| Part I (§1) — Southport deannexation (3 Brunswick parcels) | City loses tax base from 3 parcels; opposition would come from city | City of Southport — check SoS for direct contract lobbyist registration; if none, NCLM is the institutional voice. Brunswick County may be neutral or supportive (gains the parcels into county-only jurisdiction). | Lobbying center of gravity City of Southport — check SoS for direct contract lobbyist registration; if none, NCLM is the institutional voice. Brunswick County may be neutral or supportive (gains the parcels into county-only jurisdiction). Secondary players |
| Part II (§2) — Yadkinville deannexation + ETJ removal | Removing ETJ is significant — Yadkinville loses both tax base and zoning authority over the parcel | Town of Yadkinville — small-town, likely no in-house liaison or contract lobbyist; NCLM is the realistic voice. Yadkin County gains zoning jurisdiction (or the parcel goes unzoned, which is common in rural NC counties). | Lobbying center of gravity Town of Yadkinville — small-town, likely no in-house liaison or contract lobbyist; NCLM is the realistic voice. Yadkin County gains zoning jurisdiction (or the parcel goes unzoned, which is common in rural NC counties). Secondary players |
| Part III (§3) — Kannapolis deannexation (2 Cabarrus parcels) | Kannapolis is a more capable city — possible direct lobbying presence; the city has been an aggressive annexer, so a deannexation cuts against its growth strategy | City of Kannapolis — likeliest of the five to have a registered contract lobbyist or in-house government affairs liaison given its size (\~55K pop) and Research Campus politics. Worth a direct SoS lookup. | Lobbying center of gravity City of Kannapolis — likeliest of the five to have a registered contract lobbyist or in-house government affairs liaison given its size (\~55K pop) and Research Campus politics. Worth a direct SoS lookup. Secondary players |
| Part IV (§4) — Sunset Beach ETJ removal (1 Brunswick parcel) | ETJ-only — Sunset Beach loses development regulation over the parcel but no tax revenue | Town of Sunset Beach — small coastal town, almost certainly NCLM-only representation. Coastal ETJ removals attract environmental opposition. | Lobbying center of gravity Town of Sunset Beach — small coastal town, almost certainly NCLM-only representation. Coastal ETJ removals attract environmental opposition. Secondary players |
| Part VI (§6) — East Spencer added to G.S. 160A-58.1(b)(5) satellite-annexation exemption list | This is the only statewide statutory change in the entire bill — adds East Spencer to the \~150-municipality list exempt from the 10% satellite-annexation cap. This is the section where institutional lobbying actually matters. | NC League of Municipalities — NCLM tracks every amendment to G.S. 160A-58.1 because that statute is the master annexation framework. The League's standard posture is to support expanding municipal flexibility, so adding East Spencer fits the playbook. | Lobbying center of gravity NC League of Municipalities — NCLM tracks every amendment to G.S. 160A-58.1 because that statute is the master annexation framework. The League's standard posture is to support expanding municipal flexibility, so adding East Spencer fits the playbook. Secondary players |
| Part VIII (§8) — Effective date | Standard | — | Lobbying center of gravity — Secondary players |