If you work in university maintenance, Granger considers you an MVP because your playbook ensures your arena is always ready for tip-off. And Granger is your trusted partner, offering the products you need all in one place, from HVAC and plumbing supplies to lighting and more, and all delivered with plenty of time left on the clock, so your team always gets the win. Call 1-800-GRANGER, visit Granger.com, or just stop by Granger for the ones who get it done. It's 5.05 and welcome in to a Thursday edition of the Carolina Journal News Hour on Charlotte's FM News Talk, 107.9 FM, WBT, I'm Nick Craig. Good morning to you.
We start with some great business news out of our state capitol this morning as the Raleigh-Kerry metro area ranks number fourth in the country for small business performance. This is according to a new co-working cafe study released this week. North Carolina State Capitol trails only Miami, Austin, and Washington, D.C. for small business performance. The study measured metros with more than 1 million residents using a weighted scoring framework based on three categories, business environment, economic development, and human capital.
The high placement for the Raleigh area was driven by GDP growth, a high rate of business formations, and a deep pool of tech talent. The triangle now has more than 11,000 small businesses per 100,000 residents, with those firms accounting for 47% of total employment in the area, a pretty high number there, according to the U.S. Small Business Administration and figures cited in the study, with new business applications hitting roughly 1,900 per 100,000 residents in 2024, among the highest rate of any metro in the top five. Local economy grew by 39% from 2019 to 2023, according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis and data provided there, with the region also offering a co-working market of 6.3 flex workspaces per 100,000 residents at an average of about $263 per month.
Brian Balfour, the senior vice president of research at the John Locke Foundation, said that this ranking reflects the cumulative effect of more than a decade of state-level tax and regulatory reform. He told Carolina Journal in part, this high ranking comes as no surprise to anyone who has been paying attention to Raleigh's rapid growth over the past several years. North Carolina overall has experienced significant economic and demographic gains in the last decade or so, buoyed in no part by our, in small part, by our welcoming fiscal climate. Tax reforms beginning in 2013 transformed North Carolina from one of the worst business tax climates in the nation to one of the best, with CNBC ranking North Carolina its top state for business three of the last four years. According to the most recent soaring tech talent report released in November of last year by the commercial real estate firm CBRE, the Raleigh-Durham tech workforce has grown to over 76,000 workers, which accounts for a nearly 15% increase from 2021 to 2024, adding more than 10,000 professionals in just that three-year stint.
Tech talent now accounts for seven and a half, a little under 7.5% of total employment in the region, and the average annual wage for tech workers employed within that industry is $122,000 a year. Moreover, nearly 45% of Raleigh-Carey's tech workforce is employed inside the technology industry itself, and more than half of software engineers in the area work for those tech firms. According to Steven Padigo, a professor of practice at the LBJ School for Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin, who was interviewed by co-working CAFE, the group that put forward this study, that the metros leading the small business ranking aren't simply the cheapest or loudest about being business friendly. He told the group, there are places where entrepreneurs can operate, connect, hire, find customers, and build a life. This is the modern small business equation, and it's about talent, quality of place, flexible spaces, social capital, market demand, and a public sector that gets the basics right.
The South dominated the. Large metro tier overall claiming four of the top five spots. Durham also drew mention in the study as a mid-sized metro segment, where the firm pointed to its university-anchored talent pipeline as a driver of knowledge and service sector entrepreneurship. Wake County's economic development has been publicly tied to broader momentum of the region to its tech force, noting a November update that Raleigh-Durham climbed four spots to number 12 in that CBRE national tech talent ranking as innovation is thriving, talent is growing, and opportunity continues to expand.
However, Balfour cautioned that Raleigh's trajectory also brings strains that the state will need to manage in the years to come, saying, with such rapid growth, however, becomes challenges. Raleigh's infrastructure and rapid rise in housing prices will require continued attention to make it an attractive Place to work and live. You can read more on this. We've got the article linked up on our website, CarolinaJournal.com. You can even click through to see the full co-working cafe study, which again has the Raleigh-Carey, not the Raleigh-Durham, but the Raleigh-Carey Metro at number four in the country for small business performance behind Miami, Florida, Austin, Texas, and Washington, D.C.
