August 8, 2025 • 33 mins
The NCDOT has opened its new 10-year transportation plan. State Auditor findings show the town of Mount Olive lost more than $210,000 due to negligent data entry. The State Board of Elections is meeting today, and a new poll finds most Americans view Chinese ownership of U.S. land as a major threat. Governor Stein opposes a push for expedited court review in the ongoing utilities appointment dispute.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:09):
It's five oh four and welcome into a Friday edition
of The Carolina Journal News Hour News Stock eleven, ten
ninety nine three WBT.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
I'm Nick Craig.
Speaker 1 (00:18):
Good morning to you, and we know road construction and
congestion is a big issue all across our state. The
North Carolina Department of Transportation has launched a statewide public
comment period to help shape its next infrastructure plan, which
will run from twenty twenty eight to twenty thirty seven.
(00:38):
This is amid growing concerns over congestion and big parts
of our state, including our major metropolitan areas like Charlotte
and Raleigh. Now through Friday, August the twenty ninth, residents
can offer suggestions via the NCDT website as well as
week long drop in sessions at NCDOT offices through out
(01:00):
the state. Eligible suggestions span all six transportation modes, including highway, rail, transit, ferries, aviation,
as well as bicycle and pedestrian facilities, but exclude routine
maintenance projects like pothole repairs or resurfacing, which are not
handled in a ten year what is typically called a
(01:23):
step the state Transportation Improvement Program. One area that is
being highlighted is in the trying open an area a
ten mile stretch of US one from I five forty
in Wake Forest and Franklin County as some worka continues
there that originally budgeted about ninety three million dollars for
(01:45):
a project to begin construction in twenty eighteen. However, the
project now carries a one point three to four billion
dollar price tag and has been delayed multiple times. Public
input collected will feed directly into the project prioritization process
under the Strategic Investment Law. That is a formula that
(02:06):
balances data driven scoring with community input to guide which
projects are selected for funding across the six transportation modes
in the state. In addition to public suggestions, NCDOT will
consider input from local planning organizations and state staff. Submitting
projects will undergo a three tiered prioritization project statewide mobility projects,
(02:32):
regional impact projects, and division need projects. Statewide mobility projects
are evaluated first and are one hundred percent based on data,
with scoring results expected by the spring of twenty twenty six.
We've got some additional details on this, including the link
to the dot website where that again that public comment
(02:53):
runs all the way through August. The twenty ninth. You
can go on there and check out what division you're
in across the state of North Carolina, see where some
of these listening and hearing sessions are taking place, and
where you can go and can submit some comments, submit
some feedback. That is over on our website. This morning,
Carolina Journal dot com the headline ncdot's ten year plan
(03:16):
opens amid us one frustrations Again. You can read those
details at Carolina Journal dot com, where it's now five
oh seven, News Talk eleven, ten ninety nine to three WBT.
There's been a lot of national news over the last
few weeks with the term jerrymandering or partisan jerrymandering, looking
at states like Texas and Illinois. It's been a big
(03:37):
political battle nationally. While it's not currently a big issue
in North Carolina, it has been a big political issue
in the past. To get some more information on that
and kind of explain this whole process to us this morning,
doctor Andy Jackson of the John Locke Foundation joins us
on the Carolina Journal News Hour. The bullseyes not on
North Carolina now, Andy, So, I guess that's a good sign.
But over the last fifteen or twenty years, redistricting. Drawing
(04:00):
maps has been a very, very hot button political issue
across North Carolina.
Speaker 3 (04:05):
Yeah. Actually it goes further than that. We've gone decades
since we've had a time where the General Assembly has
drawn a set of three maps for the state House, states,
and in Congress, and all three have survived the entire decade.
We have to go back and think to the nineteen seventies,
the eighties, nineties, the aughts, twenty tens, all of them
(04:27):
in took twenty twenties. Now every decade has had maps
struck down. It's an ongoing process. I'm cautiously hopeful that
we're not going to have to do any more redistricting
in North Carolina until the next census in twenty thirty two.
Speaker 1 (04:44):
So as we look at these discussions federally that are
going on and bringing it back here to North Carolina,
the concern is in states like Illinois where Democrats have control,
they draw maps that are friendly to Democrats. In a
state like Texas, where the Republicans controlled the legislature, they
draw maps that favor Republicans. Andy, is this a process
that the legislature is supposed to do in these various states?
(05:07):
And here in North Carolina when maps need to be redrawn.
Speaker 3 (05:12):
Traditionally it has been the legislators draw the maps. That's
that's based out of the constitutional order. Specifically North Carolina.
The State House draws House maps that have to be
approved by both chambers. The state Senate draws Senate maps.
They draw also draw or start the rounds on the
congressional maps. So yeah, it's mandated by the North Carolina
(05:33):
Constitution that the General Assembly draw the districts. That's the
way it's traditionally been at every state. There are some
states that use either advisory commissions or they use commissions
that draw the whole maps. I will say one of
the things is the idea is that those would not
end up with gerrymanderd maps or maps that have other problems.
(05:55):
And sometimes that's the case, but just as often as not,
those problem those districts drawn by commissions or justice problematic.
Recent example in Michigan, they had a series of maps
that were thrown out or a series of districts that
were thrown out as racial gerrymanders drawn by a commission.
So drawn by commission is no protection from a potential lawsuit.
Speaker 1 (06:18):
I hear this term thrown around all the time. I've
seen it here in North Carolina as well.
Speaker 2 (06:22):
Andy. The maps need to be fair, and I hear
this term.
Speaker 1 (06:25):
I see a lot of chatter on social media, talking
heads on cable news talking about fair maps. But as
you just kind of walked us through the process, this
is inherently a political thing that goes on when you've
got an elected group of individuals in agied state legislature
that are the ones that are responsible for drawing these maps.
Speaker 3 (06:43):
No, well, yeah, definition of fair is in the eye
of the beholder, and it's probably unremarkable that one side
will decide on a definition of fair that benefits them
the most. So, for example, in North Carolina, Democrats would
want to say, look at the statewide average where Democrats
(07:06):
generally are pulling around forty eight percent give or take
on the election, and so you would say, well, by
that measure, Democrats should have about half of the seats.
But if you look at it in the local communities,
you know, different parts of the state, the political geography
of the state, it doesn't really come out that way.
(07:27):
For example, there were a couple of plaintiffs on a
lawsuit Harper v. Hall, the one that overturned maps a
couple of years ago, and even the experts for the
plaintiffs who were given their testimonies said that the most
likely congressional map in North Carolina is a nine to
five Republican map. No Democrats would think that is fair,
(07:50):
but that's what you usually get if you just draw maps,
not considering politics, just geography, just where people live. And
that's a lot closer to the ten to four that
we have now than say a seven to seven that
Democrats would like. Could we get to a nine to
five map, We could probably not under the existing rules,
(08:10):
because it's in the nature of the beasts that the
party and control will want to draw maps that favor
their side.
