Category: Lou’s Views

Lou’s Views
News & Views / February Edition

Calendar of Events –

N.C. Azalea Festival
April 4^th thru 6^th
Wilmington

Wilmington has been celebrating Spring Southern Style since  1948.  There’s something for everyone among their community’s rich array of artwork, gardens, history, and culture. This festival is considered one of the top events in the Southeast.
For more information » click here 

Southport Springfest
April 19^th  
Southport

Welcome Spring Easter weekend in style at the Southport Spring Festival, a tradition that started in 1996. This festival features a wide variety of activities.
For more information » click here

Strawberry & Wine Fest
April 27^th
Sunset Beach

.

The Strawberry and Wine Festival, hosted by the Old Bridge Preservation Society since 2014. There will be wines available from Silver Coast Winery with strawberries as the main fare of the day. It’s a day of wine, food, entertainment, and craft vendors.  
For more information » click here

Days at the Docks Festival
April 29^th & 30^th
Holden Beach

The annual festival which started in the 1980’s occurs in April or May and is sponsored by the Greater Holden Beach Merchants Association. It’s the Holden Beach way to kick-off the Spring and start the vacation season. In addition to the food and arts & crafts, enjoy live music & entertainment, a horseshoe tournament and the world famous “Bopple Race”. Lots of activities for the entire family!
For more information » click here

Blue Crab Festival
May 17^th & 18^th
Little River SC

.
Little River has been celebrating the World Famous Blue Crab Festival since 1981. It is held on the waterfront in Little River and is one of the largest festivals in the Southeast. The purpose of this festival is one that supports and showcases the fabulous atmosphere of the local communities.
For more information » click here

Brunswick County invites residents to participate in lifesaving certification training
Brunswick County’s Risk Management and Parks and Recreation departments are partnering to offer First Aid/CPR/AED Certification Training in 2025. This new training program is designed to provide residents with the knowledge and skills needed to recognize and respond appropriately to cardiac, breathing, and first aid emergencies.

“Many accidents at work and at home—such as bruises and cuts sustained from tripping or burns given by heating equipment—can be helped by a bystander with the proper resources and training,” Risk Manager Andy Yoos said. “That’s why it’s important for everyone to know how to perform basic lifesaving care.”

The training is open to any Brunswick County resident 12 years of age and older. Participants under 18 years of age must be accompanied by an adult guardian for the entire training session. Upon successful completion of the course, participants will receive an American Trauma Event Management (ATEM) First Aid/CPR/AED certification card, which is valid for 2 years.

The 2025 training sessions will be held on Feb. 15 inside the Town Creek Park Community Building, April 26 inside the Leland Field House, June 7 inside the Lockwood Folly Community Building, Aug. 9 inside the Waccamaw Park Community Building, and Oct. 4 inside the Leland Field House. Participants must register and pay online before the training date.

There are only 12 seats available per training session and the registration fee is $10 per person. Each class will consist of an AM Session from 9 a.m. to 12 p.m., a 30-minute lunch break*, and a PM session from 12:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. You must attend and complete both sessions to receive certification.

*Participants must bring their own lunch and beverages.

 Upcoming Training Session
Saturday, June 7, 2025 / Supply Area
Location: Lockwood Folly Community Building, 1691 Stanbury Rd SW, Supply, NC 28462
Time: 9 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.
Cost: $10 per person

Learn more and register online on the Brunswick County Parks and Recreation RecDesk website.

For questions or more information about the training program, email Brunswick County Risk Management.

For more information » click here

Discover a wide range of things to do in the Brunswick Islands for an experience that goes beyond the beach.
For more information » click here.

Calendar of Events Island –

Tentative – dates are not confirmed yet

Family Nighttime Easter Egg Hunt 
The Town will hold its annual nighttime Easter Egg Hunt on Friday, April 18^th 

Easter Sunrise Service
Holden Beach Chapel and the Brunswick Islands Baptist Church and are sponsoring an Easter Sunrise Service at 6:30 a.m. Easter Sunday, April 20^th at the Holden Beach Pier.

Parks & Recreation / Programs & Events
For more information » click here

Reminders –

Yard Waste Service
Yard debris pick-up will be provided twice a month on the second and fourth Fridays during the months of March, April, and May. Please have yard waste placed at the street for pick-up on Thursday night. The first pickup of the season is on March 8^th. No pick-ups will be made on vacant lots or construction sites.

Debris must be placed in a biodegradable bag or bundled in a length not to exceed five (5) feet and fifty (50) pounds. Each residence is allowed a total of ten (10) items, which can include a combination of bundles of brush and limbs meeting the required length and weight and/ or biodegradable bags with grass clippings, leaves, etc.

Brunswick County Shred Event
Brunswick County will be hosting its spring free shred event at the Brunswick County Government Center on Saturday, March 1^st. Brunswick County residents and/or property owners can dispose of any unneeded documents free of charge. Proof of Brunswick County residency or property ownership is required.

Brunswick County Governmental Center
3325 Old Ocean Hwy., Bolivia, NC 28422

News from Town of Holden Beach
The town sends out emails of events, news, agendas, notifications, and emergency information. If you would like to be added to their mailing list, please go to their web site to complete your subscription to the Holden Beach E-Newsletter.
For more information » click here

Paid Parking
Paid parking will be enforced in all Holden Beach designated parking areas. It will be enforced from 9:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. daily, with free parking before and after that time. All parking will use license plates for verification. 

Visit https://hbtownhall.com/paid-parking for more information and to view a table with authorized parking areas. 

Solid Waste Pick-Up Schedule
GFL Environmental change in service, October through May trash pickup will be once a week. Trash collection is on Tuesdays only.

Please note:
. • Trash carts must be at the street by 6:00 a.m. on the pickup day
. • BAG the trash before putting it in the cart
. • Carts will be rolled back to the front of the house

GFL Refuse Collection Policy
GFL has recently notified all Brunswick County residents that they will no longer accept extra bags of refuse outside of the collection cart. This is not a new policy but is stricter enforcement of an existing policy. While in the past GFL drivers would at times make exceptions and take additional bags of refuse, the tremendous growth in housing within Brunswick County makes this practice cost prohibitive and causes drivers to fall behind schedule.

Solid Waste Pick-up Schedule –

starting October once a week 

Recycling –

starting October every other week  pick-up

Curbside Recycling – 2024
GFL Environmental is now offering curbside recycling for Town properties that desire to participate in the service. The service cost per cart is $119.35 annually paid in advance to the Town of Holden Beach. The service consists of a ninety-six (96) gallon cart that is emptied every other week during the months of October – May and weekly during the months of June – September. 
Curbside Recycling Application » click here
Curbside Recycling Calendar » click here

Trash Can Requirements – Rental Properties
GFL Environmental – trash can requirements
Ordinance 07-13, Section 50.08

Rental properties have specific number of trash cans based on number of bedrooms.

* One extra trash can per every 2 bedrooms
..

 § 50.08 RENTAL HOMES.
(A) Rental homes, as defined in Chapter 157, that are rented as part of the summer rental season, are subject to high numbers of guests, resulting in abnormally large volumes of trash. This type of occupancy use presents a significantly higher impact than homes not used for summer rentals. In interest of public health and sanitation and environmental concerns, all rental home shall have a minimum of one trash can per two bedrooms. Homes with an odd number of bedrooms shall round up (for examples one to two bedrooms – one trash can; three to four bedrooms – two trash cans; five – six bedrooms – three trash cans, and the like).

Building Numbers
Ocean front homes are required to have house numbers visible from the beach strand.
Please call Planning and Inspections Department at 910.842.6080 with any questions.

§157.087 BUILDING NUMBERS.

(A) The correct street number shall be clearly visible from the street on all buildings. Numbers shall be block letters, not script, and of a color clearly in contrast with that of the building and shall be a minimum of six inches in height.

(B) Beach front buildings will also have clearly visible house numbers from the strand side meeting the above criteria on size, contrast, etc. Placement shall be on vertical column supporting deck(s) or deck roof on the primary structure. For buildings with a setback of over 300 feet from the first dune line, a vertical post shall be erected aside the walkway with house numbers affixed. In all cases the numbers must be clearly visible from the strand. Other placements may be acceptable with approval of the Building Inspector.

State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)

THB Newsletter (02/03/25)
Public Input Opportunity
The N.C. Department of Transportation is inviting the public to provide feedback on the Draft 2026-2035 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The STIP is developed under the Strategic Transportation Investments law (STI), which established the Strategic Mobility Formula.

Over the past 18 months, NCDOT has worked closely with the public, legislature, local planning organizations and other stakeholders to implement this law and develop the Draft STIP.

As part of this effort, NCDOT will host regional drop-in sessions (see flyer) across the state between February 17 and March 17, 2025. These sessions and the broader outreach effort aim to gather input on:

• • The variety and geographic diversity of projects;
  • The process used to develop the STIP;
  • Ideas for improvement.

Feedback from these sessions will also help shape the development of the 2028-2037 STIP.

To learn more about this outreach effort, we encourage you to watch a short informational video at https://youtube/yRhAgZ_ywiw?si=PUO4sClDuqSyU682.

Your Input Matters
This communication is an invitation to participate in shaping North Carolina’s transportation network. The public comment period will run from January 31, 2025, to April 4, 2025.