In some other statewide news, we are keeping an eye on this morning, state and national Republican Party groups are celebrating a court victory in a dispute over what are described as never-resident voters in North Carolina. The GOP groups indicated on Wednesday that Special Superior Court Judge Hoyt Tessner had issued a ruling favoring their position in the legal fight with the North Carolina State Board of Elections and the Democrat National Committee. It's important to note that as we published this story yesterday, the ruling has still to this point had not been posted on the North Carolina e-court's portal. We are going off of the announcements from these groups.
However, the judge did indicate that he would issue an order in the case, if the various parties, that would include. The Republican groups, state board of election, and the Democrat National Committee. If those groups could not reach a deal by May 22nd, he would rule.
So the timing would, in fact, appear to be very much on brand with that. North Carolina Republican Party Chairman Jason Simmons said in a statement: quote, this ruling confirms that the state constitution forbids voting by individuals who have never lived in North Carolina. The Court of Appeals and Supreme Court decisively ruled on this previously, and the decision reaffirms this common sense principle that only North Carolina citizens can vote in North Carolina elections. According to the chairman of the Republican National Committee, this being the RNC, who was also a party in this suit, he wrote in part, this is a clear win for fair and lawful elections. The court upheld the North Carolina Constitution and made clear that only North Carolina residents can vote.
Vote in the state, the RNC will continue, will keep fighting to ensure that only eligible citizens can vote. This term, we've talked about it plenty of times here on the Carolina Journal News Hour. These never residents are described as adults born outside of the United States whose parents or guardians last lived in the state of North Carolina before moving overseas. The state's Uniform Military and Overseas Voter Act allows never residents to vote in North Carolina.
However, those Republican groups, including the National Republican Party, challenged this law back in 2024. That caused a months-long dispute over the outcome of that decision as it related to the state Supreme Court election that we watched in 2024. And we have been keeping a very close eye on the details on this case over the last couple of months. One of the major changes here, the state board of elections. Recently, shifting its political makeup from a Democrat-majority board to a Republican-majority board.
This was due to legislation put in place by the North Carolina General Assembly, which moved those appointments from the governor to a different member of the North Carolina executive branch in-state auditor Dave Bollock. The governor, a Democrat, Bollock, a Republican, changing the political makeup there. What was a 3-2 Democrat-majority board is now a 3-2 Republican majority board, meaning that they were more, seemingly from the recent legal challenges, more in favor of working with these groups to make sure that they are complying, in fact, with state law. Again, we have not seen a full copy of the court order. We don't know if there will be any additional appeals or any additional movement in that.
However, we'll keep you up to date on it as these never residents, as it stands right now, will not be eligible to vote here. The state of North Carolina. We'll keep you up to date continuing coverage over on our website this morning, CarolinaJournal.com. 519, welcome back to the Carolina Journal News Hour, Charlotte's FM News Talk, 107.9 FM, WBT, I'm Nick Craig. Good morning to you.
One of the long-running legal stories that we've been keeping an eye here on the Carolina Journal News Hour and over on our website, CarolinaJournal.com, deals with bars that were shut down during the COVID-19 pandemic. If you wind back the clock going back almost six years now, you will remember a lot of discussion taking place across the state of North Carolina from many bar and restaurant owners.
Some of those bar owners, in particular, have taken the state of North Carolina to court to walk through the latest. Mitch Kokai from the John Locke Foundation joins us on the Carolina Journal News Hour. Mitch, hard to think. Six years ago, these conversations were brand new. Everybody was trying to figure everything out.