Speaker 1 (08:16):
Well, and I'm glad you bring up the geography on this,
because this is relevant not only in congressional races and
the seats that you're talking about, but in the legislature now,
where Republicans have a supermajority in the Senate one vote
shy of that in the House majorities in both chambers.
It's geography, Andy, And we see in North Carolina. In
many of these other states, you've got these more Democrat
(08:38):
strongholds in urban areas and as you get further out
from those areas, it tends to lean more red. That's
not necessarily a new phenomenon, though, is it.
Speaker 3 (08:48):
It's not. It's been going on for a while. The
urban areas in North Carolina have been going more and
more democratic. Rural areas, especially in the eastern part of
the state, have been going more republic Look in those
areas are changing rapidly, and so for example, if you're
running a race in Durham or in the middle of
(09:09):
Greensboro and you're running for state House, those districts, really
the only competitive part is going to be in the
Democratic primary. That's the nature of the district. You doesn't
it doesn't really make any sense to say, well, this
community is this way, but since they're so democratic, we're
going to string out a long district that goes from
downtown Durham to say, Harnett County somewhere where it's more
(09:32):
Republican in order to make it more competitive. Districts should
really represent their communities, and it would be it'd be
great if legislators would do it that way, and then
we wouldn't have to worry about, you know, which side
benefits more than the other. Unfortunately, that's not the nature
of the beast. I'd like it to get closer to
(09:54):
that ideal, but certainly trying to artificially change areas by
teaming them up with vastly different areas and the idea
of making it more fair or more competitive is not
what you should be doing.
Speaker 2 (10:07):
Andy, We appreciate the analysis and the information. This morning.
Speaker 1 (10:10):
Doctor Andy Jackson from the John Locke Foundation joins us
on the Carolina Journal News Hour.
Speaker 2 (10:20):
It's five twenty.
Speaker 1 (10:20):
Welcome back to the Carolina Journal News Our Newstock eleven
ten ninety nine three WBT. Checking out some statewide news
this morning. The North Carolina Auditor's Office in the news
once again after receiving numerous allegations on its tip line.
The auditor conducted an investigation into the town of Mount
Olive that's in Wayne County, as well as its water
(10:43):
department and its municipal airport, among other reviews. According to
a report released by state Auditor Dave Bollock, among the findings,
the town's water department lost a whopping two hundred and
ten thousand plus dollars in revenue due to negligent data entry.
The Auditor's office received an allegation that a sitting town
(11:05):
commissioner received water service despite failing to pay for it,
and that the town's water department employees committed fraud by
failing to pay for their own water bills and avoiding
late charges for themselves and others. Auditors found that the
town lacked formal policies and procedures for utility billing data
(11:26):
entry was performed in a very negligent nature, and oversight
during the implementation of utility rate increases was inadequate. Those
deficiencies increased the risk of billing errors, reduced accountability and
hindereds and hindered the town's ability to ensure accurate utility
revenue tracking. They reviewed the mayor and current town commissioner's
(11:49):
utility payment history for the calendar year twenty twenty four,
and under this investigation, it revealed that one commissioner had
his one hundred dollars cutoff fee voided nine times.
Speaker 2 (12:01):
Throughout the year.
Speaker 1 (12:02):
Further, he did not make a single payment on his
utility bill until August of twenty twenty four, when the
Office of the State Auditor received the initial allegation, at
which point his outstanding balance was nine hundred and forty
two dollars, yet that one hundred dollars cutoff fee when
service should have been stopped was voided and he was
continuing to receive water and sewer services. The commissioner paid
(12:26):
the utility bill in full after receiving the allegation in
August of twenty twenty four, but auditors say his payment
history did remain inconsistent through March of twenty twenty five.
During the investigation, the same commissioner was found to have
another utility account for a different address, which was closed
in January of last year. However, the account had an
(12:49):
unpaid balance of more than three hundred and forty dollars
as of March of twenty twenty five. While reviewing this allegation,
auditors discovered that the town's water departsartment voided hundreds of
cutoff fees each month. In twenty twenty four, the departments
supervisor voided more than avoided one thousand, eight hundred and
(13:10):
thirty eight cut off fees and only charged two hundred
and ninety one, meaning that eighty six percent of the
cutoff fees were voided in the town with no valid
reason documented. Also in twenty twenty four, the supervisor fraudulently
voided cut off fees for eleven months for her own
utility account and for nine months for the water department's
(13:33):
bill and clerk. The supervisor didn't make a payment on
her utility account until that same time period August of
twenty twenty four, when the Auditor's office began again got
these allegations when she paid one hundred dollars despite her
account balance exceeding one thousand dollars at the time. By
the end of the calendar year twenty twenty four, her
(13:54):
balance had increased to one thousand, three hundred and eighty
one dollars. With this, the town suspended her in January
of this year and terminated her in March. She paid
her utility bills in full in the month of February.
The town also suspended the billing clerk in January and
terminated her as well in March after her balance had
(14:16):
grown to nine hundred and twenty dollars. She, like the supervisor,
paid her full utility bill in February as well. The
North Carolina State Auditor's Office also found that due to
negligent data entry and lack of oversight, the town grossly
undercharged customers for water and sewer usage and lost significant
(14:37):
amounts of revenue. This negligence and lack of oversight continued
in March, when an attempt to correct the data entry
errors resulted in some customers being grossly overcharged. Back in
October of twenty twenty three, the town's board increased utility rates,
including water and sewer rates for both residential and commercial accounts.
(14:59):
The minimum and maximum water charges were set at the
exact same rate, meaning that commercial customers were build the
minimum base charge regardless of their actual water usage. The
same issue continued in August of twenty twenty four, when
the town improved yet another rate increase. There were other
(15:19):
utility issues as well, which continued to be documented in
the report. Auditors recommended that the town develop and implement
policies and procedures regarding avoiding cutoff fees and proper segregation
of duties should They also recommend that the town should
develop and implement proper controls to ensure that rate information
(15:43):
is correctly entered into the town's utility system. And again
it was not just the water system that was being
looked at. Some other allegations being levied against Mount Olive,
including some issues ongoing at the airport, problems with the
town bearing the financial burden of providing fuel at the
airport as well, even though the airport operator is contractually
(16:06):
obligated to purchase and sell the fuel. The airport operator
extended a credit extended credit on the town on behalf
of themselves for fuel purchases. Some big time issues on
going there. State Auditor Dave Bollock said in a press release, quote,
Proper management at the local level is incredibly important to
(16:28):
ensuring resources are not abused and protocol is followed. Our
investigation division took a deep dive into Mount Olive's finances
and undercovered several concerning issues. Local officials agreed with the
findings in our report. Now it's time for our recommendations
to be put into action. Interim town manager Glenn Holland
(16:51):
wrote in a response, saying, quote, the Town of Mount
Olive it takes these allegations seriously and accepts all findings
and recommendations made in this report. Again, looking at some
of those other allegations and issues, the town's finance manager
lacks a lacked a proper process to verify monthly fuel
(17:14):
consumption invoices at the airport, creating a major risk for overpayment,
that all checks were not necessarily included in the town's
accounting system, as well as the town lacking policies and
procedures governing the authorization of timesheets for hourly employees. Looks
like a real mess over in Mount Olive. However, the
(17:34):
Auditor's office doing its job of researching and doing its
investigation into the town. It is a twenty nine page
audit that goes through all of the issues of the town,
which is located in Overwayne, located in Wayne County, which
only has a population of about forty two hundred residents.
