Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Asheville council adopts FY2026–27 budget, sets tax rate at 37.69 cents after narrow vote
Summary
After lengthy debate over pension contributions, downtown revenue uses, and service cuts, council adopted a $275.1 million all‑funds budget and set the general‑fund tax rate at 37.69 cents per $100 of assessed value in a 4–3 vote; the package reinstates a 1% employer 401(k) match and includes targeted reductions and service adjustments.
Asheville City Council narrowly adopted the city’s fiscal year 2026–27 budget after a prolonged debate over tax burden, service‑level cuts and how to use downtown sales tax revenue. The final motion passed by a 4–3 vote.
Lindsay Spangler, the city’s budget and performance manager, presented a proposed all‑funds budget of about $275.1 million and outlined an initial recommendation that would have set the general‑fund property‑tax rate at 37.84 cents per $100 of assessed value. After council feedback and last‑minute adjustments—chief among them reinstating a 1 percent employer contribution to the city’s 401(k) and an allocation of downtown sales tax toward public‑safety costs—the council approved a tax rate motion settling at 37.69 cents per $100.
What council approved: The budget preserves core services, funds debt service on voter‑approved general obligation bonds, adds modest personnel and program investments (including an expanded affordable‑housing staff position tied to the GO bond work), and includes a 2.8 percent cost‑of‑living adjustment for staff. Council also authorized limited reallocation of downtown (BID) sales‑tax receipts to support some public‑safety work while adding new parking meter and fees language tied to the FY27 fees and charges ordinance.
Why it mattered: Councilors and the public debated trade‑offs for weeks: restoring retirement contributions for employees, reducing community‑center hours or security contracts, and whether to use BID sales tax to fund police roles. Some council members and residents said raising property taxes would further strain households already coping with recovery costs and insurance rate increases; others warned that cutting services or deferring infrastructure investment would be fiscally short‑sighted.
Councilors framed the decision in competing priorities. Supporters of the approved package said it stabilizes the city’s finances and preserves essential services while restoring some compensation elements for staff. Opponents objected to specific reuses of downtown tax receipts and reductions in community center hours and continued to press for deeper service cuts or different revenue choices.
Fiscal particulars and next steps: The manager reported that the adjusted tax rate reflects refined revenue assumptions, including a slight increase in expected tax collection rate and reallocation moves. Staff said the budget is balanced and preserves reserves, enabling the city to keep a strong credit profile and continue planned capital work. Council handled multiple related amendments and conflict‑of‑interest recusals (economic‑development and sports commission contributions were approved in separate votes).
The budget takes effect July 1. Council members said they expect to revisit specific items and performance decisions in coming months as part of regular oversight and to examine the multi‑year forecast that staff presented showing continuing fiscal pressure in out years.