Upon Further Review –

Carolina Bays Parkway project S.C. 31

Boom or doom: How a new highway could transform rural Brunswick County
A new road in southern Brunswick County will open the flood gates of opportunity for some but could close the doors of homes and businesses for others. The Carolina Bays Parkway Extension project could be the missing link for rural towns to become Brunswick’s next big, booming city. However, some small-town business owners are questioning if the boom will be big enough to reach them. The N.C. Department of Transportation and the S.C. Department of Transportation are working together to extend S.C. 31, known as Carolina Bays Parkway, from S.C. 9 in Horry County, South Carolina, to U.S. 17 in Brunswick County. “The extension would provide a more direct and efficient movement of traffic seeking to bypass congestion within the areas of Calabash in North Carolina as well as Little River and the Grand Strand areas in South Carolina,” per NCDOT’s website. “As a result, local and tourist traffic on area roadways would experience less congestion and delays.” That area includes Brunswick places on each side of U.S. 17: Growing Carolina Shores, Calabash and Sunset Beach at the coast and inland more rural Hickman’s Crossroads, Ash and Longwood. South Carolina is almost ready to begin construction on its end, but North Carolina has yet to find a landing spot as well as funding. With a majority of potential connection spots near Hickman Road and a new shopping center on the way near Carolina Shores, people and businesses in southern Brunswick County could be teetering on trouble or treasure.

Twenty years in the making
The Carolina Bays Parkway Extension project began in 2006 with a feasibility study with conceptual alternative routes and has evolved into seven potential​ routes being studied. Interactive maps of the alternatives can be viewed on NCDOT’s website. The NCDOT portion of the project is only funded for preliminary engineering, NCDOT spokeswoman Lauren Haviland said, but not for right-of-way, utilities or construction. Right-of-way, utilities and construction for NCDOT’s part of the project is estimated to cost $809,700,000, Haviland said. Shallotte Mayor Walt Eccard has watched and supported the road project for about 10 years. He said it’s a complicated project with multiple agencies involved in both states. “I’m a big supporter of this project, I think it’s critical,” Eccard said. “I think the area will benefit, I think citizens will benefit in their travels.” If constructed, the route will be built in phases and enhance evacuation routes, improve safety and smooth out traffic flow as the county continues to grow in population. Exact costs and timelines to construct each phase for the North Carolina side have not been determined, Haviland said. Despite eagerness, Eccard said NCDOT has no funding to support its portion of the road. “Ultimately, we cannot move forward even when a route is selected until we have adequate funding and that’s been an issue for several years now,” Eccard said. Horry County in 2016 passed a capital projects sales tax referendum that allocated $125 million for its portion of the project, according to NCDOT’s website. In North Carolina, $4.1 million was allocated for planning and design. Public hearings for the North Carolina side of the extension have been delayed several times but, Eccard said, there is hope the draft environmental impact statement will be available this spring so public hearings and review can start, and a final route can be selected by NCDOT. Haviland confirmed a public hearing will be held in late spring if the draft environmental impact statement is approved soon. NCDOT has seven alternative maps for preferred routes in Brunswick County that will eventually dump onto U.S. 17. However, five alternatives cross on the northern side of U.S. 17 around Hickman’s Crossroads along Hickman Road in Calabash.

Impacting generations
Distant relatives David and Myles Bennett were born and raised in the Calabash area. Myles was raised on Thomasboro Road near the heart of Calabash while David was raised on the northern side of U.S. 17 around Hickman’s Crossroads. The Bennetts have been in the Calabash area since the 1800s, Myles Bennett said, noting most know their family through farming and the seafood restaurant business. David Bennett is also related to the Hickman’s, who have lived in the Ash and Longwood areas since the 1700s. He said the property he lives on has been in his family’s name since 1845 and that his father’s entire life was spent on the property. “His life was here. … And he was so worried that if they took that away, then he had to leave here,” he said. One of the alternative routes connecting near Hickman’s Crossroads would place the road on top of David Bennett’s dining and living room and partially through the Manley Bennett Cemetery that holds approximately 300 graves, with some headstones dating back to the 1800s. SCDOT is currently working with NCDOT to secure the environmental permit from the Federal Highway Administration, SCDOT spokeswoman Hannah Robinson said in early January. “Once the document is secured, right-of-way acquisition can begin,” Robinson said. “At this time, we anticipate construction to begin in 2028.”

Needed project with a questionable future
The timeline and future of the project is still unknown. Though project start and completion dates are still in question, local leaders look forward to the additional road and evacuation route. “The county only has one main artery and it impacts the ability for people to move around,” Carolina Shores Mayor Dan Conte said. “The extension would be a boom to Ash, but it would also help us.” The extension is a “critical infrastructure need,” said Conte, because it will give southern Brunswick County residents more opportunity to move throughout the county with less traffic, especially during an evacuation. “There’s no provision right now to easily move people from our town or from the southern part of the county,” he said, noting N.C. 130 quickly floods during heavy rainfall and residents need an alternative route. With proposed and already approved developments near Ash, Calabash and Longwood areas piling up, the road could also declutter future traffic. Myles Bennett echoed Conte’s thoughts, believing the extension would help decongest existing traffic-prone areas. However, his neighbor Hannah Williams Crane fears the road will only make things worse. Crane was also raised on Thomasboro Road and has deep roots to the Calabash area through her mother’s side of the family, who were the Moore’s. She said Hickman’s Crossroads is already “so congested with traffic.” Many drivers who often travel through Hickman’s Crossroads already plan to get stuck, she added.

Local businesses consider the impact
Though the new road means less traffic along currently congested roads, south traveling traffic flow could stop in front of Carolina Shores as popular retail stores like Walmart and Publix build along U.S. 17. Calabash Deli co-owner Sean Grady said the extension could have a positive or negative impact on the Calabash community. Traveling will likely be easier but new shopping centers and fast food chains could take away customers from small businesses. Existing traffic jams and recent closure of the Calabash Bridge have already deterred potential customers from visiting the small town, he said. “A lot of people are avoiding Calabash because it’s a small, quaint town and some people don’t want to get caught up in the traffic and they kind of stick to the major highway and drive right past us,” Grady said. Like Grady, Coffee Cottage and Calabash Garden Tea Room owner Kathy Cody said it is hard to say the exact impacts the extension will have on the Calabash community since there is no finalized plan nor promised timeline. “The longer it takes them to actually initiate it and make it happen, the harder it’s going to be, and the more people and neighborhoods are going to be affected,” she said.

New road, high housing market, low rural life
Some major housing and commercial developments have already been approved around the potential route area, like the 2,950-home development named Ashton Farms. Housing developments are coming in while rural lifestyles are being pushed out. Myles Bennett and Crane explained they have already seen changes to Calabash as nearby wooded areas are cleared for new housing developments and vehicular traffic increases. “The stuff in front of us has been woods my entire life and just last year we saw them start clearing trees right across the road from Thomasboro,” said Crane, noting they are expected to have over 1,000 new neighbors. The heart of Calabash was built with family-owned businesses. Calabash would have to add more grocery stores and “convenient” businesses if the extension were to push more people to Calabash, Crane said. The “small town feel,” she noted, could be negatively changed. Like Calabash, the Ash and Longwood communities are full of generational families and homes, Crane and David Bennett said. “My grandfather loved this place, and he used to say that J.D. Rockefeller did not have enough money to buy his place,” David Bennett said. Some fear the new road, if built near Hickman’s Crossroads or Ash, will drain the history and culture of the Ash community. “It’s no longer going to be family land, it’s no longer going to be the quiet town that we know,” Crane said. David Bennett’s mother was from Longwood. He said the Longwood community was named after his great grandfather, noting he has relatives that will also be uprooted. The road could cause David Bennett and many others to pack up their lives with nowhere else to go. “I don’t want to go anywhere, I want to stay here, this is my home. … I don’t think people think about the lives that something like that is going to affect,” said David Bennett, noting many local generational families would not survive if they were displaced and forced to live elsewhere. Ocean Isle Beach Mayor and real estate agent Debbie Smith said road projects “typically” have a positive impact on property values, noting homes closer to the new road could increase in value. “Then again, it may change some of the uses from rural farming to more urban development,” Smith said. She said the road will be beneficial to the whole area and “critical for the future of our area” since it will increase access and emergency evacuation routes throughout the county and across state lines. “I think more than anything it would improve transportation and maybe keep some of our roads from becoming overburdened. … It is desperately needed for the area,” Smith said.

Where to grow from here
Brunswick County is seeing tremendous growth and municipalities are planning projects, setting budgets and updating unified development ordinances to prepare for more. “Until we see the final plans, it’s really hard to say,” Eccard said of the extension bringing more traffic to Shallotte. Conte said Carolina Shores is almost completely built out with no room for more major developments. Though the town has no more room, he said traffic will always be an issue. Families living along the alternative routes are conflicted, depressed and worried because they do not know what to do, David Bennett said. For example, he said, upgrading his house could be a waste of time if the home is destroyed in a few years. “It’s constantly in the back of your mind. …. Where are we supposed to go? What are we supposed to do?,” he said. Potential impacts to noise, low income and disadvantaged populations, cultural resources and the environment are considered when selecting the least environmentally damaging and practicable alternative route, Haviland said. “In cases where impacts to private properties are unavoidable, NCDOT will work with individual property owners to help minimize impacts or mitigate through appropriate compensation,” Haviland said. The NCDOT representative said it should have a recommended alternative route selected after the public has time to review the draft environmental impact statement, look at preliminary designs and make formal public comments. “As part of the alternative analysis process, impacts to communities, properties, landowners and businesses are considered. … Comments from the public are always welcomed and encouraged. The formal comment period will take place once the public hearing has been scheduled,” Haviland said.
Read more » click here

Previously reported – November 2023
Carolina Bays Parkway project S.C. 31
As many of you know the extension of Carolina Bays 31 from SC to NC has been an ongoing project for many years that has been accelerated by the fact that SC has the funding and the desire to complete the existing SC31 to the NC state line. This has caused NC to produce a plan even though they have no funding for the road to enter NC and go north towards Wilmington. 

