newsobserver.com projects - Land for Tomorrow - Comments

Re: 2007: Banner year for state lobbying

ryanteaguebeckwith — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 17:19:46 -0400

It's based on the official reports filed by lobbyists with the Secretary of State. As I've noted in the past, those reports don't include payments made for non-lobbying — the so-called "consulting loophole."

That said, the Democracy N.C. report is a fair reflection of what the lobbyists themselves reported.

— RTB

Re: 2007: Banner year for state lobbying

PoliticalJunkie — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 17:14:25 -0400

I haven't seen anything regarding the methodology of this study and an analysis of the validity of the methodology. Can anyone help?

Re: Transfer tax lobbying grows

stann — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 23:11:48 -0400

Swanquarter,

You are absolutely correct as to realtors and developers working on the bond campaign.I worked along with them. Some actually contributed a substantial sum of money for the campaign..far more than I did. For most of them, I believe their motivation was as much personal as it was business related. Others I know work on school advisory boards, again as I did.Still others I know personally that are big supporters of our public schools.

If you read my post you would have seen I mentioned such citizens. And yes AFP was on the opposite site of the bond debate. In my post I was I was pointing out the contrast between those realtors and developers and the position of those who are directing the lobby. How clear can I make it.

If there is a single thing I said that you think is inaccurate,tell me what it is and I'll bet I can prove it. And I wish I was a professional blogger because then I could get paid for it..no such luck.

BTW, why don't you come out of hiding and sign your name?

Stan Norwalk

Thanks.

Anglico — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 18:27:23 -0400

You guys and gals are doing great . . . and I'm sure you'll be happy to get out of the blogging hot-seat and back to your regularly scheduled programming.

Re: Hey Dome!

bkrueger — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 17:46:57 -0400

I believe our regular host (Ryan) has weighed in on this before and will, no doubt, when he returns to action next week.

But I would prefer that people (paid or not) not post press releases on the blog.

Thanks to all for being patient with us part-time bloggers this week.

Hey Dome!

Anglico — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 17:28:11 -0400

I think you need a new rule about paid political hacks posting their press releases on your blog. That is, of course, unless you want to solidify your status as another ring in the the Art Pope Puppetshow Circus.

Now regarding unpaid hacks, well, that's all good.

Re: Transfer tax lobbying grows

jfg5025 — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 17:00:28 -0400

Swanquarter,

Not exactly sure what your point is on the school bonds. Realtors and developers support school bonds because it helps business. Bonds help counties build more schools to accommodate more growth.

Bonds raise property taxes, which doesn't effect their business because property taxes are paid after a property is developed and sold.

Transfer taxes, on the other hand, impact the realtors and developers business because it is a tax on real estate transactions-- the core revenue generator for realtors and developers. Any increase in the cost of real estate transactions, might lead to fewer overall transactions, directly impacting realtors and developers' bottom lines.

Realtors and developers are simply acting in their self-interest when supporting school bonds, or opposing transfer taxes. It has little to do with supporting education.

Re: Transfer tax lobbying grows

DallasWoodho — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 16:49:01 -0400

The Partnership for North Carolina’s Future, Forcing Taxpayers to Fund Lobbying For New Taxes

Hypocrisy on the Right to Vote

(Raleigh) Taxpayer money from across North Carolina is being abused by the North Carolina League of Municipalities and other groups funded by tax dollars according to the free market limited government group Americans for Prosperity-North Carolina. These groups are using taxpayer funds to lobby and advertise for massive tax increases.

“It is dishonest for these taxpayer funded groups to use hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars to lobby for higher taxes, including a land transfer tax,” said State Director Francis De Luca. “Public resources should not be used to push a higher tax political agenda. No taxpayer in North Carolina, when they are required to pay their local and county taxes, has agreed to have their tax money used to pursue a political agenda of higher and more taxes.”

And in what can only be considered a new low in hypocrisy, the misnamed Partnership for North Carolina’s Future is running taxpayer funded ads criticizing private groups like the North Carolina Association of Realtors and the NC homebuilders for fighting against a “vote”, when it is the League and its allies that fight letting the citizens of North Carolina vote on important issues.

“The NC League of Municipalities which runs the Partnership is fighting to keep North Carolina citizens from having a vote on forced annexation,” said De Luca. “The NC League of Municipalities is fighting to keep people from having a vote on a constitutional amendment to stop eminent domain abuse. .

http://www.americansforprosperity.org/index.php?id=3571&state=nc

Re: Transfer tax lobbying grows

swanquarter — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 16:27:00 -0400

Not surprisingly Stan, you don't let the facts get in the way of a good smear campaign. You never have before, so I don't why I expected anything less this time.

I certainly can't speak for them, nor do I want to, but I do recall where the Realtors actually SUPPORTED school bond campaigns in both Wake and Mecklenburg Counties within the past two years....I guess you just don't remember that or choose not to because it doesn't fit your MO. Likewise, while you are very quick to cast aspersions, you fail to point out that AFP and the Realtors were actually on opposite sides of that school bond debate. Just further evidence that you don't care about the truth, only spreading misinformation to further your goals.