What's the latest you're tracking in the court system? You might remember, Nick, that a couple of different lawsuits were filed against then-Governor Roy Cooper over his COVID-era shutdowns. And the claims from these bar owners and their bars as the plaintiffs was that the bars were being treated unfairly compared to other businesses that were being allowed to reopen. When COVID happened, almost all businesses were shut down. But fairly early on in the government's regime on this, they started allowing businesses to reopen, but forced private bars to remain closed for a much longer time period than many other businesses, including some of their competitors.
So there were a couple of different lawsuits challenging these shutdowns and saying that Governor Cooper and his administration were violating these bar owners' rights to get the fruits of their own labors, running their legal businesses. And in August of 2025, the state Supreme Court, in party line votes, five to two, With the five Republicans on one side and the majority and the two Democrats on the other side, said that, yes, these bar owners could move forward with their lawsuits challenging the shutdowns as violating their state constitutional rights.
So the cases are back before a trial court. And in one of the cases, led by the North Carolina Bar and Tavern Association, we're seeing some movement in getting to an actual resolution of the dispute at the trial court level. We talked a little while ago about the fact that the plaintiffs' lawyers in this case had gone to the judge who's overseeing this case, Judge Superior Court Judge Edwin Wilson, and said, look, there are a number of these plaintiffs. It was in the neighborhood of 25 to 30 if you lump bar owners and their bars together. We haven't been able to contact them since 2024.
And so we would like the court to say that we no longer represent these plaintiffs. Since we can't reach them, we can't talk to them about legal strategies.
So please just allow us to stop representing them. Judge agreed to that. And then, at the same time, on the other side of the court dispute, Governor Josh Stein's lawyers, since Stein has taken over as the defendant in this case, once he took office as governor, they've said, Well, we should dismiss those plaintiffs from the case. They're not represented by anyone. They haven't taken part in this case for a couple of years, so they should just be dismissed from the case.
And a hearing that took place this week before Judge Wilson dealt with that issue of whether those plaintiffs, now that they're not represented by any lawyer, should also be dismissed from this case. And he basically agreed. He didn't take any final action. He said the party should come up with an order, send it to him by Tuesday, and then he'll sign off on it. He also didn't take any action on another request that's come from Stein's lawyers, and that is to disqualify or dismiss from the case the North Carolina Bar and Tavern Association itself.
Now he was the lead plaintiff in this case, but now Stein's lawyers are saying. The association itself can't get any relief based on what has come out from the state Supreme Court. They were seeking an injunction at the time, but they can't get any damages. It would be the actual bar owners and the bars themselves that could get damages, not the Bar and Tavern Association.
So that issue was not addressed in this latest hearing, but could be in a hearing that's now scheduled for June 9th. And that's the next big date in this case is that probably all other things are going to be resolved before it could go forward to discovery and motions to get rid of the case and potentially to even go to a trial. We also learned during the course of this latest hearing about how many plaintiffs are really left. The plaintiffs' lawyers described it as 60 groupings. And when they meant groupings, they're talking about grouping of an individual person who's the bar owner and one or more bars that the person owns.
So about 60 real plaintiffs, if you lump them. The bar owners and their bars together. That's how many are still pursuing this case. And that's how many could potentially collect damages from the state if they ultimately prevail. Mitch, you were very clear to use the word bar consistently in our discussion.
And this is relevant for our audience that maybe doesn't remember exactly what was going on six years ago when these discussions were first coming to light. Restaurants that served alcohol were able to reopen. I say relatively in the time scale, but relatively quickly, they were allowed to continue to operate. But bars in particular, of which there is no food being served, those are the ones that were hit with these very lengthy shutdowns that went well beyond what we saw from any other lockdown or shutdown here in the state of North Carolina. Yes, and it was not just the fact that you had a distinction between restaurants and bars.
Restaurants that had a bar could open their bar. And country clubs that had a bar could open their bar. It was basically standalone private bars that had no other business. Those were the ones that were remained that remained closed during the entirety of this shutdown. And that was part of the reason of the suit.
