WHQR's Sunday Edition is a free weekly newsletter delivered every Sunday morning. You can sign up for Sunday Edition here.
Off the Rails?
Eight years ago, I met Laura Padgett – who’d been Wilmington’s longest-serving council member – at a Port City Java to talk about a bold new transportation plan she’d been tasked with heading up.
The milquetost name – “rail realignment” – belied the project’s ambitious goal of shifting freight rail out of Wilmington and converting the existing tracks to a trolley car system circumnavigating the city.
It was then – and I think still is now – the most complicated project I’ve covered. And the most expensive. Back in 2017, Padgett told me it would cost between $500 million and $1 billion.
“That’s billion, with a ‘b,’” Padgett told me. “The number definitely strikes people.”
The rail realignment project addressed a key problem: the circuitous freight route that CXS tracks carved through the city was inefficient, annoying, and potentially dangerous.
Freight trains travel from the Davis Yard, in Navassa, and cross the Northeast Cape Fear River using the Hilton rail drawbridge – sometimes called “Wilmington’s bridge to the sky” (you’ve probably seen it, jutting into the air, to the north of MLK Jr. Parkway, as you drive into downtown).
From there, the tracks lead southeast, crossing Princess Place Drive and Market Street, almost to Kerr Avenue. Then, the tracks turn almost completely around, heading southwest towards the port, crossing Independence Boulevard, Oleander Drive, 16th and 17th streets, and other thoroughfares.
Visually, the tracks form a giant ‘greater-than’ sign – but, if you’ll pardon the pun, it’s less than ideal, logistically.
It can take hours to transit the tracks to the port, and slow-moving trains can stall drivers for 10 to 20 minutes. City officials would also later latch on to the idea that, as trains move across the southern part of the tracks, they effectively cut off ambulances from the hospital complex on South 17th Street.
The solution: extend tracks down through Brunswick County and have them cross the Cape Fear River south of the existing Cape Fear Memorial Bridge, closer to the port. This would mean quicker delivery times for CSX and fewer traffic headaches (and potentially stranded ambulances) in Wilmington.
As a bonus, the city’s rail tracks could be converted to a trolley system. Later, other options were considered, including a series of pedestrian and cyclist paths, something akin to The High Line, a series of decommissioned elevated metro rail lines that New York City converted into a (very cool) park.
It was hard not to be charmed by Padgett, who struck me as smart and passionate, with a dry sense of humor and a way with facts and figures. A champion of public transportation for decades, the city’s downtown multimodal station was dedicated to her in 2020. You could see why Mayor Bill Saffo had put her in charge of the rail realignment task force.
All she had to do was convince private and public partners – CSX, neighboring counties, the Port, NCDOT, and the feds – to get on the same page and likely invest hundreds of millions of dollars. Especially for a bridge across the river, which widens as you head south towards the ocean, meaning spanning it would be costlier than other proposed bridges.
“There are people in other cities, in other countries, and they’ve accomplished projects like this. It’s really quite amazing when people put their heads down and get it done. There are a lot of variables, and a lot we still need to know, but we have a project that’s buildable,” Padgett told me in 2017, adding “But, the price tag is huge.”
After my first major article on the project came out, headlined, “This ambitious railway plan could reshape Wilmington. It could also cost a billion dollars,” Padgett was a little peeved that I’d included “a billion” – the upper end of the potential cost range – above the fold, so to speak. It seems a little sensationalist to her. I think history, which is to say eight years of inflation, has unfortunately vindicated me.
Baby steps
Since then, in spite of the staggering scale of the task, rail realignment has moved forward, bit by bit. A year and a half later, in late 2018, the project had built steam (to reuse my unavoidable pun from back then).
Despite setbacks from Hurricane Florence, Padgett had secured a letter of support from CSX (following a leadership change that seemed to make the company more inclined to consider large projects).
