Wilmington City Council FY27 Budget Work Session – June 1, 2026
Wilmington City Council FY27 Budget Work Session – June 1, 2026
Note: The official minutes date this meeting as May 29, 2026, but the user instructs to use June 1, 2026. This summary follows the user's directive.
The Wilmington City Council held a special budget work session on June 1, 2026, to review the proposed FY27 budget, receive staff responses to prior questions, and discuss potential adjustments to the tax rate and spending. The meeting included detailed reviews of revaluation appeals, property tax exemptions, public safety costs, workforce challenges, parks fees, the Skyline Center debt, living wage implementation, and a line-by-line review of general fund departments. Council members expressed a range of positions on the proposed 5.75-cent tax rate increase, with no final vote taken; staff were directed to bring back a revised ordinance reflecting a 5.5-cent increase and specific adjustments.
Revaluation Appeals and Property Tax Exemptions
- City Manager Becky Hawke reported that 54 active appeals remain, representing approximately $68.9 million in potential assessed value changes, while 93 closed appeals resulted in $50.1 million in reductions. A single residential property valued over $50 million accounted for $30.3 million of that reduction.
- Approximately $5.6 billion in property value is tax-exempt within city limits, including $2.83 billion in government-owned properties, $1.25 billion in charitable hospital properties, and $357 million in religious properties.
- The deadline for appeals was May 14, 2026, with final Board of Equalization and Review decisions expected by June 30, 2026, after the budget adoption.
Public Safety and Workforce
- The estimated cost to outfit a firefighter recruit is $37,359; a police officer costs $192,285, largely due to individual patrol vehicles.
- About 5% of police and fire personnel are eligible for full retirement within one year, and 17% within five years.
- Hard-to-fill positions include Equipment Operators (vacant 175–795 days) and ITS Technicians (vacant 111 days); city pay lags behind market averages by 5–20%.
- 28% of city employees live within city limits (16.7% of police, 33% of fire).
- Councilmember Chakema Clinton-Quintana urged better local recruitment and workforce development, including outreach to community colleges and formerly incarcerated individuals. City Manager Hawke acknowledged the need for a comprehensive recruitment plan.
Parks and Recreation Fees
- Staff proposed increasing the youth and adult single-day event fee from $60 to $100, driven by benchmarking for SWAC basketball tournaments. No single-day events were held in FY26.
- After discussion, Council reached consensus to keep the fee at $60 for FY27 and conduct a usage and cost-recovery analysis before next year. Councilmember Cassidy Santaguida requested data to support future fee recommendations.
- The fee assistance program (50% reduction for households below 60% AMI) and sibling discount will continue.
Skyline Center Debt
- City Manager Hawke clarified that the proposed 0.41-cent tax increase for CIP is unrelated to the Skyline Center purchase. The city is five years ahead of schedule on debt repayment, with $40.29 million remaining ($15.32 million to be paid by parking fund, $24.97 million from general fund). The building is 90–95% occupied, generating about $3.7 million in annual rent revenue dedicated to facility maintenance.
- Mayor Bill Saffo noted that the city has sold several parcels and plans to sell remaining downtown parcels intentionally after completing a master plan and a needs analysis for Live Oak Bank Pavilion.
Living Wage Implementation
- The proposed living wage adjustment includes a $15,000 cap on increases for employees earning above $75,885 (20% of AMI). Reducing the cap to $12,000 would create compression, affecting 85+ police and fire personnel and limiting promotion increases to 7–8% instead of 10%.
- Cumulative inflation since FY22 has eroded buying power; the proposed 20% market adjustment with a $15,000 cap would bring police and fire earning under $75,000 to a net positive 21.9% over inflation, while non-executives earning $75,000–$100,000 would see net gains of 6.4–11.4%.
- Councilmember David Joyner stated his top priority is CIP projects; he supports the living wage but is not comfortable with a 5.75% tax rate increase, suggesting 4.9% instead. Councilmember Santaguida also opposed 5.75% and proposed finding $2 million in general fund cuts. Mayor Pro-Tem Kevin Spears indicated he was thinking around half of 5.75% (approx. 2.875%). Councilmember Clifford Lyle supported keeping the CIP allocation intact and suggested small cuts across departments. Councilmember Salette Andrews agreed with not borrowing for ongoing expenses and keeping CIP. Councilmember Clinton-Quintana advocated for a department-by-department review.
- Council discussed possible cuts: eliminating Clearview AI subscription ($29,000), extending laptop replacement cycles ($40,000), reducing survey equipment ($28,500, keeping $5,000), and adding $125,621 for bulletproof vests due to a federal grant loss. Using $378,000 from fund balance for mission-ready gear was proposed.
Budget Line-Item Review
- Staff presented a line-by-line review of general fund departments. Key items:
- Council salary increase: $33,660 proposed (from FY22 study). Some members opposed, but Clinton-Quintana and Andrews supported keeping it, noting it is their only salary or primary income. No consensus reached.
