the state's community colleges should admit illegal immigrants and/or their children.

In that post I had Rep. Pricey Harrison, a Greensboro Democrat, explain why she filed legislation that would require the community college system to admit the children of illegal immigrants.

Today, here's Sen. Phil Berger explaining why he filed a bill to do the opposite and direct the community college system keep those with questionable immigration status out:

The General Assembly is in the process of inviting Gov. Bev Perdue to give her annual State of the State address on March 9 at 7 p.m. (The governor cannot just show up in the General Assembly and start yacking. There are rules and tradition that govern these sorts of things.)

A governor delivers the State of the State once every legislative session - that's every two years to normal folks. Typically, the governor uses the speech to talk about their budget priorities and what other legislation she would like the General Assembly to work on.

When I saw her after the Council of State meeting this morning, I asked Perdue what she might tell the honorables.

"Would you like to help write the speech? We don't have one yet," Perdue joked. She added that meetings on the state budget, both the current year and the proposal for the budget that will take effect July 1, have consumed most of her time.

Click here to listen to her full answer.

I reported last week that funding for promoting the High Point Furniture Market was among the cuts that the Commerce Department offered to Gov. Bev Perdue as a way to help balance next year's budget.

The recurring funding (that which the state gives every year unless legislators act to stop it) for the market is less than $1 million. That hardly seems like enough to cure what could be in the neighborhood of $3 billion budget gap. Still, the old saying "A million here, a million there and pretty soon you're talking about real money," often applies when trying to cut down a state budget.

I didn't have a chance to speak to Perdue directly about the Commerce submission last week, but did today after the Council of State meeting.

Perdue said that marketing of the High Point Furniture Market was important, particularly with challenges from other venues.

"I mean with (Las) Vegas trying to come in and take some ground from North Carolina we really must stay committed to the show itself and the market it opens up globally for North Carolina," Perdue said.

It's good news for High Point that she can speak in those terms. It would make it much harder for those lobbying to win support if they had to explain what the market was to Perdue from scratch.

That said, Perdue said that all budget items "were on the table" as potential cuts and she could not commit to what might happen with the market one way or the other.

"My heart's in the right place, I just don't know that the state's pocket book is in the right place," she said.

Click here to listen to her full answer. (40 seconds)

Groups who support adding a gay marriage ban to the state constitution -- or, more precisely, want to define marriage as one man and one woman: plural marriages and barnyard nuptials would be banned as well -- rallied behind the legislative building today.

North Carolina already has a law that defines marriages as one-man-and-one-woman, but that definition is not constitutional. Folks who are concerned about this worry that a judge could overturn state law.

Temperatures are cold today and there's snow on the ground, so it's not a surprise that there appears to be fewer people here today than when the same groups rallied two years ago. Still, it's a sizable crowd - WRAL's estimate of more than 1,000 may be low-ish, but I didn't get up on the roof and count heads.

But for all the sound and fury, I don't think the political situation has changed much from last week (or last year).

Still, it does look like at least a few protesters have gotten the message that it is the legislative leadership standing in their way:

I just liked this picture:

This was noted in the legislative press room by a few folks, including the Barkeep, but I haven't seen it shared yet.

A bill filed in the House this week would put a referendum before voters on a having a state constitution ban on gay marriage.

I wrote last week about the Senate version of the bill and how the legislative leadership won't let them get to fruition. In the Senate, such measures have been sent to the Ways and Means Committee, which hasn't met since George W. Bush's first term.

Speaker Joe Hackney was a little more subtle in his handling of the bill. He gave it four serial referrals.

"So?" I hear you ask. Here's what that means.

Since Hackney took over as Speaker, bills usually get a hearing in two committees. That can be a pretty tall order, particularly and the end of session, when committee time is short. But the idea is that if two committees sign off on something, it's been given a thorough going over.

On rare occasions, a bill will get three referrals, especially if it has a tax component. The bill to ban smoking, which was written by the House majority leader, may end up with three referrals before it hits the House floor.

Four referrals is just, well, it's a long road to walk. Even if all the committee chairmen were enthusiastic about passing such a bill, it would take the measure at least a month to clear out of committee were it to move at a quick but normal pace. And since committee chairmen serve at the please of the Speaker, perhaps their enthusiasm for this measure is less than ardent.

The bill, H 361, has been assigned to the Rules committee, then on to Election Law and Campaign Finance Reform and then to Judiciary I and finally to Appropriations.

Even if proponents were to push the bill by means of parliamentary maneuvers that let recall the bill from committee, the time involved would be immense. Every time such a vote got near, the bill could be passed on a voice vote and shuffled off to the next committee where a series of legislative clocks would be reset.

While nothing the legislature ever does is permanent or intractable, it seems this bill is unlikely to find its way to a floor vote.

The Greensboro protest petition bill passed the House 116-0 Tuesday afternoon. I now goes to the Senate for consideration.

Update: Click here to listen to the two minutes that it took the House to pass the protest petitions bill.

I passed my friend Frosty here on the way in to the Legislative Building this morning. He was standing in front of the historic state Capitol building and looked rather relaxed for a snowman about to face temps in the low 70s. I'm sure there's a parable in there for state leaders about getting too smug in the face of impending crisis, but it's too early in the morning for half-baked snark so just enjoy the pictures. (Click on the picture to enlarge.)

Gov. Bev Perdue signed her first bill into law today. Senate Bill 198 allows the same person to hold the post of North Carolina School Board Chairman and Executive Director of the state's public schools.

Perdue's pick for the job is former Cumberland County Schools Superintendent Bill Harrison.

Perdue announced the merger of the two positions back in January as part of an effort to clarify lines of authority within the school system.

"We are putting a system together so we all talk one talk and walk one walk," Perdue told reporters, legislators and a passel of school children gathered in the Old House Chamber at the Capitol Wednesday morning.

Click here to listen to more from the news conference.

House members are looking at H 120, which would create a pilot program for public financing of city council elections.

Chapel Hill currently has such a pilot and this measure, which is co-sponsored by Rep. Pricey Harrison, would allow cities such as Greensboro to create their own public financing systems.

Two Greensboro residents, Nick Divitci and Eric Eno, came to Raleigh to lobby on the bill's behalf.

Divitci said that the bill would help cure "lopsidedness" in the makeup of City Council.

"The lopsidedness is mostly toward the development interests," Divitci said. He emphasized that Greensboro would not be required to participate if the bill passed. Instead, the city council would have to apply to the State Board of Elections to participate.

