Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Budget topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

County manager proposes 2¢ property tax increase to fund schools, EMS and pre‑K in FY2026–27 budget

Durham Board of County Commissioners · May 12, 2026
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

County Manager Hager presented a recommended FY2026–27 budget that proposes a 2¢ property tax increase — estimated to generate about $17 million — to support Durham Public Schools, pre‑K expansion, EMS staffing and other priorities; the board set public hearing and work‑session dates for further review.

County Manager Hager presented the Durham County recommended budget for fiscal year 2026–27 and said the county faces a sharp slowdown in revenue growth that requires “judicious planning and long term focus.” He proposed a 2¢ increase to the property tax rate for the general fund, saying, “This increase will add 17,000,000 in new dollars to support increased Durham Public School funding, increased pre k support, and meet increased service demands in key mandated areas such as EMS.”

The manager described constrained revenue prospects after years of growth, citing a string of commercial appeals that reduced anticipated property‑tax valuation growth and slower sales‑tax gains. He said property and sales taxes constitute roughly 80% of general‑fund revenue and projected next‑year sales tax at about $133,000,000. The recommended county budget would be just over $1,000,000,000 in total, with a general fund near $700,000,000.

Why it matters: Hager framed the proposal as a choice between raising the property tax rate, slowing expenditure growth or a mix of both. He said the 2¢ increase would be targeted to high‑priority spending including education, early‑childhood supports and public safety — areas where the county faces legally or politically constrained obligations and rising costs.

Key allocations and changes in the recommended budget include: - Durham Public Schools: an increase of $10,900,000 for current‑expense funding, bringing county support to a little over $235,000,000 (a 4.8% increase, manager estimate). - Pre‑K: $1,270,000 recommended for expanded pre‑K support, including $700,000 to backfill one‑time ARPA funding and $500,000 for ongoing operational expansion. - Employee compensation and benefits: funding to support a cost‑of‑living adjustment (COLA), $1,600,000 for increased benefit costs, and additional investment in an on‑site wellness clinic. - Public safety staffing: recommendation to add ten additional paramedic/EMT positions to staff another complete EMS unit and five new law‑enforcement officer positions for the sheriff’s office (some growth achieved through internal realignment). - Sewer rate: a recommended 10% increase in the sewer‑utility monthly consumption rate to support major water and sewer capital projects; no increase in the stormwater utility fee for the coming year.

Hager said departments identified $6,200,000 in reductions during budget preparation to offset expenditure growth, and the recommended net position change is modest (6.3 new positions in the general fund plus one in risk management, with other additions placed in non‑general funds). He also noted continued commitments to Durham Technical Community College and other education partners.

Board process and next steps: Hager announced a public hearing on the proposed budget for Tuesday, May 26, and scheduled work sessions beginning May 19, with additional sessions on May 21, May 28 and June 2; an additional work session may be convened on June 4 if needed. Budget adoption is planned for Monday, June 8. Commissioners thanked staff for the presentation and signaled they would deliberate priorities in the upcoming work sessions.

What the board and staff asked: Commissioners raised no substantive objections during the presentation; they emphasized the difficult trade‑offs ahead and the importance of public engagement through the hearing and work sessions.

Sources and attribution: All figures, quotes and timetable above are drawn from Manager Hager’s presentation to the Durham Board of County Commissioners (county manager Hager).