[{"_1":2,"_110":-5,"_111":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,74,86,98],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},"mediaId",6217098,"mediaKeyId","3649479-d5c5cf06e7cf0a3980239e8034a5ffc7","parentId",3649479,"title","Raleigh council declines to fund a city historian position in FY26 proposal; one‑time cost estimated about $118,000","audioSeconds",172,"startMs",819000,"endMs",991000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3649479-d5c5cf06e7cf0a3980239e8034a5ffc7&start=819&end=991","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3649479-d5c5cf06e7cf0a3980239e8034a5ffc7/thumbnail_819000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6217098/Raleigh/Wake-County/North-Carolina/Raleigh-council-declines-to-fund-a-city-historian-position-in-FY26-proposal-onetime-cost-estimated-about-118000","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6217098-282d37685939347f0ef3ef98fe95d11d/orig.mp4?Expires=1775320277&Signature=jLNJNq98STQoNf275mGD7GDHGe4zyCJ456MlBkpinq8IDMGTilFCCz09v-~StrrRBIbUbyAXNrihJvzikZ~220Qgo3BPHDfQCtgzGYAPjR2L~Gh4JCiU0j9DSNwKRROyYvp9N3t1vLhPf3uIdKCCfjKfAwZ0vouZdtcqvgun9bDh4ijBQS9B4AOiGS0TXg~ioWoylD~wzwJskypJ0AEIOawTqQp2EznAcmLCXxMejzSbgQBqLQptDV7z2rR59zb4PB9J6Ezb2wZ82f3ZsGvgeuNXGOeLFx7PIxBG9Hcs-eooW0-SAUZLHbi2ItFccP2-tjs26bZADfAIf5~LU3P0~w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-06-03T08:49:53Z","article","A council budget note requesting creation of a city historian position was discussed and staff said the FY26 proposed budget does not fund the role.

Sadia Sitar, Budget and Management Services, summarized the budget note, said the city clerk had provided background in a city manager’s update and that benchmarking found no other North Carolina jurisdiction with a dedicated city‑historian position. Sitar noted existing local resources that perform cultural and historical roles, including the City Museum, Mordecai House and the Tucker House.

Parks staff provided an estimated cost if the city hired a historian; Sitar said that figure is “about a hundred and $18,000-ish” but reiterated the position is not included in the FY26 proposed budget. Council members indicated no action was required at the work session on the historian request.

No motion or appropriation was made.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Raleigh City Council Budget Work Session - June 2, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Council budget note requesting a city historian was reviewed; staff reported no jurisdiction in the state has a comparable position, Raleigh has museum partners, and the FY26 proposed budget does not fund a historian. Parks staff estimated the cost at roughly $118,000.","taxTitle","Raleigh, Wake County, North Carolina","taxId",4736,"location","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":77,"_43":78,"_45":79,"_47":80,"_49":81,"_51":82,"_53":83,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":84,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":85,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},6217104,"Three Raleigh intersections with safety concerns included in Vision Zero capital budget for FY26",2448,858000,3306000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3649479-d5c5cf06e7cf0a3980239e8034a5ffc7&start=858&end=3306","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3649479-d5c5cf06e7cf0a3980239e8034a5ffc7/thumbnail_858000.jpg","/articles/6217104/Raleigh/Wake-County/North-Carolina/Three-Raleigh-intersections-with-safety-concerns-included-in-Vision-Zero-capital-budget-for-FY26","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6217104-85fde652eb3223e5a545f420f57386e2/orig.mp4?Expires=1775320277&Signature=no-Kmo7pizxP4H3W2eOAnBocTClmU3yu-CqkmB~wtgb-No9JoOHsoAEAqVtV6xp63cxohO2OMlx4vahbCN5L56nBzO6l~-AvAkW7sz90uCj8BIz1NnajJPtI2KodGkuQD~AOYlEEhOLAh6qDAdOaSKPRddlihDQXGLzxuvv~SHtiGrsHzxWYtBGgb6GbaJvCHFaqJKh0ddQ6NjbDLqvdLFfnflEURmZN9Furj942WzwVMbZOftTEPgWo3rms63i3CNXLGt9mKb8C3z3jquelElnnAZ7nbH-wQRS9UsoP0NSQpFplQj4Tvo8oS17ju6NDMvMyWOPCM5OMM1Z627dWfQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City budget staff told the council that three intersections the council flagged for safety concerns are included in the proposed FY26 capital budget under the Vision Zero safety program and that funding for sidewalk and wheelchair‑ramp improvements is included.