There have been numerous rumors about what routes are and are not being considering and quite honestly there are some things that we do know for fact after the most recent meeting but there are even more things that we, and NCDOT for that matter, don’t have answers to at this point.  The purpose of this communication is to make everyone aware of what we know.  At the Sept Board meeting the Community Impact Committee made a presentation that clearly identified 2 of the proposed routes along with many of the details surrounding a project like this. It is suggested that if you haven’t seen it to review the below “Enumerate Engage – Login”  link for more detail about this project.

What we know based on the last meeting with the NCDOT two weeks ago;

• • SC has the funding thru a sales tax in Horry County
  • SC has asked NC where to end their construction to the NC SC state line or in other words, where does NC want the SC portion to end? 
  • NC has selected route 4 which is east of Indigo Farms near Hickman Road (NC 57) 
  • Carolina Bays is a high priority for the BC county region of NCDOT but there is NO funding for this project, and it will have to compete with other projects throughout NC based on a set of criteria which at this point has placed it as a low priority within NC.
  • NCDOT has decided to have a 3 Phase plan for the road in NC.

• • • Phase 1 will take SC31 from the state line to a new interchange at Ash Little River Road
    • Phase 2 will take it from there to Longwood Road NW (Rte. 904) near the Grissettown Longwood Fire and Rescue Department. 
    • Phase 3 will take it from there to Route 17 at either the Rte. 904 or the Rte. 130 intersection

• • The Environmental Impact Study (EIS) although not officially approved is close to approval and once it is approved there will be 2 public meetings (one in NC & one in SC)  to solicit input on the 2 alternative routes to connect to 17. These meetings will take place sometime in mid to late Q1 ’24
  •  At this point only Phase 1 & 2 are locked in with preliminary funding expected in 2025 or 2026
  •  Phase 3 is still under review. No route has been selected albeit there is solid rationale for both alternatives and a route must be selected prior to any State or Federal funding proposals that are to be are submitted. 
  •  The public meetings will be VERY important in determining the Phase 3 route !!!

Without funding, NCDOT continues Carolina Bays Parkway discussion
On Oct. 16, the Grand Strand Area Transportation Study (GSATS) Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) and the GSATS Policy Committee with both North Carolina and South Carolina participants met. Both meetings were held at Ocean Isle Beach Town Hall. Both meetings were open to the public and focused on the Carolina Bays Parkway Extension project that will extend Carolina Bays Parkway — also known as South Carolina Highway 31 — from South Carolina Highway 9 in Horry County, South Carolina, across the North Carolina state line to US Highway 17 in Brunswick County. Representatives from participating towns, cities and counties and project leads from the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) were in attendance. During the combined policy meeting, participants received a presentation by NCDOT Division 3 Engineer Chad Kimes and Project Development and Environment Analysis (PDEA) Engineer Mason Herndon. Kimes told the committee that NCDOT wants to start obtaining funding for the extension by the end of next year to get the North Carolina side of the project moving. “I can tell you, Carolina Bays is one of our number one priorities in this region that’s unfunded, currently, by the state of North Carolina,” he said. Kimes explained that they are going to try several ways to get state funding over the next few months and they will know a little more by spring 2024. He noted that the project had been submitted for state funding in the past, however, they have yet to receive any money. “The lowest project to score in our scoring system that got picked up in our [Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP)] program scored a 74.6,” he said. “We were scoring the Carolina Bays at a 62.71. The difference between that 62 and that 74.6 is about $14 billion worth of projects in between, so there was a big difference…” He told the board that NCODT will be applying for federal grants too, however, all grants will require a match by the state. “On a price tag like this, North Carolina can match anywhere between 30 and 50% on federal grants but we will be pursuing it,” Kimes said. If they do apply for federal grants, the project may score better in the prioritization process because it will bring down the overall cost of the project for North Carolina. Kimes noted they are looking to lower project costs by eliminating interchanges and installing superstreets, adding they may reduce the number of right a ways, too, and that things can be changed in the future. Kimes said they are seeking to connect the project to US Highway 17 sooner to lower overall costs and are still considering installing tolls along the project to offset the total cost as well. Herndon gave the Policy Committee, along with a good-sized audience, a presentation on NCDOT’s progress on the project, funding and planning. Herndon said they are studying seven different routes in the draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), however, alternative route four is the preferred one at the moment. He explained that one of the interchanges would go up to Ash Little River Road in Ash. Alternative four would connect with South Carolina at Hickman Road Northwest in Calabash, and travel through Hickman’s Crossroads. It would cross the Hickman’s Branch River and the Cawcaw Swamp. The suggested route would take the project to Gwynn Road Northwest in Longwood and Bland Road Northwest in Longwood. If alternative map four is chosen for the extension, the project would not connect with US Highway 17 until its intersection with Longwood Road and Seaside Road near Grissettown. “Alternative four ties into [US Highway] 17 at the 904 intersection,” Herndon said. Asked how much money had been committed on North Carolina’s end, Herndon said none. He said they were told by the Federal Highway Administration (FHA) to look at an “affordable solution” to get the project started since they have no funding currently. He said NCDOT has been working on it and has sent the draft EIS, which includes all seven alternatives, to the FHA. He said NCDOT will eventually have a financial plan to show their commitment to the entire project with South Carolina. Herndon said the project would be done in phases — phase one would either stop at the North Carolina and South Carolina boarder or carry into Brunswick County up to Ash Little River Road. “Now, we’re not talking about this as the complete project, this is just phase one of the project,” he said. “Every project that we’ve got is so many miles long that we build it in sections, and it has to have logical termini. So, basically, those are the two logical termini we feel like we can start with.” If phase one were carried into Brunswick County, he said an interchange would be built at Ash Little River Road. “This would require us to do improvements along Hickman Road and along Ash Little River Road to get traffic to 904 until phase two is built,” he said. A timeline for phase one could not be provided at this time. “Until we actually have money in the bank for this project in North Carolina… that’s going to be when we can really develop a timeline,” Herndon said. He said they hope that having this plan, with some committed funds, will help move things forward, and also explained that the final EIS may not get approved without a full financial plan for the entire project. Kimes said he felt confident that they will receive right of way funding by the end of 2024 to kickstart the project. With the project plan coming together, Herndon said he expects public hearings to commence in early 2024. Shallotte Mayor Walt Eccard said he has been telling folks for three years that there would be a meeting to discuss the draft EIS. He asked how sure they were about the public hearings and if early 2024 was a reasonable date to tell people. In response, Herndon said he felt fairly confident that there would be public meetings for the extension, and they could begin in early 2024. He noted that the final EIS meeting might not be until the end of 2024 or beginning of 2025. “The public hearings after the draft EIS [are] to give public input on what we’re proposing,” Herndon said. He explained the final EIS would contain the final determined route for the Carolina Bay Parkway Extension, however, the drafted EIS, used for information purposes, will include all seven alternative routes. Brunswick County Board of Commissioners Chair Randy Thompson said there would be major construction work that would take years if alternative four is chosen. He said he was concerned about the potential traffic on affected roads during the duration of the project’s construction, noting that traffic is already a major issue with the county’s increasing population growth. “We need the highway; there’s no doubt about that. We need the highway,” Thompson said. Kimes said they will look at all the potentially effected roads to see what they can handle and make sure steps are in place for potentially needed improvements. All of the alternative routes can be found online on the NCDOT website at https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/carolina-bays-parkway/Pages/project-maps.aspx

Corrections & Amplifications –

Island Homes Sold – 2024 * Lou’s Views
A complete list of homes sold in 2024

Island Land Sold – 2024 * Lou’s Views
A complete list of land sold in 2024

Island Properties Sold – Comparison * Lou’s Views
A comparison of Holden Beach properties sold through the last three (3) years

Odds & Ends –

Brunswick Community College holds groundbreaking for new first responder training center
Brunswick Community College held a groundbreaking ceremony Friday morning for the new “Alan Holden Public Safety Center,” named after the chair of BCC’s Board of Trustees. The building will be located directly behind the main entrance to the college off highway 17. Construction of the more than 28,000 square-foot facility is scheduled to begin Monday. The state-of-the-art facility will feature a wide array of specialized labs and training rooms. Including a moveable wall tactical firearm room, a self-defense arrest techniques mat room, fire truck and police scenario simulators, and EMS scenario training rooms. College president Gene Smith says the new facility will continue BCC’s mission of expanding with the community. “This facility will provide the opportunity for BCC to continue to serve our students and meet the needs of our community for many, many, many, years to come,” Smith stated. Construction is estimated to finish in March of 2026.
Read more » click here