She applied for a $2 million grant to help with preliminary engineering and a portion of the environmental review process. The grant got supporting letters from New Hanover, Pender, and Columbus counties, the North Carolina State Ports, and federal representatives, including Congressman David Rouzer and then-Senator Richard Burr – and, the following year, it was awarded.
In 2021, the city set aside $3.5 million as “seed money” that could serve as matching funds for future grant applications or collaborations with other government partners.
Beyond that fund, the project has garnered over $3 million in funding, including $2.5 million in federal funds, $400,000 from the state, $200,000 from the city, and $100,000 from the regional planning organization. The city has also dedicated staff to the project, including a project manager.
Rail realignment has completed the federal environmental process – often a major hurdle for big projects – and 30% of its engineering plans. NCDOT’s widening project for South Front Street is currently designed to incorporate the plan.
Derailed?
This year, the city clawed back the $3.5 million it had set aside for rail realignment as part of its efforts to pay down the debt from purchasing the former PPD and Thermo Fisher building, now the Skyline Center.
But the bigger question is about the lynch pin of the project: a rail bridge across the Cape Fear River. If you can’t get trains across the river south of downtown, then there’s really no realigning going on.
Back in 2020, NCDOT contemplated including rail as part of the replacement for the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge. And as recently as 2023, the city paid $200,000 in consulting fees to explore the option further. It appeared that building one bridge – for pedestrians, vehicles, and traffic – would cost less than building two separate structures.
But as NCDOT and its partners struggled with rising costs, it focused on a less expensive model. And the parameters of the $242 million federal grant NCDOT was awarded last year don’t leave any room for rail. (The grant is currently ‘paused’ by DOGE, but officials hope it will be released later this year.)
Earlier this month, I asked Division Three Engineer Trevor Carroll if the “horse had left the barn” to incorporate rail with the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge replacement, and he confirmed it had. The timing was bad, the projects had different height requirements, and changing up the current plan could jeopardize the grant, he said. Carroll told me he couldn’t speak to what might happen in the future, but a rail bridge is nowhere on NCDOT’s radar right now.
I think of the slow, steady progress that Padgett made leading the task force, work that was later picked up by Aubrey Parsley, who was named project director. It’s been an impressive journey.
But it’s hard to see where it goes from here, though admittedly I’m not a transportation expert. (“Dammit Jim, I’m a journalist, not an engineer!”)
In five years, the CFMB replacement project’s estimated cost has tripled to over $1 billion. “With a B,” as Padgett once told me. It’s hard to imagine a rail bridge would be less. In fact, with a wider span of river, and longer onramps with lower grades (since trains can't do 'uphill' that well), it would likely cost more.
A new Cape Fear Memorial Bridge, it’s worth remembering, is a top priority for local, state, and federal officials. I’ve heard it called “critical,” “necessary,” and “essential” for the region, but the project is still struggling to find funding. Rail realignment, despite its admirable ambition, doesn’t garner the same kind of adjectives — so one has to wonder what will motivate the massive government investment it will take to get the project going.
And, there’s the issue of property. Years ago, Independence Boulevard was extended nearly to the riverfront in anticipation of a ‘southern bridge’ – the Cape Fear Skyway and later Cape Fear Crossing, projects that never materialized, in part due to opposition from the Brunswick County side. Since then, development on both sides of the river has drastically hemmed in the available land. Easements and right-of-ways set up in preparation for a bridge and connecting ramps have been built on.
Early last year, Mayor Saffo told me he didn’t think there would ever be another bridge south of the current CFMB replacement site.
“I do agree with the fact that the Southern bridge is dead and gone for all intents and purposes,” he told me.
Still, the city remains optimistic that the project will find a way.
“The project is still feasible. But it will take a significant participation beyond the city's, more specifically at the state and federal level. One item that certainly went into the decision-making process on de-obligating the funds was the known constraints on the state's transportation budget given the significant needs that arose from Hurricane Helene. The project remains important to the city and the city will continue to opportunistically pursue activities to advance it,” a city spokesperson told me.
