Monday, July 21, 2014

Ohio Judge Rules That Free Newspapers Can Compete to Publish Legal Notices



HAT TIP : Legal Notice Online

Ohio Judge Rules That Free Newspapers Can Compete to Publish Legal Notices
A Common Pleas judge in Ohio has ruled that a free newspaper can publish legal notices in Darke County, Ohio. The Ohio statute, unlike most other states does not require explicitly that paid circulation publications are the only vehicle for public notices.  The statute was changed in 2011. The next step will be to allow online publications which have more readers and would lower costs for municipalities nationwide, the right to compete as well. Newspaper trade associations have lobbied successfully to keep notices in print. This case has already been appealed once and was remanded back to the trial court for procedural reasons according to an article in AP article in Columbus CEO Magazine . According to the article, this time when the case is appealed the court of appeals will need to address the actual statute.   As paid circulation publications continue to lose subscribers, perhaps free publications will provide greater access to the public for legal notices and save us all money.

Tuesday, June 24, 2014

North Carolina Home Builders Assoc. Paid Lobbyist BS e mail on Repeal of Protest Petitions

North Carolina Home Builders paid lobbyist screwing established neighborhoods all over the state of North Carolina with this bull shit e mail to all state members to repeal protest petitions .

From: "Martin, Lisa" <LMartin@nchba.orgLMartin@nchba.org

>>
Date: June 23, 2014 at 4:29:03 PM EDT
To: "'Rep. Adams'" <alma.adams@ncleg.netalma.adams@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Brawley'" <robert.brawley@ncleg.netrobert.brawley@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Bumgardner'" <dana.bumgardner@ncleg.netdana.bumgardner@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Catlin'" <rick.catlin@ncleg.netrick.catlin@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Cunningham'" <carla.cunningham@ncleg.netcarla.cunningham@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Dixon'" <jimmy.dixon@ncleg.netjimmy.dixon@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Hager'" <mike.hager@ncleg.netmike.hager@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Hanes'" <edward.hanes@ncleg.netedward.hanes@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Hardister'" <jon.hardister@ncleg.netjon.hardister@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Harrison'" <pricey.harrison@ncleg.netpricey.harrison@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. IIer'" <frank.iier@ncleg.netfrank.iier@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. insko'" <verla.insko@ncleg.netverla.insko@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. McElraft'" <pat.mcelraft@ncleg.netpat.mcelraft@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Millis'" <chris.millis@ncleg.netchris.millis@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Richardson'" <bobbie.richardson@ncleg.netbobbie.richardson@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Stam'" <paul.stam@ncleg.netpaul.stam@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Steinburg'" <bob.steinburg@ncleg.netbob.steinburg@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Stevens'" <sarah.stevens@ncleg.netsarah.stevens@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Wells'" <andy.wells@ncleg.netandy.wells@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Whitmire'" <chris.whitmire@ncleg.netchris.whitmire@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Avila'" <marilyn.avila@ncleg.netmarilyn.avila@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Baskerville'" <nathan.baskerville@ncleg.netnathan.baskerville@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Blackwell'" <hugh.blackwell@ncleg.nethugh.blackwell@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Brown'" <rayne.brown@ncleg.netrayne.brown@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Conrad'" <debra.conrad@ncleg.netdebra.conrad@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Faircloth'" <john.faircloth@ncleg.netjohn.faircloth@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Farmer-Butterfield'" <jean.farmer-butterfield@ncleg.netjean.farmer-butterfield@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Jones'" <bert.jones@ncleg.netbert.jones@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Lambeth'" <donny.lambeth@ncleg.netdonny.lambeth@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Malone'" <chris.malone@ncleg.netchris.malone@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Martin'" <susan.martin@ncleg.netsusan.martin@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Murry'" <tom.murry@ncleg.nettom.murry@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Pierce'" <garland.pierce@ncleg.netgarland.pierce@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Queen'" <joe.queen@ncleg.netjoe.queen@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Schaffer'" <jacqueline.schaffer@ncleg.netjacqueline.schaffer@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Setzer'" <mitchell.setzer@ncleg.netmitchell.setzer@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Shepard'" <phil.shepard@ncleg.netphil.shepard@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Tine'" <paul.tine@ncleg.netpaul.tine@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Waddell'" <ken.waddell@ncleg.netken.waddell@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Wray'" <michael.wray@ncleg.netmichael.wray@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Bell'" <larry.bell@ncleg.netlarry.bell@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Brandon'" <marcus.brandon@ncleg.netmarcus.brandon@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Brawley'" <william.brawley@ncleg.netwilliam.brawley@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Brisson'" <william.brisson@ncleg.netwilliam.brisson@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Brody'" <mark.brody@ncleg.netmark.brody@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Brown'" <rayne.brown@ncleg.netrayne.brown@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Bryan'" <rob.bryan@ncleg.netrob.bryan@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Dobson'" <josh.dobson@ncleg.netjosh.dobson@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Dollar'" <nelson.dollar@ncleg.netnelson.dollar@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Elmore'" <jeffrey.elmore@ncleg.netjeffrey.elmore@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Fulghum'" <jim.fulghum@ncleg.netjim.fulghum@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Holley'" <Yvonne.holley@ncleg.netYvonne.holley@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Horn'" <craig.horn@ncleg.netcraig.horn@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Jordan'" <jonathan.jordan@ncleg.netjonathan.jordan@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Lewis'" <david.lewis@ncleg.netdavid.lewis@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Lucas'" <marvin.lucas@ncleg.netmarvin.lucas@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Ramsey'" <nathan.ramsey@ncleg.netnathan.ramsey@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Speciale'" <micheal.speciale@ncleg.netmicheal.speciale@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Terry'" <evelyn.terry@ncleg.netevelyn.terry@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Presnell'" <Michele.Presnell@ncleg.netMichele.Presnell@ncleg.net>>, "'Rep. Wells'" <Andy.Wells@ncleg.netAndy.Wells@ncleg.net>>, "Rep. Tim Moffitt" <Tim.Moffitt@ncleg.netTim.Moffitt@ncleg.net>>, 'Hugh Blackwell ' <Hugh.Blackwell@ncleg.netHugh.Blackwell@ncleg.net>>, "'Larry Hall (larry.hall@ncleg.netlarry.hall@ncleg.net>)'" <larry.hall@ncleg.netlarry.hall@ncleg.net>>, "'Mitchell Setzer (mitchell.setzer@ncleg.netmitchell.setzer@ncleg.net>)'" <mitchell.setzer@ncleg.netmitchell.setzer@ncleg.net>>, "'Hugh Blackwell '" <Hugh.Blackwell@ncleg.netHugh.Blackwell@ncleg.net>>, "'Graig.Meyer@ncleg.netGraig.Meyer@ncleg.net>'" <Graig.Meyer@ncleg.netGraig.Meyer@ncleg.net>>, "'robert.reives@ncleg.netrobert.reives@ncleg.net>'" <robert.reives@ncleg.netrobert.reives@ncleg.net>>
Subject: Please Retain Sect. 2.7 of S 493 (Protest Petition Repeal)


Dear Representatives Moffitt and Murry, Vice Chairs and Members:



493 2014 Regulatory Reform Act<http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/BillLookUp/BillLookUp.pl?Session=2013&BillID=s+493&submitButton=Go> will be before the House Regulatory Reform Committee tomorrow (6/24) for consideration.  The NC Home Builders Association strongly supports this bill.  In order to add clarity to the misinformation that has been spread regarding Section 2.7 Repeal Protest Petitions, we offer the following information.



Protest petitions are authorized for all cities in NC (there is no protest petition authority for counties).  Filing of a protest petition may be done when a person owns only a small portion of the area surrounding a municipal rezoning tract. Sufficient signatures on the petition elevate the city council vote requirement from a simple majority to a super-majority (75%) before the rezoning ordinance adoption is allowed.



Protest petitions have been in the NC statues since the 1920s and were conceived in an era that was pre-information age to address the issue of informing the public of pending land use changes.  Planning laws and practices have changed since then.  Strict laws require notice of rezonings to neighbors and the public, including signs on the property, mailings to neighbors within a certain distance, electronic notification and publication in common news outlets.  Most developers meet with neighbors (often because they are either required or strongly encouraged to by the city or town).  Concerns are addressed, compromises made and some applications are withdrawn. Most cities have made Conditional Use zonings (by far the majority of cases in NC) a legislative process to allow neighboring property owners to have more involvement in the rezoning process.



Protest petitions are a NIMBY’s dream (NIMBY= Not in My Backyard).  Modern growth management principles promote infill, redevelopment, higher densities and mixed uses.  Protest petitions present an unnecessary and sometimes impossible hurdle for project approval, even though Conditional Use zoning and modernized land development ordinance requirements incorporate techniques to minimize and mitigate impacts to surrounding properties.  There is no power granted to citizens greater than the power bestowed by the protest petition. With a protest petition, one person can take away an entire city’s right to have a zoning decision decided by majority vote.  Protest petitions do not represent the citizen “David” against the developer “Goliath”.  Neighborhood groups and those supporting the use of protest petitions as a planning tool refuse to acknowledge the many instances when protest petitions are used to deny a rezoning that is recommended by a professional planning staff, consistent with the adopted growth plan and even identical to the zoning on adjacent lots.  Developers may win or lose; however, the only "winner" is the neighbor with unilateral power to alter the manner in which duly elected officials can transact the public’s business.

Municipal protest petition authority is an unfair and outdated concept and must be repealed!  Please retain Section 2.7 of S 493.

Sincerely,

[lmartin]

Lisa D. Martin
Director of Government Affairs
North Carolina Home Builders Association
5580 Centerview Drive, Suite 415
Raleigh, NC 27606
919-676-9090 or 800-662-7129

[NCHBA_small (2)]

Friday, June 20, 2014

Argument for Protest Petitions in North Carolina State Law by Ben Kuhn

 
We have come to find out that the Triad Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition also known as the "TREBIC CARTEL"  has successfully snuck in wording of a bill that will repeal the Protest Petition for good with no compromise or tweaking of this state law just a complete repeal. Here is a few reports linked from this week.
Charlotte Observer HERE
Greensboro News and Record HERE
 
The sponsors of this bill admitted an intent to reduce the bargaining power of neighborhood groups in zoning fights from the Durham Herald Sun . So now we know that neighborhoods all over this state don't have a chance against the Crony Capitalist and their lobbyist who are paid to sway minds and votes. If this repeal comes to fruition than you can kiss your neighborhood good bye when the commercial crony capitalist come a knockin.
 
Talked with Ben Kuhn who agreed to allow me to repost his argument FOR Protest Petitions in North Carolina State Law here is the post
 
 

The Argument For Protest Petitions

Article Date: Tuesday, December 10, 2013

Written By: Ben Kuhn

When a rezoning application is filed, nearby residents are often faced with potential development adjacent to their community that is in conflict with their expectations based on what has always been there and what previously could have been developed under the existing zoning. The rub ordinarily arises in situations where a rezoning proposed on an adjacent property will mark a stark contrast from the zoning and/or character of development of the property already existing next door. The impacts of such a rezoning on the neighboring properties can be significant. The results of such developments can and do affect neighboring property values. This can harm property owners and the community in general.

The developer, their lawyer, architect, land planner, traffic engineer, and others pursuing a significant rezoning case usually have regular professional interaction with staff and elected officials in a number of ways. They lobby and speak directly with planning staff and elected officials. They attend and network at Chamber of Commerce meetings, receptions, downtown booster events, holiday functions, professional development seminars, fund-raisers, UDO “charrettes,” etc. There they meet, discuss matters, spend time to gain trust, and achieve some level of familiarity with and among staff and elected officials. These same officials then make decisions on matters such as rezoning cases brought by developers which often affect people living next door more than anyone else. These interactions happen day in and day out all year, every year, and in this manner developers are able to address issues and respond to questions about specific rezoning cases much more deftly and directly than the ordinary citizen. This level of familiarity takes time and money — neither of which ordinary citizens possess in large measure. This is how the gears of local power often grind. I am not here to say that is bad, or there is anything wrong with developers and others seeking out such relationships and building influence in this manner. That’s the way the world turns and how one can legally influence how power is exercised.

However, no ordinary citizen can reasonably counter-balance such input and influence with just one vote for one town council member in a particular municipal district once every four years.  The ballot box is not much refuge for these impacted citizens when the issues before the larger electorate have little, if anything, to do with the major impact arising from one rezoning application voted on three years ago which has already resulted in a “monstrous” development being built next to their “little slice of heaven.” Realistically, few persons affected can vote in any particular election cycle for the elected official that represents their district (and perhaps for one or two at-large members on the ballot). Let’s be honest: That’s not much. Without the balance-shifting power of the statutory protest petition, there is little that one or a few neighbors can do to register their objection or opposition to a particular rezoning in a manner that can influence elected officials and protect their interests.

Our Legislature has therefore concluded that there must be a mechanism that gives residents a tool to balance such substantial influence and power as exercised by local elected officials at the behest and request of developers. At its core, the protest petition is a reasonable moderating influence to ensure that neighboring properties are zoned and developed in a cohesive and complimentary manner for the benefit of everyone in the community. It is designed to provide one power and advantage to the ordinary citizen, which if it did not exist, could result in those most impacted having little in their quiver to combat overwhelming development interests and municipal authority.

The protest petition and its 75 percent super-majority vote requirement reasonably readjust the scales when a developer requests elected officials to exercise their power to approve a zoning change. This is similar to what happens in the context of a variance application requiring a four-fifths vote to be approved.

A variance application basically requests that a city or town overlook technical compliance with an ordinance where strict compliance would present unnecessary hardship, and where the variance requested is consistent with the spirit and intent of the ordinance and is in the public interest. When an elected body is tasked with voting on a rezoning application in the face of a protest petition much the same forces are at play. The developer wants something different than what is then the written law of the land — i.e., the changed zoning status of the property in question. When asked to change a zoning classification in the face of opposition from those most directly affected, decision-makers should reasonably come to near consensus that the proposed rezoning serves the public interest and should be approved despite the serious impacts upon immediate neighbors arising from the decision.

Some suggest that fairness and balance exist due to public notice requirements, staff and planning board involvement, and public records laws. However, this ignores the fact that developers and their team of professionals are experienced in navigating these waters and have crucial input and influence at every stage of the process. The family at 742 Evergreen Terrace does not. They likely have never sat down and met with, or even spoken to, a town staffer, planning board or town council member — ever — about anything. The process is usually so foreign to ordinary citizens that they do not understand that even a decision as to when to file the rezoning petition has major implications.

There are numerous moving pieces to the decision-making process involving a rezoning. When a developer comes to town council with a proposed change that will alter the nature and character of an existing zoned property, that developer should be expected to bring their “A” game. Developers should (and some do) anticipate the reasonable concerns of neighbors such that the proposed changes will be welcomed by and benefit those affected. If this were done in every case, of course, the protest petition as a “citizen weapon” would rarely be pulled out of the bag.

However, until we arrive at a day when the developer, staff, planning board, town council, and affected neighbors can all be expected to waltz through rezoning proceedings “happily-ever-after” with everyone welcoming changes brought by someone who often has no connection to the impacted neighborhood other than a desire to reap benefit from its location and development potential, the protest petition is a tool that must remain in the bag to protect nearby property owners. As a realist, and perhaps jaded a bit by some of the rezoning and other land use disputes in which I have represented those who oppose a major zoning change, we are just not there . . . and probably never will be. Until then, the Legislature must continue to ensure that the protest petition is a tool available to protect the interests of North Carolina citizens.

Ben Kuhn is the owner of the The Kuhn Law Firm, PLLC and practices law in Raleigh. He can be reached at bkuhn@kuhnlawfirm.com

Thursday, June 19, 2014

Newspapers Publishing “Public Notices”–Gov’t Subsidizing the Media





HAT TIP : Stephen Frank's California Political News

Government forces people to pay for ads in newspapers–”public notices”–that few read. This partially explains why newspapers do not take on city hall.  Government “certifies” which newspaper get the business and money–so shut your pages to exposing corruption and take the money and run.
There is an alternative being suggested in Arizona.  Put the notices on the Internet.  A dead tree paper is put in a bird cage or used to start of fire in the fireplace.  Put the “public notices”on the Internet and they will be found 24/7 and we save the environment.
If not, how about this:  “- A law that require them to publish public notices and take them to every home in the community whether or not the resident subscribes to the paper at no additional charge beyond the current prices.
- A law that would require their database to be indexed and searchable by Google and the other search engines, completely open to the public, and advertised via Google Ad Words and other online measures, and this cost should not be passed on to member organizations, subscribers or submitters.”

If it a public notice, the public should get it–all the public–force the newspapers to give away  the papers that publish the notices.
What do you think–free market for public notices or government making laws that use private money to subsidize dead tree’s?

 Newspapers: “It’s Not About the Money”
By Lynne LaMaster, Intellectual Conservative,  2/16/12
The Arizona legislature is considering a bill, HB 2403, that would remove the print newspapers’ monopoly on publishing public notices. Lynne LaMaster, who runs several eNews websites in Arizona, gave this speech today to the House Committee voting on the bill.
This entire experience has been very enlightening to me. I have learned far more than I ever imagined.
One of the most fascinating items I learned, is that according to the Newspaper organizations, this really isn’t about the money. It’s about their duty as “watchdogs” to protect the public interest by publishing Public Notices in their respective newspapers.
Therefore, if this measure doesn’t pass, may I suggest that an alternate piece of legislation be considered. This would be:
- A law that would require newspapers to publish public notices in the same font and using the same white space as is on their home page featured story, at no additional charge beyond current prices to either the submitter or the subscriber.
- A law that would require them to offer translations into Spanish or other common languages of the community when appropriate, publishing in both English and the other language at no additional charge beyond the current prices.
- A law that would require better formatting, links that are easily pulled out of the content maps and photos where appropriate at no additional charge beyond the current prices.
- A law that require them to publish public notices and take them to every home in the community whether or not the resident subscribes to the paper at no additional charge beyond the current prices.
- A law that would require their database to be indexed and searchable by Google and the other search engines, completely open to the public, and advertised via Google Ad Words and other online measures, and this cost should not be passed on to member organizations, subscribers or submitters.
I’d be willing to bet that if you were to consider a law such as the one I just outlined, you’d find the newspapers even more vociferously and vehemently opposed to that law than the one you’re considering here right now. Because we all know that it IS about the money and protecting their monopoly and power.
Of course, if you were to allow online publications to publish public notices, we could do all these things automatically. Because we are more than a simply a newspaper online. We know the Internet and its capabilities and we know how to use it properly, efficiently and effectively.

Guilford County North Carolina Public Employee Salaries compliments of Rhino Times and Links to Charlotte Salaries

HAT TIP: RHINO TIMES

Each year the Rhino Times has published the salaries of public employees in Guilford County N.C. Since they do not cover the City of High Point with the new restructured Rhino Times here is a list of the other salaries they do cover.

Guilford County Schools Salaries CLICKHERE
City of Greensboro Salaries CLICKHERE
Guilford County Salaries CLICKHERE

It would be interesting to see if the Greensboro News and Record would provide this transparency to the citizens of Guilford County like we see down in Charlotte where the Charlotte News and Observer provides all this information on their web site

N.C. Government Salary Base CLICKHERE

N.C. University Salary Base CLICKHERE

Charlotte Mecklenburg County  Schools  CLICKHERE

City of Charlotte CLICKHERE

Mecklenburg County Salary CLICKHERE

Salaries of 9 Counties surrounding the Queen City CLICKHERE

Raleigh News and Observer Tax Delinquency Bill to Wake County Citizens is ????????

$25,224 is the bill paid to the Raleigh News and Observer to post for only one day in paper the tax delinquency for Wake County N.C. in 2013. This state law needs to be repealed because the bigger counties in this state already have this information available for anyone to see 24-7 on their county web site. No need to waste taxpayers money on this state law that needs a complete overhaul.

Looking back at the other major counties Mecklenburg County had a bill of $83,049 while in the past Guilford County had a bill around $90,000 but went to a request process and now it is only close to  $5,500 in Jamestown News.

Citizens all over this state need to be aware of the wasteful spending that goes on daily at our local and state government and the need to overhaul state law to maybe understand that the internet can provide this information to 80% of our population saving taxpayer monies in the process. Having mandated state law to provide this information only in a paid paper is absurd. Time to understand it is 2014 and we have a computer to provide this information to the masses.

Monday, May 26, 2014

Charlotte Observer 2014 Tax Delinquency Bill $83,089 for 1 Day in Paper

 
Every year state law mandates that each county in the State of North Carolina provide a list of the tax delinquents for the previous year. Charlotte Observer's bill for 2014 =$83,089.
 
Taxpayers all over this state are getting hosed for having to pay this bill each year. In Guilford County they did it a little bit different because they were going way above and beyond to provide this information putting it in 3 newspapers Greensboro News and Record, High Point Enterprise and Carolina Peacemaker when in reality it only had to provide it in one publication. The Guilford County Commissioners finally made a request for proposal for this yearly bill and saved over $92,000 on this yearly hand out to the paid papers here is a link to that report CLICKHERE
 
Hopefully the citizens of Mecklenburg County can see what happened in Guilford County bid the process out and get the lowest bidder to provide this information. It will save plenty of taxpayers money in the process.

Monday, May 5, 2014

Triad Newspaper Circulation Decline Makes Public Notice Modernization Laws A No Brainer

Owen Covington from the Triad Business Journal has this headline "Triad daily newspapers see continued circulation declines"  . In the article was some interesting tidbits about our local newspaper for example

 
"The News & Record saw Sunday circulation drop from 79,358 as of March 31, 2013 to 72,649 as of the same date this year, an 8.5 percent decline. It's average weekly circulation was below 50,000, declining from 54,452 last year to 49,496 this year. "

Then later in article other cities did not fare well either



It was a difficult year for all of the state's daily newspapers, none of which saw year-over-year increases in circulation, according to the AAM report.
The Charlotte Observer, North Carolina's largest newspaper, saw Sunday circulation fall from 191,962 last year to 179,698 this year. It's sister paper in Raleigh fared slightly better, with a decline from 179,214 in 2013 to 171,406 this year.

Over the past few years this blog has been notifying the public on the wasted taxpayer money being thrown at paid newspapers in regards to public notice laws in the State of North Carolina. One item that got the attention of the Guilford County Commissioners was the tax delinquency bill where we saw them save over $92,000 here is that report CLICKHERE

Let's dig deeper into the numbers the triad business journal has provided. As we see if you are really wanting public notices then you will need to get a weekly subscription to the Greensboro News and Record because they rarely show public notices on a Sunday edition which is it's most popular day they leave it for the obscure days of Monday and Tuesday for their public noticing. So let's take the population of Guilford County which is 506,610 and with the weekly circulation of 49,000 then that comes close to 10% of Guilford County residents are reading the News and Record in this County . I will even throw them a bone and double their readership to 20% for reading households of 2 who might read the paper. We also need to take into consideration the High Point Enterprise but did not have their circulation numbers for this report.

While doing a little google research I came across this from East Carolina University below :




A Decade of Change: Digital Technology and Internet Access in North Carolina
                                      1999 to 2010
                                               Kenneth Wilson, Ph.D.
                                       East Carolina University August 2010
 
In the past decade, North Carolina has experienced an amazing transformation. In 1999, only 53 percent of households had home computers. By 2010 that figure has risen to 82 percent. In just eleven years, the proportion of homes without a computer has dropped 62 percent. In 1999, the proportion of all homes with Internet access was 36 percent but this has risen to 80 percent in 2010. In that same time frame, the proportion of homes without Internet access has dropped 69 percent .

We see that internet in the home has increased to 80% in North Carolina households while we keep on having to shell out taxpayer money to 20% of the population in Guilford County  to have public notices run in a paid paper when in reality we can save money to put this information online on government web sites all over this state.

It is time to modernize the public notice laws in this state and if you want to research more on this you can look under the public notice section with plenty written over the past few years. CLICKHERE

Also we need to remember that our good Senator Trudy Wade from Guilford County has a bill to help modernize Public Notice Laws in the State of North Carolina and needs our help in the short session . Will post more once we find out what is happening with the bill

Monday, April 14, 2014

Corrupt Democratic Ex- Mayor of Charlotte Cannon Bringing Campaign Finance Reporting in N.C. to the Forefront, It's About TIME


A report out from Lake Wylie Pilot titled "Feds eye ex-mayor Cannon's campaign in Charlotte corruption probe" CLICKHERE has some interesting observations from local politicians and what has not been done from plenty of Board of Elections all over the State of North Carolina.

In the report was this

"An Observer review of Cannon’s campaign records since 1999 found reports with misleading, inaccurate and missing information that makes it difficult to tell where the former mayor got much of his money. State law requires that candidates disclose the name, address, occupation and employer of any donor who gives at least $50.

In about 100 cases since 2011, no job title was listed for donors to Cannon’s campaigns. In about 250 cases, no employer is listed.

In about 38 percent of cases since 2011, the information about Cannon’s donors didn’t include either job title or employer.

Then we have this later in the report

"The Mecklenburg County Board of Elections is responsible for auditing local races. Told of the Observer’s findings, board director Michael Dickerson acknowledged his office needs to improve its oversight of finance reports.
“We obviously have not scrutinized as closely as we should as far as employer and occupation information,” he said."

Obviously Director Michael Dickerson needs to understand campaign finance and what needs to be reported on the reports that come into your office that is state law under 163-278.11

§ 163-278.11.  Contents of treasurer's statement of receipts and expenditures.
(a)        Statements filed pursuant to provisions of this Article shall set forth the following:
(1)        Contributions. - Except as provided in subsection (a1) of this section, a list of all contributions received by or on behalf of a candidate, political committee, or referendum committee. The statement shall list the name and complete mailing address of each contributor, the amount contributed, the principal occupation of the contributor, and the date such contribution was received. The total sum of all contributions to date shall be plainly exhibited. Forms for required reports shall be prescribed by the Board. As used in this section, "principal occupation of the contributor" means the contributor's:
a.         Job title or profession; and
b.         Employer's name or employer's specific field of business activity.
 
Then this was written in report
 
In North Carolina, the state Board of Elections is charged with looking into complaints for all state and local campaigns. It has two employees assigned to do investigations.
The agency is supposed to conduct routine audits on as many as 10,000 annual finance reports for state races, but officials said there is a 10-year backlog due to short staffing.

“The state is overwhelmed,” Hall said. “They say they want to do reviews, but they don’t.”
State election officials have authority to levy fines on candidates who file late finance reports. They can force office-seekers to surrender improper donations. But there is no fine for failing to disclose donors’ jobs or employers.

Innocent mistakes?

The Mecklenburg elections board performs routine audits for local races to ensure candidates did not receive illegal donations, file late reports or fail to comply with other rules.
But information contained in Cannon’s filings calls into question how closely Mecklenburg reviewed the documents.

After large donations from William Bodenhamer Jr., an owner of Charlotte’s Yellow Cab, finance reports described his job title variously as “real estate,” “business owner” and “business man.” In one case, his employer was described as “property development.” In another case, it was blank
 
 
This is unacceptable for our state to not audit these records but rely on self policing of the obvious that these campaign treasurers know what needs to be done but fails to do so.
 
Triadwatch has been doing it's part in the past with plenty of instances where we like to self police these local candidates and their campaign finance reports for example:
 
 June 29, 2009 ex mayor of Greensboro was reported with a headline "Greensboro Mayor amends 2007 2008 campaign forms for second time " CLICKHERE
 
or on May 29, 2009 we have ex Guilford County Commissioner Paul Gibson on Triadwatch with a headline
"Guilford County Commissioner Paul Gibson with a Letter from N.C. Board of Elections on campaign amending " CLICKHERE
 
 
This from the Greensboro News and Record from 2009 thank goodness I copied it because they have lost all connection to past history on their web site
 
"Keith Brown started a movement that led to reinstatement of protest-petition rights for Greensboro citizens. Now he’s prompted a finding by the N.C. State Board of Elections that Action Greensboro made an improper donation of $5,000 to the George Simkins Memorial PAC for supporting bond proposals.
Brown, who writes the Triad Watch blog, says his research indicates many Guilford County politicians are lax in following campaign-finance reporting rules. He’s probably right, and those politicians warrant closer scrutiny. If they don’t comply with the law when they’re running for office, they won’t when they’re in office."

It is a shame that a huge corruption scandal brings this issue to the forefront but here in Guilford County we have been talking about this issue for awhile and we need closer scrutiny from the North Carolina State Board of Elections and put some fines into these reports if they do not comply with state law. Seems like Mecklenburg County has similar problems to what we see in Guilford County in regards to non compliance by local politicians on their reports
 
 

Thursday, April 10, 2014

Greensboro Chamber of Commerce Top 3 Salaries total $674,435


Here is a picture of the top 3 salaries at the Greensboro Chamber of Commerce 990 report with total compensation for Patrick Danahy, Deborah Hooper and Dan Lynch= $674,435. Shake your head on this one.

Tuesday, April 8, 2014

Guilford County Commissioners Save $92,000 with a Bid Process for the Tax Delinquency Bill




Above is the bill for last years tax delinquency from the Greensboro News and Record which if you take this years numbers $86,406 divided by 14,500 = $5.95 per line compared to below where they had to do a bid process with 3 other paid papers  and it was $28,855 divided by 14,500 = $28,855. How can one paper with no bid process charge $86,406 now with a bid process go down to $28,855?

What the Guillford County Commisioners did was a huge step in tax delinquency process where in the past they advertised in both News and Record, High Point Enterprise and also the Carolina Peacemaker . Under state law they only had to advertise in one paid paper that is where we had the request for proposal shown below. This bill to the taxpayers went from close to $97,975 to having the Jamestown News post the tax delinquency bill for 2013 at $5,945 a savings of
$92,030.