It's not a super large town. All of that information
(17:56):
is in that full twenty nine page audit. You can
get a link to that full report as well as
our article this morning by visiting our website Carolina Journal
dot com. The headline auditor mount Olive lost over two
hundred and ten thousand dollars due to negligent data entries.
That is again available over on our website Carolina Journal
dot com.
Speaker 2 (18:22):
It's five thirty five.
Speaker 1 (18:23):
Welcome back to the Carolina Journal News our new stock
eleven ten ninety nine three WBT The North Carolina State
Board of Elections has a meeting scheduled coming up a
little bit later on today to discuss a variety of
issues ahead of municipal elections coming up later on this year.
As some counties have experienced disagreements on how to handle
(18:43):
early voting those Any of those disagreements in a individual
county will have to be sorted out by the State
Board of Elections After meeting today, however, the Board will
take less controversial voting plans for counties like Mecklenburg, Forsyth,
and Lee Counties. All of the those plans were approved
unanimously by local leaders ahead of the State Board meeting.
(19:05):
The twenty twenty five municipal elections actually are staggered. Some
individuals vote in September, some in October, and the final
group in November, with some counties and cities having multiple
election dates throughout the remainder of this year. The Board
today plans to vote on early voting plans for September
races in debate extending the deadline for counties to submit
(19:28):
their plans for October and November. Regardless of when people
vote later this year, they will have to show a
valid photo ID or have an acceptable excuse for lacking
one to fill out AD exemption form. Another item on
the State Board's agenda today is to finalize a lawsuit
(19:48):
settlement with the National Republican Party which kept many UNC
Chapel Hills students and employees barred from being allowed to
use their university issued ID to vote. Other university IDs
were allowed in the twenty twenty four elections, but those
were all physical ID cards. UNC Chapel Hill offers a
(20:09):
digital ID by default. The State Board of Elections had
voted to allow those digital IDs when the board was
under Democrat control, and various Republican groups, including the Republican Party,
sued trying to stop it. They won their case for
the twenty twenty four elections, but there's still but there
has still been remained an open question on how to
(20:32):
handle this issue in the future. The Election Board recently
was switched to Republican control, and one of the new
board's first actions was to agree with the Republican Party
and not allow any form of digital identification to be
used as a valid form of ID when voting. That
meeting will be coming up a little bit later on today.
(20:52):
We'll have coverage of it on our website, Carolina Journal
dot com and if any relevant news comes forward, anything big,
well pass it along to you. Coming up Monday morning
right here on the Carolina Journal News Hour, where it's
now five point thirty eight News Talk eleven ten ninety
nine to three WBT, there has been growing concern across
the United States over foreign entities and ownership of farmland
(21:16):
that has especially played out as it relates to China.
To go over some details out of a new poll
this morning at Katie's ender Carolina Journal dot Com joins
us on the Carolina Journal News Hour, Katie. As we
already know, agriculture and farming is the biggest business here
in the state of North Carolina, so I'm sure this
is on the minds of a lot of North Carolina farmers,
but it seems like pretty much across the board there
(21:38):
is huge concern over foreign investment into agricultural land here
in the continental United States.
Speaker 4 (21:46):
Yeah, that's exactly right, Nick. This is something that we've been,
you know, kind of watching for over a year now
here at the Carolina Journal. But there's a new pull
out from the Vandenburg Coalition, and they are a pulling
group that pulls voters largely the Trump based so kind
of those Trump voters on different issues, but really what
they focused on in this particular poll was like a
(22:07):
lot of foreign policy issues, especially related to China. And
really what we're looking at specifically here is, you know,
how they feel about initiatives that would block or restrict
China from owning land in the United States. And so
eighty eight percent of respondents said that they would support
efforts to prevent China from acquiring US land, with seventy
percent expressing strong support. And they also said that concern
(22:31):
over China's control of pharmaceutical ingredients is widespread, with ninety
six percent worried that China could weaponize this control by
cutting off medication supplies. And the pharmaceutical industry is another huge,
you know industry here in North Carolina, We've had a
lot of pharmaceutic pharmaceutical manufacturers here, so that's another industry.
And then sixty eight percent said that there were concerns,
(22:53):
describing the level of worry as extremely high or very high.
This concern is particularly prominent among the demographics that rely
high on the pharmaceuticals. So we won't get into that
too much right now, but there's a lot of concern,
especially among the Trump base, concerning Chinese ownership of the
United States land. And so when we look at these
poll result results, seventy percent said that they would strongly
(23:16):
support these initiatives, eighteen percent said that they would somewhat
support them. And then if you look at the data
even further and you kind of break it down a
little further, seventy three percent of traditional conservatives said they
would strongly support it, fourteen percent said they would somewhat
support it, and eight percent would totally oppose it. And
that's what the Vandenberg Coalition describes as traditional conservatives. If
(23:40):
you look at what they call maga conservatives, eighty percent
would strongly support it, twelve percent would somewhat support it,
and six percent would totally oppose it. And then the
last grouping is moderates, fifty per seven percent would strongly
support it, twenty seven percent would somewhat support it, and
fourteen percent would totally oppose it. So even in that
moderate group, they're still over fifty percent strongly support these initiatives.
(24:03):
And then if you kind of break it down in
a different way, if you look at urban versus rural voters,
the urban voters strong fifty nine percent strongly support it,
twenty seven percent somewhat support it, and eleven percent totally
oppose it. And then, of course out of the rural voters,
those numbers are higher, seventy two percent strongly support it,
fifteen percent somewhat support it, and ten percent totally oppose it.
Speaker 1 (24:26):
You know, Katie, going back to those moderate numbers, there's
not too much of a disparity there between what either
traditional conservatives or what this poll calls MAGA voters Trump
predominantly Trump supporters, and those moderates. You're only looking at
a difference between eight percent and fourteen percent. That's not
typically the case when you look at the difference between
what many would call very actively involved individuals on the
(24:49):
MAGA or conservative side and those that may be more
middle of the road and may vote for some Democrats
on certain issues and so on and so forth. I
guess it's pretty fair to say that this is a
pretty bipartisan issue, at least when we look across this
more right leaning base of individuals on an issue like
foreign ownership of farmland.
Speaker 4 (25:09):
Right, that's exactly right, Nick, So you know, these pull
numbers really kind of show it to you is you know,
this is an issue that a lot of people are
very very concerned about it, especially you know in the
Republican Party. Whether you're you know, a MAGA voter or not,
you're probably going to be, you know, strongly concerned about
foreign ownership, especially Chinese ownership of the United States land.
(25:30):
And a lot of this is specifically, you know, related
to and targeting you know, land that tends to be
near or around sensitive military bases and stuff like that.
