Cabarrus County commissioners reviewed five years of county spending and gave staff guidance to continue building the FY budget while weighing property-tax choices, possible cuts to nonessential programs and the impacts of mandated services.

County budget staff presented a side-by-side, “apples-to-apples” comparison of the countygeneral-fund and CIF fund expenditures from 2020 through 2025. Staff said the combined expenditures grew from about $275,000,000 in 2020 to about $411,000,000 in 2025, a change of roughly $135,000,000. By function, the largest increases cited were public safety (about $44,000,000), education (about $29,000,000) and human services (about $24,000,000).

Staff told the board that the presentation focused on the expenditure side only and removed intra-fund transfers so numbers would not be double-counted; the comparison excludes the school appropriation, which staff said remained outstanding. County staff also explained that about 80% of county program spending is for state- or federally mandated services, and that the recent increase in human-services spending is related in part to Medicaid expansion and federally funded programs.

Commissioners discussed options for the property tax rate. One commissioner noted the current county rate as 0.576 and said raising it to 0.586 would produce about $4.7 million; that commissioner offered an illustrative household impact, saying a median house valued at $356,000 would pay roughly $2.97 more per month (about $35 per year) under that scenario. Commissioners did not vote on any tax-rate change during the meeting.

Several commissioners pressed for reducing or eliminating county funding for economic-development incentives. One commissioner said, “II've already said I want no funding for the EDC," and argued incentives constitute an improper use of taxpayer funds. Another commissioner said they opposed fully defunding the economic-development corporation because a smaller appropriation (the board discussed a roughly $250,000 reduction figure mentioned in the budget) would preserve workforce and small-business programs the EDC runs.

Board members also discussed the consequences of moving the tax rate downward. Staff warned that lowering the rate this fiscal year would reduce base revenue and magnify funding gaps in future years: staff projected that a tax-rate cut large enough to reduce near-term revenue would require finding substantially larger gaps the next year (staff cited examples that could grow to the low tens of millions in subsequent years depending on compounding and growth assumptions). Commissioners asked staff to show the fiscal impact of a two-cent reduction scenario so the board could weigh tradeoffs without making immediate decisions.

Vacancies and position savings were raised as potential offsets. Staff said removing all current vacant positions would produce roughly $9.9 million in savings, but noted many vacancies are in public safety and that cutting vacancy budgets could significantly affect sheriff and EMS hiring and operations. Commissioners reiterated prior direction to staff that they do not want layoffs or reductions in core services, and said any discussion of positions should distinguish between currently vacant slots and filled posts.

Budget-review process steps were clarified: staff will continue line-by-line department reviews and hold individual meetings with department heads to identify nonrecurring costs and explain increases. Staff emphasized they already require department heads to justify line-item increases, and flagged several known upcoming expenditures (for example, periodic EMS medical-equipment replacement).

The board did not adopt budget or tax-rate changes at the meeting. Commissioners asked staff for further analysis (including the two-cent scenario) and said they will continue discussion at upcoming budget workshops and at a special budget meeting. The meeting adjourned by a procedural motion that carried 4-0.

Ending: Staff will return to the board with department-level savings options and the requested tax-rate scenarios; commissioners signaled they will continue deliberations in subsequent budget meetings.