BCC breaks ground on Alan Holden Public Safety Center
Brunswick Community College (BCC) on Jan. 31 celebrated the groundbreaking of the Alan Holden Public Safety Center today, marking the beginning of a transformative project that will bolster educational and career opportunities while addressing critical workforce needs in the region. Construction of the 28,278-square-foot facility is scheduled to begin on Feb. 3, with an estimated completion date of March 2026. The state-of-the-art facility will feature a wide array of specialized labs and training rooms, including a VirTra Simulator, moveable wall tactical firearm room, self-defense/arrest techniques mat room, driving simulators, EMS scenario training rooms, and an apparatus bay. It will serve as the new home for numerous programs and certifications designed to train the next generation of public safety professionals. “Today’s groundbreaking is a monumental step forward in Brunswick Community College’s mission to meet the growing needs of our community,” said Dr. Gene Smith, President of BCC. “The Alan Holden Public Safety Center will provide top-tier education and training opportunities for students and support in-service training for our local law enforcement officers, fire, and rescue personnel. We are deeply honored by Alan Holden’s generosity and his trust in BCC to carry forward a legacy of excellence and service to our community.” The facility will house Associate in Applied Science degree programs in Criminal Justice Technology, Emergency Medical Science (EMS), and Public Safety Administration with specializations in Corrections, Law Enforcement, and Emergency and Fire Management, and 911 Communication and Operations. In addition, the center will offer diploma, certification, and continuing education courses such as Basic Law Enforcement Training (BLET), Emergency Medical Responder (EMR), Advanced Life Support (ALS), and a variety of firefighter training programs. “This project is a game changer for the safety and well-being of the people of Brunswick County and beyond,” said Sheriff Brian Chism. “The Alan Holden Public Safety Center will provide invaluable training resources for public safety professionals, ensuring they are prepared to protect and serve at the highest level. We are grateful to both Mr. Holden and BCC for their continued contributions to and support of our community.” For more information about Brunswick Community College and the Alan Holden Public Safety Center, visit brunswickcc.edu.
Read more » click here

Alerts
Brunswick County uses ReadyBrunswick as part of the County’s effort to continuously improve communications during emergency situations within our area. Powered by Everbridge, the ReadyBrunswick notification system sends emergency notifications in a variety of communication methods such as:

• • • Landline (Voice)
    • VoIP (Voice over Internet Protocol)
    • Mobile (Voice)
    • Mobile SMS (Text Messaging)
    • Email

In the case of an emergency, you may choose to receive notifications via one or all of these communication methods. It’s recommended that you register several media options to receive messages in the event a particular communication device is unavailable.
For more information » click here

Brunswick County Emergency Communications Notification System
Get notified about emergencies and other important  community news by signing up for our ReadyBrunswick Emergency Notification System. This system enables us to provide you with critical information quickly in a variety of situations, such as severe weather, unexpected road closures, missing persons, evacuations of buildings or neighborhoods, and more. You will receive time-sensitive messages wherever you specify, such as your home, mobile or business phones, email address, text messages and more. You pick where, you pick how.

 SIGN UP HERE to choose the type of alerts you want to receive

This and That –

 Car insurance companies ask for 22.6% rate increase in North Carolina
Companies asked for proposed rate hike to take effect Oct. 1
Auto insurance companies are asking for a sizable rate increase in North Carolina, up an average of 22.6%. The request for the rate increase was filed by the North Carolina Rate Bureau on Monday, Feb. 3, the state Department of Insurance said. The companies asked that their proposed insurance rate hike take effect Oct. 1. Now that the request has been filed, the insurance commissioner has 60 days to review it, according to the department. During his review, Commissioner Mike Causey will determine if the companies’ request is justified. If he disagrees with their request, Causey has the power to have the Department of Insurance negotiate a settlement, or he can call for a hearing. State officials said settlements have been reached in the past, but if the companies’ request goes to a hearing, a hearing officer would have the final say. Monday’s filing comes two years after the companies asked for a 28.4% increase. That request eventually resulted in a settlement with an average 4.5% increase per year for two years. In a statement, N.C. Rate Bureau COO Jarred Chappell said the request for an increase comes as vehicles and repairs have become more expensive and accidents have become more common. “This request reflects the fact that vehicles and repairs are getting more expensive, partly because automakers pack so much technology into modern vehicles,” Chappell said. “Accidents have become more common, partly because distracted driving has eroded driving habits. Vehicle weights are up, and so is horsepower, both of which make accidents more severe.” Chappell said North Carolina has some of the lowest auto insurance rates in the country, and said an increase is needed to “ensure a large number of companies want to write policies in the state.”
Read more » click here

When will the Brunswick County Visitors Center re-open?
The Brunswick County Visitors Center, a state-operated facility in Shallotte, is a popular rest stop for those driving along U.S. 17. Located at the intersection of U.S. 17 and N.C. 130 between Wilmington and Myrtle Beach, the facility is a North Carolina Department of Transportation rest area that serves thousands of patrons each year. But the facility has been closed for renovations and has not yet re-opened. A reader recently wrote to the StarNews and inquired about plans to re-open the facility. Here’s what we found out.

When did the facility close?
The visitors center closed in fall 2023 for construction.

What did the project include?
According to a previous StarNews article, the project involved several improvements, including a new family restroom facility, water line, updated drainage and landscaping improvements. The article stated a construction contract for $981,000 was awarded to Kowen General Contractors out of Maxton for the project.

What was the project timeline?
Kowen was able to begin construction in October 2023, but according to Lauren Haviland, spokeswoman for the NCDOT, the firm did not start groundwork until March 2024. “That delay was due to the contractor had never done work for NCDOT before and was unfamiliar with the processes, such as working with certified sub-contractors,” Haviland said, in an email. “Also, several items of work have been added, extending their agreement to the end of the year.”

What items were added to the project?
Haviland said additional work includes waterline and hydrant installation, additional tile work, removing and replacing existing sidewalks, additional support at one of the entrances, cabinet work in one of the rooms, and removing and replacing the fascia. Haviland noted that while the original contract amount was $981,000, the project was funded for $1.5 million. As of the November 2024 estimate, Haviland said NCDOT had spent about $1,352,000.

When will it be completed?
According to Haviland, construction is expected to be completed in late January 2025.
Read more » click here

Why rising costs have left some Wilmington-area beach nourishment projects high and dry
Carolina and Kure beaches in New Hanover County and Oak Island in Brunswick County could be left waiting for sand due to rising dredging costs and a surge in demand for such projects nationwide
Some Wilmington-area beaches, recently covered by a rare snow storm, will soon again be a hive of activity as officials take advantage of the open environmental window − outside of sea turtle and shorebird nesting season − to pump fresh sand onto the vital economic engines for many coastal communities. The activity, however, will be muted this year, and that has officials in both New Hanover and Brunswick counties concerned.

What’s going on?
Call it the law of supply and demand. Beach nourishment is inherently expensive, requiring lots of pre-project planning and permit work and then securing an acceptable sand source that can be pumped onto a beach. If that borrow site is farther away than say a nearby inlet, like Wrightsville Beach and Carolina Beach mine for their projects, it will cost more to move the sand from the source to the beach. “Sources of sand are drying up in some places,” said Dr. Robert Young, director of the Program for the Study of Developed Shorelines at Western Carolina University. “Borrow areas don’t make sand. These are non-renewable resources. And as you creep offshore even a little, costs go up, often a lot. But another factor that’s helping send the cost of beach nourishment surging is the high demand for projects to rebuild beaches all along the Gulf and East coasts battered by recent hurricanes and the few number of American companies out there in the dredging business. “There are simply a limited number of companies out there that can do this kind of work, and competition is fierce because we’re literally trying to hold the line everywhere from Saco, Maine, to Padre Island, Texas, and that’s only a little bit of an exaggeration,” Young said. “When you have a lot of demand and not a ton of supply, the people who do work like this are really in the driver’s seat.”

What have been the impacts this year?
With prices coming in well above predictions, some Cape Fear-area beach towns are having to adapt and make painful decisions. In New Hanover County, the periodic federal nourishment of Carolina and Kure beaches is one that has fallen victim to the financial headwinds. The Pleasure Island project had an estimated cost of just under $20 million. But the only bid for the work the Army Corps of Engineers received came in at $37.5 million. In a letter to residents, Kure Beach Mayor Allen Oliver said the price differential was just too much to overcome this winter. “Getting additional bidders are slim and since the price was double the estimated project cost, the best possible solution is to postpone the event until next year,” the mayor said. “We should get better pricing and more bidders participating.” The delay means the two New Hanover beach towns will have to go longer than expected without a fresh injection of sand − a worry for officials and residents in a world where climate change is increasingly fueling stronger and bigger tropical storm systems. “This is not the most favorable situation for us and Carolina Beach, but honestly it is the most logical decision based on the lack of bidders and the cost of the single bid received,” Oliver said. In Brunswick County, Oak Island also is feeling the pain of higher prices and not enough competition. When the town opened bids up this fall for a large-scale, end-to-end beach nourishment project to take place this winter, the bids from two companies “were significantly above a feasible budget for the town, which was reflective of the fact that there is essentially no availability of dredging company equipment to conduct the project during that timeframe,” states a post on Oak Island’s website. The project is estimated to cost at least $40 million, with half of that covered by a one-time state grant. Bids for the same work to take place during the 2025-26 dredging window came closer to the town’s budget, and Oak Island officials are now in negotiations to see if the work can get done between mid-November and late April 2026. “If negotiations are not successful, the project will be rebid in 2025,” the town stated online. Now officials and residents have to hope the beach can hold out until then. Hurricane Isaias, which raked the Brunswick County shoreline nearly five years ago, chewed away a lot of the beach. Storms, king tides and gradual sea-level rise has since then added to the pain − not to mention the no-name storm and the remnants of Tropical Storm Helene that hit Brunswick County last September and October, respectively. Big beach projects aren’t the only ones getting caught up in the financial squeeze. A project put out to bid by the corps of engineers to dredge the shipping channel near the mouth of the Cape Fear River this winter and place the sand on Oak Island and Caswell Beach also came in 20% over estimates.