The House Election Law and Campaign Finance Committee passed the bill today. (It now goes to Judiciary II before heading to the House floor.)

Here's what Divitci told the committee:

Eno, a Lindley Park resident, said his neighborhood has been involved in fighting a lot of rezoning cases.

"I think there's been a disproportionate influence on the council by developers," he said.

The bill has the support of Common Cause, a good government group that has organized a lobbying effort on behalf of the legislation.

Jessica Hayes, a lobbyist for the N.C. Home Builders Association spoke against the bill during its committee hearing. She said if it passed, her member's participation through their political action committee would be curtailed.

"There is a finite amount of money we can contribute to each candidate," she said.

Dallas Woodhouse, who heads the North Carolina chapter of Americans for Prosperity, a conservative group, also spoke against the bill.

"There is only so much the taxpayers can absorb in this state," he said. Cities are already struggling to cope with the sour economy and decreased tax collections.

He added that taxpayers, he said, should not be forced to fund the campaigns of those with whom they disagreed.

Update: Click here for the newspaper story.

The Greensboro protest petition bill passed the Senate Wednesday afternoon. There are no more legislative hurdles it has to get through, so it will be sent to the Secretary of State’s office and become law.

Because the protest petition bill is a local bill, one that affects fewer than 15 counties, the governor does not have to sign it.

A friendly staffer up in D.C. e-mailed this photo earlier in the week:

If you'll look closely, the gentleman seated on the left is no longer English Prime Minister Winston Churchill. Instead, Rep. Howard Coble, Republican of Greensboro, is among the big three at Yalta.

Apparently, Rep. Walter Jones (or, more correctly, someone on Jones' staff) has been producing a series of pictures as homage to Coble's "long and varied career."

While the photos are beginning to make the rounds via e-mail, they've been getting posted in the Republican cloak room just off the U.S. House floor.

Coble chuckled when I asked him about the Yalta picture Wednesday.

"I told Walter Jones, 'Your chief of staff has too much time on his hands,'" but quickly added that the pictures have "become the talk of the cloakroom."

Others in the series of doctored pictures include Coble walking ashore in Korea with Gen. Douglas MacArthur and walking with President John F. Kennedy.

But Coble says the Yalta picture is his favorite. Not only does Coble's head seem to fit perfectly on Churchill's body, but Churchill was holding a cigar in the photo.

"I'm an occasional cigar smoker," Coble allowed.

Here's another from the series:

Update: Glen Downs, chief of staff for Jones, called back and fessed up to being the artist behind the illustrations. Downs grew up in Greensboro, went to Paige High School, and knew Coble when the now-Congressman was in the legislature.

The pictures started as an inside joke, Downs said. Coble's resume has a bit more variety than your average Congressman, from Coast Guard commander to state secretary of revenue.

"The guy has pretty much done everything," Downs said.

Fred G., a reader from Greensboro who drops me an e-mail from time-to-time, called earlier this week to chat about a couple things, including his car insurance rate going up. He had gotten a letter from his company saying that a new state law was partly to blame.

That law requires drivers to carry coverage in case of an accident with a motorist who was uninsured or under-insured. Before Jan. 1, you could opt out of such coverage or have a lower than recommended coverage. Now all drivers are required to carry coverage equal to the amount they have for other parts of their coverage.

For Fred, it meant a bump of more than $100 in his premium.

This struck me as odd since back in January, when the new law took effect, the Department of Insurance estimated that the average driver would see their rates go up $17.

"The intent is to add another layer of protection for consumers," said Insurance Commissioner Wayne Goodwin.

Up to 12 percent of drivers are on the roads without insurance. That's illegal and those folks can't get their tags renewed, but those folks are out there. It makes sense, Goodwin said, to make sure everyone has enough coverage so they're not left with a big bill should they have an accident with one of those folks.

And, he said, the number of uninsured drivers could go up as the economy worsens and people try to cut down on expenses or simply can't pay their bills.

But, Goodwin allowed, the law "has lead to some unintended consequences."

There's already an ongoing fight between insurers and the state over insurance rates, and this question of uninsured motorist coverage has gotten sucked into that, Goodwin said.

My friend Mark Johnson, who writes for the Charlotte paper, beat me to the punch reporting this out fully. Click here for his story from today's paper that outlines the issue pretty well and includes this:

It's unclear how many car owners saw a rate increase because of the requirement for equal levels of coverage. About 70,000 customers of Nationwide, the largest auto insurer in the state, got bigger insurance bills because of the law, said Susan Valauri, director of government relations for Nationwide in North Carolina. The average increase was approximately $22 for the year, with the largest jump being about $120 for the year.

Glasgow likely saw such a sharp price increase because he had a high level of coverage on his liability insurance and the minimum level of coverage on his uninsured motorists provision.

Valauri said more than 99 percent of the company's N.C. customers already had uninsured motorist coverage, and 91 percent maintained an equal level of coverage with their liability insurance.

“It's not a big deal for the vast majority of drivers,” Valauri said. “For those other customers ... it may have been a very big deal for them.”

According to Johnson, Mecklenburg Sen. Dan Clodfelter is working on a fix to the law.

Has your car insurance rate gone up? If so, drop me a line in the comment links or at mark.binker@news-record.com.

Greensboro will be the site of one of five regional health care reform discussions the Obama administration is conducting, Gov. Bev Perdue announced today.

"The governor was happy to play host to this important event and remains committed to hearing from all sides on this issue," said Perdue spokeswoman Chrissy Pearson.

The North Carolina event follows on a health care reform summit held at the White House Thursday.

The meeting will take place March 31, according to a news release. The same release said the events are "designed to bring citizens, health care workers and patients together to express concerns and offer solutions for reforming the nation’s health care system."

Information on precisely where the discussions will take place, who will participate and how long they will be was not immediately available.

Earlier today, the AP reported:

Gov. Beverly Perdue's choice to lead North Carolina's public school system has a second title after being elected chairman of the State Board of Education.

Former Cumberland County Schools Superintendent Bill Harrison was sworn into a seat on the board today. Within minutes he was elected chairman, replacing outgoing chairman Howard Lee.

Harrison also leads the state's public school system, which serves 1.5 million students.

Harrison's dual titles are part of Perdue's plan to consolidate power in public education and makes the governor ultimately responsible for public school performance.

Just before 5 p.m., State Superintendent of Public Instruction June Atkinson sent this along:

“I congratulate Dr. Bill Harrison for being elected as chair of the State Board of Education.