Sadia Sitar, Budget and Management Services, said those three intersections are budgeted through the Vision Zero safety program and that “updates to the sidewalks, wheelchair ramps, and any such improvements” are funded at approximately $1,300,000 in the FY26 annual budget. Council members confirmed there was no further action necessary at the work session for that budget note.

No motion or vote was taken; the projects are reflected in the capital budget as described by staff.","Staff reported that three intersections identified by council as having safety concerns were funded in the FY26 capital budget under Raleigh's Vision Zero safety program at roughly $1.3 million; no further action requested.",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":89,"_43":90,"_45":91,"_47":92,"_49":93,"_51":94,"_53":95,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":96,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":97,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},6217108,"Raleigh has $17 million available for rental development but received $55.5 million in requests, leaving 1,335 units unfunded",289,1141000,1430000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3649479-d5c5cf06e7cf0a3980239e8034a5ffc7&start=1141&end=1430","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3649479-d5c5cf06e7cf0a3980239e8034a5ffc7/thumbnail_1141000.jpg","/articles/6217108/Raleigh/Wake-County/North-Carolina/Raleigh-has-17-million-available-for-rental-development-but-received-555-million-in-requests-leaving-1335-units-unfunded","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6217108-ef553c368c31b3de21a1a209bdaab0b2/orig.mp4?Expires=1775320277&Signature=WxnTG8i2hj7cuYjYerVnnng4dSATM-R1ryk4uuZAfMofA2qStXsxWUNtZmRqF0wRAgJVeRDVMoxqnQ2mWx8Awe2lxlGf7S7q7gLkN47vJYUfGBzFrY3WUoYQkCcLGFZEzV3D8RwUuXOSnjxtki6nZWbzX4GSVfwG3QzYXxKmvGO0mzEM5PCM~F23745rQBz~PsYU5YgYQXLySRk8Fjetn1Ad5DAvT~qPjPSVVTC~VZsqxAG53ors4PRyJ5YxvdZdRGT5fDwJOmX2r3cTpMOI48seVyiYtzpGh61a4PCMRINp4b2bcf~d5IxtO-CE1I7TDPP9PwcJRjVsMimifTFmEQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City of Raleigh housing staff told the council the city has about $17 million available for rental development gap financing but received roughly $55.5 million in requests for fiscal year 2025, leaving a large unfunded pipeline.

Sadia Sitar, Budget and Management Services, relayed the housing briefing and introduced Emily Sutton, director of Housing and Neighborhoods, who explained the competitive scoring process. “These are competitive application process. So these are the 11 that did not score high enough to achieve the funding,” Sutton said. She said 17 total projects applied, six were funded and those six led to funding for 670 units; the 11 unfunded projects account for about 1,335 units.

Council members asked whether applicants could return in future rounds. Sutton said projects sometimes do come back but “we don't know that for sure.” Council member Harrison and others pressed staff on how close available funding could get to the requested total; staff noted the two clear options to expand gap financing are a property‑tax increase or borrowing through bonds.