They're saying, look, if you're shutting us down because there's some sort of health impact, why is there health impact from our bar and not? A very similar bar that's attached to a restaurant or to some other establishment. What makes us different? And they basically said that the government couldn't come up with any adequate excuse. And so that was one of the reasons why it was unfair and perhaps unconstitutional to shut down these bars, these standalone bars, while allowing bars in restaurants and in other areas to reopen.
There was also Accusations made in the course of the suit that the governor was taking economics into account and the idea of allowing breweries and businesses that have been seen as contributing to the economy more than a bar, allowing them to reopen for economic reasons, but forcing the bars to remain closed. All of that would take place as a court case moved forward. But the main thing at this point is that it's not really going to move forward until you know exactly who the plaintiffs are who are going to be taking part in this and what the defense is going to be from Governor Stein and the State Justice Department lawyers who are representing him. Mitch, one of the most disturbing things in this entire scenario is the fact that while these bars were shut down, they still owed the state of North Carolina, had to go through the process of getting their ABC certification renewed, which I'll note is a lengthy and relatively expensive situation.
Meanwhile, the door is essentially barred shut, not allowed to operate. And so I would imagine as this case continues to roll out, that some of that will come up in this discussion from these bar owners. On one hand, the state says, pony up for your ABC license or you won't be able to serve alcohol. And on the other hand, the state says, well, you can't serve alcohol anyway, but if you allow your license to lapse, there's a lot of big issues with that as well. Yeah, I'm sure that that is going to be playing a major role as this case moves forward.
And then, of course, I don't know how much this is going to play a role, but there's a potential that this case could even play some sort of role in our marque election matchup. Because remember that the Democrats candidate for U.S. Senate is former Governor Roy Cooper, and it was Governor Cooper and his administration that was responsible for all of this. Governor Stein is being forced to deal with this case now, and he played some role in local state government at the time as the Attorney General, but he did not make any of those decisions. It was Governor Roy Cooper at the time who was ultimately responsible for these shutdown decisions.
And it's possible that as this election matchup moves forward, that those who are trying to elect Michael Watley might say, hey, you know, look at this case and remember that Governor Roy Cooper was shutting down businesses and hurting the economy and keeping us all away from our jobs. And potentially, even though it's now been six years since all of that happened, some people might remember that and say, hmm, this could affect what I think about when I go to the polls. Yeah, I guess from a political standpoint, maybe a little bit of a guerrilla marketing campaign mission of these very fruitful bars and restaurants across the state of North Carolina that are packed with people after work each and every weekday. Real quick, one more time, this June the 9th court date that we've got on the calendar, what exactly is going to go on there? We'll probably see at that meeting, which has been billed as a status conference, they'll kind of finalize who are the plaintiffs in this case.
My guess is there will be a ruling on whether the Bar and Tafford Association can continue as a plaintiff or not. And then after that, probably a schedule of what's going to take place with any discovery, future hearings, maybe setting a trial date out in the future in case they can't come up with some sort of settlement.
So it's basically a status conference that'll set the stage for what moves forward with the rest of the case.
Well, cool. We'll be keeping our eye on that. We know that you'll keep us up to date not only here on the Carolina Journal News Hour, but we do have continuing coverage of this over on our website, CarolinaJournal.com. We appreciate the update this morning. Mitch Cokey from the John Locke Foundation joins us on the Carolina Journal News Hour.
Yeah. It's 5.37. Welcome back to the Carolina Journal News Hour, Charlotte's FM News Talk, 107.9 FM, WBT, I'm Nick Craig. Good Thursday morning to you. Continuing our coverage this morning of the General Assembly short session last week here on the Carolina Journal News Hour, we brought you a lot of detail on Senate Bill 1080, the name of that legislation, lower taxes for all of North Carolina.
It is, in fact, actually a constitutional amendment that voters will have the opportunity to decide on in November, moving the state's income tax from 7% to 3.5%. We have been watching the reaction as this legislation and constitutional amendment continues to unfold. in Raleigh. It walks through some additional reaction this morning. Teresa Opeka, CarolinaJournal.com, joins us on the news hour.