The State Board of Education also approved the establishment of a chief executive officer position with the authority to manage the day-to-day operations of the Department of Public Instruction and appointed Dr. Harrison to serve in that role. I believe this action violates the Constitution of North Carolina and usurps the will of the voters who granted me the privilege to serve as State Superintendent of Public Instruction. I do not believe that the governance issue will be resolved until it is challenged in the judicial system or the Constitution is changed. I will not abdicate my constitutional and statutory responsibilities.

I remain committed to the 2.2 million voters who elected me and to the children and educators in this state.”

For those trying to figure out whether we really have a pending constitutional crisis might want to take a gander at the state constitution.

If you play the home game, let me know what you think via the comment link below.

The following came via e-mail from Linda Struyk Millsaps, the Chief Operating Officer of the N.C. Department of Revenue. It is a statement from Revenue Sec. Kenneth Lay:

"We are experiencing a temporary backlog in issuing refunds because of the difficulty of garnering the special funds we are using for cash flow. We expect some significant progress to be made in the next few weeks. We are writing checks every week, and everyone who is due a refund will get a refund."

A side note: this directly contradicts what I was told not once but twice in the past two weeks by the Department's spokeswoman, Kim Brooks. She said that there were no problems or delays in issuing refunds.

I also wonder where this falls in the pantheon of things that Gov. Bev Perdue doesn't want to be surprised by.

Update: Click here for WRAL's story.

The Supreme Court issued a ruling in Bartlett v Strickland today, a case that involves voting districts in the Pender County area. Click here for a PDF of the decision. This is the AP's early report on the topic.

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — An attorney representing Pender County officials who sued North Carolina in a redistricting case is thrilled his clients have won at the U.S. Supreme Court.

The nation's highest court ruled Monday that a federal civil rights law doesn't require North Carolina to draw legislative districts in which black residents comprise less than half the voting-age population.

The justices said in a 5-4 decision that such gerrymandering is required only if a district has a numerical majority of black voters, even if that voting block is potentially strong enough to determine an election's outcome.

Attorney Trey Thurman represents current and former county commissioners who originally sued in 2004, after lawmakers redrew district lines and split the county based on racial makeup.

On its face, I don't see this suit having an immediate impact on Guilford County. Only two of the county's ten legislative districts cross county lines. Both are senate districts held by Republicans and both were drawn to round-out raw numbers rather than racial make-up.

This is the Capital Beat live-blog of Gov. Perdue’s State of the State address tonight. The address is due to begin at 7 p.m. You can get live audio from the House chamber here.

The following dialog box is generated by Cover-it-Live and will be fed via Twitter. For those on Twitter, my stream will also be picking up tweets with #NCGA and #NCSOS hashtags. (For those of you not on Twitter, that means you'll get to see some comments from others, not just me.)

The live-blog will commence sometime between 6:30 p.m. and 7 p.m.

Update: Perdue's prepared remarks are posted after the jump.

Click here for today's newspaper story on Gov. Bev Perdue's State of the State address.

So was there actual, you know, news from the speech? A little.

First off, Perdue said she would be delivering her budget next week. Although the honorables have been getting briefings and meeting on the budget, it is the governor's budget message that officially kicks off the tax and spending dance.

Lawmakers I talked to last night all noted that Perdue's address was light on specifics and said they would look to her budget proposal for hard numbers.

Secondly, the word "furlough" in relation to state workers came up quite a bit after the speech last night. Perdue didn't use the F word herself, but both House Speaker Joe Hackney and Senate Minority Leader Phil Berger mentioned it as an option that would have to be considered.

Finally, the speech was notable for what you didn't hear. You didn't hear a lot of push-back afterward. Yes, the Republicans sought to lay blame for the current fiscal mess at the Democrats' feet, but didn't take issue with Perdue's calls for austerity or the fact she said deep budget cuts would be needed. And Democrats seemed content to take their medicine, reconciling them at least for the evening that whatever state spending plan is produce would likely hack off just about every constituency they had.

"I think we have our marching orders now," said Sen. Tony Rand, the majority leader in the Senate.

And during the speech, Perdue didn't offer up a round-robin nod to all the state's various industries and movers and shakers. You didn't hear, for example, the governor send love to farmers and when she mentioned the business community it was to admonish them to do more for education, not pay lip service to corporations on tax issues.

If Perdue's budget reflects her rhetoric, education leaders should be fairly happy, or at least not completely disappointed. Everyone else: that grinding sound you hear is her Excellency sharpening a pike to gore your particular ox.

Update: More on the SOTS festivities from the tavern and Dome.

For those interested in H 88, a bill that would let public schools teach comprehensive sex education classes, it passed the House Health Committee today on a 32-21 vote.

Click here for a story I wrote back when it was introduced.

Among the yes votes was Greensboro Democrat Alma Adams.
Among the no votes: Rep. Laura Wiley, a High Point Republican, and Rep. Pat Hurley, a Randolph County Republican.

The bill next goes to the House Health Committee. If it passes there, it would then go to the floor of the House.

Four members of Guilford County's legislative delegation filed H 519: Greensboro/Energy-Related Development Incentives yesterday at the request of the city. It would add Greensboro to a list of municipalities that can offer developers incentives for energy efficient construction that includes Cabarrus County, Asheville, Charlotte, Concord, Durham, Kannapolis, Locust, Wilmington, Carrboro, Cary, Chapel Hill, Harrisburg, Midland, Mount Pleasant and Stanfield.

Legislators up here were a bit, um, fuzzy on how the thing might work in practice, but Greensboro Planning Director Dick Hails was happy to fill in the blanks.

Developers who wanted to take advantage of the incentives would have to show they are building an environmentally friendly process, such as applying for LEED certification.

In exchange, the city could offer things like:

• * A discount on plan review and other fees.
• * Expedited processing of a plan.
• * Increased density for a particular project.

On that last one, Hails said that Greensboro was less likely to offer something like that because city zoning law already allows for pretty high density.

But offering a break of fees, which can run into thousands of dollars on a large project, is definitely an option, as is offering an expedited review.

"I know a lot of developers would probably be as interested in saving review time as getting a break on fees," Hails said.

The request for the new authority came as part of the city's legislative agenda, which said the city would "seek legislation to enhance the ability of municipalities to implement energy-efficient practices and programs, and to remove obstacles to doing so through incentives, funding and research."