Is it all bad news?
At least one beach town in the Wilmington area will be seeing new sand this winter. This week, Surf City will begin pumping sand from Banks Channel on the Intracoastal Waterway side of the Pender County beach town onto its beach strand. The nearly $20 million project, which is expected to wrap up in late March, will nourish the town’s entire strand, adding an estimated 60 feet of beach from the Topsail Beach line to 1,000 feet north of the Surf City Fishing Pier. Town Manager Kyle Breuer said although Surf City only received one bid for the work, it was within the town’s estimates and the timing of when the dredging could take place within the fairly narrow fall/winter navigational window also worked. “We were very fortunate and very thankful,” he said. Breuer noted that not only will the project help nourish Surf City’s eroded beach but also piggyback on the earlier dredging of parts of Banks Channel done by Topsail Beach to improve navigation around the southern half of Topsail Island. The breakdown of the project’s cost is roughly $5 million from Surf City and about $14.5 million in funding coming through a one-time state grant.

What does the future look like?
Unfortunately, a lot like today − if not worse − for beach towns desperate to hold back the encroaching ocean, Western Carolina’s Young said. He said the pressures that are driving prices upward are only likely to increase as sea-level rise, more storms and increased development make shore protection efforts more frequent and necessary than ever along many parts of the country’s oceanfront. The new Trump administration’s stated goal of taking a fine-tooth comb to the federal budget and slashing a lot of discretionary spending also could leave many coastal communities hunting for new revenue sources outside of Washington just as dredging prices surge and the need for beach nourishment increases. “Beaches are not stable, they move, so the only future I see is one where costs are increasing because there’s only so much sand and we’re doing it more often and in more places,” Young said.
Read more » click here

Fauna & Flora –

NC State Native Plant Resources » click here

NC Sea Grant Coastal Landscapes » click here

New Hanover County Arboretum Native Plant Garden » click here

Audubon Native Plant Database » click here

Fauna & Flora » click here
Holden Beach recommended plant list – deer resistant & salt tolerant

Factoid That May Interest Only Me –

People flocked to this North Carolina city in 2024.
Now, it ranks No. 1 in US — again
North Carolina is home to the nation’s hottest place for people to start calling home — again, a new report finds. Wilmington ranks No. 1 on a list of metropolitan areas that attracted new residents in 2024, according to data the moving company United Van Lines shared with McClatchy News on Jan. 2. The city, near popular beach destinations, wasn’t the only North Carolina-based metro to receive recognition. The Charlotte, Raleigh and Hickory areas also ranked among the top places people flocked to last year, according to moving companies. Wilmington topped its list after United Van Lines said it studied thousands of moves in metro areas across 48 states and Washington, D.C. It studied the percentage of people moving into and out of each place to determine where they settled down.

What makes Wilmington rank No. 1?
When compared to all metro areas across the country, Wilmington reigned supreme with 83% of inbound moves compared to 17% outbound, results show. The Wilmington area regained the top spot that it held in the 2022 rankings, when United Van Lines praised the area for its “large historic district, vibrant riverfront” and proximity to the coast. The metro had slipped to the No. 2 spot on the 2023 list, McClatchy News reported. The latest results were published as U-Haul shared similar lists in early January. The moving company in a news release said it studied “net gains of U-Haul customers taking one-way equipment into and out of metro areas” in 2024. On both the U-Haul and United Van Lines lists, North Carolina ranked among the top 10 states gaining new people. “While U-Haul rankings may not correlate directly to population or economic growth, the U-Haul Growth Index is an effective gauge of how well states, metros and cities are attracting and maintaining residents,” the company wrote. Here’s how other North Carolina-based metros fared in the national rankings: Hickory at No. 9 for all metros (United Van Lines) Charlotte at No. 1 and Raleigh at No. 8 for larger metros (United Van Lines) Charlotte at No. 2 and Raleigh at No. 7 for all metros (U-Haul) After Wilmington, these metros rounded out the nation’s top five favorite places to move, per United Van Lines: Springfield, Missouri, at No. 2 Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, at No. 3 Flagstaff, Arizona, at No. 4 Brownsville-Harlingen, Texas, at No. 5
Read more » click here

Study: Wilmington area No. 1 place people are moving to
A national moving company that releases data on where people are entering and exiting annually has put out its 2024 study.
It rates Wilmington, North Carolina, among the top metropolitan statistical area people are moving to, according to United Van Lines. The company has traced migration patterns on a state-by-state basis since 1972 and utilized data from its parent company, UniGroup, handling household moves in 48 states and D.C. Wilmington MSA consists of the tri-county region (New Hanover, Brunswick and Pender counties) and has come in the top 10 for many years now but climbed to the number-one slot in 2022 as well. The 2024 study indicates that 83% of people the company tracked moved to the Wilmington MSA, with 17% leaving in 2024. Only two other North Carolina cities came in the top 25, including Greenville (74% inbound and 26% outbound) and Greensboro-Winston-Salem area (65% inbound and 35% outbound). Located 77 miles south of Wilmington, the area of Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, tracked number three (80% inbound and 20% outbound). Overall, North Carolina was the number five state people moved to, according to the survey, with South Carolina topping out at number three. The company asks surveyors if they are moving due to improved cost of living, to be closer to family, for retirement, as a company transfer or for a new job, or for a lifestyle change. North Carolina came in number seven for people to move for retirement. Neighboring South Carolina came in third for retirement, fifth for lifestyle change and sixth for improved cost of living. West Virginia jumped nine spots since 2023 and came in as the number one state people flocked to, due to its affordable housing, outdoor activities, and the cost of living being lower than the national average. For the seventh year in a row, New Jersey has remained the most highly exited state, with most movers leaving due to retirement.  “As housing costs continue to rise, Americans are moving to lower density, more affordable regions between expensive, economic-driving states,” an economist and professor in the department of public policy at the UCLA, Michael Stroll, noted in the release. See United Van Lines full report here.
Read more » click here

Hot Button Issues –

Subjects that are important to people and about which they have strong opinions

Climate
For more information » click here.