But yeah, there are people that are very concerned, as
they should be, about these foreign entities owning so much
land here in the United States.
Speaker 1 (25:46):
And when we look at this here in North Carolina
turning it back home this morning, there have been pushes
by the General Assembly, both this legislative session and in
years past, Katie, to.
Speaker 2 (25:57):
Deal with this.
Speaker 1 (25:57):
We've also seen some discussion out of the federal level
over putting a ban and block on this. So not
only are our regular individuals that are responding to this
poll concerned, seems like legislators here in North Carolina and
then of course those up in Washington, d C. Have
some of those similar concerns about it as well.
Speaker 4 (26:16):
That's right, Nick, So, like I said at the beginning,
this is something we've been following here at CJ for
over our year now, and back in January of twenty
twenty four, three point five percent of farmland in North
Carolina are upwards of seven hundred thousand acres was foreign owned.
Now that's not specifically Chinese owned, so it could be China, Russia,
you know a lot of those, you know, Eastern countries,
(26:36):
but three point five percent is foreign owned in the
state of North Carolina alone. And in twenty twenty four,
the Government Accountability Office released a report to Congress that
found that foreign holdings of US agricultural land has really
been growing. And so we've had a couple of bills
introduced in this session in the General Assembly kind of
(26:57):
targeting these issues. One was HB one Pin thirty three,
which was sponsored by Representative Jennifer Belcom, Representative John Bell,
Representative Jeff Zanger, and Representative Neil Jackson. And Representative Jeff Zanger,
who's you know, strongly concerned about this issue, he said,
I think folks are starting to understand that even though
we have a global economy, we can also create vulnerabilities
(27:17):
if we're not wise and that's where people get a
little bit rightfully concerned. And then there's also another bill
that was introduced this session, a Senate bill called the
Prohibit Foreign Ownership of North Carolina Land. And so with
this Senate bill specifically, these bills are very similar. There
are some differences, but with the Senate bill specifically, it
targeted specific countries that would be barred from owning US land.
(27:41):
But when they were discussing this, I think in the
House Rules Committee, they specifically said that they could go
back and add countries to that list if they needed
to do so at a later time. So, yeah, this
is definitely something that is of concern not only here
at the state level, but at the federal level as well,
and you know should be.
Speaker 1 (28:00):
Katie, We went over a lot of different numbers and
different groups. Since details, folks might want to go and
maybe look at this on a screen.
Speaker 2 (28:06):
Where can they go and do that this morning?
Speaker 4 (28:09):
Sure they can read the full article with all the
quotes and all the charts and everything at Carolina Journal
dot com.
Speaker 1 (28:14):
It's a great update this morning. We appreciate it. Katie
Zender joins us on the Carolina Journal News Hour. Good
morning again, it's five point fifty two. Welcome back to
the Carolina Journal News Hour News Talk eleven, ten ninety
nine three WBT. Don't forget if you miss any portion
of our show. You can check out the Carolina Journal
(28:36):
News Hour on demand in our podcast form. It's available
on Google Play, Apple Podcasts, and Spotify. Just search for
the Carolina Journal News Hour, Tap the subscribe or follow
button and you'll get a new program delivered each and
every weekday morning. It's the Carolina Journal News Hour podcast.
To download it and subscribe now. Democrat Governor Josh Stein
(28:58):
is urging North Carolina's second highest court to reject a
proposal from Treasurer Brad Briner to speed up an appeal
in a separation of powers dispute that continues to evolve.
The case revolves around a shift of the State Utilities
Commission appointment from the governor to the Treasurer.
Speaker 2 (29:17):
Earlier this week.
Speaker 1 (29:18):
Briner and his team filed a motion on Tuesday with
the North Carolina Court of Appeals as he is seeking
an expedited schedule for resolving the case, called Stein v. Hall.
Stein's lawyers responded yesterday by saying, quote, despite prevailing on
the only issue relevant to his office. The Treasurer seeks
(29:39):
expedited benefiting on all three issues. The Treasurer cannot establish
a good cause to suspend or vary the appellate rules,
this court should delay his request. Stein filed a lawsuit
against the Republican state legislative leaders to challenge three provisions
in a recent state law. One that limits the governor's
(30:01):
choice when filling judicial vacancies, a second change in voting
requirements for State Building Code Council, And finally, the third
shifts one of Stein's three utility appointments to a Brad Briner,
the Treasurer, who is a Republican.
Speaker 2 (30:18):
A three judge a trial court.
Speaker 1 (30:19):
Panel ruled in Stein's favor in June on the judicial
vacancy's issues. However, the same panel ruled in favor of
the legislatures on the other two. The trial court's decision
allowed Briner to appoint Donald van Dervart to the Utilities
Commission back on July the first, when the previous board
members term ran out. Stein's lawyers wrote, quote, the Treasurer
(30:44):
is suffering no harm and has made no showing that
the Commission's work has been impacted in any way. The
Appellate Court heard oral arguments in the case back on
February the seventeen. That was a case that was called
at the time Cooper v. V.
Speaker 2 (31:00):
Berger.
Speaker 1 (31:01):
As this dealt with law that was passed in the
latter parts of twenty twenty four. That has now changed
its name to Stein v.
Speaker 2 (31:09):
Hall looking at.
Speaker 1 (31:10):
The new governor and the new leader of the looking
at that in the General Assembly, so that case has
now changed its name. Briner's motion Tuesday indicated that state
legislative leaders did allow his proposal for an expedited view,
with the Treasurers of Lawyers writing quote, the constitutional issue
(31:31):
presented in this case are important and should be determined
so that the public and regulated entities can have certainty
on the state law. Again, this is an ongoing battle
between Democrat governors and the Republican led General Assembly. We
saw in the past couple of years under previous Governor
(31:52):
Roy Cooper. Anytime the legislature attempted to change some of
these various appointment abilities and authorities away away from the
governor and into other duly elected Council of State members,
lawsuits were brought. That's exactly what we saw, for example
with the North Carolina State Board of Elections that we
were talking about a little bit earlier this morning. Similar
(32:14):
legislation change the power structure on that board by giving
State Auditor Dave Bollick the ability to appoint those three
members instead of the governor. And when you look at
that switch going from Stein to Auditor Dave Bollick, you
have a Democrat of course in the governor's mansion and
a Republican in the Auditor's office, so you can see
(32:35):
that power shift playing out. That did go through the
court system, and it was determined that the General Assembly
did in fact have the right to reallocate and reauthorize
the entity that is responsible for those appointment powers. We
are seeing something similar with the Utilities Commission in this
case against the state Treasurer in Brad Briner. The expedited
(32:58):
schedule has been requested by him. However, Stein's lawyers are
not in favor of that, so we will continue to
keep an eye on this legal process as it continues
to unfold across the state. You can read more information
and more details on this story and some of the
background and history over on our website, Carolina Journal dot com.
The headline Stein opposes expedited court review in utilities appointment dispute. Well,
(33:25):
that's going to do it for a Friday edition of
the Carolina Journal.
Speaker 2 (33:28):
News Hour.