Updates from the New Hanover County budget vote
In last week's edition, we wrote a lot about the county's new budget, but there were some unanswered questions — some, but only some, of which we've tracked down more information about. There are still a lot of moving parts, so we're continuining to look into it.
Endowment 'ends' Northside Co-op grant
First, a week ago, I was still vetting out what appeared to be a “pullback” by The Endowment from the Northside Co-op, a community-run grocery store planned to address the food desert in Wilmington’s Northside. The Co-op recently paused construction to review the impact of a new grocery store planned on the site of the recently demolished city building at Third and Chestnut streets. A new private development there is expected to include a Publix – and that’s likely to impact the viability of the Co-op negatively.
Commissioner LeAnne Pierce seemed to be suggesting that The Endowment had cancelled its $6.8 million grant for the Co-op and instead directed over $2 million to the county (to address food insecurity).
This week, after some persistent pestering, The Endowment confirmed that it has “ended” its grant in support of the Co-op, “given the many ongoing changes in the project’s scope, design, and location.” The Endowment said it was exploring other ways to address food insecurity, specifically in the Northside. The Endowment did not comment on Pierce’s suggestion that there had been a substitute grant made to the county.
I’ve heard from several people familiar with the situation that we can expect an announcement from The Endowment on this front sooner rather than later – maybe in the next week or two. So, stay tuned.
Private emails
Also, I’d alluded to a comment Commissioner Stephanie Walker made about “directing people to mark budget emails ‘private.’”
I asked the county about this, and they explained they use two different subject-line terms – “private” and “confidential” – to keep emails off of the public terminal. The terminal, if you’ve never seen or used it, is a desktop computer in the lobby of the government center, free to use during business hours, allowing people (not just journalists) to read through the last few months of government emails.
Emails marked confidential often have protected personnel information that would likely require legal review before being released in response to a public records request; those marked private are usually “working documents” or “internal discussions,” according to the county. Basically, private emails are still reviewed to protect information that legally shouldn’t be released – but they’re more likely to be turned over if someone files a PRR. And, in fact, the county quickly turned over a ‘private’ email County Manager Chris Coudriet sent to commissioners about the budget when I asked about it.
In that email, Coudriet noted, “I have marked this email private as I understand some concern expressed that my communication last Friday was not marked as such. It was not my intention to get ahead of the board in its review and most certainly not my intention today.”
The “last Friday” email Coudriet refers to earlier budget proposals that I did get my hands on and write about, ahead of any public discussion by the commissioners. Acting on a tip (and a hunch), I asked county comms staff for the email, and they had shared it. But, notably, anyone searching for that email on the terminal would have come away empty-handed.
I don’t know who ‘expressed concern’ to Coudriet, but suffice to say I disagree with them. I get that, in unscrupulous hands, those proposals could have been sensationalized or taken out of context, especially because they contemplated reductions in staffing. But that’s an insufficient reason, in my opinion, to try and keep them away from the public.
The terminal is a great resource for the public, but it is a courtesy (as I’ve been reminded), and the county is free to regulate its content however it wants, even if I don’t love it. It does mean I don’t rely on the terminal exclusively for my reporting.
In the case of the final budget from last week, the rushed timeline for drafting and approval meant the terminal wouldn’t have been much practical help. Because it updates at noon (I think), and the emails about the budget were sent Wednesday night, I don’t think there’s much I could have done or reported before the details of the email were essentially discussed at 2 p.m. when the meeting started, and approved a few hours later.
Still, to Walker’s point, I’m always in favor of more transparency.
Board of Elections confusion (again)
Lastly, a few of you reached out about where the Board of Elections landed amid the various New Hanover County budget cuts we detailed last week.
Things have not been copacetic between the county and the BoE. After allegations that the BoE violated the law during the election in November, Coudriet authorized a $30,000 third-party review of the elections office. The county and BoE disagreed over some of the results of that review. More recently, the county chafed at the BoE’s use of government email to urge thousands of people to contact commissioners, asking them to provide funding support.
