University of North Carolina System employees were secretly recorded in four videos over several weeks professing support for DEI initiatives, despite system policies against them. The videos, published by conservative group Accuracy in Media (AIM), led to firings at UNC Charlotte, Asheville, and Western Carolina; UNC Wilmington is still reviewing. While legally permissible, experts question the ethics of AIM’s undercover methods, noting potential harm and credibility issues in journalism. AIM defends its approach as honest and necessary for exposing wrongdoing. The debate highlights tensions between legal rights, journalistic ethics, and the impact on individuals caught in such investigations.
by Kate Denning, Carolina Public Press June 23, 2025
A series of four videos over nearly four weeks have shown University of North Carolina System employees professing the continuation of DEI initiatives in their respective universities despite the system’s policies against such programs, the latest being out of UNC Wilmington.
But undercover reporters and freelancers recorded the videos, without introducing themselves as members of the press or announcing that they were recording the conversations. A group calling itself Accuracy in Media published the videos.
Since videos of administrators at UNC Charlotte, UNC Asheville and Western Carolina University have been released, the universities have each announced that the individuals are no longer employed. UNC Wilmington said last week that the employees’ actions are under review.
Accuracy in Media is a conservative watchdog organization, which says it uses “investigative journalism and citizen-led activism to expose government corruption, public policy failures and radical activists,” according to its website. It frequently publishes undercover investigations filmed with hidden cameras.
While making such undercover recordings appears to be legal in North Carolina, experts question the ethics of a supposed journalistic outlet using undercover methods.
Carolina Public Press asked Accuracy in Media last week about whether the organization had worked with anyone tied to the state’s university system in advance of gathering these videos, but the organization did not respond to that question prior to publication. Shortly after initial publication, the organization responded, “AIM did not work with the Universities prior to the investigations.”
In response to further questions from CPP about the timing of communications between the organization and other parties, AIM said, “Since the videos have been released, Accuracy in Media activists have sent 4,806 emails to the trustees. However, we have not had private communications with any trustee or legislator.”
Legally sound
On whether undercover journalists secretly recording is legal, media lawyer Mike Tadych told Carolina Public Press simply, “I don’t think that it’s illegal.” It’s important to consider whether the subject of undercover reporting has a reasonable expectation of privacy, he said.
“If you went into someone’s home pretending to be a general contractor and you’re not … and you engage them in a conversation, and it demonstrates that they’re racist and then you expose that, well, you would have lied to get into their house, so I think that expectation of privacy issue comes up,” Tadych said.
But in the case of the former employees at the universities, their positions as employees of public universities and the videos being filmed on public campuses lower the expectation of privacy, he said.
The landmark case Food Lion, Inc. v. Capital Cities/ABC, Inc. has long been a point of reference for investigative journalists. Two ABC News producers submitted applications to North and South Carolina Food Lion grocery stores with false references and misrepresented education and employment history and ultimately became employed at the stores in 1992.
Their use of hidden cameras while working at Food Lion enabled them to run a story on ABC’s PrimeTime Live alleging unsafe and unhealthy practices in the store’s deli. Food Lion sued the network in Greensboro’s federal court alleging fraud, breach of the duty of loyalty, trespass and unfair trade practices. The jury found ABC liable for fraud, trespass and disloyalty.
After both ABC and Food Lion appealed the outcome to the U.S. Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, it upheld the breach of loyalty and trespass claims but denied ABC committed fraud, which was largely considered a win for press freedom.
Tadych said media lawyers often reference this case to help journalists determine whether undercover reporting is a risk worth taking, as well as assessing the four invasion of privacy torts — appropriation of name or likeness, public disclosure of private facts, false light and intrusion upon seclusion. In this scenario, Tadych doesn’t see a clear legal path to claiming Accuracy in Media invaded the employees’ privacy.
“Is it actionable in a sense that there’s an invasion of privacy? I think it would be a very difficult claim, based on my knowledge of that area of law,” Tadych said.
“We do not have two of the four invasion of privacy torts. We do not have false light and we do not have publication of true but embarrassing private facts, and the other two are basically misappropriation.”
Ethical questions about universities videos
While the method of obtaining the videos of the employees at each of the universities appears to be in good legal standing, media experts raised concerns about the ethics of undercover reporting.
