Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capital Improvement Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City staff outline $255 million five‑year capital plan and signal possible bond issues
Summary
City staff presented a first draft of a five‑year capital improvement plan covering general government and utility projects, identified roughly $255 million in general‑government investments and large utility projects that may require revenue or general obligation bonds, and sought council guidance on priorities and financing options.
Get email alerts on the Capital Improvement Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City staff presented a first draft of a five‑year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) covering fiscal years 2026–2030 and asked the City Council to review priorities and feedback as the budget process proceeds.
Ken Hunter, a city staff presenter, told council the general‑government CIP totals "just over $255,000,000" for 2026–2030 and that staff currently projects about $34,000,000 of that could fall in fiscal 2026. He described the submission as "a first run at these proposals" and said revisions are expected as staff prepares the 2026 budget.
The presentation separated general‑government projects (Part A) from utilities (Part B) and stressed that the CIP list focuses on city‑owned physical infrastructure with project costs over $100,000 or projects financed rather than paid from current operating funds. Hunter said the city is exploring a mix of cash/reserve funding, installment financing and possible bond issues.
Why it matters: staff flagged large, multi‑year projects and financing choices that would affect taxes, rates and debt capacity. Hunter said planners are considering approximately $70 million in bonded general‑government projects in a future multi‑year program and noted that general obligation bonds "do require voter referendum here in North Carolina." For utilities, staff described a potential revenue bond package of roughly $63 million across electric, sewer and possibly stormwater to finance long‑life utility assets.
Key projects and funding notes - Fire Station 2: Hunter said the project (contract and financing) was awarded in fiscal 2024 and is under construction, and that he "can also report ... that that project will come in on budget." He characterized it as a >$10 million project. - Judicial Center Phase 1: staff said state appropriations total $8.5 million for the project and that approximately $4.5 million of that is planned for immediate work; demolition and site acquisition have begun. - Facilities: staff identified the Imperial Center roof and window replacements and improvements to the environmental services complex (Thorpe Road transfer station) as near‑term priorities. - Parks & Recreation: the CIP lists Sunset Park work and additional greenway extensions, including efforts west of I‑95 and Ward 5 improvements. - Technology & communications: the plan includes data‑center expansion, cybersecurity support (a vCISO/VSISO), and major radio and transmitter upgrades for public‑safety communications. - Utilities: staff said the utility CIP is large — Hunter summarized the utilities five‑year total with electric making up roughly $94.5 million of the package and noted a fiscal‑year‑2026 utilities projection of about $58.7 million (compared with about $31.7 million expected this year). Several stormwater projects depend on FEMA hazard‑mitigation funding; staff said delays in FEMA action have pushed out construction for the downtown drainage project.
Financing and timing issues Hunter described three primary financing approaches: pay‑as‑you‑go using cash/reserves, installment financing (traditional loans), and bonds. He said the city is working with Davenport (financial advisors) to assess capacity and that bond issuance would require a referendum for general obligation debt. Hunter spelled out that, even if authorized by referendum, bonds are typically issued in tranches rather than as a lump sum and that LGC approval is required for final financing.
Council members pressed staff on timing and priorities. Several council members emphasized Ward 5 park needs and asked whether projects such as Fire Station 8 (proposed west of I‑95) could be accelerated; staff said location and service‑area definitions would affect design and timing. Council members also raised utility territory and load‑management questions; staff said the city’s franchise area is secure and that infrastructure investments for economic development would be evaluated carefully so existing customers do not subsidize speculative expansions.
What’s next Staff asked council to use the CIP presentation to inform budget‑year prioritization. Hunter said the CIP will be revised and brought into the fiscal‑year‑2026 operating budget deliberations, and that staff will return with more detailed cost estimates and financing scenarios.
Ending note: Council and staff scheduled follow‑up budget work sessions in April and agreed to continue CIP review and to discuss financing options with Davenport.