No council action was taken at the session. Council asked staff to post the housing allocation detail in the manager’s update and to return with any additional analysis that might show multi‑year or bond financing options for the unfunded projects.","Housing staff reported $17 million available for rental development gap financing for FY25, funding six projects that produced 670 units while 11 competitive applications (about 1,335 units) were not funded; council asked whether unfunded projects could reapply.",{"_33":99,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":100,"_41":101,"_43":102,"_45":103,"_47":104,"_49":105,"_51":106,"_53":107,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":108,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":109,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},6217114,"Raleigh council debates funding separation allowance for firefighters, weighing raises vs. long‑term liability",2366,931000,3297000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3649479-d5c5cf06e7cf0a3980239e8034a5ffc7&start=931&end=3297","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3649479-d5c5cf06e7cf0a3980239e8034a5ffc7/thumbnail_931000.jpg","/articles/6217114/Raleigh/Wake-County/North-Carolina/Raleigh-council-debates-funding-separation-allowance-for-firefighters-weighing-raises-vs-longterm-liability","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6217114-d8f7bbad9e2299157ff8acadd8d6234e/orig.mp4?Expires=1775320277&Signature=QVeOTmU6be4qFwAH2Tm5sUJSBHjCsQpNdnwjIuCu7ok17FEk4--Oil6DN1xLUgEUe9w~bdeCvN4XkgZsDl4-TLSf1Y7ACLcDByN2eVtFm76uz78r7YlxwjAr3oTJ0V-9XHKGpr9OvN9PvwNnmmN5lLs51aWrT1XRBrbzvPZUU6u7ALgxIY2ESQTbqOs2rBTwIUssbq9~oJAj-WPp26ZfbvKQRKtZvy2hGbP34OthcSUcqajxnxlxs3ydMNEAcAnBQk7OgR~Ghe~eNwbrgFG1HmfUA4Oc-2Wh7orB~3E4kYnE1Pu9l07foWgPESE1CZYm-Dsl3vAO9AJXoNFjjDSJ-g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City of Raleigh budget staff presented actuarial estimates for a proposed separation allowance for firefighters and several other operating departments, prompting a multihour council discussion about trade‑offs between one‑time salary increases and a long‑term benefit.

Sadia Sitar, Budget and Management Services, told the council the separation allowance is “a temporary benefit payable at retirement till the age of 62” and said the actuarial work showed an unfunded amount and an annual cost to reach full funding. She said the consultant’s data put the total actuarial cost shown on the slide at about $9,726,000 and that roughly 48% — about $4.6 million — would be attributable to Raleigh Fire. Sitar also noted a larger liability figure referenced during the discussion: “you take that, that $32,000,000 and there’s a plan to pay it back over 20 years,” a finance staff member said during the meeting.

Council members disagreed on how to proceed. Council member Harrison and others suggested using portions of the compensation‑study allocation already in the proposed budget to fund separation allowance, or proposing a small dedicated tax increase (referred to informally as “a penny for public safety”). Opposing council members urged caution about adding an other‑post‑employment liability, noting the city’s existing long‑term liabilities and the uncertainty of investment returns.

Finance staff and the council clarified funding mechanics. Jennifer Stevens, Finance, explained the city generally funds long‑term liabilities on an actuarial basis rather than strictly pay‑as‑you‑go and said that approach is “highly recommended.” Ryan (finance staff) summarized how an actuarial funding plan would first pay the annual normal cost then amortize the preexisting liability over a multi‑year schedule.

Councilors asked for specific, comparable figures before any policy decision: the percent salary increase that would remain for firefighters if part of the compensation pool were redirected to separation allowance; the monthly impact cited in the packet (an 11% salary increase would be about $700 a month before taxes for an average firefighter); and how much separation allowance funding would reduce that monthly increase. Multiple council members asked staff to conduct a department‑wide, impartial “flash poll” of firefighters (administered by HR) so that employee preferences between immediate pay and a retirement‑era benefit could inform the decision.

No motion or formal vote was taken. Council directed staff to provide the requested calculations and to prepare materials for the next budget work session so members could weigh (1) using compensation funds, (2) a small property‑tax increase, or (3) another funding approach. Mayor Pro Tem Ford, who sponsored the budget note that prompted the actuarial review, joined several colleagues in asking that staff also clarify whether other operating departments would be included if council chose to adopt separation allowance citywide.

Councilors repeatedly emphasized that any decision would create a continuing liability. As one council member summarized, “this is in perpetuity,” and would affect future budgets and recruitment if not coordinated with multi‑year compensation planning.

The council did not adopt a policy or appropriation at the session; staff will return with the requested math, an HR‑administered employee poll for firefighters, and a recommended path for whether to treat only fire or include other operating departments.","City staff presented actuarial estimates for a proposed separation allowance and council members debated using FY26 compensation funds, a small tax increase, or reallocating salary increases; no formal action taken, staff directed to provide further analysis and to survey fire personnel.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Raleigh council declines to fund a city historian position in FY26 proposal; one‑time cost estimated about $118,000

Three Raleigh intersections with safety concerns included in Vision Zero capital budget for FY26

Raleigh has $17 million available for rental development but received $55.5 million in requests, leaving 1,335 units unfunded

Raleigh council debates funding separation allowance for firefighters, weighing raises vs. long‑term liability