There’s something happening here
What it is ain’t exactly clear

2024 Brought the World to a Dangerous Warming Threshold. Now What?
Global temperatures last year crept past a key goal, raising questions about how much nations can stop the planet from heating up further.
At the stroke of midnight on Dec. 31, Earth finished up its hottest year in recorded history, scientists said on Friday. The previous hottest year was 2023. And the next one will be upon us before long: By continuing to burn huge amounts of coal, oil and gas, humankind has all but guaranteed it. The planet’s record-high average temperature last year reflected the weekslong, 104-degree-Fahrenheit spring heat waves that shuttered schools in Bangladesh and India. It reflected the effects of the bathtub-warm ocean waters that supercharged hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico and cyclones in the Philippines. And it reflected the roasting summer and fall conditions that primed Los Angeles this week for the most destructive wildfires in its history. “We are facing a very new climate and new challenges, challenges that our society is not prepared for,” said Carlo Buontempo, director of the Copernicus Climate Change Service, the European Union monitoring agency. But even within this progression of warmer years and ever-intensifying risks to homes, communities and the environment, 2024 stood out in another unwelcome way. According to Copernicus, it was the first year in which global temperatures averaged more than 1.5 degrees Celsius, or 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit, above those the planet experienced at the start of the industrial age. For the past decade, the world has sought to avoid crossing this dangerous threshold. Nations enshrined the goal in the 2015 Paris agreement to fight climate change. “Keep 1.5 alive” was the mantra at United Nations summits. Yet here we are. Global temperatures will fluctuate somewhat, as they always do, which is why scientists often look at warming averaged over longer periods, not just a single year. But even by that standard, staying below 1.5 degrees looks increasingly unattainable, according to researchers who have run the numbers. Globally, despite hundreds of billions of dollars invested in clean-energy technologies, carbon dioxide emissions hit a record in 2024 and show no signs of dropping. One recent study published in the journal Nature concluded that the absolute best humanity can now hope for is around 1.6 degrees of warming. To achieve it, nations would need to start slashing emissions at a pace that would strain political, social and economic feasibility. “It was guaranteed we’d get to this point where the gap between reality and the trajectory we needed for 1.5 degrees was so big it was ridiculous,” said David Victor, a professor of public policy at the University of California, San Diego. The question now is what, if anything, should replace 1.5 as a lodestar for nations’ climate aspirations. “These top-level goals are at best a compass,” Dr. Victor said. “They’re a reminder that if we don’t do more, we’re in for significant climate impacts.” The 1.5-degree threshold was never the difference between safety and ruin, between hope and despair. It was a number negotiated by governments trying to answer a big question: What’s the highest global temperature increase — and the associated level of dangers, whether heat waves or wildfires or melting glaciers — that our societies should strive to avoid? The result, as codified in the Paris agreement, was that nations would aspire to hold warming to “well below” 2 degrees Celsius while “pursuing efforts” to limit it to 1.5 degrees. Even at the time, some experts called the latter goal unrealistic, because it required such deep and rapid emissions cuts. Still, the United States, the European Union and other governments adopted it as a guidepost for climate policy. Christoph Bertram, an associate research professor at the University of Maryland’s Center for Global Sustainability, said the urgency of the 1.5 target spurred companies of all kinds — automakers, cement manufacturers, electric utilities — to start thinking hard about what it would mean to zero out their emissions by midcentury. “I do think that has led to some serious action,” Dr. Bertram said. But the high aspiration of the 1.5 target also exposed deep fault lines among nations. China and India never backed the goal, since it required them to curb their use of coal, gas and oil at a pace they said would hamstring their development. Rich countries that were struggling to cut their own emissions began choking off funding in the developing world for fossil-fuel projects that were economically beneficial. Some low-income countries felt it was deeply unfair to ask them to sacrifice for the climate given that it was wealthy nations — and not them — that had produced most of the greenhouse gases now warming the world. “The 1.5-degree target has created a lot of tension between rich and poor countries,” said Vijaya Ramachandran, director for energy and development at the Breakthrough Institute, an environmental research organization. Costa Samaras, an environmental-engineering professor at Carnegie Mellon University, compared the warming goals to health officials’ guidelines on, say, cholesterol. “We don’t set health targets on what’s realistic or what’s possible,” Dr. Samaras said. “We say, ‘This is what’s good for you. This is how you’re going to not get sick.’’ “If we were going to say, ‘Well, 1.5 is likely out of the question, let’s put it to 1.75,’ it gives people a false sense of assurance that 1.5 was not that important,” said Dr. Samaras, who helped shape U.S. climate policy from 2021 to 2024 in the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. “It’s hugely important.”  Scientists convened by the United Nations have concluded that restricting warming to 1.5 degrees instead of 2 would spare tens of millions of people from being exposed to life-threatening heat waves, water shortages and coastal flooding. It might mean the difference between a world that has coral reefs and Arctic sea ice in the summer, and one that doesn’t. Each tiny increment of additional warming, whether it’s 1.6 degrees versus 1.5, or 1.7 versus 1.6, increases the risks. “Even if the world overshoots 1.5 degrees, and the chances of this happening are increasing every day, we must keep striving” to bring emissions to zero as soon as possible, said Inger Anderson, the executive director of the United Nations Environment Program. Officially, the sun has not yet set on the 1.5 target. The Paris agreement remains in force, even as President-elect Donald J. Trump vows to withdraw the United States from it for a second time. At U.N. climate negotiations, talk of 1.5 has become more muted compared with years past. But it has hardly gone away. “With appropriate measures, 1.5 Celsius is still achievable,” Cedric Schuster, the minister of natural resources and environment for the Pacific island nation of Samoa, said at last year’s summit in Azerbaijan. Countries should “rise to the occasion with new, highly ambitious” policies, he said. To Dr. Victor of U.C. San Diego, it is strange but all too predictable that governments keep speaking this way about what appears to be an unachievable aim. “No major political leader who wants to be taken seriously on climate wants to stick their neck out and say, ‘1.5 degrees isn’t feasible. Let’s talk about more realistic goals,’” he said. Still, the world will eventually need to have that discussion, Dr. Victor said. And it’s unclear how it will go. “It could be constructive, where we start asking, ‘How much warming are we really in for? And how do we deal with that?’” he said. “Or it could look very toxic, with a bunch of political finger pointing.”
Read more » click here

2024 was the hottest year on record, breaching a critical climate goal and capping 10 years of unprecedented heat
It’s official: 2024 was the hottest year on record, breaking the previous record set in 2023 and pushing the world over a critical climate threshold, according to new data from Europe’s climate monitoring agency Copernicus. Last year was 1.6 degrees hotter than the period before humans began burning large amounts of fossil fuels, Copernicus found. It makes 2024 the first calendar year to breach the 1.5-degree limit countries agreed to avoid under the Paris climate agreement in 2015. Scientists are much more concerned about breaches over decades, rather than single years — as above that threshold humans and ecosystems may struggle to adapt — but 2024’s record “does mean we’re getting dangerously close,” said Joeri Rogelj, a climate professor at Imperial College London. The Copernicus analysis points to a slew of climate records falling last year: The planet endured its hottest day on record in July; each month from January to June was the warmest such month on record; and levels of planet-heating pollution reached unprecedented highs. Last year is part of a pattern of off-the-charts heat. Every single one of the world’s 10 hottest years happened in the last decade, according to Copernicus data. Behind these statistics lies a huge toll. “Every fraction of a degree … brings more harm to people and ecosystems,” Rogelj said. The extreme weather that swept the globe last year shows just how dangerous life in a warmer world already is. Back-to-back hurricanes in the US, fueled by ultra-warm ocean temperatures, killed hundreds of people. In Spain, more than 200 people died in catastrophic floods. Amazon rivers fell to unprecedented lows during the region’s worst drought on record and the Philippines experienced an extraordinary typhoon season, with six in just 30 days. The climate crisis played a role in all of these extreme events, according to scientific analyses. Scientists are still trying to fully understand why global heat has been so extreme for the past two years. The main driver is clear: the human-caused climate crisis, boosted by El Niño, a natural climate pattern that tends to have a warming influence, which began in 2023 and ended earlier this year. But it doesn’t explain all of the heat. Scientists have also pointed to a recent drop in shipping pollution following regulations — a win for human health, but, in a cruel twist, this type of pollution also helps cool the planet by reflecting sunlight back into space. The eruption of a huge underwater volcano in the South Pacific in 2022, which sent plumes of water vapor — a potent greenhouse gas — into the atmosphere may have also contributed. Then there are the clouds. A December study found a dearth of sun-reflecting clouds over the ocean may be another factor. Scientists believe it’s unlikely 2025 will be another record-breaking year. La Niña, a natural climate pattern that tends to have a global cooling influence, was declared Thursday. “But people shouldn’t think that’s climate change hitting pause or plateauing,” said Paulo Ceppi, a climate scientist at Imperial College London. “A small dip doesn’t change the clear upward trajectory we’re on,” he added. Scientists say the decades to come are likely to be hotter still as humans continue to burn planet-heating coal, oil and gas. “The world doesn’t need to come up with a magical solution to stop things from getting worse in 2025,” said Friederike Otto, a climate scientist at Imperial College London. ‘We know exactly what we need to do to transition away from fossil fuels.”
Read more » click here

You just lived through the hottest year on record. Again.
In 2024 temperatures reached 1.6 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels.
This is a climate era when even the most ferocious records are bound to be broken. Scientists in Europe Friday confirmed that 2024 had been the hottest year on record — and the first to surpass a dangerous warming threshold of 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) that nations had pledged not to cross. But even as experts described the year as unprecedented, they acknowledged that it would ultimately become just one more marker in an upward warming trajectory causing havoc on a growing scale. “As long as people keep burning fossil fuels, this will only get worse,” said Friederike Otto, who leads a scientific group, World Weather Attribution, which assesses the role of climate change in amplifying extreme weather events. In 2024, according to data from the European Union’s Copernicus Climate Change Service, temperatures reached 1.6 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels. Aside from Australia and Antarctica, every continent experienced its warmest year on record. So too did sizable parts of the ocean. It is the second consecutive year in which the world has set a temperature record. In 2023, the arrival of El Niño — a natural phenomenon that is known to boost global temperatures — brought a jolt of warming much earlier than scientists had expected, with a temperature 1.48 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels. Then in 2024, temperatures predictably remained elevated in the wake of the fading El Niño, and scientists are debating what other factors may have contributed to the margin of record warmth. Projections suggest that 2025 might not be as hot as the past two years but that it will probably rank in the top five warmest years on record. Despite the year-to-year fluctuations, the general trend is obvious, as is the cause: the emission of greenhouse gases, primarily from fossil fuels. Each of humanity’s 10 hottest years have come over the past decade. At the time, 2016 was seen as an unprecedented scorcher — what one climate scientist called a “wake-up call.” Just nine years later, 2016 is now looking “decidedly cool,” said Adam Scaife, the head of long-range prediction at Britain’s Met Office. In 2024, so many heat-related events caused death and damage that it was hard to keep up. It was a year in which an estimated 1,300 religious pilgrims died under 120-degree Saudi Arabian heat. It was a year when a smoke plume stretched diagonally across nearly all of wildfire-stricken South America, when heat-exhausted howler monkeys fell dead out of trees in Mexico, and when the hottest place on earth — California’s Death Valley — registered its hottest month ever. The heat also transformed the oceans. Marine heat waves, expansive blobs of unusual oceanic heat, covered parts of all ocean basins during the year, reaching extreme levels in the tropical Atlantic, North Pacific and western Indian Ocean. That fostered an atmosphere capable of holding more moisture, which in turn led to one of the year’s most pronounced patterns: intense storms and flooding. Dubai, a hub of luxury in the arid Persian Gulf desert, was hit by a year’s worth of rain in a single day, flooding highways and grounding flights. For the first time on record, four tropical cyclones formed simultaneously in the western Pacific in November — displacing hundreds of thousands of people in the Philippines. In Spain, an extreme rainfall pattern fed on unusually warm Mediterranean waters, leading to the deadliest floods in a single European country since 1967. “It was like a tsunami,” said Mario Martinez, a Valencia barbershop owner, who watched the floodwaters break through the glass windows of his shop. He escaped the rising waters by hopping on a car that had gone into the storefront, and then jumping to a second-floor balcony. “First, you’re just grateful to be alive,” said Martinez, 50. “And then you realize what has happened and how much it has ruined you.” He said the flood threw him back by “20 or 30 years.” He spent weeks in cleanup mode, and when he reopened a month later — still with mud caking the walls — his was the only remaining business on the block.

