Legislative
Actions
Measure proposes raising fees for car safety inspections
The cost of a car safety inspection would rise from $8.50 to
$14.45 in October while an auto emissions test, which is
required in nine urban counties, would shoot up from $19.40 to
$33.55 under terms of a bill introduced in the House this
week. The measure, H. 969 Air Quality/Motor Vehicle
Inspection Fees, was introduced by Speaker Pro Tem Joe
Hackney, a Democrat from Chapel Hill. It implements terms of
the Ambient Air Quality Improvement Act of 1999, a major
clean-air bill passed in the last session of the General
Assembly. Exhaust from cars and trucks account for about half
of all air pollution and as much as 90 percent of ozone in
urban areas.
Under current law, cars licensed in the state's most urban
counties -- Cabarrus, Durham, Forsyth, Gaston, Guilford,
Mecklenburg, Orange, Union and Wake -- are required to pass a
safety test as well as an
annual emissions test. Cars registered in the 91 other
counties are only required to pass the safety test. But with air
quality issues increasing in importance, the General Assembly
in 1999 adopted legislation that would gradually spread the
emissions-testing requirement to 48 counties that are home to
80 percent of all the cars and trucks registered in the
state.
The first expansion of the emissions testing program will come
in July 2003 when the requirement extends to Catawba,
Cumberland, Davidson, Iredell, Johnston and Rowan counties. In
January 2004 it will spread to include Alamance, Chatham,
Franklin, Lee, Lincoln, Moore, Randolph and Stanly counties.
In July 2004 Buncombe, Cleveland, Granville, Harnett and
Rockingham counties will join the program. Burke, Caldwell,
Haywood, Henderson, Rutherford, Stokes, Surry and Wilkes
counties come under emissions testing in July 2005. In January
2006 it will include Brunswick, Carteret, Craven, New Hanover
and Onslow counties.
In the 1999 legislation, the legislature also scrapped the
current method of testing a car's emissions. Now, a service
station attendance sticks a "sniffer" up a car's
tailpipe while it's running to measure emissions, but that
system doesn't measure nitrogen oxide, the major component of
ozone. In its place, the state adopted a computer-based system
in which inspection stations will use computers that will
connect directly to the car's onboard diagnostic (OBD) system.
While an OBD test won't directly measure exhaust levels, it
will determine if any of the vehicle's air pollution control
equipment are not operating properly. The OBD tests would
begin in January in the nine counties currently under the
emissions testing requirement.
While all these new air quality systems have been in place for
nearly two years now, the legislature for two years has put
off setting the price that drivers will pay for the tests. The
N.C. Independent Garage Owners Association has said its
studies show that service stations will need a minimum of $33
to break even on an OBD emissions test. The state Department
of Environment and Natural Resources, which administers the
vehicle emissions testing program, has informally proposed a
fee of around $25.
Rep. Hackney's bill also proposes penalties of up to $1,000
for drivers who violate the emissions and safety testing
requirements.
Kirk testifies
telecommunications Bill
NCCBI
President Phil Kirk testified Tuesday before the House Finance
Committee regarding H. 571 Simplify Tax on
Telecommunications, a measure which would decrease from
6.5 percent to 4.5 percent sales tax on intrastate long
distance and would implement a new 4.5 percent tax on
interstate long distance calls for the first time in North
Carolina.
On Wednesday the Finance Committee gave the bill a favorable
report
The bill sponsors have indicated that the bill is “revenue
neutral” which means that while some individuals and
businesses will experience an increase in their telephone
costs, others will have decreases. If most of your long
distance calls are within the state, your bill should go down.
If you make a majority of calls out of state, your bill will
go up.
NCCBI currently does not have a position on the issue but Kirk
explained to the House committee that several North Carolina
businesses have expressed concerns that the new tax would
significantly add to their telecommunications costs (companies
who have reported have estimated $50,000 and above). Kirk also
noted that although he understands that some businesses will
experience a decrease in costs, those companies have not
called to let NCBI know that information.
Kirk pointed out that the states surrounding Virginia, South
Carolina and Georgia do not have this tax.
This issue will be on the
agenda for discussion at NCCBI’s Tax and Fiscal Policy
Committee on Monday, April 9. NCCBI members are urged to
let us know if they will experience cost savings or cost
increases because of this potential law change. Please call
Leslie Bevacqua (919-836-1406), Julie Campbell (919-836-1402)
or Phil Kirk (919-836-1407) to provide your input.
Bevacqua
Testifies in Support of Limited Umstead Act Exemption
NCCBI
Vice President of Governmental Affairs Leslie Bevacqua
testified Wednesday in support of S. 531 Exempt Certain
Community College Activities from the Umstead Act.
The bill, which received a
favorable report from the Senate Education/Higher Education
Committee, will allow community college facilities to be used
by businesses for information technology outsourcing and
telecommuting sites; for small business incubators; and
product testing services.
NCCBI’s Economic Development Committee adopted a position
this fall to support a waiver of the Umstead Act to provide
these types of limited but important services that enhance
local economic development opportunities.
Joint
committee examines study of DOT cash management
Legislators
heard findings and recommendations on Wednesday from a study
of the N.C. Department of Transportation cash balances and an
assessment of opportunities and constraints for reducing them.
No decisions were made on the recommendations.
The independent study,
conducted by the Dye Management Group Inc., explains
that there is a major concern that the balances in the
state’s Highway Trust Fund ($850 million) and the Highway
Fund ($270 million) have grown while there is a large backlog
of highway needs.
The report
said that the cash balance of the Highway Trust Fund have
risen to over $850 million since 1989 from the following
sources:
-
$215 million came from the
issuance of a highway bond in that amount in 1996.
-
$300 million is a necessary
program delay to build cash reserves (working capital) to
fund construction.
-
$100 million arose because
revenues were underestimated.
-
$200 million is attributable
to undesired program delivery delays.
-
$40 million is due to the
municipal aid reserve.
The Dye
Management Group ultimately recommends that the state use
current cash balances and available bonding authority to shift
to a cash-flow basis and thereby create a one-time
acceleration of highway construction program funding.
Currently, the state uses cash financing and sets aside all
money for a project at the on-set of a project. Cash
flow financing would set aside the funding allocation as it is
needed over the construction-time of the project.
Return to Page One
|