Hails said that some cities have struck out on their own to offer these kinds of incentives without specific authority from the state. But, he said, the current law was unclear so Greensboro wanted to have the ability spelled out in writing.

The bill has a pair of pretty friendly House referrals, going to House Local Government I (chaired by Rep. Earl Jones, one of it's sponsors) and the House Energy and Energy Efficiency Committee, where Rep. Pricey Harrison is a Vice Chair. It's also a local bill, which means it's less likely to draw flack from ideological opponents, if there are any.

Gov. Bev Perdue's office has just sent word that she will release her version of the state budget on Tuesday. More details - like what time of day - to come, according to the notice.

Sen. Phil Berger has filed S 495, which would give Oak Ridge ETJ authority over property adjacent to its town limits.

Anyone from Oak Ridge have an opinion one way or the other about this?

Greensboro's annual motor vehicle tax would rise from $5 to $16 under bills introduced by Rep. Pricey Harrison in the House and Sen. Katie Dorsett in the Senate. The money would go toward paying for public transportation in the city.

More than two years ago, I wrote a story on the N.C. Legislative Black Caucus Foundation, a nonprofit closely tied with the legislative black caucus at the General Assembly.

It became one of several stories, posts, updates, etc... written by myself and others.

The central question in all of those stories was this: was it okay for a group of influential lawmakers to run a nonprofit that could solicit donations in unlimited amounts from folks who had business before the General Assembly.

Both of their own volition - and probably with a bit of prodding from us scruff media types - the caucus changed its practices.

One of the things we've been told repeatedly is that the caucus foundation and its legislative board members were given the all clear by the Legislative Ethics Commission. I've been waiting for that opinion to be released since it was supposedly issued in 2007.

Well, finally, here it is. It has been redacted but even a casual reader can see it involves the circumstances surrounding the black caucus foundation.

It's pretty clear from the opinion that in order to be ethically in the clear, the makeup of the board needed to change from being mostly legislators to being controlled by non-legislators. And it was pretty clear that the Legislative Ethics Committee was concerned about the appearance of something being hinky. From the report:

In addition to the issues related to direct and indirect gifts discussed above, under its duty to advise legislators on suggested standards of conduct under Chapter 120 of the General Statutes, the Committee suggests that there are circumstances where a legislator's solicitation and acceptance of a donation to the Organization from a lobbyist or lobbyist's principal could be inappropriate and could be perceived as an improper use of one's legislative position for the private benefit of either the legislator or another, namely the Organization.

For example, it would be inappropriate for a legislator who serves on the board of a 501(c)(3) organization that is controlled by the legislator or a group of legislators, such as the Organization, to solicit or accept donations on behalf of the 501(c)(3) organization from lobbyists or lobbyist's principals. It would also be inappropriate for a legislator serving on the board or executive committee of a 501(c)(3) organization, such as the Organization, where either the board or the executive committee is controlled by the legislator or a group of legislators, to participate as a member of the board or executive committee in any action that authorizes the solicitation or acceptance of donations by the 501(c)(3) organization from lobbyists or lobbyist's principals.

Click here to read the whole thing.

From today's paper:

WHITSETT — A brewing fight over North Carolina’s beer distribution laws has its roots in Guilford County, with executives from two local businesses duking it out behind the scenes at the General Assembly.

Red Oak Brewery has stepped up its lobbying efforts to convince legislators that beer makers should be able to distribute up to 60,000 31-gallon barrels without being required to go through a wholesale distributor.

But wholesalers such as Greensboro’s R.H. Barringer Distributing say the General Assembly should hold fast to the current 25,000-barrel limit or lower it to avoid possible conflicts with federal laws.

“Our concern is that someone who has a Red Oak could have a poor Red Oak experience,” said Eric Hice, vice president of operations with the company. Red Oak’s beer is neither filtered nor pasteurized, processes that help brews last longer whether in a bottle or a keg.

“If it’s not handled right, we have real taste problems,” said Bill Sherrill, Red Oak’s owner. In particular, Sherrill said, it’s critical the beer is refrigerated from the time it’s brewed until it reaches a customer.

Beer distributors, Sherrill argues, send usually unrefrigerated trucks out with dozens of kegs from different brands and can’t ensure beer from small brewers is handled or marketed properly.

But as Mark Craig, president of R.H. Barringer, walks between walls of beer cases stacked 18 feet high in the company’s warehouse, he points to brands from around the country and overseas that his company sells in North Carolina.

“Longboard comes from Hawaii,” Craig said, pointing out a few cases shipped from the Kona Brewing Co. “It’s fine; it’s taken care of.”

Click here for the whole thing.

The state budget dance will formally begin Tuesday when Gov. Bev Perdue unveils her tax and spending proposal.

Already we've seen the preliminary handkerchief waving, bowing and pleasantries that go along with the beginning of any cotillion. The honorables have been reading up on various sections of the state budget in committee meetings while getting briefed on how bad the revenue picture really is.

Meanwhile, Perdue has been telling anyone who will listen how "tough" the choices she's going to have to make are. Her senior budget staffer even briefed us scruffy media types on the fiscal picture last week.

After Perdue makes her opening move, the action shifts to the legislature like this:

• * The Senate will take a crack at writing the budget first this year.
• * After the Senate passes its version, the House will get a shot at writing it and almost certainly put their own stamp on it.
• * The House, Senate and governor's office negotiate until a final budget is put before the honorables.

All along the way, updated tax revenue figures, breaking news, and the odd policy priority that bubbles to the surface shapes the final product. While some changes are big and thematic – what percent raise will teachers get, if any or how much money will be put into the mental health care system – often the fiercest battles are fought over the smaller pots of money.

For those small programs, such as support for the High Point Furniture Market, inclusion in the governor’s budget is a golden ticket to the final round of budget negotiations. And it’s a good bet those golden tickets will be harder to come by than a Wonka Bar at a health food convention this year.

Perdue has been giving different glimpses of her budget over the past week. Gov. Mike Easley used to do this sort of thing, putting out pieces of his budget agenda in advance to make sure they got media attention before putting out the entire thing, when reporters would start asking pesky questions about how he might pay for all those goodies.

As Laura Leslie notes at her blog, this isn't a half-bad idea since the stories written tomorrow will all be about which programs are getting slashed or who is getting taxed to balance the budget.

So what do we know of Perdue's budget priorities so far? The summary is this:

• * This afternoon she'll talk about her education spending plans, but she already said in the state of the state address that she wants to increase per pupil spending.