Teresa, a lot of buzz about this in Raleigh, and it looks like Governor Josh Stein jumping into the conversation as well. What does he have to say? Sure. Good morning, Nick. Thanks for having me.
Yep, so Governor Stein did not mince words at a press conference yesterday when he called it a con cynical shell game. And also, a millionaire protection cap that's only gonna hurt the average North Carolinian and benefit the wealthy. That's what he called the constitutional amendment that's going to appear on the ballot in November. He said basically the amendment's a con because while they say it's going to lower taxes, it really doesn't because it's already happening by law. It's not going to put any more money into anyone's pockets.
But what it's going to do is make regular people pay the consequences of it next year and years into the future. Because it's going to insulate the very wealthy from ever having an increase in their income tax. He says, we have to have a balanced budget every year. And you know who's going to have, you know, and more revenues are needed. And you know who's going to have to pay for it?
It's going to be you, the regular people, every time you go to buy something through sales tax.
So, you know, basically he's saying it's all a farce, is what he was calling it. And he's echoing a lot of the discussion that we did hear in Raleigh last week from Democrats on the floor of the North Carolina House and Senate. Teresa, this point was made. And there is some relevant points to be made that the current state income tax rate is 3.99%. It is set to drop January the 1st of 2027 when we flip the calendar over to 3.49%.
So right below this proposed constitutional cap that, again, voters will get to decide on. But as I heard the debate taking place in the General Assembly last week, lawmakers, especially those that were bringing forward this legislation on the Republican side of the aisle, Teresa, they said that this was going to protect North Carolinians in the future from state government if there is a change in leadership, a change in political makeup in Raleigh, that a new General Assembly would not have the ability to jack up that personal income tax rate without once again going back to the voters and getting a constitutional amendment passed. Yeah, and basically, what Governor Stein said, it was the exact opposite. It's going to only hurt people in the future. You know, like he said, right now it's the lowest it's ever been.
And basically, you're tying the hands of future legislatures. If, you know, coming down the pike, if you don't know what's coming down the pike, there might be something really worse on the horizon that no one really knows about. He likened it going back to when he was in the state senate back in 2009 in that era when there was like 2008, the Great Recession. In saying that they had to look for how they had to raise money at that point. And talked about that, and basically saying that it's only going to hurt people.
Because you gotta There's only two ways to raise revenue, basically sales tax or income tax.
So, what you're going to do is basically going to have to raise the sales tax. I guess this is likening it like the property tax. It's like, okay, well, if you're going to cut property taxes where the different municipalities and county governments are getting money, they're going to get money from somewhere, right?
So, they're going to have to raise a fee. It's the same thing with this. That's basically what he's saying: they're going to hurt people down the line through an increase in sales tax if you're cutting the income tax. Plus, also now he's saying that people in the legislature, excuse me, people who are working for state government, teachers, correctional officers, but he also pointed to Secretary of State Elaine Marshall's office where they're getting loads and loads of business creation, you know, applications for business creations every year. They don't have the staff to really handle it and they don't have not gotten a significant raise.
And Secretary Marshall has raised that same point over and over at various councils. State meetings that I've attended, basically saying even right now, it's a serious problem.
So, yeah, he pointed to a lot of different things, basically disagreeing with the legislature that it's going to really hurt people. And it's already hurting people, especially state employees who they don't have the funding for. Teresa, let's be perfectly blunt and honest about this. This has become a hyper-political issue in Raleigh. Republicans are on one side of the issue.
Democrats are on the other. This is not anything new. This is not a surprise that we're bringing to our audience here this morning. But I do feel like I need to make the point and maybe ask you a little bit more about this. It seems like this discussion over cutting taxes has essentially become kind of a boy who's cried wolf argument because Republicans in Raleigh have been consistently cutting the personal income tax and corporate income tax rates here in North Carolina for the last 15 years.