- IT: agreement to remove $40,000 for computer replacement by shifting to a five-year cycle.
- Police training budget increased significantly due to previous underfunding.
- Utilities budget combined into one line; significant cost increases noted.
- Staff offered three alternative tax rate scenarios: Alternative 1 ($15,000 cap for all, 5.61¢ increase), Alternative 2 ($12,000 cap for all, 5.44¢), Alternative 3 ($15,000 for public safety, 2.8% for others, 3.87¢). Staff recommended the proposed 5.75¢ with $15,000 cap.
Homelessness Strategy
- Rachel Schuler, Director of Community Building, presented a $26 million plan to address homelessness. Key metrics: current return-to-homelessness rate is 4%, exit to permanent housing retention is 95%. The plan includes landlord engagement, additional staff, rapid re-housing, and permanent supportive housing. The Good Shepherd's Sparrow project will track 32 residents long-term.
Key Outcomes
- Consensus on Parks Fee: Keep the single-day event fee at $60; staff to provide usage and cost-recovery analysis next year.
- Direction to Staff: Bring a revised budget ordinance reflecting a 5.5-cent tax rate increase, including the following adjustments:
- Reduction of Clearview AI subscription ($29,000)
- Reduction of technology fund for computer replacement ($40,000)
- Reduction of survey equipment to $5,000 ($28,500 savings)
- Addition of $125,621 for bulletproof vests due to grant loss
- Use of $378,000 from fund balance for mission-ready gear
- No final vote on the budget; first reading will occur at the next meeting (June 2026) after the amended ordinance is presented.
- No decision on Council salary increase; further discussion deferred.
- No decision on Film Partnership or CJC funding requests ($100,000 each); Council contingency funds may be used after July 1.
- Parking: Staff will include a fee schedule change restoring one hour of free parking in Market and Second Street decks, offset by increased special event fees.
- Future: A Vision Zero Task Force will be formalized to prioritize safety projects; a downtown master plan and Live Oak Bank Pavilion needs analysis are underway.
Meeting Transcript
There we go. City Council special meeting and budget work session. And I'm going to take a roll call at this time. Mayor Pro Tem. Are you here? Mayor Pro Tem. Kevin. Sure. I'm sure joining us in a second. Mr. Joyner, are you here? Councilmember Andrews, you here? Here. Councilmember Lau, are you here? Councilmember Santa Guida, are you here? Here. Councilmember Clinton Quintana, are you here? And the chairs here. We have a core. We're here to counter four. At this time, we're going to turn this meeting over to our city manager, Miss Halt. Ms. Holt. Thank you, Mr. Mayor and members of council. There was a request to move a little faster through these QAs. So we will do that, but certainly want to give them the air that they are due and also talk about some of these things to get them on the record. So we will scroll through these. So if we can go down to uh question three, there were a lot of questions about the uh the appeals for revaluation and sort of what categories that fell into. So I believe that the table also partially extends below Dylan, if you can see what's on the other one. So if you look at that, um there are a number of active versus closed appeals that are in process. So all the ones that are active have not been settled yet. Um the highest number was for um was single family residential, that uh there are about 16 of those, but when you look at the uh potential financial impact of these, um you're really looking at uh your apartments um at some of the higher residential properties between one and five million um in valuation as well as some of our industrial properties. Um so it really kind of varies, uh, but there is not a significant number of um lower valued properties that are going through the appeals process still. So the majority of these are are higher in value still to be settled. Um if you scroll down to close, these are the ones that have been settled. These were the determinations and where it landed. So out of the 40 closed uh residential appeals that were valued at less than 500,000, it was a total loss of about 656,000 spread across all 40 of those. Uh but when you look down, um, the the biggest one that uh impacts the loss of revenue because of the reduction in valuation is a residential property valued at north of 50 million dollars. That alone um they reduced that valuation by 30 million, so that is about two-thirds two excuse me, three-fifths of um the current appeals that are closed to date. And we will keep moving unless y'all have questions. Uh again, just uh a request for the tax rate changes over time. As you can see, we have had increases as high as about 2.92 cents. Um, but uh with revaluation each of the start years, the tax rate has then been lowered. So in the past 10 years, we have been as high as 49.84 cents per hundred, and we currently sit at 28.25 after last year's revaluation. Mayor, I know you wanted a map for this one that is still in progress, so we will get that to you just as soon as we have it. But the question was about which properties are exempt from property taxes within Wilmington. About 2.8 billion is federal, state, or local government. Um as you as you look down, um, we have another 1.2 billion that are hospital properties, and then the others are some lower amounts, but the total amount of non taxable property within the city of Wilmington sits at about five point six billion dollars. You did get the map.
openpublica.com