Speaker 1 (33:29):
WBT News is next, followed by Good Morning BT. We're
back with you Monday morning, five to six right here
on News Talk eleven, ten and ninety nine to three
WBT
It's five oh four and welcome into a Friday edition
of The Carolina Journal News Hour News Stock eleven, ten
ninety nine three WBT.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
I'm Nick Craig.
Speaker 1 (00:18):
Good morning to you, and we know road construction and
congestion is a big issue all across our state. The
North Carolina Department of Transportation has launched a statewide public
comment period to help shape its next infrastructure plan, which
will run from twenty twenty eight to twenty thirty seven.
(00:38):
This is amid growing concerns over congestion and big parts
of our state, including our major metropolitan areas like Charlotte
and Raleigh. Now through Friday, August the twenty ninth, residents
can offer suggestions via the NCDT website as well as
week long drop in sessions at NCDOT offices through out
(01:00):
the state. Eligible suggestions span all six transportation modes, including highway, rail, transit, ferries, aviation,
as well as bicycle and pedestrian facilities, but exclude routine
maintenance projects like pothole repairs or resurfacing, which are not
handled in a ten year what is typically called a
(01:23):
step the state Transportation Improvement Program. One area that is
being highlighted is in the trying open an area a
ten mile stretch of US one from I five forty
in Wake Forest and Franklin County as some worka continues
there that originally budgeted about ninety three million dollars for
(01:45):
a project to begin construction in twenty eighteen. However, the
project now carries a one point three to four billion
dollar price tag and has been delayed multiple times. Public
input collected will feed directly into the project prioritization process
under the Strategic Investment Law. That is a formula that
(02:06):
balances data driven scoring with community input to guide which
projects are selected for funding across the six transportation modes
in the state. In addition to public suggestions, NCDOT will
consider input from local planning organizations and state staff. Submitting
projects will undergo a three tiered prioritization project statewide mobility projects,
(02:32):
regional impact projects, and division need projects. Statewide mobility projects
are evaluated first and are one hundred percent based on data,
with scoring results expected by the spring of twenty twenty six.
We've got some additional details on this, including the link
to the dot website where that again that public comment
(02:53):
runs all the way through August. The twenty ninth. You
can go on there and check out what division you're
in across the state of North Carolina, see where some
of these listening and hearing sessions are taking place, and
where you can go and can submit some comments, submit
some feedback. That is over on our website. This morning,
Carolina Journal dot com the headline ncdot's ten year plan
(03:16):
opens amid us one frustrations Again. You can read those
details at Carolina Journal dot com, where it's now five
oh seven, News Talk eleven, ten ninety nine to three WBT.
There's been a lot of national news over the last
few weeks with the term jerrymandering or partisan jerrymandering, looking
at states like Texas and Illinois. It's been a big
(03:37):
political battle nationally. While it's not currently a big issue
in North Carolina, it has been a big political issue
in the past. To get some more information on that
and kind of explain this whole process to us this morning,
doctor Andy Jackson of the John Locke Foundation joins us
on the Carolina Journal News Hour. The bullseyes not on
North Carolina now, Andy, So, I guess that's a good sign.
But over the last fifteen or twenty years, redistricting. Drawing
(04:00):
maps has been a very, very hot button political issue
across North Carolina.
Speaker 3 (04:05):
Yeah. Actually it goes further than that. We've gone decades
since we've had a time where the General Assembly has
drawn a set of three maps for the state House, states,
and in Congress, and all three have survived the entire decade.
We have to go back and think to the nineteen seventies,
the eighties, nineties, the aughts, twenty tens, all of them
(04:27):
in took twenty twenties. Now every decade has had maps
struck down. It's an ongoing process. I'm cautiously hopeful that
we're not going to have to do any more redistricting
in North Carolina until the next census in twenty thirty two.
Speaker 1 (04:44):
So as we look at these discussions federally that are
going on and bringing it back here to North Carolina,
the concern is in states like Illinois where Democrats have control,
they draw maps that are friendly to Democrats. In a
state like Texas, where the Republicans controlled the legislature, they
draw maps that favor Republicans. Andy, is this a process
that the legislature is supposed to do in these various states?
(05:07):
And here in North Carolina when maps need to be redrawn.
Speaker 3 (05:12):
Traditionally it has been the legislators draw the maps. That's
that's based out of the constitutional order. Specifically North Carolina.
The State House draws House maps that have to be
approved by both chambers. The state Senate draws Senate maps.
They draw also draw or start the rounds on the
congressional maps. So yeah, it's mandated by the North Carolina
(05:33):
Constitution that the General Assembly draw the districts. That's the
way it's traditionally been at every state. There are some
states that use either advisory commissions or they use commissions
that draw the whole maps. I will say one of
the things is the idea is that those would not
end up with gerrymanderd maps or maps that have other problems.
(05:55):
And sometimes that's the case, but just as often as not,
those problem those districts drawn by commissions or justice problematic.
Recent example in Michigan, they had a series of maps
that were thrown out or a series of districts that
were thrown out as racial gerrymanders drawn by a commission.
So drawn by commission is no protection from a potential lawsuit.
Speaker 1 (06:18):
I hear this term thrown around all the time. I've
seen it here in North Carolina as well.
Speaker 2 (06:22):
Andy. The maps need to be fair, and I hear
this term.
Speaker 1 (06:25):
I see a lot of chatter on social media, talking
heads on cable news talking about fair maps. But as
you just kind of walked us through the process, this
is inherently a political thing that goes on when you've
got an elected group of individuals in agied state legislature
that are the ones that are responsible for drawing these maps.
Speaker 3 (06:43):
No, well, yeah, definition of fair is in the eye
of the beholder, and it's probably unremarkable that one side
will decide on a definition of fair that benefits them
the most. So, for example, in North Carolina, Democrats would
want to say, look at the statewide average where Democrats
(07:06):
generally are pulling around forty eight percent give or take
on the election, and so you would say, well, by
that measure, Democrats should have about half of the seats.
But if you look at it in the local communities,
you know, different parts of the state, the political geography
of the state, it doesn't really come out that way.
(07:27):
For example, there were a couple of plaintiffs on a
lawsuit Harper v. Hall, the one that overturned maps a
couple of years ago, and even the experts for the
plaintiffs who were given their testimonies said that the most
likely congressional map in North Carolina is a nine to
five Republican map. No Democrats would think that is fair,
(07:50):
but that's what you usually get if you just draw maps,
not considering politics, just geography, just where people live. And
that's a lot closer to the ten to four that
we have now than say a seven to seven that
Democrats would like. Could we get to a nine to
five map, We could probably not under the existing rules,
(08:10):
because it's in the nature of the beasts that the
party and control will want to draw maps that favor
their side.
Speaker 1 (08:16):
Well, and I'm glad you bring up the geography on this,
because this is relevant not only in congressional races and
the seats that you're talking about, but in the legislature now,
where Republicans have a supermajority in the Senate one vote
shy of that in the House majorities in both chambers.