We've heard this continued argument and discussion from those that are against those cuts, saying that you're going to set up the state for bankruptcy. The state's going to be looking over the edge of a fiscal cliff. To this point, none of that has happened. The state has plenty of money. Revenues continue to trend in the upward direction.
Do you think using this same argument now for 15 years with none of these doomsday scenarios ever coming to fruition has kind of set the Democrats' argument to fall on deaf ears? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I think so. I think so.
I think it has, you know, like you say, it's boy who cried wolf going over and over again. That's just going to happen. It's going to happen. And it doesn't. But then you're also getting Democrats' viewpoints like Stein saying, well, you don't know what's going to happen in the future, which, I mean, that's what they've been saying before, right?
But, you know, they pointed to everything that's going on right now in the country. We've got the war with Iran, which, you know, we didn't have before, but there's always been a war somewhere. But all the different factors that play into all of this, all the different things, it's, yeah, it has fallen on deaf ears. But, you know, at the same point, they're trying to do the, you know, what they have to do, right? The fear-mongering and things of that nature.
So, but yeah, I think it has fallen on deaf ears, but What else do they have? Basically, at this point, right?
Well, and to another point, and to another point you made, you were referencing and quoting some of the governor's comments talking about his time in the North Carolina Senate back in 2009 and talking about the Great Recession there. Teresa says, I remember it, the state had a personal income tax rate of 8% at that point, more than double of what it is right now, and they still didn't have any money with a higher tax rate.
So, similar with that argument there, I just don't seem that it doesn't seem that that adds up to anything of reality as to what we've seen here in North Carolina over the last 20 or 25 years. Yeah. Yeah, yeah. And then he also likens the s he he also mentioned that and also the corporate income tax, right? He he he also mentioned that as well and during this press conference, that that it shouldn't be zeroed out by 2030 because it's already the lowest in the nation and it was higher before.
And they really could use that money here. It's just going to go to the corporations, people who aren't corporations who aren't even headquartered here, or even to. Non-non-Americans, people who are non-American, not citizens, right? They're going to be benefiting the most out of all this. Basically, what it's saying continues to happen here is lower pay for state employees and services.
And it's only going to get worse over time. They're going to have to look for revenue at other places. But, you know, we said this before in the John Locke Foundation, you know. They already had a higher income tax model before, and it failed before. It discouraged growth, took unnecessary dollars out of hardworking families' pockets.
That's, of course, to attributing that quote to Joseph Harris, the fiscal policy analyst for the John Locke Foundation.
So we've tried all this stuff before, and basically, to what Joseph Harris said, the 3.5% cap. Isn't a con. It's actually a safeguard to protect all taxpayers because you're trying to do something. It's trying to prevent, as you say, future politicians dragging us back down the road of failed policies, protecting. They've done such a good job already in the last so many years, as you mentioned, about Promoting growth, making North Carolina the best state in the country to come do business with, which is what Secretary of State Marshall's office is dealing with, right?
All of that points to the Republican legislature bringing, you know, having all these policies in place and is protecting them.
So that's the opposite argument on this against Governor Stein and Democrats who argued against this.
Well, Teresa, you used the word failure. It's a strong word, but unfortunately, it's accurate to describe what the state of North Carolina looked like prior to 2010 with some of the highest taxes anywhere in the Southeast, a climate that was not encouraging business or personal growth. We're seeing a lot of move-ins, and of course, that comes with its issues as well here in North Carolina as a direct result of that. Let's end on this, Teresa. I heard this point being made by multiple Democrats in the General Assembly last week.
They publicly stated that, of course, this is going to pass because voters, regardless of their political persuasion, everybody wants to pay lower taxes. We've consistently asked voters through our Carolina Journal poll over the last couple of months and years what their thoughts are on taxes and lowering taxes. It is a very bipartisan issue that polls well.