“Accuracy in Media’s conduct may be legally acceptable; it seems like it probably doesn’t violate the law, though you may see people arguing otherwise,” said Evan Ringel, a communication law and journalism ethics professor at Appalachian State University. “There is an argument that it violates traditional principles of journalism ethics.”
What’s legal may not necessarily be ethical and vice versa, Ringel said. He referred to the Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics, which gives four ethical principles for journalists to consider: seek truth and report it, minimize harm, act independently and be accountable and transparent.
There could be an argument that AIM violated one or more of these principles, particularly considering the employees who lost their jobs as a result of the videos, he said.
“There is very much an argument that that is not minimizing harm,” Ringel said. “There’s a counterargument, of course, but it’s at least an open question.”
Eric Deggans, a member of the National Advisory Board for the Poynter Institute for Media Studies and the Knight Chair in Journalism and Media Ethics at Washington and Lee University, said making ethical decisions as a journalist often means weighing risks.
“You have to ask yourself, is the damage that you’re going to do to your credibility as a reporter by misleading sources you’re reporting on, is it worth it for whatever it is you’re going to learn or report?” Deggans said.
“From my standpoint, as somebody who’s been a journalist for 30 years, there are very few things that would rise to that standard where it would be worth damaging my credibility as a journalist in order to get access to learn something. And I feel like a lot of times, the things that are learned can be learned through ethical reporting.”
In an era where journalists already struggle to gain and maintain the public’s trust, reporters who mislead sources will only hurt the cause, Deggans said. It can also cause confusion for those who don’t have an understanding of how journalists tend to do their jobs.
“The people who don’t know much about journalism will assume that journalists mislead sources all the time, and they might be suspicious when a journalist comes to them,” he said.
President of Accuracy in Media Adam Guillette told Carolina Public Press AIM’s style of hidden camera journalism is essential to its investigative work.
“Undercover, hidden camera, investigative journalism is by far the most honest, accurate and ethical form of journalism,” Guillette said. “It’s essential for when you’re going to expose people who are breaking rules and breaking laws.”
He cited the use of anonymous sources and written quotes, which he said can be used to make up sources or take quotes out of context unbeknownst to the reader. AIM’s videos are longer and thus provide greater context than local television and print media, he said.
Critics sometimes describe AIM’s strategies as “gotcha journalism,” an interviewing method intended to elicit statements that could be damaging to the interviewee’s image.
When asked about this criticism, Guillette said journalists often complain about AIM’s methods but don’t contact them for comment, leading to one-sided stories. Although he later said AIM always seeks to uphold ethical standards.
“We always adhere to the law, and certainly it’s our goal to make sure that every video presents the subjects in the most honest, appropriate context,” Guillette said.
“Unlike, unfortunately, many people in the media today, we don’t quote people out of context. We don’t want to do gotcha journalism. We exist to provide journalism that’s much better than what we see from many mainstream outlets.”
Ringel and Deggans both pointed out that the journalism industry does not have a licensing system or ethics board to determine when journalists behave ethically or who is considered a journalist at all.
While this helps maintain a free press, the lines can get blurred on what is considered good practice or a good journalist. That also appears to apply to these undercover videos involving the universities.
“Anyone should be free to practice journalism if they choose to try it,” Deggans said. “But that also means that the audience has to be careful about who they trust and about what kind of reporting they consume and how much credibility they give to it.”
Editor’s note: This article has been updated twice after initial publication to include responses from the Accuracy in Media group.
Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.
Political Bias Rating: Center-Right
This article presents information on a controversy involving DEI initiatives at public universities and undercover investigations by Accuracy in Media, a known conservative watchdog group. The coverage provides context about the legal and ethical concerns of undercover journalism, including critiques from media ethics experts, while also giving space for AIM’s defense. However, the inclusion of details about AIM’s conservative lean, the framing of the DEI programs as contentious, and the emphasis on the legality and ethics of undercover conservative-style watchdog journalism points to a center-right perspective. The article is largely informative but subtly frames the issue with a conservative-leaning outlook by giving prominence to AIM and portraying its methods as essential and principled investigative journalism.
The University of North Carolina-Asheville plans to build a 5,000-seat soccer stadium on 45 acres of woodland south of its campus, partnered with Asheville City SC and a private developer (unnamed). The $200+ million development includes retail and market-rate housing but lacks clarity on affordability and community impact. The project faces strong opposition from local residents concerned about environmental loss and neighborhood disruption. UNCA claims economic benefits, job creation, and increased housing stock but has not disclosed detailed plans or an economic impact report. Critics call for transparency, fearing privatization of public land and exclusion from decision-making.