• * Over the weekend, Perdue released an audio statement on the National Guard, which seems to have gone missing from her web site. In it, she said that she would propose spending $2 million for National Guard family assistance centers and more from other programs, such as one that helps the children of national guard soldier cope with their parents' deployments.

• * Last week, she pledged to spend millions on beefing up the probation and parole system, where officials have admitted they can't keep track of all the offenders they should.

• * In another address last week, Perdue outlined economic development priorities that included raising the earned income tax credit, creating a tax exemption for small businesses and spending millions on job creation and recruitment programs.

Left unsaid so far is how Perdue plans to pay for all of this while tamping down a budget shortfall expected to be in the $2 billion range.

Undoubtedly, Perdue will have to make cuts in other areas and she has been gathering suggestions on what those might be. And while few expect she'll propose a broad-based tax hike such as a sales tax increase, taxes on alcohol and tobacco will almost certainly be proposed.

Whatever she does when she finally lifts the curtain tomorrow, prepare for much rending of clothing, beating of chests and gnashing of teeth.

Gov. Bev Perdue continued her budget rollout today at Wake County Community College's campus in North Raleigh today.

She said that her budget:

• * would increase spending on public education by 2.5 percent, but relies heavily on federal stimulus dollars to do that.

• * will cut state support for central office administrators.

• * will increase funding for retraining workers.

• * would fund enrolment growth and expand support for financial aid for university systems.

• * however, she said she would be cutting funding for joint campuses and centers located not on a university's main campus. To my mind, that says the folks running the UNCG-NCAT nanotechnology school are likely in for a disappointment.

For more of Perdue’s thoughts, check out the videos below.

Sen. Stan Bingham filed S 351: No Felon as Sheriff earlier this month, and I've had it rattling around on my to-do list for a while. (Dome posted on it here.)

Currently, a sheriff can't hire someone as a deputy who has been convicted of a felony. But, as long as someone has had their voting rights restored, a convicted felon can run to be sheriff.

Bingham's bill would put a constitutional amendment before voters. If enacted, it would add the following to the qualifications for sheriff:

No person is eligible to serve as Sheriff if that person has been adjudged guilty of any felony against this State or the United States, or of a felony in another state that also would be a felony if it had been committed in this State, whether or not that person has been restored to the rights of citizenship in the manner prescribed by law.

(Click here to listen to Bingham and I talk about his bill.)

Who might this apply to? Well, Bingham is from Davidson County and there have been rumors - See this discussion on the Lexington Dispatch's forums page - that former Davidson County Sheriff Gerald Hege might give it a go in 2010.

Hege, for those of you who don't remember, was once dubbed "America's toughest sheriff," but ended up pleading guilty to two felonies in 2004. From a News & Record story in 2007 when Hege finished his probation:

The probation stemmed from his guilty plea in May 2004 to two felony counts of obstruction of justice for attempts to cover up money missing from the vice and narcotics unit of the sheriff's department. He resigned from the office he had held since being elected in 1994.

During Hege's first year of probation, he was under house arrest with an electronic monitoring ankle bracelet and was allowed to leave his home only for work, said Keith Acree, a spokesman for the N.C. Department of Corrections.

[snip]

Hege also paid $7,900 in court-ordered fees and restitution, Acree said. Hege completed 50 hours of community service working in the kitchen of the Salvation Army in Lexington.

Hege's guilty plea in 2004 ended a nine-year tenure as sheriff marked by his eccentric tactics: pink jail cells, paramilitary garb and media grandstanding. Hege generated national - and even international - attention for some of his techniques.

The criminal case against Hege stemmed from a State Bureau of Investigation probe that involved testimony from 28 of his own employees, including two top supervisors.

There were allegations Hege ordered prisoner abuse, promoted racial profiling, recklessly drove his sheriff's car and misused county personnel and equipment. But it was Hege's attempts to cover up money missing from the department's vice and narcotics unit that sealed his fate.

As a convicted felon, Hege couldn't carry a firearm, but he could hold the office.

Bingham said that he was contacted by several Piedmont area sherrif's asking him to run the bill. When asked if it was in direct response to the possibility Hege will run again, Bingham said, "Of course it is, Hege and others. He's not the only one."

Bingham said he expected Hege to run in 2010 but said the prospects for getting his bill through the General Assembly weren't good. That's because amendments to the state's constitution are scrutinized closely by members who are reticent about changing the state's foundational document.

So, was Bingham concerned about a Hege run in 2010?

"Absolutely he'll run again, but I don't think he'll get elected," Bingham said. "But there's no doubt about it, he's going to run."

Click here to listen to Bingham and I talk about his bill.

From this week's Washington Watch column:

When the Supreme Court ruled last week on a North Carolina case involving circumstances under which legislative districts can be drawn to protect minority voting rights, members of the Congressional Black Caucus immediately started talking about legislation to overturn the decision.

“On first blush, it was thought this was a disaster,” said Rep. Mel Watt, a Charlotte Democrat who represents parts of Greensboro and High Point in the 12th District. “After a day or so, the second reaction was just 'This is bad.’ And somewhere between those two is probably what it really is.”

Click here for the whole thing. And
click here for the ruling and background.

So, Gov. Bev Perdue rolled out her budget today and it got a fair amount of attention from us scruffy media types.

Click here to read the whole thing for yourself. Fair warning: the books measure roughly a foot high when stacked on my desk, so I'm guessing the PDFs are pretty big.

For those who want some of the early media coverage:

• * Update: Legislative leaders didn't give Perdue's budget the dreaded "dead on arrival" stamp, which means she did better her first time out than former Gov. Mike Easley did on his last.

• * The AP's Gary Robertson takes you through the basics.

• * One of my stories for tomorrow looks at some of the parochial effects of the budget, including the possibility a local prison could close.

• * My colleague Sonja Elmquist writes about one of the far flung effects of the current budget crisis.

• * The N+O's budget-paloza.

• * News 14 rocks some video.

Among the things that got lost in the wake of Gov. Perdue releasing her budget Tuesday was an update on H 2, the proposed workplace smoking ban.

When last we left the bill, it had cleared the House Health Committee and was on its way to House Judiciary I. I'm told J-I nearly approved the bill yesterday but held off to give Rep. Paul "Skip" Stam time to offer some amendments.

