New Hanover County weighs 30.6¢ vs. 32.6¢ budget plans; staff recommends 30.6¢ and a May 18 public hearing

The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners spent the bulk of its April 30 meeting debating two options to balance the FY27 general fund: a 30.6¢ tax-rate scenario that uses roughly $3.9 million in fund balance and one‑time revenues, and a 32.6¢ scenario that would raise the rate by 2¢ and avoid drawing on reserves. County staff said they will transmit a recommended budget early next week and set a public hearing for May 18.

Amanda, the county presenter, said both scenarios include $800,000 in additional funding for New Hanover County Schools and restoration of pre‑K funding (about $900,000). She said staff also recommend using limited one‑time capital revenues and modestly increased borrowing to close the gap under the 30.6¢ option.

Environmental management staff proposed raising the landfill tip fee from $52 per ton to $61 per ton — a $9 increase — to cover a spike in capital needs in the county’s five‑year capital improvement plan. "As we develop the remaining cells on the southern property ... we have to move a lot of existing infrastructure," the landfill director said, citing duplicated facilities, relocated customer convenience sites and accelerated cell construction. Staff described the increase as intended to carry through the life of the capital plan, not as a one‑year charge.

Staff estimated the average household impact from the $9/ton fee would be about $2 per month, but cautioned that haulers set retail prices and could pass through higher charges; one staff member said he had seen a private hauler pass an increase that amounted to $20 per month for a single account. Commissioners pressed staff on the county’s limited ability to control privately set hauler rates; legal staff noted the enabling statute can allow rate-setting authority when granting new solid‑waste franchises but the county currently has no rate-setting control over existing franchise contracts.

Commissioners debated whether to protect the board’s fund‑balance policy floor (16.67%) and reserve the revenue stabilization fund (RSF) — staff said the RSF corpus is about $292 million — or to use a small portion of fund balance to avoid a tax increase. Several commissioners warned against repeatedly using one‑time funds for recurring expenses and urged caution about depleting reserves that buffer storm response or long reimbursement lags.

Manager-level staff said they would present a recommended budget to the board no later than May 18 and that a public hearing would be scheduled for that date if the recommended materials can be transmitted early next week. The board directed staff to provide additional options (including a 1.5¢ alternative) on request; no final tax‑rate vote was taken at the work session.

Next steps: staff will transmit a recommended budget early next week, the board scheduled a public hearing for May 18, and the budget process continues toward formal adoption before June 30.