Still, it’s hard to think of a more “core service” than free and fair elections. So, while there’s clearly some tension – if not outright bad blood – between the BoE and the county, I did expect to see the county financially support enhancements to the election office. And, in fact, several earlier budget iterations included significant funding increases for the BoE – but the final budget approved last Thursday cut those.
This week, on Wednesday, the BoE board and director held an emergency meeting to discuss the impact of those cuts. That led to reporting this week from Port City Daily with the jarring headline, “BOE: Early-voting access, election accuracy in jeopardy after county budget cuts,” indicating that two BoE positions and the overall budget had been cut – and that the accessibility and integrity of future elections were at stake.
I’m still trying to unpack all this, but I can say so far it’s complicated.
The BoE’s budget wasn’t cut, exactly – it received a roughly 19% increase (about $470,000 more) compared to last year. But the BoE director and board chair tell me that’s $250,000 or so less than they asked for, which was what they thought it would take to operate both this year’s municipal and next year’s primary elections. That’s opposed to last year, when there was only one election.
So, from the BoE’s point of view, the county has asked them to cut a quarter million dollars from their budget. And that, according to Board Chair Derrick Miller, justified fears that the election could go poorly, and that the “strains will increase the chances that eligible ballots might not get counted while also increasing the chances that ineligible ballots might get counted,” which could open the process to legal election challenges.
The county has pushed back on some of this in internal emails, and Commissioner Dane Scalise – who has previously criticized the BoE for last year’s election snafu and the use of public email to whip up support – has very publicly said the BoE needs “new leadership.” Scalise pointed to the fact that the voter turnout for primary and municipal elections, combined, is smaller than one general election – less than half, in fact.
The BoE acknowledged that there are some costs that depend on turnout, but also standard costs for each election, regardless of its size.
As for those two positions, it appears they weren’t cut but ‘frozen’ – part of a countywide freeze on new hires as the administration figures out how it will operate on the budget’s demand for 5% across-the-the-board cuts. They’re now unfrozen, and Coudriet said the BoE is moving ahead with hiring. When, exactly, that changed isn’t really clear – but some of the situation appears to have evolved leading up to and even during the BoE’s emergency meeting on Wednesday.
And if you're thinking, 'why didn't the BoE just wait to hold their meeting until it had more information,' I asked the same question. But it seems recent changes to election law, including some tucked into a Hurricane Helene relief bill, mean that the terms of the current BoE board members will end next week, but new members won’t be sworn in for nearly a month later, on July 22. So it feels like there’s sort of a ticking clock.
In any case, if you’re confused, you aren’t alone.
I had hoped to get an article on all of this out this week, but – with the Coudriet out of the office on Friday, and comms staff (perhaps wisely) unwilling or unable to speak on his behalf – there were some loose ends I couldn’t tie up. One of the reasons I’m glad to have this newsletter is that I can update you on what I do know, and be candid about what I don’t.
What I can pretty confidently say is that some of the BoE confusion can be attributed to the rapid development and approval of last week’s budget. I have heard on background from many county employees that there is essentially a scramble to figure out how, exactly, to implement the significant cuts. That includes about 70 current employees who will lose their jobs – although it’s not clear, because I don’t think the county yet knows, whether they’ll be laid off, phased out, encouraged to retire, or given a severance package.
(In that ‘private’ email, Coudriet had asked commissioners to consider tapping their $300 million revenue stabilization fund to achieve the cuts through attrition — retirements and resignations, etc. — as opposed to layoffs. But that would take a supermajority vote, with four of the five commissioners on board. No word yet if that’s on the table, presently.)
It’s not to say Coudriet and top staff won’t figure it out, but it does seem like it’ll be a bumpy ride – and I don’t think the BoE will be the only pain point.
I’ve already written “stay tuned” once in this newsletter, and I hate to sound like a broken record, but … stay tuned. In the meantime, keep sending us your questions and concerns. There are a lot of moving parts in a county budget, and a lot more work to see how this new, leaner version will work.