Here's the report from AP's daily news roundup:

SMOKING BAN: The effort to ban smoking in bars, restaurants and other public places has soft enforcement provisions, but a provision allowing local governments to impose tougher enforcement if they choose could increase penalties to include a misdemeanor. The bill discussed in a House judiciary committee would ban smoking in enclosed public places, including workplaces. Smokers asked to stub out their butt who refuse could be fined up to $50, but only by a public health officer. Businesses could be fined up to $200 after their third failure to stop smokers. The bill also allows local government to be tougher on secondhand smoke.

If what I'm told is right, you'll see the bill back in J-I on Tuesday and then it will probably bounce in to the House Finance Committee before hitting the floor. If it follows the same pattern as in 2007, it won't be any of its committee stops that are a problem for the bill, but its floor vote that's in doubt.

A couple of Greensboro-focused local bills - those that affect just one particular area of the state - floated through the House Local Govt. I Committee Wednesday morning:

• *H 541: Greensboro Motor Vehicle Levy would give the City Council the ability to raise the city's annual motor vehicle tax from $10 to $16. The extra money would go to support public transportation. The bill next goes to the Finance Committee.

• *H 519: Greensboro/Energy-Related Dev. Incentives would allow Greensboro to offer incentives to developers to use "green" construction techniques. The bill next goes to the committee on Energy and Energy Efficiency.

Gov. Bev Perdue's budget continues to provide stories for us scruffy media types ... and consternation for just about everyone else.

From today's N+R:

• * Click here for my story about a social worker training program that could get cut. Telling here is that no one says this is a bad program, but folks in Raleigh say it's not efficient enough.

• * On day one of the budget release, UNCG and NCA&T were still evaluating the pain that the governor's budget would impose. Day two, my colleague Joe Killian reports they're feeling the pain.

Okay...I have to run off and do some reporting outside the Beltline today. Y'all play nice.

Moving from our news desk this afternoon:

• * This update from me on the Board of Community College's efforts to adopt a policy on illegal immigration. There will be a little more on this in tomorrow's paper, but some background is here.

• * My colleague Joe Killian reports: People need to understand the hard facts of coming deep budget cuts, University of North Carolina President Erskine Bowles said Thursday at a UNC Board of Governors meeting. "We're going to lose hundreds of people and it's going to hurt this University," Bowles said. "It's going to hurt our academic core."

Update: Click here for Friday's newspaper story.

-=-=-=-=-=

Here's a little more on the NC Community College Board's discussion (click for today’s brief update) over whether to admit illegal immigrants to colleges in the system.

First off this post from earlier in the month (click here) has links to some of the policy letters that went back and forth and bills that have been filed in the legislature.

Also interesting, my friends at Stateline have written about a very similar discussion going on in California and elsewhere.

Finally, you can hear the most interesting bits of consultant Gina Shkodriani's and lawyer Alice Maginnis' presentations to the board by clicking here.

Filed in the House today was H 688 Jamestown/Satellite Annexations. The measure would remove the training wheels from Jamestown's satellite annexation powers - the ability to take land into the town that is not contiguous to the corporate limits. Currently, the town cannot have satellite territory that adds up to more than 10 percent of the town proper. Sponsor: Rep. Laura Wiley

One of my favorite time-wasting/good-for-background-noise shows on cable is Mythbusters, mainly for the show's propensity to gratuitously blow stuff up.

Among the best tag lines from the show comes when the two hosts approach a damaged apparatus (usually one subjected to the aforementioned gratuitous explosion) and notes, "Well, there's your problem."

It's a slightly more succinct way to say, "Wow, there's no question why this won't work anymore and I really don't need to explain it because the evidence is right there in front of your face."

I had one of those moments this morning, although, sadly, it didn't involve an explosion.

The latest Elon Poll asked a question reported deep down in its data sheet:

"Would you say that campaign contributions to state lawmakers influence their legislative activities [a lot, some, not much, or not at all]?"

Now, I know what the response would be if you asked your average journalists. But these results come from a sample of folks roughly split on public financing of elections and who, as much as ever happens in a poll, seem to reflect the general population of the state:

NOT AT ALL 4.9

NOT MUCH 5.3

SOME 43.0

A LOT 40.9

DON T KNOW (v) 5.4

REFUSED (v) .4

Simply put: Well over 80 percent of those surveyed believe campaign contributions in some way, shape or form influence how state legislators go about making the laws of North Carolina.

I've written dozens of stories over the years about campaign donations and they inevitably contain some quote from a politician or their spokesman that says, "Well, sure, I get money from X industry, but they just must like where I stand." In fact, you can find just such a quote regarding donations on the federal level in the Charlotte Observer's story about tobacco industry donations to Richard Burr:

Burr spokesman Chris Walker says the campaign donations don't influence Burr's policy agenda.

"It's not something that comes into any equations here," Walker said. "It doesn't really affect what we're doing legislatively."

Let's be clear: this is a Republican/Democrat thing. You can write that same kind of story for just about any politician of any influence at the local, state or national level.

Even if it's true the policy position came first, even if it's true that a few thousand bucks isn't so much money in the grand scheme of fundraising, and even if it's true the money chased the policy position and not the other way around, the Elon Poll says 80 percent of the people don't believe you.

Well, there's your problem.

It does not matter if the campaign finance system is pure as the driven snow. The average citizen is unwilling to make the leap of logic to say; sure, you might get thousands of dollars from a particular interest but you, Mr. or Ms. Legislator, but it doesn’t influence your choices at all.

If you accept the poll results, there are a couple of relevant questions:

• * Is there a fix?
• * If so, what is it?

The same Elon Poll says folks are split on the idea of public financing for campaigns. The idea of putting tax dollars into campaigns with whose sentiments you might disagree sits poorly with a lot of folks.

So what's your solution? (Or should we take the results of the poll to mean that people believe money influences politics but they're okay with that?) The comment link is open for opining.

The Elon University Poll just put out its latest two-day cycle of data, and in their news release today played up this question:

I'm going to read you three statements, and, after I read all three, I'd like for you to tell me which statement comes closest to your position on this issue:

[(#1) I oppose any legal recognition for same sex couples,

(#2) I support civil unions or partnerships for same sex couples, but not full marriage rights, or

(#3) I support full marriage rights for same sex couples].