On June 13, the University of North Carolina-Asheville confirmed a rumor that had circulated for months: It plans to build a soccer stadium on the land currently occupied by 45 acres of woods south of its main campus.
The plan, developed in collaboration with the amateur soccer club Asheville City SC, calls for a 5,000-seat stadium surrounded by retail and market-rate housing, to be built over the remainder of this decade. It would be followed by an as-yet-unannounced project on university property on the other side of Broadway Street. Both properties are part of the school’s Millennial Campus holdings, a designation that allows for public-private partnerships typically outlawed on campuses in the UNC System.
Just as the plan’s announcement has answered one much-asked question — what is to become of the woods? — it has, in turn, unleashed many more, none of which the school has been keen to answer.
Who’s involved in the project? UNCA and Asheville City SC are working with a private developer, Chancellor Kimberly van Noort confirmed last week, but neither the school nor the club will identify it.
UNCA and Asheville City SC are working with a private developer, Chancellor Kimberly van Noort confirmed last week, but neither the school nor the club will identify it. // Photo credit: UNCA
How could it affect the local economy? The school has boasted job-creation and tax-generation projections but hasn’t said how it came to those numbers.
And what does it mean for students, faculty and the surrounding community? Van Noort said the development will provide badly needed housing but she did not commit to making it affordable, and the school has said nothing about what types of events, outside school athletics and Asheville City SC matches, might take place at the stadium.
UNCA has given an estimate of what the whole project will cost: more than $200 million. Much of the price tag and risk, it says, will be taken on by the developer, which in return will get to design, build and operate the whole development, and to own the retail, housing and parking (though the state will retain ownership of the ground beneath it). But the university will be seeking public subsidies amounting to $29 million, half the projected cost of the stadium. Exactly how it will secure that money is not clear yet, either.
Chancellor presents plan to Board of Governors committee
In the time since UNCA unveiled its plan, it has generated an array of intense responses. Community members, who have pleaded for the woods to be preserved since UNCA began exploring their development in January, viewed it as a disaster. Not only would this proposal herald the end of what they see as a natural urban haven, they said — it would dramatically change the character of north Asheville.
“This would destroy our neighborhood and our way of life, full stop, no question,” said Chris Cotteta, president of the Five Points Neighborhood Association. “People will leave. Property values will plummet. We have an incredibly strong and connected community here, and it would be torn to shreds.”
“This would destroy our neighborhood and our way of life, full stop, no question,” said Chris Cotteta, president of the Five Points Neighborhood Association, describing the impact of UNCA’s plans for a 5,000-seat soccer stadium on 45 acres woods south of its main campus. // Watchdog photo by Starr Sariego
On Wednesday, van Noort presented the idea to members of the UNC System’s Board of Governors, which will have to approve the project before it moves forward. (They did not vote at the meeting, which was set solely for van Noort to go over the plan.)
Some of them heaped unvarnished praise on the project: Kirk J. Bradley, a real estate executive and venture capitalist who serves as the chair of the board’s budget and finance committee, called it a “win-win” that would give the school a “competitive advantage.” The most pointed questions came from John Fraley, a former state House member from Mooresville, who said van Noort needed to return with more detail on myriad aspects of the plan — and pointed out that she’d made no mention of the blowback to the idea.
“There’s nothing in the presentation that really talks about the area, so to speak,” Fraley said, noting that he’d followed news coverage over the woods debate. “I think it would be appropriate for the Board of Governors to have a better understanding of that once you’ve talked to the community and all of that.”
UNCA has argued that each aspect of its plan holds promise for the school and the surrounding community. The stadium, it said, would “draw people from across the region and state” for matches and other events. The housing, proposed at 300 to 450 units, would alleviate on-campus overcrowding and bolster the city’s housing stock. Combined, the woods development and the unannounced plans for the property across Broadway would “bring in investments of over $250 million, hundreds of jobs, and substantial increases in new sales tax revenue each year.”
There is demand for a major soccer facility in Asheville, said Jan Davis, a member of the Asheville Buncombe Regional Sports Commission’s board of directors and a former city council member. An on-campus stadium, in addition to serving the school’s teams, could provide both a permanent home for Asheville City SC and a way to compete in the booming youth sports industry.