Will the heat continue?
Though the world broke the 1.5-degree Celsius threshold in 2024, that doesn’t mean the planet has formally breached the most ambitious target set in the Paris agreement. It will take a much longer span for scientists to make that determination. That’s partly because there are many variables that make some years hotter than others. One of those variables is the natural El Niño-Southern Oscillation, based on shifts in ocean trade winds, which can influence global weather patterns. During El Niño periods, sea surface temperatures across the middle of the Pacific Ocean tend to be higher than average. During La Niña periods, they tend to be cooler. Right now, cool water in the equatorial Pacific signals that La Niña has developed. But it is expected to be short-lived. New climate model projections show the cool water in the Pacific eroding and giving way to warmer-than-average seas by the middle part of 2025. Meanwhile, warmer-than-average seas are predicted to continue across most of the rest of the planet. This suggests that the planet will have little, if any, reprieve from record warmth in the months ahead — which could be exacerbated further if an El Niño develops later in the year. El Niño events are known for their warming effect, as heat that builds up along the equator spreads outward. There is some question about what drove the record warmth of 2023 and 2024, besides the emergence of a strong El Niño climate pattern. Scientists have explored contributions from a 2022 volcanic eruption that spewed water vapor into the atmosphere, a spike in solar activity sending more energy toward Earth, and reductions in air pollution around the world, which allowed more sunlight to reach the planet’s surface. They found a mix of influences. But a full understanding is still lacking, said Gavin Schmidt, director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies. That makes it more difficult to predict what trajectory temperatures could take in the years ahead, since some warming factors could be temporary, while others could continue adding to the warmth, said Nick Dunstone, a fellow at the Met Office. “It really depends what the driver is, as to what happens next,” Dunstone said.

A hidden toll
Despite the planetary alarm bells, it was a brutal year for environmental diplomacy. The right-wing shift in many countries, coupled with the victory of former president Donald Trump in the United States, widened divides over who is responsible for climate change and how to deal with it. Several end-of-year events on environmental issues either derailed or failed to make substantial progress. Saudi Arabia used its veto power to push back against the global phaseout of fossil fuels. Wealthy nations offered only a fraction of the money needed by poorer countries to handle the escalating costs of climate change. And indeed, in 2024, extreme events left the greatest toll in places least equipped to handle it. Sudan, torn apart by war, saw flooding that inundated crops and displaced scores who had already fled once because of conflict. Across Chad, Mali and Nigeria, extreme rains killed more than 1,000 and upended the lives of people such as Babakura Bukar, who fled his home when the rainfall started and then returned to it in a rented canoe. The flooding was so vast that in the aftermath, his neighborhood, in the Nigerian city of Maiduguri, resembled a lake. Bukar paddled toward his home and felt his heart drop. The outer fence of his property had collapsed. His furniture and most of his electronics were destroyed. He managed to salvage a solar panel from the rooftop. “It was a nightmare,” said Bukar, 58, a retired journalist. Even several months later, he is still living with his family in the guesthouse of a friend. He received $200 in government assistance, he said. But rebuilding his home will cost about $6,000, he estimated. “And I don’t even think I am halfway done,” he said.
Read more » click here

Global Temperatures Shattered Records in January
Earth’s prolonged streak of abnormal heat continued into 2025 despite the arrival of La Niña ocean conditions, which typically bring cooler temperatures.
Even as much of the United States shivered under frigid conditions last month, the planet as a whole had its warmest January on record, scientists said on Thursday. The warmth came as something of a surprise to climate researchers. It occurred during La Niña conditions in the Pacific Ocean, which tend to lower the globe’s average temperature, at least temporarily. Earth’s surface has now been so warm for so much of the past two years that scientists are examining whether something else in the planet’s chemistry might have changed, something that is boosting temperatures beyond what carbon emissions alone can explain. Those emissions, the byproduct of burning coal, gas and oil, remain the main driver of global warming, which reached record levels in both 2023 and 2024. It’s because of La Niña that scientists expected this year to be slightly cooler than the past two years, both of which experienced the opposite pattern, El Niño. The waters of the eastern tropical Pacific oscillate between El Niño and La Niña conditions, influencing weather worldwide by changing the balance between heat in the ocean and heat in the air. But a host of other factors figure into global temperatures as well. At the moment, chances aren’t high that 2025 will end up being the hottest year on the books, Russell Vose, a climate scientist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, told reporters recently. But this time last year, researchers were saying much the same thing about 2024, Dr. Vose said. They were wrong. “So, it’s a tough game, forecasting global temperature,” Dr. Vose said. According to Copernicus, the European Union climate monitoring agency, last month was much balmier than usual in northern Canada, Alaska and Siberia, as well as parts of Australia and Antarctica. Abnormally high temperatures above the Hudson Bay and the Labrador Sea helped shrink Arctic sea ice to a record low for January, Copernicus said. As scientists try to explain the unending streak of worldwide warmth, one thing they’ve focused on is reductions in air pollution. In a report this week, James Hansen, the famed former NASA scientist, argued that cutting pollution had already played a big role in causing global warming to accelerate. The reason is a little counterintuitive: For decades, humans have not only been emitting carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases when they burn fossil fuels. They’ve also been spewing tiny sulfate particles into the air. These particles spur the formation of more and brighter clouds, which help shield Earth from the sun. But as regulators have curbed sulfate pollution to protect people’s lungs, this cooling effect has diminished, exposing the planet to more of the full force of greenhouse warming. Three decades ago, Dr. Hansen was among the first scientists to draw broad attention to climate change. Speaking to reporters this week, he argued that the United Nations was ill-prepared to address accelerated warming. The U.N.’s approach to meeting its climate goals still counts on societies to slash their carbon emissions in the coming decades, he said. Those goals now look “impossible” to achieve, Dr. Hansen said, “unless some miracle occurs that we don’t understand.”
Read more » click here

Flood Insurance Program
For more information » click here

National Flood Insurance Program: Reauthorization
Congress must periodically renew the NFIP’s statutory authority to operate. On December 20, 2024, the president signed legislation passed by Congress that extends the National Flood Insurance Program’s (NFIP’s) authorization to March 14, 2025.

Congress must now reauthorize the NFIP
by no later than 11:59 pm on March 14, 2025.

GenX
For more information » click here

Push to regulate ‘forever chemicals’ like GenX stalls as Trump scraps discharge limits
Contamination from manmade chemicals like GenX, which polluted numerous N.C. water sources, is largely unregulated, and scientists have tied the ‘forever chemicals’ to a host of health ailments
Among the slew of executive orders President Donald Trump has signed since returning to the White House, there’s one that has particular resonance for Southeastern North Carolina. The new administration has withdrawn a proposal to set limits on some toxic “forever chemicals” in industrial wastewater discharges. The decision came as the president issued an executive order to freeze any new federal regulations pending a fresh review by Trump officials. The draft rule, which the then-President Biden led U.S. Environmental Protection Agency sent to the White House for review last summer, was seen as a precedent-setting move by limiting releases of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) like GenX, manmade chemicals that have been linked to an array of health problems including certain cancers, liver damage, thyroid disease, immune system dysfunction and other health problems. The withdrawn proposal would have required industry to monitor and reduce PFAS discharges under the federal Clean Water Act. In a historic announcement last spring, Michael Regan, EPA administrator and North Carolina’s former top environmental regulator, traveled to Fayetteville to announce the new draft rules. The location for the announcement wasn’t by accident. Eight years ago, the StarNews broke the story that water in the Cape Fear River downstream of Chemours’ Fayetteville Works Plant contained high levels of previously unknown chemicals. In the years since, PFAS have been found throughout the United States and worries about the environmental, financial and health impacts of this national contamination have seen a raft of proposals at the federal, state and local levels to protect people, punish the PFAS polluters, and learn more about the true health impacts of the compounds that have already been linked to several types of cancer. Chemours and the previous owner of the Fayetteville Works plant, DuPont, have admitted to dumping the toxic chemicals into the Cape Fear River and allowed them to enter the air and local groundwater for decades. The chemicals are used in many household and everyday items, and they “have a place and are important for certain industries and certain practices,” Regan said last year. But decades of uncontrolled dumping of the chemical compounds into the environment, including into waterways and groundwater that serve as drinking sources for millions, and their widespread use, including in fire-fighting foam, has seen PFAS contamination and health concerns proliferate across the country. The substances are often called forever chemicals because they do not easily break down in nature or the human body. But that regulatory push now appears to have stalled − at least at the federal level. “These guidelines would have provided states, like North Carolina, with important information to help manage PFAS producer’s discharge permits,” said Emily Donovan, co-founder of Clean Cape Fear, a grassroots community environmental action group formed in the wake of the PFAS contamination coming to light. “This would help states stop PFAS at the source before these toxic forever chemicals end up in the bodies of water communities use to create tap water.” Although plenty of lawsuits are still working their way through the courts and some industrial manufacturers have settled with some states and local utilities, almost all efforts to control PFAS contamination are still being shouldered by local taxpayers. In Southeastern North Carolina, the Cape Fear Public Utility Authority, H2GO in Brunswick County, and the Fayetteville Public Works Commission all have invested millions in systems to address the contamination − costs that are largely being shouldered by their customers. Efforts at the state level in North Carolina to deal with the contamination also are moving forward with fits and starts as politics and concerns over the economic impacts on businesses clouds the regulatory push. Although state regulators are now slowly moving forward with some proposals, the effort by the N.C. Department of Environmental Quality has been hampered by a lack of guidance at the federal level. An aversion by the Republican-controlled General Assembly to implement any rules or regulations that go beyond federal environmental requirements also has tied regulators hands to adopt new measures. Donovan said that shouldn’t be seen as an excuse, noting that the actions of the Trump administration don’t absolve state officials from regulating PFAS discharges in North Carolina waters. “State regulators have the power and authority to set strong limits on PFAS releases,” she said. “We have not seen (the Department of Environmental Quality) take a clear and strong initiative in their most recent permit writing efforts and that’s a problem worth addressing.” Having adopted temporary limits last fall, state water quality officials are currently working on draft rules setting safe health standards for eight types of “forever chemicals” in groundwater. It will then be up to the Environmental Management Commission, a 15-member state board of political appointees that has dragged its feet in the past on adopting new PFAS regulations, to decide whether to proceed with starting the process of making the rules permanent.
Read more » click here