Whether or not to put a constitutional amendment on same sex marriage before the voters has been a topic before the General Assembly. The Elon Poll reported the following results on the question:

(#1) OPPOSE ANY LEGAL RECOGNITION FOR SAME SEX COUPLES 44.4

(#2) SUPPORT CIVIL UNIONS OR PARTNERSHIPS FOR SAME
SEX COUPLES, BUT NOT FULL RIGHTS 27.5

(#3) FULL MARRIAGE RIGHTS FOR SAME SEX COUPLES 20.8

OPPOSE ALL ASPECTS OF THE SAME SEX MARRIAGE (v) 1.5

OPPOSE SAME SEX MARRIAGE ON RELIGIOUS GROUNDS (v) 1.0

DON'T REALLY CARE ABOUT IT, DOESN T BOTHER ME (v) 1.7

DON'T KNOW (v) 2.8

REFUSED (v) .4

(My gut reaction is the "Don't really care" answer rate would be higher if it were offered as an initial response choice.)

The Elon Poll results seemingly conflicts with those gathered from a recent Civitas Poll. The Civitas Institute is a conservative think tank and has sent representatives to news conferences supporting a gay marriage ban. It asked about gay marriage this way:

North Carolina is the only state in the Southeast that does not have a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and woman. Do you support or oppose a constitutional amendment in North Carolina defining marriage as between one man and one woman?

Support 76%

Oppose 21%

Not Sure 4%

Refused >1%

For those who may be wondering, I'm told the more liberal-leaning PPP hasn't put out public numbers on the topic.

Elon also asked a roughly analogous question to Civitas - "Would you [support or oppose] an amendment to the North Carolina constitution that would prevent any same sex marriages?" - respondents remained split: with a little more than half opposing a constitutional amendment and about 40 percent supporting one. Civitas was up at 76 percent. So what gives?

Both polls seemingly did a good job get a broad spectrum of the population, although I think it's possible that the Civitas Poll's question 27 regarding political philosophy may reflect some over-sampling. (The party affiliation question, #30, is spot on with what I'd expect to see, though.)

Remember, Elon didn't preface its question with information about other states. It definitely seems like the wording of the question might have gotten in the way of replicable results here. Put crudely: The Civitas questions established a norm by referring to other states and there’s a pretty good body of research that shows poll respondents like to seem “normal” to those asking the question.

Elon also allowed people to express a middle path on both their questions. As with a lot of political issues, you have die-hards on either side and then folks who are willing to trod the middle road.

Click here for today's Washington Watch column, in which I talk to Sen. Kay Hagan about joining the group of 15 moderate Democrats on her side of the hill:

Hagan said Monday that the United States was experiencing a fiscal crisis that called for higher than typical government spending.

But, she added, “I also think we’ve got to look at the long term. ... Obviously long term, I’m looking at not incurring as much debt as we’re talking about.”

I've got to admit, Hagan didn't move off her talking points from this news release by very much.

I spoke to Hagan late Monday and we covered a couple items that weren't in the column. Among them, Gov. Bev Perdue's proposed budget, which cuts spending on a number of programs. They include two that Hagan has an interest in:

• * Personal Financial Literacy The recommended reduction eliminates the appropriation which is no longer necessary as Personal Financial Literacy has been integrated into the curriculum and is also available to students through the North Carolina Virtual Public School (NCVPS)... ($500,000)

• * Phase Out Tuition Waiver for NC School of Science and Math (NCSSM) It is recommended that the funding of tuition remissions for graduates of NCSSM entering the UNC system be discontinued. Held harmless would be NCSSM graduates already in the UNC system. Funding would be completely eliminated by 2012-13. Appropriation ($990,619) in 2009-10 ($2,034,190) in 2010-11

Why these two? Both were championed by Hagan when she was a state senator and she cited both on the campaign trail as examples of smaller but important she did in the legislature.

In fact, Hagan took some heat over the tuition exemption bit from more liberal Democrats while she was in Raleigh. They suggested that the tuition waiver for kids already at one of the most prestigious public high schools around was unfair to kids who couldn't get into the school.

"Obviously I think nobody envies the choice Gov. Perdue has to make," Hagan said. Of the tuition waiver, she said, "We put it in place to keep our brightest here in North Carolina. We didn't want to lose them to out of state universities."

On the personal financial literacy piece, which looks like it will live on in some way, Hagan said the current financial crisis shows the need for such education.

"Personal financial literacy has not been something that's been taught properly in the past...It's not rocket science and we need to be teaching it."

Smoking bill clears committee:

The House Judiciary I committee approved a bill to ban smoking in most public places, including bars and restaurants, on a voice vote this morning.

Several amendments aimed at making the bill less strict - one would have exempted veterans organizations - were withdrawn in committee after proponents raised questions about them.

Proponents say studies show there are no safe level of second-hand smoke and that the public needs to be protected.

"There's no risk-free exposure to bacon and eggs," said Rep. Paul "Skip" Stam arguing against the bill. "It's just not as great as smoking."

According to House calendars, the bill is next due to go the full House but according to its sponsor, Rep. Hugh Holliman of Lexington, may have to be heard in one more committee before it comes to the floor.

Background here.

I just spoke with at Rep. Holliman who says the bill will likely hit the floor early next week, barring a fortuitous head-count Wednesday or Thursday. (Read: if four opponents miss session this week, expect H2 to be brought up for immediate consideration.)

A contemplated dip into the House Finance Committee will not be necessary, he said.

The Senate would get the bill next.

The N.C. Education Lottery plans to sell lottery tickets through Ace Cash Express, a Texas-based check cashing outlet.

From the story for tomorrow's paper:

“It obviously raises a lot of concerns,” said Rob Schofield, a lawyer and director of research for the liberal watchdog group N.C. Policy Watch. His organization has been critical of the lottery since its inception.

“This is really one more step down the road that the lottery was already headed of being a poor tax,” Shofield said.

Shofield pointed out that the state had to sue Ace earlier this decade to stop the company from offering payday loans, a type of lending that North Carolina had recently outlawed.

Calls to Eric Norrington, Ace’s senior vice president for public affairs, were not returned Tuesday afternoon.

Shaheen said that the lottery cannot choose who it allows to sell lottery tickets based on their other businesses.

“Anybody in North Carolina who runs a business and can pass a background check is eligible,” Shaheen said. “We cannot turn anybody down for any reason other than they failed a background check or they’re trying to be in business selling lottery tickets only...Other than that we have no choice who sells.”

Click here for the whole thing.

Worth noting: the state sued ACE to get them to stop payday lending after the legislature outlawed the practice. Background here and here.

