Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Utilities Fees topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

New commissioner presses county staff on high water tap fees; staff to provide study and comparisons

2140112 · January 22, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Commissioners questioned Harnett County's water and sewer tap fees and asked staff to provide the underlying system‑development fee study and a county comparison. Utilities staff said the system development fee is set from a five‑year study and that lowering the fee could affect future bonding capacity.

HARNETT COUNTY, N.C. — Commissioners at the Jan. 21 Harnett County meeting pressed county utilities staff for a clearer explanation of the county’s water tap fees after a newly seated commissioner described them as “outrageous.”

The discussion began when a commissioner asked why residential and commercial tap fees differ sharply — for example, why a 3/4‑inch residential tap is listed at $421.00 while larger commercial taps carry much higher charges. County staff and utilities representatives explained that the published amount combines a tap charge and a system‑development (impact) fee and that the system‑development fee is calculated from a statutory study performed roughly every five years.

“Mister Byrd” (newly assigned to the utilities department) said the system‑development fee is derived from a consultant study that estimates infrastructure costs, and that portions of a published tap fee can be administratively divided between a development fee and a tap installation charge. “That system development fee is derived from a study that’s done every 5 years,” Byrd said. The transcript shows a staff member explained the study is required by statute and establishes the maximum charge the county may collect for impacts to the water and sewer systems.

Staff also warned that reducing the impact fee could affect future evaluations when the utility sells bonds, because revenue projections and rate covenants rely on fee levels. Commissioners asked staff to return with a detailed breakdown, methodology from the most recent consultant study, and comparisons to neighboring counties; staff said they could provide that information and potentially have it ready for the next work session.

No formal vote was taken; commissioners directed staff to gather the documents and background materials necessary to evaluate whether the county’s fees should be adjusted and to present that information at an upcoming meeting.