Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Blowing Rock council adopts 2026–27 budget, raises tax rate to $0.44 after public objections
Summary
The Blowing Rock Town Council voted to adopt the 2026–27 recommended budget, approving a tax rate increase from $0.40 to $0.44 per $100 valuation after debate over alternatives and public calls for more transparency. Councilors cited fund‑balance goals, rising fixed costs, and a plan for contingency and a five‑year forecast.
Get email alerts on the Municipal Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Blowing Rock Town Council voted to adopt the town’s recommended 2026–27 budget and set the property tax rate at $0.44 per $100 valuation after a public hearing and extended council debate.
The budget presentation, led by the town manager (introduced at the meeting as Alistister Ran and referred to throughout the meeting as Alice), said the recommended budget is balanced under North Carolina law and that property taxes remain the town’s largest revenue source, estimated at roughly $7.77 million. The manager noted the recommended tax rate was revised from an initial 45 cents to 44 cents after the council’s budget workshop and that “one penny is equivalent to $174,000.” The budget includes a proposed 3% cost‑of‑living adjustment for staff and a 3.5% increase in water and sewer rates to cover inflationary costs.
During public comment, resident Brandon Walker urged the council to delay any vote until more budget documentation and responses to a public‑records request were provided. Walker said postponing the hearing for a council member’s conflict and scheduling the hearing immediately before a vote “shows a lack of respect for your constituents” and criticized what he described as missing or truncated budget messages on the town’s website.
Councilors debated alternatives on the dais. One council member said a three‑cent increase would be “too tight” and risk drawing on the town’s savings for routine expenses; others argued staff and the new finance director had presented work that prioritized core services and essential capital needs. The town manager outlined possible one‑penny ($174,000) reductions composed of smaller line‑item cuts and noted larger capital and accessibility projects were being pursued for grant funding.
The council moved and seconded a motion to approve the recommended budget; the motion passed and the budget carried at the $0.44 rate. On the recorded roll call at the vote, one councilor opposed the measure.
The budget document includes capital purchases such as a replacement trash truck ($265,000) and park restroom improvements (a $250,000 grant match), adjustments to administrative staffing lines and facility projects, and plans for a rate study for the water/sewer fund. The manager also flagged state legislation (House Bill 1089) that could impose property‑tax levy limits as a material uncertainty for future budgets.
The council directed staff to move forward with implementation steps outlined in the recommended budget; the manager said staff will continue to pursue grants, contingency planning, and the planned five‑year forecast to guide future decisions.

