Articles in regional publications that pertain to a wide range of North Carolina-related topics.
Search Results
40 results
for "Lawrence, David M"
Record #:
18213
Author(s):
Abstract:
The Councils of Government was an organization promoting local government through a federally backed program. These councils consisted of locally elected officials organized into two categories; those groups meeting regularly for discussions and the others in charge of enacting changes proposed during the meetings of the first group. In the spring of 1969, these groups were surveyed and feedback from the Institute of Government's inquiries is presented in this article.
Source:
Subject(s):
Record #:
18333
Author(s):
Abstract:
Almost all North Carolina local governments have outstanding indebtedness. Yet except for the very largest counties and cities, local governments issues new debt--bonds and notes--only infrequently. This article introduces the reader to the subject of local government debt, and the character and history of debt in North Carolina
Source:
Subject(s):
Record #:
18539
Author(s):
Abstract:
Tax-increment financing is a program allowing cities to borrow fund for development projects and repay those loans through increased taxes. In Spring 1982, the General Assembly approved tax-increment financing programs and put to a public vote in the fall of 1982. The article reviews pros and cons of tax-increment financing and a voters' guide on the subject.
Source:
Subject(s):
Record #:
18578
Author(s):
Abstract:
One statutory option a city or county has in enforcing its ordinances is to impose a civil penalty on a violator, and if necessary, sue for the penalty in a civil action in the nature of the debt. This article considers the question of whether the ordinance being enforced must set out an exact dollar amount for each penalty, to be sued for regardless of circumstances, or whether it may set out a dollar range for penalties and leave to an administrative official or board the decision as to the amount of the penalty in any individual instance.
Source:
Subject(s):
Full Text:
Record #:
18579
Author(s):
Abstract:
Both cities and counties enjoy statutory authority to enforce their ordinances through civil penalties, which if necessary can be collected in a civil action in the nature of the debt. The North Carolina General Statues sets the upper limit of the fines or penalties for local ordinances enforced as misdemeanors or infractions, but there is no statutory maximum for civil penalties in general.
Source:
Subject(s):
Full Text:
Record #:
19784
Author(s):
Abstract:
Several methods are available to cities and counties when enforcing their ordinances. Criminal enforcement is one, with the punishment usually being the payment of a fine. Another method is civil enforcement through an action in the nature of a debt, with the punishment being the payment of a penalty. This bulletin explores the differences that can result because a city or county decides to enforce a particular ordinance through one or the other method of enforcement.
Source:
Full Text:
Record #:
19882
Author(s):
Abstract:
This bulletin summarizes legislation affecting community and economic development enacted by the 2003 session of the North Carolina General Assembly.
Source:
Record #:
19883
Author(s):
Abstract:
This bulletin summarizes legislation affecting community and economic development enacted by the 2004 session of the North Carolina General Assembly.
Source:
Record #:
20518
Author(s):
Abstract:
This bulletin discusses on-street and off-street legal issues that have arisen since the early 1950s, including enforcement of parking regulations by both criminal remedies and civil penalties; adoption, by ordinance, of evidentiary rules to be used in enforcement actions; towing--when it is permitted and under what procedures; and the use of towing and criminal remedies in publicly owned off-street lots. It also questions whether earlier cases should be accorded the full weight of precedent.
Source:
Subject(s):
Full Text:
Record #:
20522
Author(s):
Abstract:
G.S. 160A-195uthorizes cities to regulate the speed of trains within city limits. This bulletin discusses two recent federal district court cases that strongly suggest that this authority may now have been preempted by regulations of the Federal Railroad Administration. It also suggests ways that cities that wish to keep their regulations may appeal the court decisions.
Source:
Subject(s):
Record #:
20538
Author(s):
Abstract:
This bulletin discusses the definition of real estate transaction under the current regulations in the context of certain uniquely governmental transactions and outlines the reporting requirements to be fulfilled by the reporting person.
Source:
Subject(s):
Full Text:
Record #:
20544
Author(s):
Abstract:
This bulletin addresses two questions: 1) can a citizen refuse to provide his or her Social Security account number to the government, and if so, when? and 2) once a government has acquired a person's social security number, is that number a public record, accessible to anyone who cares to ask?
Source:
Subject(s):
Full Text:
Record #:
20554
Author(s):
Abstract:
The 1994 NC General Assembly enacted Chapter 570 (HB 120), which makes significant changes to the state's open meetings law. The major changes are made in two areas of the statute--first, in the definition of public body, the type of group subject to the statute, and second, in the authorizations to hold closed sessions.
Source:
Subject(s):
Record #:
20570
Author(s):
Abstract:
A number of North Carolina cities and towns are seeking to attract new business by offering incentive grants linked to property taxes. This means that a business that invests money in a new plant and equipment would receive property tax relief for a specified number of years. In essence the local government is refunding part of the taxes paid on property and creating a partial exception of the property from taxation. This bulletin examines whether such action is legal under the NC Constitution.
Source:
Subject(s):
Record #:
20577
Author(s):
Abstract:
In Multi-Media Publishing of North Carolina, Inc. v. Henderson County, decided on February 15, 2000, the NC Court of Appeals explored the contours of the open meetings law provision that allows a public body to hold a closed session to \"consult with an attorney employed or retained by the public body in order to preserve the attorney-client privilege between the attorney and the public body.\"
Source:
Subject(s):
Full Text: