YOUR VOICE IS NEEDED!
The best way to beat the realtor attack campaign is to contact your Wake state representatives and senators.

Summary: For the first time in years, the North Carolina General Assembly is likely to consider legislation that would enable counties to implement new local options for growth to help pay for the rapidly rising costs of growth. WakeUP calls these revenue-generating options, fair growth funding, which includes real estate transfer taxes and impact fees. The focus of most of the bills which have been introduced is the transfer tax because it has the greatest revenue-generating potential. Because many counties are clamoring for new funds for growth costs, like schools, many bills have been introduced to give specific NC counties the opportunity to ask voters if they would support a transfer tax and more. Meanwhile, other bills in the Senate propose transfer taxes potentially statewide. As of mid April, all bills await further action as the legislature turns to its budget.

• Wake Representatives Jennifer Weiss and Deborah Ross introduced HB 1142, Wake Land Transfer Taxes, to give Wake County transfer tax authority with funds designated for school construction.
• Wake Senators Janet Cowell and Vernon Malone introduced SB 610, Wake County Revenue Options, permitting voter referendum for the transfer tax, impact fees and a sales tax to generate growth funding.

Realtor lobby attacks fair growth funding.
While WakeUP and many other nonprofits support local transfer tax options for counties, the NC Association of Realtors has launched a well-funded, state-wide ad and lobbying campaign attacking the transfer tax. No doubt, this will pose a significant roadblock to advancing legislation supporting fair growth funding, as the realtor lobby is the largest contributor to NC legislative campaigns.

Fair Growth Funding Bills (transfer tax) in the NC General Assembly
(as of 4-11-07)

• Statewide Local “Menu of Options” bill---HB 153, introduced by Rep. Michaux (D-Durham), which allows counties to decide by voters’ referendum to implement any of the following: additional one cent sales tax, impact fee, meals tax, occupancy tax for hotels, motels, etc; county income tax, and county real estate transfer fee.
• State of NC “Financing of Capital Projects Bill”---S 1201: introduced by Senator Clodfelter (D-Mecklenburg). This bill would increase NC’s present .2 % (one-fifth of one per cent) deed stamp tax to .5 %. It would also impose a vehicle tax (maximum is $1000 for cars and $1500 for recreational vehicles), one half of which is to go to the state’s Highway Trust Fund and one half to go to the general fund. Each county would receive the same share (one tenth of one percent) it currently receives from the deed stamp tax.. The remaining .4% would be divided between the state’s general fund and the Parks and Recreation and Natural Heritage Trust Funds. The increased revenue in the state general fund could be used to support bonds for education, open space, water and sewer, community colleges and universities, transportation, and other infrastructure needs.
• Statewide Local Options “Implement Modernization Commission Recommend---S 1529: introduced by Senator Clodfelter (D-Mecklenburg). Allows the following local options for counties with referendum or, under certain conditions, without referendum: meals tax, hotel occupancy tax, .5% local transfer tax for cities and counties, a privilege tax on retailers, and authorization for a county Medical Assistance program.
• Statewide Local Option 1% Real Estate Transfer Tax---S 1516: introduced by Senator Atwater (D-Chatham, Durham, and Lee). Allows any county to hold a public referendum to decide whether to impose a 1% real estate transfer tax in that county.
• County specific bills for a 1 % transfer tax, introduced for specific counties to apply only to their county and decided by voter referendum:
  1. Avery County HB 1180, introduced by Rep Frye (R-Avery, Caldwell, Mitchell, Yancey)
  2. Chatham County HB 711, introduced by Reps. Harrison (D-Guilford) and Insko (D-Orange)
  3. Granville County SB 551, introduced by Senator Doug Berger (D-Franklin, Granville, Vance, Warren) and HB1081, introduced by Rep. Crawford (D-Granville and Vance)
  4. Hoke County SB 612, introduced by Senator Weinstein (D-Hoke and Robeson).
  5. Hoke County HB 742, introduced by Rep. Yongue (D-Hoke, Robeson, Scotland) and Rep Pierce (D-Hoke, Robeson, Scotland)
  6. Moore County HB 712, introduced by Reps. Harrison (D-Guilford) and Insko (D-Orange)
  7. Pamlico County HB 1093, introduced by Rep Underhill (D-Craven and Pamlico)
  8. Tyrell County HB 1175, introduced by Rep. Owens (D-Tyrell), Harrison, and Insko
  9. Wake County SB 610, introduced by Senators Cowell (D-Wake) and Malone (D-Wake). Different from other bills listed in that it requires a simultaneous referendum on three revenue sources: impact fees, transfer tax, and sales tax.
  10. Wake County HB 1142, introduced by Rep. Weiss (D-Wake) and Ross (D-Wake). Funds to be allocated for school construction only.