Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Collection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fayetteville council asks staff to study alternatives to Cumberland County tax collection; return in August
Summary
Staff presented a preliminary analysis on bringing billing and collections in‑house. Council directed staff to analyze costs for third‑party collection alternatives and return with a report in August.
City staff presented preliminary findings from a School of Government benchmarking study on whether Fayetteville should take billing and collections of property taxes in‑house rather than contract with Cumberland County. The report recommended further analysis; council asked staff to produce a cost comparison and implementation plan.
Chris Lowry presented the analysis, noting that the city would control billing and collections only; property assessments remain a county function. A potential in‑house program would unify billing for property tax, solid waste and stormwater on a single statement. Staff estimated a preliminary staffing scale of about 18 FTEs for Fayetteville—roughly $950,000 in salaries alone—plus technology and startup costs. The presentation flagged that up‑front costs would likely exceed current county contractor fees and that the project would likely not yield immediate cost savings.
Lowry said the county currently receives 0.75% for on‑time remittances and 1.75% on delinquent collections. Staff emphasized risks: taxpayer confusion during transition, data‑integration challenges with county systems, cybersecurity needs, and higher customer‑service volume during startup. He estimated a 12‑ to 18‑month implementation timeline with phased roll‑out and monitoring.
Council members said potential benefits include improved control over collections, the ability to pursue delinquencies and liens directly and to coordinate city debt collection efforts across revenue streams. Staff said decisions on aggressive collection tactics (for example, hiring a 1099 collector, using a third‑party collection agency or pursuing foreclosures) would rest with the city if collections were brought in‑house.
Council voted to direct staff to return with a cost analysis comparing third‑party collection alternatives (other than Cumberland County) and options for standing up in‑house collections, and to report back by the August administrative meeting.