Furthermore, just because one group has similar beliefs on one issue, doesn't necessarily mean they are joined at the hip. Quite the contrary. In fact - I am sure your "partner" KB Homes would be quick to through you under the "school bus" if you were advocating $15,000/unit impact fees.

There are plenty of other accusations in your post that could be thoroughly discredited, but unlike you, I am not a professional blogger/activist and therefore need to get back to work...

Re: Transfer tax lobbying grows

stann — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 15:37:46 -0400

It would be surprising if the realtors-developers lobby didn't put up a big fight over maintaining their twenty year control of the NC legislature on matters pertaining to growth and development. But how the "game" is played tells us a lot about them.

First they hire a media/public relations consultant who helped defeat the 1999 school bond in Wake. This major defeat was a critical factor to the current crisis in Wake's schools. Next they bring in as a coalition partner Americans for Prosperity (AFP). AFP is a nationwide libertarian organization. A leading libertarian defines their mission as shrinking government down to the size where it can be flushed down a bathtub. A local leader defines his strategy as undermining confidence in government institutions, e.g. public schools. Libertarian philosophy seeks the replacement of public schools with vouchers, religious schools and private schools.

Finally, they lobby against any relief for financially hard pressed school systems here in Wake and in other fast growing counties. In fact, they lobby against support for both classroom education and school construction. According to numerous reports, their lobby resorts to threats of retribution.

Is that all coincidence. Hmmm...Someone is paying the media consultant and those lobbyists and approving what they are doing. Who are they? What's their attitude on government and schools?

Now I personally know of several individual realtors and developers who do not buy into the implicit philosophy of their lobbyists. KB homes, for example, has disassociated themselves with the realtor-developer lobby. If I were a realtor or developer I wouldn't want to be associated with the folks staff has hired or the coalition partners staff has brought in. After all realtors and developers need government (read: citizens/taxpayers)to put in the infrastructure needed for the $44 billion per year NC development industry to make a profit. Hundreds of bills come before the General Assembly every year that impact development. Aren't realtors and developers shooting themselves in the foot? Legislators are human. I imagine they don't react well to threat. There are remedies for mis-manged growth that are far more onerous than a small transfer tax that mostly will be passed on to buyers. For example, neighboring Chatham county has a moratorium on large new subdivisions.

Its up to individual realtors and developers to speak-up and to leave or reform their own out-of-control organization. They need to be part of a solution that moves everyone forward - not just anti-everything. Until they do children, parents and other citizens are caught in the crossfire between the development industries lobby and the state legislature.
And citizen's vote outweighs development money.

Stan Norwalk
Vice Chairman, WakeUP Wake County
Unpaid advocate for improving education and Fair Growth Funding
Stann@nc.rr.com

Re: Transfer tax lobbying grows

bnartist — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 09:19:17 -0400

I guess if Cinderella counties and cities can't go to the ball that leaves corporate lobbyists and PACs running the show.

Re: Transfer tax lobbying grows

DallasWoodho — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 09:00:41 -0400

Yes, taxpayer funded lobbying should be against the law

Changing the subject is your answer?

patanthony — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 08:25:52 -0400

Can we focus on the issue at hand, which is whether to allow the voters of each county to decide for themselves whether to impose a transfer tax. The legislature is not proposing to impose a tax, but simply to allow voters to decide for themselves in each county.

The county commissioners have to pay for infrastructure one way or another, and right now the only way most counties have is the property tax. A 1% transfer tax is equivalent to a 10% increase in property tax, on average. A recent poll has found that voters prefer the transfer tax by a margin of 10 to 1, but the realtors do not want to allow them that choice. The counties that do have the opportunity to impose a transfer tax have found that it has not hurt growth.

Re: I guess that means

swanquarter — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 23:08:23 -0400

"That's why they oppose the over-reaching limits on planning that come with the property rights agenda."

I guess private property rights aren't important to "your kind of people" Anglico or are they? You have such a problem with what the Navy is doing in Washington County, yet those people surely feel stongly about the " private property rights agenda". I am sure they appreciate your characterization above.

The truth is the League is just as hypocritical as you are. When the issue suits your purpose, i.e. transfer tax, you want NC to be more like your breathern in California - having referendums for any and every issue that elected officials don't have the spine to vote on themselves. Why even elect them in the first place?

It is only when an issue doesn't fit your ideals of socialism, ie. forced annexation, that you, the LoM and your partner in crime Fitzsimon don't want to let the people vote.

So which is it Anglico? Why should "we the people" be "allowed" to vote on an issue in one case, but not "allowed" to vote in another?

Re: Transfer tax lobbying grows

bnartist — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 21:31:26 -0400

Local governments have to come to Raleigh to plead for permission to provide the services that the public expects them to deliver.

You're a paid registered lobbyist but you're trying to tell us that local governments should compete with both hands tied behind their backs?