Community members, who have pleaded for the woods to be preserved since UNCA began exploring their development in January, viewed the announcement of a soccer stadium as a disaster. Several members of the UNC System’s Board of Governors heaped praise on the plan. // Watchdog photo by Starr Sariego
“I think it’s one of the real disappointing things with the sports commission — we don’t have enough venues to get tourism visitation to the level we should have it,” he said.
The teams that would call the stadium home have not yet shown they can reliably fill a 5,000-seat venue. Asheville City SC, which played its first season in 2017, reportedly drew more than 2,000 spectators to some matches at Memorial Stadium. In 2023, amid renovations to Memorial that changed the size of its soccer pitch, the team moved to UNC-Asheville’s Greenwood Field.
Ryan Kelley, the club’s president, declined to provide attendance figures. He said attendance had dropped since the move to Greenwood, which he attributed to the field’s infrastructure, including limited seating.
“Our attendance figures on both the men’s and women’s sides were among the best in the country at our level when we were at Memorial with access to the capacity and facilities required to put on events of that size,” he said in an email. “A purpose-built stadium will allow our teams to move up to the next level and unlock the club’s full potential.” (Asheville City is an amateur club; its men’s team plays in USL League Two, which has 144 teams across the U.S. and is considered one of the country’s highest-level amateur leagues; its women’s team plays in the USL W League, which has 93 teams.)
Recent crowds at UNCA games have been sparse: In the handful of games played at home last season before Tropical Storm Helene sent them on the road for the rest of the year, the men drew an average of 354 per game, the women an average of 261.
Van Noort said Wednesday that the school plans for the stadium to host 90 revenue-generating events each year, not including UNCA games. Asheville City SC’s men’s and women’s teams each play about a half-dozen home games per year, leaving nearly 80 slots to fill, and UNCA has not said what types of events may take place there.
“We’re imagining Kenny Chesney concerts blaring out of that thing,” said Elizabeth Pritchitt, a resident of the nearby Five Points neighborhood and an advocate for preserving the woods.
Pritchitt said she was also dismayed by the university’s characterization of the woods as they stand today. Van Noort’s presentation described them as “unused land” that the university could turn “into an active portion of campus that generates economic activity.
But as Pritchitt and others have noted, UNCA has long made use of the woods in ways that go beyond their recreational utility. One report, created by a faculty advisory committee, found that the area is “routinely used” by 18 biology and environmental science classes.
“The South Campus wooded area is not just green space,” the report declared. “It is a living laboratory, an irreplaceable resource that has supported extensive, grant-funded research critical to both our institution and the broader scientific community.”
Economic impact report remains in UNCA’s hands
More insight into how UNCA envisions the stadium being used could be contained in an economic impact report, a document typically prepared in the early stages of planning for projects involving public lands or funds. It would also explain how the university arrived at its job and tax projections. It might show what kind of jobs would be created — and whether any would transcend the short-term construction gigs and part-time stadium personnel positions that usually come with venue-building projects.
Van Noort, citing “estimates from the economic impact summary,” alluded to the existence of such a document Wednesday, and Asheville Watchdog has submitted a public records request for it, along with a slew of other documents. UNCA has not released it, nor any of the other requested records.
A billboard on Merrimon Avenue heralds the effort to save UNCA’s urban woods from development. // Watchdog photo by Starr Sariego
The school’s housing plans remain similarly opaque. In March — when UNCA announced that it would seek to develop the woods, two months after heavy equipment first arrived to survey the property — van Noort said that “affordable workforce and student housing” was on the table.
Even the staunchest defenders of the woods have readily acknowledged a need to improve the housing stock at or near UNCA. The school filled its on-campus housing over capacity last fall, and rent increases in recent years have made living off campus more difficult for students. Demand is not likely to ease: Enrollment has started to bounce back after a long period of decline, and the school hopes to add about 800 more students by the end of the decade. Faculty members have also signaled a need for more workforce housing as Asheville’s cost of living climbs.
UNCA filled its on-campus housing over capacity last fall, and rent increases in recent years have made living off campus more difficult for students. Demand is not likely to ease: Enrollment has started to bounce back after a long period of decline, and the school hopes to add about 800 more students by the end of the decade. // Watchdog photo by Starr Sariego
More than a third of UNCA students receive Pell Grants, according to the school’s website, meaning they fit the federal government’s definition of showing “exceptional financial need.” About a quarter of them are first-generation college students.