From MSNBC's First Read blog :

Firing their shot in the current battle over the budget, the liberal group Americans United for Change has launched a six-figure ad blitz (likely to exceed $700,000) that will run in states that just happen to be represented by some of the more conservative Democratic senators --

Those Senators include Kay Hagan of North Carolina, who recently joined up with 15 other "moderate" Democratic senators to form a caucus. Those moderate Democrats are balking at the high level of debt and spending in Obama’s budget plan.

You can see the ad on American's United for Change's blog. The group is described as "pro-Labor" and "pro-White House" in recent writings by Washington-based political writers.

Update: Here's the ad from YouTube:

House Bill 2, aka the smoking ban, is on the the House Calendar for Thursday, 3/26.

Don't freak.

"We're not going to do it tomorrow," Rep. Hugh Holliman, the House majority leader and the bill's chief author told me a minute ago.

It could come up next week, he said, but there could be some scheduling conflicts there as well.

The vote on this bill is expected to be very *very* close, so Holliman is counting votes carefully and only going to pull the trigger when he's sure as many friends as possible are in the chamber.

From this morning's story on tobacco under fire in North Carolina:

“The argument I’m getting is this thing about tobacco farmers and companies, that we owe some sort of debt to them because they built the state,” Haynes said. “Well, our country was also partially founded on slavery, and we’re not doing that any more. We woke up and got some common sense one day. … Why aren’t the farmers farming something else? They’ve had plenty of time to switch.”

Isley shakes his head when asked if there’s another crop that could yield as much money for his 100-acre farm as tobacco.

“Maybe one acre of strawberries, and if you could have a little stand up on the roadside, maybe that could sustain your family,” he said.

Really?

“No. I wish it was,” he said.

So why doesn’t he get out of farming altogether?

“It’s in my blood,” he said. “It must be. It sure wasn’t because I wanted to get up at 4 a.m. every day and go to bed at midnight every night and make less money than my classmates.”

Click here to read the whole thing.

Haynes is Holly Haynes, a Winston-Salem woman who is fighting cancer. Isley is John Isley, a fourth-generation tobacco farmer from Reidsville. Among others, the story also includes quotes from folks who work at Greensboro-based Lorillard.

What I hoped to do with this story is let you hear a little bit from folks who are deeply vested in the tobacco policy debate but whose voices aren't often heard.

My editors and I talked over several times whether we needed to include a smoker in the story and decided against it because we've heard from them on many occasions. If you're dying for that perspective, Mark Johnson's excellent piece from earlier this year can scratch that itch.

And I should thank N+R news librarian Diane Lamb, who helped me sort through figures from the ESC, BLS and Reynolds American regarding tobacco-related employment.

If you're looking for more on this story:

• * Click here for H2, the smoking ban bill sponsored by Rep. Hugh Holliman. And Click here for background.

• * Click here to read the 2006 Surgeon General's report that declared:

  "Research reviewed in this report indicates that smoke-free policies are the most economic and effective approach for providing protection from exposure to secondhand smoke. But do they provide the greatest health impact. Separating smokers and nonsmokers in the same airspace is not effective, nor is air cleaning or a greater exchange of indoor with outdoor air. Additionally, having separately ventilated areas for smoking may not offer a satisfactory solution to reducing workplace exposures. Policies prohibiting smoking in the workplace have multiple benefits. Besides reducing exposure of nonsmokers to secondhand smoke, these policies reduce tobacco use by smokers and change public attitudes about tobacco use from acceptable to unacceptable."

• * You can read details of the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement on tobacco here. Good resources that help explain more include here, here, and here.

• * The Fort Worth Star-Telegram recently did a good story on the pending federal tobacco tax hike, while McClatchy's Washington Bureau put out this story about the ongoing conflict over FDA regulation of tobacco.

• * For those interested in public opinion, a March 2009 Elon University Poll showed that "A strong majority support local or state laws that ban smoking in all public places, including public buildings, offices, restaurants and bars. Seventy percent support local laws and 67 percent support state laws."(PDF)

So, does your opinion line up with the public's? The comment link is open.

Gov. Perdue's office today announced the N.C. Open Book website was up and running.

I haven't had a lot of time to play with it, but the site allows you to search grants and contracts issued by state agencies. So, for example, you can find out:

• * Bennett College students got a total of $297,132 in legislative tuition grants in 2008.
• * Family Services of the Piedmont gets a whole lot of grants, including roughly $22,000 for something called "Non-Intensive Family Preservation Services"
• * the United True Holiness Church got roughly $25,000 in two separate grants, the largest for "Child & Adult Food Program"

There's some potential for reporting fun here.

From the White House:

Washington, DC – Vice President Joe Biden and Department of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack will travel to North Carolina on Wednesday, April 1st to highlight how the Recovery Act is helping rural America. They will travel to Faison, North Carolina to visit the Goshen Medical Center, which is a rural area clinic receiving Recovery Act funds and serves Duplin, Eastern Sampson and Southern Wayne Counties. They will then travel to Pikeville, North Carolina to visit the area’s Rural Fire Department’s main station, which is receiving Recovery Act funds to help build a new facility, because the current station cannot accommodate the necessary ladder trucks required to adequately and safely fight fires. The Vice President and Secretary Vilsack will also make a major announcement regarding rural housing funding.

Rep. Hugh Holliman told me this evening that he expects
H2, the smoking ban bill to be debated Wednesday "barring any unexplained absences."

He seemed pretty confident that the bill would prevail, but added, "It will be close."

For those following H 120, which would allow for taxpayer-funded elections, it was due to be heard tonight (Monday) but supporters say it needs a technical fix. The measure is heading back to committee, but Holliman said he expected to see it back on the House calendar later this week.

As for tomorrow's calendar: I'll be in Greensboro Tuesday to cover Gov. Perdue's big health care shindig.

Gov. Bev Perdue and Nancy-Ann DeParle, director of the White House Office on Health Reform, hosted a 90-minute town hall on health care reform Tuesday at NCA&T alumni events center.

Click here for the early version of my story.

More from the governor here and the feds here.

During the event, Perdue and DeParle heard from both pre-selected people and those who raised their hands. Included were health care providers as well as people who have had struggles with the health care system.

During a question-and-answer session after the event, DeParle said that she would carry the stories from today's forum back to Washington with her. (You can click here to listen to Perdue and DeParle take questions from reporters after the forum.)

One of the stories that seemed to stick with DeParle was that of Kirby Heard, 52, of High Point. The graphic designer talked about how she has lost her health insurance and now relies on a system of free clinics, but has been waiting eight months to see a dentist to replace a filling.

Click here to listen to what Heard told the forum.