It's geography, Andy, And we see in North Carolina. In
many of these other states, you've got these more Democrat
(08:38):
strongholds in urban areas and as you get further out
from those areas, it tends to lean more red. That's
not necessarily a new phenomenon, though, is it.
Speaker 3 (08:48):
It's not. It's been going on for a while. The
urban areas in North Carolina have been going more and
more democratic. Rural areas, especially in the eastern part of
the state, have been going more republic Look in those
areas are changing rapidly, and so for example, if you're
running a race in Durham or in the middle of
(09:09):
Greensboro and you're running for state House, those districts, really
the only competitive part is going to be in the
Democratic primary. That's the nature of the district. You doesn't
it doesn't really make any sense to say, well, this
community is this way, but since they're so democratic, we're
going to string out a long district that goes from
downtown Durham to say, Harnett County somewhere where it's more
(09:32):
Republican in order to make it more competitive. Districts should
really represent their communities, and it would be it'd be
great if legislators would do it that way, and then
we wouldn't have to worry about, you know, which side
benefits more than the other. Unfortunately, that's not the nature
of the beast. I'd like it to get closer to
(09:54):
that ideal, but certainly trying to artificially change areas by
teaming them up with vastly different areas and the idea
of making it more fair or more competitive is not
what you should be doing.
Speaker 2 (10:07):
Andy, We appreciate the analysis and the information. This morning.
Speaker 1 (10:10):
Doctor Andy Jackson from the John Locke Foundation joins us
on the Carolina Journal News Hour.
Speaker 2 (10:20):
It's five twenty.
Speaker 1 (10:20):
Welcome back to the Carolina Journal News Our Newstock eleven
ten ninety nine three WBT. Checking out some statewide news
this morning. The North Carolina Auditor's Office in the news
once again after receiving numerous allegations on its tip line.
The auditor conducted an investigation into the town of Mount
Olive that's in Wayne County, as well as its water
(10:43):
department and its municipal airport, among other reviews. According to
a report released by state Auditor Dave Bollock, among the findings,
the town's water department lost a whopping two hundred and
ten thousand plus dollars in revenue due to negligent data entry.
The Auditor's office received an allegation that a sitting town
(11:05):
commissioner received water service despite failing to pay for it,
and that the town's water department employees committed fraud by
failing to pay for their own water bills and avoiding
late charges for themselves and others. Auditors found that the
town lacked formal policies and procedures for utility billing data
(11:26):
entry was performed in a very negligent nature, and oversight
during the implementation of utility rate increases was inadequate. Those
deficiencies increased the risk of billing errors, reduced accountability and
hindereds and hindered the town's ability to ensure accurate utility
revenue tracking. They reviewed the mayor and current town commissioner's
(11:49):
utility payment history for the calendar year twenty twenty four,
and under this investigation, it revealed that one commissioner had
his one hundred dollars cutoff fee voided nine times.
Speaker 2 (12:01):
Throughout the year.
Speaker 1 (12:02):
Further, he did not make a single payment on his
utility bill until August of twenty twenty four, when the
Office of the State Auditor received the initial allegation, at
which point his outstanding balance was nine hundred and forty
two dollars, yet that one hundred dollars cutoff fee when
service should have been stopped was voided and he was
continuing to receive water and sewer services. The commissioner paid
(12:26):
the utility bill in full after receiving the allegation in
August of twenty twenty four, but auditors say his payment
history did remain inconsistent through March of twenty twenty five.
During the investigation, the same commissioner was found to have
another utility account for a different address, which was closed
in January of last year. However, the account had an
(12:49):
unpaid balance of more than three hundred and forty dollars
as of March of twenty twenty five. While reviewing this allegation,
auditors discovered that the town's water departsartment voided hundreds of
cutoff fees each month. In twenty twenty four, the departments
supervisor voided more than avoided one thousand, eight hundred and
(13:10):
thirty eight cut off fees and only charged two hundred
and ninety one, meaning that eighty six percent of the
cutoff fees were voided in the town with no valid
reason documented. Also in twenty twenty four, the supervisor fraudulently
voided cut off fees for eleven months for her own
utility account and for nine months for the water department's
(13:33):
bill and clerk. The supervisor didn't make a payment on
her utility account until that same time period August of
twenty twenty four, when the Auditor's office began again got
these allegations when she paid one hundred dollars despite her
account balance exceeding one thousand dollars at the time. By
the end of the calendar year twenty twenty four, her
(13:54):
balance had increased to one thousand, three hundred and eighty
one dollars. With this, the town suspended her in January
of this year and terminated her in March. She paid
her utility bills in full in the month of February.
The town also suspended the billing clerk in January and
terminated her as well in March after her balance had
(14:16):
grown to nine hundred and twenty dollars. She, like the supervisor,
paid her full utility bill in February as well. The
North Carolina State Auditor's Office also found that due to
negligent data entry and lack of oversight, the town grossly
undercharged customers for water and sewer usage and lost significant
(14:37):
amounts of revenue. This negligence and lack of oversight continued
in March, when an attempt to correct the data entry
errors resulted in some customers being grossly overcharged. Back in
October of twenty twenty three, the town's board increased utility rates,
including water and sewer rates for both residential and commercial accounts.
(14:59):
The minimum and maximum water charges were set at the
exact same rate, meaning that commercial customers were build the
minimum base charge regardless of their actual water usage. The
same issue continued in August of twenty twenty four, when
the town improved yet another rate increase. There were other
(15:19):
utility issues as well, which continued to be documented in
the report. Auditors recommended that the town develop and implement
policies and procedures regarding avoiding cutoff fees and proper segregation
of duties should They also recommend that the town should
develop and implement proper controls to ensure that rate information
(15:43):
is correctly entered into the town's utility system. And again
it was not just the water system that was being
looked at. Some other allegations being levied against Mount Olive,
including some issues ongoing at the airport, problems with the
town bearing the financial burden of providing fuel at the
airport as well, even though the airport operator is contractually
(16:06):
obligated to purchase and sell the fuel. The airport operator
extended a credit extended credit on the town on behalf
of themselves for fuel purchases. Some big time issues on
going there. State Auditor Dave Bollock said in a press release, quote,
Proper management at the local level is incredibly important to
(16:28):
ensuring resources are not abused and protocol is followed. Our
investigation division took a deep dive into Mount Olive's finances
and undercovered several concerning issues. Local officials agreed with the
findings in our report. Now it's time for our recommendations
to be put into action. Interim town manager Glenn Holland
(16:51):
wrote in a response, saying, quote, the Town of Mount
Olive it takes these allegations seriously and accepts all findings
and recommendations made in this report. Again, looking at some
of those other allegations and issues, the town's finance manager
lacks a lacked a proper process to verify monthly fuel
(17:14):
consumption invoices at the airport, creating a major risk for overpayment,
that all checks were not necessarily included in the town's
accounting system, as well as the town lacking policies and
procedures governing the authorization of timesheets for hourly employees. Looks
like a real mess over in Mount Olive. However, the
(17:34):
Auditor's office doing its job of researching and doing its
investigation into the town. It is a twenty nine page
audit that goes through all of the issues of the town,
which is located in Overwayne, located in Wayne County, which
only has a population of about forty two hundred residents.