Granted this state law should go away with the invention of the internet and county web sites providing this information 24 hours a day and seven days a week but will take a savings of $92,000 on this for the citizens of Guilford County.

Triadwatch is doing some further investigation into what the Mecklenburg County Tax Department pays in regards to the tax delinquency bill to see if they have a bid process and what it cost the citizens of Mecklenburg to advertise in the Charlotte News and Observer. Stay tuned.



Inside Scoop had a post on this issue CLICKHERE

Thursday, April 3, 2014

Guilford County Commissioners Public Notice Bill for Guilford County Taxpayers is Close to Nothing from $86,000 to $5,945

UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE



This is a update to this story below where at tonight's  Guilford County Commissioners Meeting 4-3-2014, the commissioners had the manager to a RFP which is a request for proposal to get the lowest bid to show the tax delinquency bill for the citizens of Guilford County . In the past this bill was $86,740.29 from a post I did on May 1, 2011 CLICKHERE . The request brought in proposals from Jamestown News circulation 5,000, Greensboro News and Record circulation 54,000, and Carolina Peacemaker circulation 6,000. The lowest bidder won with Jamestown News coming in at 41 cents per listing at a cost of $5,945 which was reported from Joe Killian at News and Record on his facebook account.

This is a great step for the citizens of Guilford County and hopefully we will see a change on the state level to modernize public notice laws to 2014 standards not 1949. County Commissioners go from $86,000 down to $5954 as savings of $80,000.

Below is the report from a few weeks ago on this issue at Rhino Times.



HAT TIP : Rhino Times
Scott Yost has a new article titled "County to Stop Throwing Good Money After Bad Taxpayers".

in the article were some interesting tidbits

"However, at a Monday, Feb. 3, Guilford County Tax Committee meeting, the committee decided unanimously to recommend to the Board of Commissioners that the county cease its current process of widely publicizing the names, and instead do the bare minimum required by law."

"Guilford County Tax Director Ben Chavis told the commissioners there was no evidence the mass advertisements of names is effective in getting people to pay up.
 
“There’s no guarantee we’ll recover the advertising cost,” Chavis said.
 
Chavis said that from the studies he’s read as well as from his personal experience, putting the names out there for the public to see doesn’t really do much good"

Phillips said he wondered why it has taken so long for commissioners and other county officials to have this discussion, which could clearly save the county money.
 
“I’m fascinated by the fact that there’s never been an in-depth conversation like we’re having now,” Phillips said."

_______________________________________________________________________________

This blog has been all over this issue since it was brought up to the Guilford County Commissioners last year on January 17, 2013 by me with video starting at the 7 minute mark here is a link

http://guilford.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=710 note the audio is very low and hard to hear.

Commissioner Phillips has known about this issue for over a year unless he wasn't listening to the speaker from the floor on January 17, 2013 in Keith Brown speaking.

Hopefully we will see some drastic changes in our public notice laws modernize to the year 2014 and this tax delinquency waste of taxpayers money is a start. It is great to see our commissioners understand this and take steps to lower our taxes and what better way then to do away with the tax delinquency notices in 3 publications when the state only allows you to have to provide it in one paid publication.It will be interesting to see a bid process for this item when in reality the only ones in Guilford COunty who can bid on the tax delinquency notice is either Greensboro News and Record, High Point Enterprise or Carolina Peacemaker. Who wants the contract? or will we see Greensboro News and Record cry foul over bidding on this money they were getting in the past totaling close to $80,000

If you would like to see plenty on this topic this blog has tagged plenty of topics under

legal notice

public notice

Tuesday, March 25, 2014

Guilford County Animal Shelter Needs Help in Saving Aussie Dogs from a Suspected Puppy Mill

This pic is Triadwatch's AUSSIE HERSHEY

News 2 has a report out tonight that the Guilford County Animal Shelter has dogs from a suspected puppy mill with plenty of Australian Shepherds dogs. Here is a link to post HERE

Australian Shepherd dogs are the most loyal well trained dogs to have as a companion. They are a little high strung but with plenty of exercise and love they are a man's and women's best friend.Right now, I am sure they are assessing each dog to see how much assistance each animal needs in their rehabilitation to a loving new home. 

Here is a link to the Guilford County Animal Shelter HERE , hopefully in the next few days there will be some more information about adopting these great breed of dogs to a new loving home in the triad area of North Carolina.

NEWSBUSTED at NEWSBUSTERS.ORG 5-16-2014