Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
12 <br />MEMORANDUM <br />TO: Patrick McDonough, Senior Planner <br />FROM: Wib Gulley, General Counsel <br />RE: NCGS 105-508 et seq <br />DATE: August 29, 2011 <br />In response to the request for Triangle Transit's legal and policy understanding of the <br />non-supplantation clause of the 2009 Intermodal Transportation Fund legislation ("Act") and its <br />impact upon allocation of the new revenues authorized by that Act, let me share with you the <br />following legal and policy observations: <br />1. The non-supplant clause appears in the section of the law authorizing the % cent <br />sales tax option for Wake, Durham and Orange counties. It is not a part of the <br />sections of the Act authorizing the addition $3 regional and $7 local or county-based <br />increase in vehicle registration fees. <br />2. No NC case law or AG opinion exists to date on the interpretation of non- <br />supplantation language at this time for transportation, education or any of the other <br />areas of state law where such statutory language appears. The State Treasurers <br />staff reported that they have no specified state guidelines that they apply to non- <br />supplantation in their work. The AG's office recently advised me that DOT staff <br />thought that there might possibly be some federal regulations that had an impact on <br />this question, but they have not identified or furnished these regulations to me as of <br />this date. <br />3. The only possibly relevant NC transportation situation arises from the Charlotte and <br />Mecklenburg County ("Charlotte") use of its % cent sales tax authorized in 1997. <br />Pursuant to the 1999 Transit Governance Interlocal Agreement, the three parties to <br />that contract currently paying for transit services (Charlotte, Huntersville and <br />Mecklenburg County) agreed to maintain and not reduce their financial <br />contributions each year to the CATS system going forward. <br />More particularly, the Agreement provided that Charlotte and the other entities <br />expending funds for transit must meet a "maintenance of effort" requirement to <br />provide funds annually equal to its FY 98 local expenditure for transit services. The <br />state legislation authorizing Charlotte's transit sales tax included anon-supplant <br />clause. Their maintenance of effort requirement, according to the CATS legal staff, is <br />a product of their creation and is not specified in or specifically supported by the <br />statutes. <br />1 <br />