State
Government News
Commerce
study analyzes tax credits on rural economic development
The
state Department of Commerce on Wednesday released a study
that found that of $62.4 million in tax credits claimed in
1998 and 1999 under the Bill Lee Act, $39.8 million or 64
percent went to the 21 wealthiest counties in the state. The
study is expected to be sharply debated during a Tuesday joint
meeting of the House and Senate Finance committees.
The Bill Lee Act, adopted in 1996 and named after the late
chairman of Duke Power, is the state’s centerpiece economic
development law that attempts to attract industrial investment
and new jobs to the state’s poorest counties. The law
divides the state’s 100 counties into 5 tiers according to
their wealth and resources, and gives the biggest tax credits
to companies investing in the poorest (Tier 1) counties. The
smallest tax credits are available in the wealthiest (Tier 5)
counties. Under the law, companies can receive tax credits for
creating new jobs, investing in new equipment, for worker
training programs, for R&D expenses and central office
investments.
State Rep. Paul Luebke, a constant critic of the economic
development policy, said the study proves the Bill Lee Act
rewards companies for investing in the Triangle, the Triad and
Charlotte -- affluent areas they would have chosen anyway.
Commerce Secretary Jim Fain countered that it's not surprising
that most of the benefits go to wealthy counties. "That
the majority of the credits are taken in counties where
economic activity and industrial concentration are greatest is
neither a new nor a surprising fact — half the state's
manufacturing firms are in Tier 5 (affluent) counties,"
Fain said in a letter to legislators.
Fain added that the state shouldn't deny tax credits for urban
counties because Charlotte, the Triangle and the Triad compete
with urban areas across the country. And he noted that the
study also concludes that larger tax breaks for investments in
poor counties appear to be steering more investment to those
counties than expected. While the Bill Lee Act tax credits are
responsible for the creation of 8,101 jobs in the state's
wealthiest counties from 1997-99, they were claimed for
creation of 1,001 jobs in the poorest counties — more than
would be expected in those counties when adjusted for
population. "It looks like the act is being
effective in pushing a larger share of job creation and
investment to Tier 1 than would be expected. So that's a good
start," Fain said.
Fain said that another study by Ernst & Young will compare
North Carolina's industrial recruitment efforts to those in
Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama, Virginia, Tennessee and
Kentucky. He said he believes that study will show that North
Carolina’s industrial development incentives are not as
lucrative as those in other states.
Governor
adds 5,000 children to low-cost health insurance program
Gov.
Mike Easley on Monday announced that 5,000 children will be
able to enroll in NC Health Choice, the state’s
low-cost/no-cost health insurance program that has been frozen
since January.
“There
is no need to make these children wait when we can take action
today that gets them enrolled quickly,” said Easley. “This
is an extremely important program to North Carolina’s
working families. It ensures that many of our children who
would not otherwise have insurance get the medical care they
deserve.”
”As many of you know, the House and Senate are not in total
agreement on what next year’s budget should look like. This
is one area where there is no disagreement—children need
health coverage,” Easley said, referring to proposals in
both the Senate and the House budgets to expand the program to
78,000 children.
When the
program was frozen, 72,000 children were receiving benefits.
As children left the program, they were not replaced, dropping
the number of children receiving coverage to 57,000. The
baseline budget allows the state to enroll 62,000 children; so
5,000 children can be added immediately.
Health Choice
was created in response to 1997 federal legislation called the
Children’s Health Insurance Program. Health Choice began
enrolling children in October 1998. NC Health Choice for
Children is designed for working parents like contract
employees; day care and nursing home workers and providers;
state employees and entrepreneurs who work hard but cannot
afford private insurance.
The amount of money families can earn and still qualify to
participate in NC Health Choice for Children depends upon the
number of people in each family. For example, a family of two
can earn up to $23,220 annually while a family of four can
earn up to $35,300 annually. Families with incomes near the
maximum for their family size pay an annual enrollment fee of
$50 for one child and $100 for two or more children. They also
make small co-payments for services ranging from $5 for a
doctor’s visit and $6 for prescription drugs, to $20 for a
non-emergency visit to the emergency room.
State
audits going online
State
Auditor Ralph Campbell, making good on a promise to save paper
and make documents more accessible to the public, said he will
soon post audit reports on the department’s web site, http://www.osa.state.nc.us.
Campbell said the electronic distribution, which will be
phased in over time, will save money. The auditor’s office
produces thousands of reports every year that are mailed out
or delivered by hand to lawmakers, state agency officials,
reporters and the public. The paperless system will initially
be limited to legislators and news organizations until a fully
automated system is put into place.
Appeals Court
sides with state in DNA case
The
state Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday that
Charlotte-Mecklenburg police did not violate a man’s
constitutional right against unreasonable searches when
officers took a blood sample that later was used against him
in another, unrelated case. It was the first time the court
had taken up the contentious issue of whether police can use a
blood sample obtained from a person not charged in a crime as
evidence in another investigation. The case is State of North
Carolina v. Donald Andre Barkley (No. COA00-731). Barkley
consented in June 1996 to give a blood sample after he was
picked up as a suspect in a murder case and complained of a
hand injury. He was taken to Carolinas Medical Center for
treatment and agreed to have the sample taken. DNA evidence
obtained from the blood linked Barkley to an April 1996 rape
of a Charlotte woman. At a court hearing before his 1999
trial, Barkley claimed he understood the blood drawn was to be
used only in the prior murder investigation. The trial judge
denied a motion to suppress to the DNA evidence. Barkley was
found guilty of first-degree kidnapping and first-degree rape
and appealed. The three-judge Appeals Court panel, in a
unanimous opinion written by Judge John C. Martin, ruled that
the use of Barkley's DNA in an investigation did not violate
his rights, even when the sample was taken for another case in
which Barkley wasn't charged
Return to Page One
|