“This will be a way for us to provide good housing for students but also amenities and opportunities for them to gather socially,” van Noort said Wednesday. “The economic and community engagement impact is high.”
She described that housing as “market rate,” not affordable or workforce housing.
“The developer has proposed that they work with local and state entities in the future to subsidize and make sure the housing is accessible for the community here,” she said.
Whether incorporating reduced-cost housing will be a requirement or not is unclear.
So is the identity of the developer.
Developer to have great power over UNCA land
Whoever develops the stadium project, should it move forward, will have a great deal of power over UNCA’s land. According to the school’s proposal, the developer would design, build, finance, own and operate the housing, the 30,000 to 50,000 square feet of retail space, and roughly 1,500 spaces worth of parking, including a thousand-spot parking deck. It would also hold most responsibility over the stadium, which would be owned by an LLC established by the school’s endowment fund.
This arrangement could also allow much of the planning for a major project on public land to be hidden from the public. Though UNCA and its endowment fund are both subject to public record disclosure laws, a private developer wouldn’t be, said Pate McMichael, director of the North Carolina Open Government Coalition. Plans created by the developer would become public records as soon as they’re shared with the school, he said, but they’d be shielded until then.
“We know this is a controversial decision in the community, and I think erring on the side of sunshine here is going to be really smart for the university if there’s going to be good will,” McMichael said. “Whoever gets this contract is going to be able to make a lot of important decisions that the public won’t have tremendous access to.”
“We know this is a controversial decision in the community, and I think erring on the side of sunshine here is going to be really smart for the university if there’s going to be good will. Whoever gets this contract is going to be able to make a lot of important decisions that the public won’t have tremendous access to.”
Pate McMichael, director of the North Carolina Open Government Coalition
So far, though, even the identity of the developer has been closely guarded. Van Noort made it clear Wednesday that the school has someone in mind: Asked during the meeting how the presentation came together, she said Asheville City SC has “been working with a private developer.”
She did not name the developer. The Watchdog has asked UNCA to identify the developer multiple times but has not received an answer. In an email Wednesday, Kelley, the club president, said he was “not able to comment on development partners as those discussions are ongoing.”
The first glimpse of what the project could look like comes from a drawing contained in van Noort’s presentation, attributed to Civil Design Concepts, a local engineering firm. The stadium sits in the middle of what’s now the wooded area, with housing and retail spiraling outward. New roads and roundabouts would connect the bordering streets.
The design — which seems to drop roads and buildings directly atop the undulating terrain of the urban forest — is perplexing, “a missed opportunity and somewhat depressing to look at,” said Joe Minicozzi, a certified city planner and the principal of the Asheville-based Urban3 planning group.
Minicozzi is no opponent of development on principle. He has not joined calls to save the woods, and he said he believes that UNCA could make good use of the land, particularly for housing. But he said he could scarcely make sense of the design, a loop largely closed off from its neighborhood. The arrangement, which would require prospective shoppers to drive into the development to visit stores rather than encounter them organically, would look more at home in the suburbs than it does a short drive from the city center, he said. It seemed to reflect the insular nature of UNCA’s handling of the property, he said.
“It can be good for the campus, it can be great for the neighborhood and it can be great for the community, but it doesn’t seem like there’s even an interest to have that conversation, which is weird,” he said.
He wondered if a necessarily flat soccer stadium made sense in this hilly part of town compared, say, to the banks of the French Broad River. He questioned whether stores could survive in a complex with little foot traffic outside soccer matches and other events. But he also recognized that, aside from asking questions, most people in Asheville have no power when it comes to UNCA’s land.
“They hold all the cards,” he said. “They can do whatever the hell they want.”
Asheville Watchdog welcomes thoughtful reader comments about this story, which has been republished on our Facebook page. Please submit your comments there.
Asheville Watchdog is a nonprofit news team producing stories that matter to Asheville and Buncombe County. Jack Evans is an investigative reporter who previously worked at the Tampa Bay Times. You can reach him via email at jevans@avlwatchdog.org. The Watchdog’s reporting is made possible by donations from the community. To show your support for this vital public service go to avlwatchdog.org/support-our-publication/.
Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.