So Democrats seemingly have already conceded the point that when voters are asked coming up in November, do you want to put a cap on your income tax, that something like that is likely to pass the same way that it did back in 2018? when it was lowered from 10 to now 7%. Oh, yeah, no doubt. Who's going to say no to that? I mean, that would make absolutely no sense.
So, yeah, correct. Democrats are saying, yeah, it's going to pass. But then, also on the flip side, look what it's going to do. Your sales tax is going to go up, and the sales tax. Everybody pays a sales tax.
You're going to pay it on whatever we're all buying. It's not going to matter who it is.
So it's going to hurt someone in that respect. But by that same token, yeah, who is going to say no to lowering your income tax? But that's their argument. You're going to get, you have to get the money from somewhere. But it's, but it's actually.
Gibby. Both ways of it, you've got to look. It's future protection for your income for the taxpayer down the line. But that's the Democrats' argument: it's like, well, the money's got to come from somewhere.
So, but it basically, you're right. They are agreeing. Who's going to say no? I mean, I don't know how many people, it'll be interesting to see how many do say no when we get the results on election night. But yeah, I can't think of one person who would say no to that.
Yeah, and that is going to be something that we'll be keeping a close eye on with some very busy election results coming up in November. Teresa, you've got some additional quotes from the governor that folks can go and read this morning. How do they go and do that? Sure, they can head on over to CarolinaJournal.com. We appreciate the update this morning.
Teresa Opeka joins us on the Carolina Journal News Hour. If you're into tech, you'll love this. TikTok is a live lab. where users post instant reviews of the latest trends. Download TikTok and check it out.
Good morning again. It's 5:54. Welcome back to the Carolina Journal News Hour, Charlotte's FM News Talk, 107.9 FM. WBT keeping our eye on some business news here in North Carolina. Unfortunately, another incentive deal that was backed by state government is not coming to fruition.
A recent announcement from the Crystal Window and Door System. Last year, they announced plans to build a new factory and create jobs in Selma, North Carolina. That's in Johnston County, as part of an $83.7 million investment. A deal that was expected to grow the state's economy by more than a billion dollars, with the state of North Carolina, more particularly the Commerce Department and Commerce officials, improving a JDIG grant project valued at nearly $5.5 million, including an additional $4.1 million spread over 12 years. Years if the company Crystal Window and Door Systems were able to meet their hiring and production goals.
However, they have now recently sent a letter to state officials that they are holding off on plans to build that factory in Selma that would have created 500 additional jobs. In a letter to State Department of Commerce officials, the company president asked to terminate the incentive deal as the department's economic investment committee, which oversees the state's incentive deals, approved the request this week. Thomas Chen, the company chairman, wrote to state officials earlier this month. At the time of the application and award, Crystal, referring to the door and window company, fully intended to move forward with the proposed investment and job creation in Selma.
However, due to a combination of unforeseen business, geopolitical, and economic factors, Crystal has made the decision not to proceed with the project at this time. End quote. This is unfortunately one of many of the deals that we have covered in recent weeks, months, and years over on our website, CarolinaJournal.com and here on the Carolina Journal NewsHour. Which continue to show that the vast majority of these job development investment grants or JDIG grants that are announced by state officials, most of the time, those announcements coming directly from the top, former Governor Roy Cooper and now current governor Josh Stein are not coming to fruition in the years that follow. Many cases, the company is unable to meet the hiring goals.
In other cases, as we're talking about here this morning, the company completely scraps plans altogether to move forward with the planned investment in the state of North Carolina. And while no dollars have been expensed, unfortunately, looking back at the track record, it is not a good one for these statewide incentive programs as many of these companies are not able to follow through on their deal. And the largest example of that that we're keeping an eye on is VinFast, the Vietnamese car maker that is currently being sued by the Attorney General here in North Carolina over that lack of a deal. keep you up to date over on our website, CarolinaJournal.com. That's going to do it for a Thursday edition.
We're back with you tomorrow morning, 5 to 6, right here on Charlotte's FM News Talk, 107.9 FM, WBT.