It's not a super large town. All of that information
(17:56):
is in that full twenty nine page audit. You can
get a link to that full report as well as
our article this morning by visiting our website Carolina Journal
dot com. The headline auditor mount Olive lost over two
hundred and ten thousand dollars due to negligent data entries.
That is again available over on our website Carolina Journal
dot com.
Speaker 2 (18:22):
It's five thirty five.
Speaker 1 (18:23):
Welcome back to the Carolina Journal News our new stock
eleven ten ninety nine three WBT The North Carolina State
Board of Elections has a meeting scheduled coming up a
little bit later on today to discuss a variety of
issues ahead of municipal elections coming up later on this year.
As some counties have experienced disagreements on how to handle
(18:43):
early voting those Any of those disagreements in a individual
county will have to be sorted out by the State
Board of Elections After meeting today, however, the Board will
take less controversial voting plans for counties like Mecklenburg, Forsyth,
and Lee Counties. All of the those plans were approved
unanimously by local leaders ahead of the State Board meeting.
(19:05):
The twenty twenty five municipal elections actually are staggered. Some
individuals vote in September, some in October, and the final
group in November, with some counties and cities having multiple
election dates throughout the remainder of this year. The Board
today plans to vote on early voting plans for September
races in debate extending the deadline for counties to submit
(19:28):
their plans for October and November. Regardless of when people
vote later this year, they will have to show a
valid photo ID or have an acceptable excuse for lacking
one to fill out AD exemption form. Another item on
the State Board's agenda today is to finalize a lawsuit
(19:48):
settlement with the National Republican Party which kept many UNC
Chapel Hills students and employees barred from being allowed to
use their university issued ID to vote. Other university IDs
were allowed in the twenty twenty four elections, but those
were all physical ID cards. UNC Chapel Hill offers a
(20:09):
digital ID by default. The State Board of Elections had
voted to allow those digital IDs when the board was
under Democrat control, and various Republican groups, including the Republican Party,
sued trying to stop it. They won their case for
the twenty twenty four elections, but there's still but there
has still been remained an open question on how to
(20:32):
handle this issue in the future. The Election Board recently
was switched to Republican control, and one of the new
board's first actions was to agree with the Republican Party
and not allow any form of digital identification to be
used as a valid form of ID when voting. That
meeting will be coming up a little bit later on today.
(20:52):
We'll have coverage of it on our website, Carolina Journal
dot com and if any relevant news comes forward, anything big,
well pass it along to you. Coming up Monday morning
right here on the Carolina Journal News Hour, where it's
now five point thirty eight News Talk eleven ten ninety
nine to three WBT, there has been growing concern across
the United States over foreign entities and ownership of farmland
(21:16):
that has especially played out as it relates to China.
To go over some details out of a new poll
this morning at Katie's ender Carolina Journal dot Com joins
us on the Carolina Journal News Hour, Katie. As we
already know, agriculture and farming is the biggest business here
in the state of North Carolina, so I'm sure this
is on the minds of a lot of North Carolina farmers,
but it seems like pretty much across the board there
(21:38):
is huge concern over foreign investment into agricultural land here
in the continental United States.
Speaker 4 (21:46):
Yeah, that's exactly right, Nick. This is something that we've been,
you know, kind of watching for over a year now
here at the Carolina Journal. But there's a new pull
out from the Vandenburg Coalition, and they are a pulling
group that pulls voters largely the Trump based so kind
of those Trump voters on different issues, but really what
they focused on in this particular poll was like a
(22:07):
lot of foreign policy issues, especially related to China. And
really what we're looking at specifically here is, you know,
how they feel about initiatives that would block or restrict
China from owning land in the United States. And so
eighty eight percent of respondents said that they would support
efforts to prevent China from acquiring US land, with seventy
percent expressing strong support. And they also said that concern
(22:31):
over China's control of pharmaceutical ingredients is widespread, with ninety
six percent worried that China could weaponize this control by
cutting off medication supplies. And the pharmaceutical industry is another huge,
you know industry here in North Carolina, We've had a
lot of pharmaceutic pharmaceutical manufacturers here, so that's another industry.
And then sixty eight percent said that there were concerns,
(22:53):
describing the level of worry as extremely high or very high.
This concern is particularly prominent among the demographics that rely
high on the pharmaceuticals. So we won't get into that
too much right now, but there's a lot of concern,
especially among the Trump base, concerning Chinese ownership of the
United States land. And so when we look at these
poll result results, seventy percent said that they would strongly
(23:16):
support these initiatives, eighteen percent said that they would somewhat
support them. And then if you look at the data
even further and you kind of break it down a
little further, seventy three percent of traditional conservatives said they
would strongly support it, fourteen percent said they would somewhat
support it, and eight percent would totally oppose it. And
that's what the Vandenberg Coalition describes as traditional conservatives. If
(23:40):
you look at what they call maga conservatives, eighty percent
would strongly support it, twelve percent would somewhat support it,
and six percent would totally oppose it. And then the
last grouping is moderates, fifty per seven percent would strongly
support it, twenty seven percent would somewhat support it, and
fourteen percent would totally oppose it. So even in that
moderate group, they're still over fifty percent strongly support these initiatives.
(24:03):
And then if you kind of break it down in
a different way, if you look at urban versus rural voters,
the urban voters strong fifty nine percent strongly support it,
twenty seven percent somewhat support it, and eleven percent totally
oppose it. And then, of course out of the rural voters,
those numbers are higher, seventy two percent strongly support it,
fifteen percent somewhat support it, and ten percent totally oppose it.
Speaker 1 (24:26):
You know, Katie, going back to those moderate numbers, there's
not too much of a disparity there between what either
traditional conservatives or what this poll calls MAGA voters Trump
predominantly Trump supporters, and those moderates. You're only looking at
a difference between eight percent and fourteen percent. That's not
typically the case when you look at the difference between
what many would call very actively involved individuals on the
(24:49):
MAGA or conservative side and those that may be more
middle of the road and may vote for some Democrats
on certain issues and so on and so forth. I
guess it's pretty fair to say that this is a
pretty bipartisan issue, at least when we look across this
more right leaning base of individuals on an issue like
foreign ownership of farmland.
Speaker 4 (25:09):
Right, that's exactly right, Nick, So you know, these pull
numbers really kind of show it to you is you know,
this is an issue that a lot of people are
very very concerned about it, especially you know in the
Republican Party. Whether you're you know, a MAGA voter or not,
you're probably going to be, you know, strongly concerned about
foreign ownership, especially Chinese ownership of the United States land.
(25:30):
And a lot of this is specifically, you know, related
to and targeting you know, land that tends to be
near or around sensitive military bases and stuff like that.
But yeah, there are people that are very concerned, as
they should be, about these foreign entities owning so much
land here in the United States.
Speaker 1 (25:46):
And when we look at this here in North Carolina
turning it back home this morning, there have been pushes
by the General Assembly, both this legislative session and in
years past, Katie, to.