Political Bias Rating: Center-Left
This article exhibits a center-left bias by emphasizing community concerns, environmental preservation, and transparency in public development projects. It critically highlights the potential negative impacts on local neighborhoods, the environment, and questions around affordability and public access to information. The tone supports community activism and accountability while recognizing economic development benefits, showing a balanced but progressive perspective that favors environmental conservation and social equity alongside development. It refrains from outright partisan framing but leans toward cautious skepticism of corporate/private developer influence and governmental opacity, typical of center-left reporting.
SUMMARY: Iran claims it launched an attack on U.S. forces at Qatar’s Al Udeid Air Base amid heightened tensions and U.S. forces in the Middle East being on alert for retaliation. Questions remain about the effectiveness of a recent U.S. strike on Iran’s nuclear sites, with President Trump declaring the attack a complete success. However, military officials say damage assessments are ongoing, especially regarding underground facilities like Fordo, where bunker-buster bombs were used. Meanwhile, missile exchanges between Israel and Iran continue. President Trump has suggested regime change in Iran, though the administration states the goal is ending Iran’s nuclear program. The U.S. embassy in Qatar has advised Americans to shelter in place.
Witnesses said they saw what appeared to be missiles in the skies over the country.
www.thecentersquare.com – By Alan Wooten | The Center Square – (The Center Square – ) 2025-06-23 08:20:00
Transportation fuel prices in North Carolina surged recently, with regular unleaded gasoline rising 6 cents statewide last week, and up to 17 cents in some areas. The average price is $2.92 per gallon, still 30 cents below the national average of $3.22. Diesel averages $3.53, slightly below the national $3.67. Neighboring states show mixed prices, with Tennessee and South Carolina lower, and Georgia and Virginia higher. North Carolina’s electric vehicle charging costs average 33.1 cents per kWh, below the national 36.1 cents. The state’s 2025 gas tax is 40.3 cents per gallon, funding transportation projects through the Highway Fund and Highway Trust Fund.
(The Center Square) – Transportation energy prices skyrocketed over the weekend in North Carolina, with a gallon of unleaded regular gasoline up 6 cents on average in the past week.
In some locations, the rise from Friday to Monday was 17 cents.
The state’s $2.92 average remains 30 cents below the national average of $3.22, with the highest averages in central northern border counties and along the coast. One stretch with the lowest is from Fayetteville to the southeast toward South Carolina’s perennially lower costs.
Combustion engine consumers, which make up more than 8 million vehicle registrations, are paying $3.53 on average for diesel. Nationally, it’s $3.67.
For those traveling out of state, among border states Tennessee ($2.85) and South Carolina ($2.89) are less on unleaded gasoline, and Georgia ($2.96) and Virginia ($3.09) are more. In three weeks, Georgia is up 8 cents, South Carolina 12 cents, Tennessee 15 cents, and Virginia 14 cents.
At the turn of the calendar new year, the statewide average was $2.86, and the national average was $3.04.
North Carolina’s electric vehicle charging rate average, according to AAA, is 33.1 cents per kilowatt-hour. The national average is 36.1 cents per kwh. More than 100,000 zero emission vehicles are registered in the state.
Among 14 major metro areas, the least expensive average for unleaded gas is in Jacksonville at $2.84. Most expensive is the Durham-Chapel Hill metro area ($2.97).
Diesel is the most consumer-friendly ($3.43) in Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton.
North Carolina’s 40.3 cents per gallon tax rate for 2025 is topped by California (59.6), Pennsylvania (57.6), Washington (49.4), Illinois (47), Maryland (46.1), and New Jersey (44.9).
The motor fuel excise tax rate in the state is the amount for the preceding calendar year (40.4), multiplied by a percentage. The percentage is plus or minus the sum of the annual percentage change in state population for the applicable calendar year, multiplied by 75% and the annual energy index percentage change in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers, multiplied by 25%, the state Department of Transportation explains on its website.
Motor fuel taxes in the state go to the Department of Transportation’s highway and multi-modal projects, adding up to just more than half of the state transportation resources. Specifically, the revenues go into the Highway Fund and the Highway Trust Fund.
Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.
Political Bias Rating: Centrist
This article provides a straightforward report on recent changes in transportation energy prices in North Carolina, including gasoline, diesel, and electric vehicle charging rates. It focuses on factual data such as price averages, regional comparisons, tax rates, and how fuel taxes are allocated within the state. The tone is neutral and informational, without editorializing or framing the information to support any particular political or ideological stance. It reports on government tax policies and market data without expressing opinion or advocating for policy changes, adhering to a balanced, fact-based approach typical of centrist reporting.
