Support weakens for Nags Head sand plan
Nags Head’s beach nourishment proposal hit some rough seas Tuesday as Southern Shores rejected it, Kitty Hawk failed to agree on a plan to fund it and the state insisted on more scientific study before permitting it.
Time is running short for Dare County and its six towns to come to terms on using a 1 percent increase in the countywide occupancy tax to help pay for Nags Head’s plan. A request for authorization will need go before the General Assembly when it convenes next month.
Only non-controversial bills can be considered during the legislative short session, and the county’s General Assembly delegation has indicated that it preferred to see local governments unified on the issue.
County commissioners still could come up with a compromise that would preclude going to the legislature, but an alternative funding plan has not yet been nailed down.
Kitty Hawk Mayor Pro Tem Gary Perry said that the Town Council supports beach nourishment but will not be able state a position on the occupancy tax increase when the Dare County Shoreline Management Commission meets next week.
The shoreline panel is made up of representatives from the county and the six towns, and its recommendation, though advisory, is likely to factor into any funding decision by the Dare County Board of Commissioners.
Nags Head has asked for $20 million from the Dare County Shoreline Management Fund, which has been built up by 1 percent of the 5 percent occupancy tax. The town would borrow another $16 million and pay back the bond over five years with an additional 1 percent on the tax, which would put it at the legal limit of 6 percent.
Mayor Bob Oakes says that the extra one percent will increase the $24 million shoreline fund to around $60 million in 10 years after the debt is repaid. Since voters have already rejected a property tax increase for beach nourishment, Oakes has said that would not be an alternative he would want to pursue.
After the Town Council meeting Tuesday, Perry said the best he could do is summarize the positions of each of the council members for the shoreline commission. Perry is the town’s representative on that panel.
Kitty Hawk council members are still not convinced that rental management companies and rental property owners are on board with the occupancy tax increase. A recent Outer Banks Board of Realtors survey showed strong support for nourishment, and a little more than half favoring Nags Head’s plan. On the question of raising the occupancy tax, however, 52 percent supported it and 38 opposed it.
Councilwoman Emilie Klutz said that endorsement of an occupancy tax increase ultimately rested with the management companies and owners.
“I don’t think we should support it or oppose it,” she said.
Mayor Clifton Perry said flatly that the rental management companies “should really get up and support it or not.”
But Councilman Ervin Bateman said the council had a responsibility to state a position and echoed The Outer Banks Chamber of Commerce warning of “no beaches, no business.”
Councilman Richard Reid was absent but told the council he supported its previous position of ensuring that the shoreline fund was divided up according to the percentage of occupancy taxes each town generates.
The Southern Shores Town Council presented a prepared response at its meeting Tuesday. It said the town “respectfully declines to support” using $20 million from the shoreline management fund or raising the occupancy tax.
Southern Shores called for county government to “energize the Shoreline Management Commission,” saying “the commission should be a proactive force, producing a shoreline management plan that includes all of Dare County.”
Picking up on a sentiment expressed by Kill Devil Hills’ representative to the Shoreline Management Commission, Paul Buske, Southern Shores is also asking that “all alternatives . . . be fully explored and strategies developed for achieving changes in regulations that now leave ‘pumping sand’ as the only alternative, short of retreat.”
Artificial reefs and groins are among the alternatives that have been floated in the nourishment debate, but they are currently prohibited by state law. A study was recently completed to help the General Assembly decide whether to allow exceptions to the ban on terminal groins, or jetties, which can trap sand on the beach.
The Southern Shores Town Council said it feels the county should be looking at the coastline as a whole and not “merely refereeing a division of the spoils among competing jurisdictions.”
Southern Shores also expressed skepticism about the viability of “pumping sand” as a strategy for Dare County beaches and expressed concern that proposed economic models have not been rigorous in estimating maintenance costs. It noted that there has been “little attention, emphasis, or disclosure” given to the maintenance costs of Nags Head’s proposed project.
Council member Jodi Hess, who attended Nags Head’s informational session on nourishment Tuesday, offered “wouldn’t it be great if this was the county project?” Her reference was to the fact the project was not created as part of a countywide plan originating from the Shoreline Management Commission.
Council member Jim Pfizenmayer also expressed support for nourishment but said “the way Nags Head is going about it is not fair” and also suggested a countywide solution.
The council adopted the response by consensus and directed Hess to present it as the official town position at the Shoreline Management Commission meeting next Tuesday. Hess represents Southern Shores on the commission.
Meanwhile, Tim Kana, president of Coastal Science & Engineering, the consultants on the project, said at the informational session that the state Division of Marine Fisheries has asked for a monitoring plan to create a baseline for how the project will effect marine life along the shoreline.
That will entail four studies before the project starts and subsequent monitoring afterward. Oakes said permitting will probably be delayed until late summer or early fall.
“It’s been a moving target,” he said.
read the Southern Shores statement »
video: Tim Kana of Coastal Science & Engineering »
See what people are saying:
Join the discussion:
Ray says:
Thanks for a most informative article. I am sorry I missed that meeting. It must have been a “lulu”…
Butch Stone says:
The people will still come to the Outer Banks even if there is, one penny more renters tax..
But they wont come here, if there IS NO BEACH!!!
RDS says:
Kudos to the elected members of the Southern Shores, Kitty Hawk, and Kill Devil Hills Town Councils for asking the tough questions about this plan!
We have time to think this through. There’s no need for a rubber stamp from the county chair. Way to go, thanks again.
Allan Dooley says:
The C of C’s “No beaches, no business” is a stunningly dumb example of a false choice. Look at either side of that equation, and apply a reality principle. Who is proposing there be “no” beaches? Nobody. Who believes that every enterprise in Dare County will close? Nobody.
Please, fellow citizens, do not fall for this false dilemma. The ocean wants there to be a beach. For proof, look at what has happened to the beach in Kitty Hawk where Isabelle wiped out a string of sand-bagged cottages. Where there was not even room to walk dry-shod in front of the cottages, there is a broad, active, natural beach.
Hal Kitzmuller says:
A terminal groin is NOT an option for any Dare County community. Even if the General Assembly allows them with stipulations, terminal groins will only be allowed at inlets, and Oregon Inlet is way too far away from South Nags Head to have any impact on erosion there.
Has anyone at the County level asked Mr. Kana – whose company, by the way, is the only entity benefiting from this whole debacle – what the County stands to get in return for spending $20 million on beach nourishment?
Add up the occupancy and property tax that might not exist in the absence of beach nourishment – or that might not exist even with a $20 million beach nourishment project – and see if it totals $20 million.
Oh, and be sure to consider ONLY those properties that may actually benefit from beach nourishment (not every property east of the beach road).
Town clashes on fire department, special elections « The Outer Banks Voice says:
[...] By unanimous consent, members also declined to endorse Nags Head’s request for county beach nourishment funding and released an official response to be delivered to the Shoreline Management Commission. See related story. [...]
Bob O says:
Over 5 years, the Town of Nags Head and Dare County collect over $72,000,000 in property tax, occupancy tax and sales tax from the oceanfront and oceanside properties in Nags Head.
If there is no nourishment program, homes, hotels, and roads and other infrastructure will continue to end up in the ocean or on the beach. The legal process to remove private homes from the beach is lengthy, so homes sit on the beach for multiple years, protected by sandbags, with the beach shrinking between the water and the sandbags. This process will not stop. Eventually, say 20 or 30 years from now, much of the tax base will be gone, and only the road will remain if we do nothing.
Dr. Kana was actually in town for a public meeting on Tuesday. He clearly explained the reasoning on how much sand – it was based on historical data on the amount of sand lost over a ten year period.
Now in 20 years, you might be retired and moved, or not, but the Town and the County need to think long-term. Too often, government waits until the crisis is at our doorstep, then we spend more money on repair than we would have spent on prevention. As the tax base goes into the ocean, it can’t be replaced because of the CAMA setbacks. If we continue to do nothing, it may be too late soon. Look at the threatened tax base at Whalebone Junction – 4 major structures, sandbagged. What do you think the value of the tax revenue from the Comfort Inn, Diamond Shoals, The Yachtsman and Bodie Island Beach Club totals?
I vote says:
But 72 million is not at risk and that claim is not accurate. Only a tiny portion of that amount would be endangered over 20-30 years at the same erosion rate we have now.
And, we just opened all those condos (SEE STORY). Even if we lost those 30-year-old or more hotels, the town has a huge net gain already.
I don’t think the goal should be “AS MUCH MONEY AS WE CAN GET, LET’S STACK AS MANY TOURISTS AS WE CAN ON THE BEACH!” That’s too close to pure greed.
Why might people be turned off to the traditional Nags Head and go to Corolla? It might be that we have too many people in town now.
Gary says:
I am tired of proponents of beach nourishment contending that if beach nourishment doesn’t happen, the entire Nags Head oceanside tax base will be lost. That’s hogwash. Also, as rental properties are lost, the law of supply and demand will dictate rising rates on the properties still here, so the tax base will be largely unchanged. Lastly, developers will find a way to fill the void if demand doesn’t equal supply.
Butch Stone says:
to.. I vote now
This is what YOU said..Why might people be turned off to the traditional Nags Head and go to Corolla? It might be that we have too many people in town now.
Look at the picture above!!
Doesn’t this explain it all…
Is this what you want all of Nags Head to look like??
I think you want it to look like it, so less people will come here