Speaker 2 (25:57):
Deal with this.
Speaker 1 (25:57):
We've also seen some discussion out of the federal level
over putting a ban and block on this. So not
only are our regular individuals that are responding to this
poll concerned, seems like legislators here in North Carolina and
then of course those up in Washington, d C. Have
some of those similar concerns about it as well.
Speaker 4 (26:16):
That's right, Nick, So, like I said at the beginning,
this is something we've been following here at CJ for
over our year now, and back in January of twenty
twenty four, three point five percent of farmland in North
Carolina are upwards of seven hundred thousand acres was foreign owned.
Now that's not specifically Chinese owned, so it could be China, Russia,
you know a lot of those, you know, Eastern countries,
(26:36):
but three point five percent is foreign owned in the
state of North Carolina alone. And in twenty twenty four,
the Government Accountability Office released a report to Congress that
found that foreign holdings of US agricultural land has really
been growing. And so we've had a couple of bills
introduced in this session in the General Assembly kind of
(26:57):
targeting these issues. One was HB one Pin thirty three,
which was sponsored by Representative Jennifer Belcom, Representative John Bell,
Representative Jeff Zanger, and Representative Neil Jackson. And Representative Jeff Zanger,
who's you know, strongly concerned about this issue, he said,
I think folks are starting to understand that even though
we have a global economy, we can also create vulnerabilities
(27:17):
if we're not wise and that's where people get a
little bit rightfully concerned. And then there's also another bill
that was introduced this session, a Senate bill called the
Prohibit Foreign Ownership of North Carolina Land. And so with
this Senate bill specifically, these bills are very similar. There
are some differences, but with the Senate bill specifically, it
targeted specific countries that would be barred from owning US land.
(27:41):
But when they were discussing this, I think in the
House Rules Committee, they specifically said that they could go
back and add countries to that list if they needed
to do so at a later time. So, yeah, this
is definitely something that is of concern not only here
at the state level, but at the federal level as well,
and you know should be.
Speaker 1 (28:00):
Katie, We went over a lot of different numbers and
different groups. Since details, folks might want to go and
maybe look at this on a screen.
Speaker 2 (28:06):
Where can they go and do that this morning?
Speaker 4 (28:09):
Sure they can read the full article with all the
quotes and all the charts and everything at Carolina Journal
dot com.
Speaker 1 (28:14):
It's a great update this morning. We appreciate it. Katie
Zender joins us on the Carolina Journal News Hour. Good
morning again, it's five point fifty two. Welcome back to
the Carolina Journal News Hour News Talk eleven, ten ninety
nine three WBT. Don't forget if you miss any portion
of our show. You can check out the Carolina Journal
(28:36):
News Hour on demand in our podcast form. It's available
on Google Play, Apple Podcasts, and Spotify. Just search for
the Carolina Journal News Hour, Tap the subscribe or follow
button and you'll get a new program delivered each and
every weekday morning. It's the Carolina Journal News Hour podcast.
To download it and subscribe now. Democrat Governor Josh Stein
(28:58):
is urging North Carolina's second highest court to reject a
proposal from Treasurer Brad Briner to speed up an appeal
in a separation of powers dispute that continues to evolve.
The case revolves around a shift of the State Utilities
Commission appointment from the governor to the Treasurer.
Speaker 2 (29:17):
Earlier this week.
Speaker 1 (29:18):
Briner and his team filed a motion on Tuesday with
the North Carolina Court of Appeals as he is seeking
an expedited schedule for resolving the case, called Stein v. Hall.
Stein's lawyers responded yesterday by saying, quote, despite prevailing on
the only issue relevant to his office. The Treasurer seeks
(29:39):
expedited benefiting on all three issues. The Treasurer cannot establish
a good cause to suspend or vary the appellate rules,
this court should delay his request. Stein filed a lawsuit
against the Republican state legislative leaders to challenge three provisions
in a recent state law. One that limits the governor's
(30:01):
choice when filling judicial vacancies, a second change in voting
requirements for State Building Code Council, And finally, the third
shifts one of Stein's three utility appointments to a Brad Briner,
the Treasurer, who is a Republican.
Speaker 2 (30:18):
A three judge a trial court.
Speaker 1 (30:19):
Panel ruled in Stein's favor in June on the judicial
vacancy's issues. However, the same panel ruled in favor of
the legislatures on the other two. The trial court's decision
allowed Briner to appoint Donald van Dervart to the Utilities
Commission back on July the first, when the previous board
members term ran out. Stein's lawyers wrote, quote, the Treasurer
(30:44):
is suffering no harm and has made no showing that
the Commission's work has been impacted in any way. The
Appellate Court heard oral arguments in the case back on
February the seventeen. That was a case that was called
at the time Cooper v. V.
Speaker 2 (31:00):
Berger.
Speaker 1 (31:01):
As this dealt with law that was passed in the
latter parts of twenty twenty four. That has now changed
its name to Stein v.
Speaker 2 (31:09):
Hall looking at.
Speaker 1 (31:10):
The new governor and the new leader of the looking
at that in the General Assembly, so that case has
now changed its name. Briner's motion Tuesday indicated that state
legislative leaders did allow his proposal for an expedited view,
with the Treasurers of Lawyers writing quote, the constitutional issue
(31:31):
presented in this case are important and should be determined
so that the public and regulated entities can have certainty
on the state law. Again, this is an ongoing battle
between Democrat governors and the Republican led General Assembly. We
saw in the past couple of years under previous Governor
(31:52):
Roy Cooper. Anytime the legislature attempted to change some of
these various appointment abilities and authorities away away from the
governor and into other duly elected Council of State members,
lawsuits were brought. That's exactly what we saw, for example
with the North Carolina State Board of Elections that we
were talking about a little bit earlier this morning. Similar
(32:14):
legislation change the power structure on that board by giving
State Auditor Dave Bollick the ability to appoint those three
members instead of the governor. And when you look at
that switch going from Stein to Auditor Dave Bollick, you
have a Democrat of course in the governor's mansion and
a Republican in the Auditor's office, so you can see
(32:35):
that power shift playing out. That did go through the
court system, and it was determined that the General Assembly
did in fact have the right to reallocate and reauthorize
the entity that is responsible for those appointment powers. We
are seeing something similar with the Utilities Commission in this
case against the state Treasurer in Brad Briner. The expedited
(32:58):
schedule has been requested by him. However, Stein's lawyers are
not in favor of that, so we will continue to
keep an eye on this legal process as it continues
to unfold across the state. You can read more information
and more details on this story and some of the
background and history over on our website, Carolina Journal dot com.
The headline Stein opposes expedited court review in utilities appointment dispute. Well,
(33:25):
that's going to do it for a Friday edition of
the Carolina Journal.
Speaker 2 (33:28):
News Hour.
Speaker 1 (33:29):
WBT News is next, followed by Good Morning BT. We're
back with you Monday morning, five to six right here
on News Talk eleven, ten and ninety nine to three
WBT
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!