Homeowners Insurance
For more information » click here

Insurance rates to increase in 2025, and 2026, with Cape Fear beach communities among hardest hit
Insurance Commissioner Mike Causey announced today that the N.C. Department of Insurance has ended its legal dispute with insurance companies about their proposed homeowners’ insurance rate increase filed in January 2024. The N.C. Rate Bureau originally requested an average 42.2% increase last year, with proposed increases of up to 99.4% in the beach areas in Brunswick, Carteret, New Hanover, Onslow and Pender Counties. Under the agreement signed by Commissioner Causey and the Rate Bureau, the average statewide base rate will increase by 7.5% on June 1, 2025, and 7.5% on June 1, 2026. The beach areas in Brunswick, Carteret, New Hanover, Onslow and Pender Counties will see a 16% increase on June 1, 2025, and a 15.9% increase on June 1, 2026. Eastern Coastal areas of Brunswick, Carteret, New Hanover, Onslow & Pender Counties will see a 10.5% increase on June 1, 2025, and a 10.1% increase on June 1, 2026. “The insurance companies wanted to raise our homeowners’ rates up to 99.4% in some areas and an average 42.2% statewide in a single year,” Commissioner Causey said. “I fought for consumers and knocked them back to 7.5% increases over two years with a maximum of 35% in any territory. We consider this settlement a big win for both homeowners and North Carolina.” The Rate Bureau is not a part of the Department of Insurance and represents homeowners’ insurance companies in North Carolina, and the agreement prohibits the Rate Bureau from undertaking an effort to increase rates again before June 1, 2027. “North Carolina homeowners will save approximately $777 million in insurance premiums over the next two years compared to what the insurance companies requested. This also protects homeowners from future base rate increase requests until June 2027,” said Commissioner Causey. “These rates are sufficient to make sure that insurance companies, who have paid out large sums due to natural disasters and face increasing reinsurance costs due to national catastrophes, have adequate funds on hand to pay claims.
Read more » click here

NC, home insurance companies reach deal on new premiums.
Here’s how much you’ll pay.
Homeowners’ insurance rates in North Carolina will increase by an average of about 15% over the next two years under a settlement Insurance Commissioner Mike Causey and the N.C. Rate Bureau announced Friday. The N.C. Rate Bureau, which represents more than 100 companies that write insurance policies in North Carolina, had requested an average 42.3% increase that would have started this month. In some coastal areas, the Rate Bureau was asking to nearly double rates. Setting insurance rates is a delicate balancing act, with consumer protections and the cost of premiums on one side and ensuring that companies will continue writing policies in the state on the other. During a public hearing that started in October, witnesses for Causey’s office argued that rates should be increased by a maximum of about 3% or even lowered. The hearing was the first held during Causey’s eight years in the office. “These rates are sufficient to make sure that insurance companies, who have paid out large sums due to natural disasters and face increasing reinsurance costs due to national catastrophes, have adequate funds on hand to pay claims,” Causey said in a written statement. In Durham and Wake counties, rates will increase by an average of 7.5% in each of the next two years. Orange County’s average increases will be significantly lower, with 3.4% in 2025 followed by an additional 3.2% in 2026. For homeowners in Mecklenburg County, rates will increase by 9.3% in 2025, followed by an additional 9.2% in 2026.

Generally, the settlement’s highest increases will come in places that were hit hard by Hurricane Matthew in 2016 and Hurricane Florence in 2018. Those include:

• • Beach areas from Carteret to Brunswick counties will see average 16% increases in 2025 followed by an additional 15.9% in 2026.
  • Duplin and Lenoir counties, where rates will increase by an average 13.6% in 2025, followed by an additional 13.5% in 2026.
  • Edgecombe and Wilson counties, where rates will increase by an average 11.6% in 2025, followed by an additional 11.6% in 2026.

The areas hit hard by Hurricane Helene last September are poised to see some of the lowest average increases in the state. Buncombe, Watauga and Yancey counties, for example, are all set for a 4.4% increase in 2025 followed by 4.5% in 2026. And Mitchell County’s average increase will be 0.7% in 2025 followed by 0.9% in 2026. Jarred Chappell, the Rate Bureau’s chief operating officer, indicated in a written statement that the Rate Bureau is virtually certain to call for another significant increase once the two-year period covered by the settlement ends. “It’s a step in the right direction, but the North Carolina Rate Bureau asked for a larger increase because that’s what recent claims data called for. Storms have gotten stronger and more damaging, more people are living in disaster-prone areas, inflation in the construction industry has been particularly high and reinsurance costs have exploded. All these cost drivers remain an issue,” Chappell said. Under state law, companies writing homeowners’ insurance have the option to use “consent-to-rate” to set premiums. That allows insurers to charge as much as 250% of the regulatory cap. In 2022, about 40% of the state’s homeowners’ policies were set by consent-to-rate policies, with those homeowners’ average premiums costing 47% more than the caps negotiated by Causey and the Rate Bureau. The Rate Bureau, Chappell wrote, is aiming to keep as many carriers as possible writing homeowners insurance policies in the state. Some companies have already started to pull out of disaster-prone parts of North Carolina, most notably Nationwide, which last year did not renew about 10,000 policies from Pitt and Greene counties to the Outer Banks.

Other recent negotiated increases included:

• • An average 4.8% increase in 2017 after the Rate Bureau had requested 18.7%.
  • An average 4% increase in 2018 after the Rate Bureau had requested 17.4%.
  • An average 7.9% increase in 2020 after the Rate Bureau had requested 24.5%.

In most states, insurance companies file their rate requests independently of each other. But North Carolina is one of very few states — and perhaps the only one — where a rate bureau files for requested rates and negotiates on behalf of the entire industry. Nationally, insurance companies are seeing their profits worn away by large natural disasters coming in quick succession, along with increased building costs. In 2024, there were 27 disasters that caused at least $1 billion in damage, according to the National Centers for Environmental Information. That total is the second-highest since 1980 and includes Helene, which caused an estimated $58 billion in Western North Carolina alone.
Read more » click here 

Homeowner insurance rates set to rise significantly across the Wilmington area
The deal between state regulators and the insurance industry calls for an average 15% increase by mid-2026. But many coastal areas will see much steeper increases.
N.C. Insurance Commissioner Mike Causey recently announced his department and the state’s insurance companies had reached a legal settlement over how much the companies will be allowed to raise homeowner insurance rates over the next two years. Industry had asked for an average statewide increase of 42%, with some areas around Wilmington seeing their rates double. The settlement calls for an average of 15% over the next two years, 7.5% this year and another 7.5% next year, with areas along the N.C. coast seeing double that. Causey hailed the deal as a victory for consumers and a fair settlement for the industry, which has been hammered by a series of natural disasters on both ends of the state in recent years. “The insurance companies wanted to raise our homeowners’ rates up to 99.4% in some areas and an average 42.2% statewide in a single year,” Causey said in a statement. “I fought for consumers and knocked them back to 7.5% increases over two years with a maximum of 35% in any territory. We consider this settlement a big win for both homeowners and North Carolina.” But property owners, especially in and around Wilmington, will still have to dig deeper into their pocketbooks to pay for insurance − and industry officials have said the deal doesn’t solve the underlying problems that are driving insurance companies to seek steeper and steeper rate increases. So, is it a good deal? Let’s dig into the facts.

How did we get here?
In January 2024, the N.C. Rate Bureau, a 14-member board that represents the industry, submitted a proposal to raise homeowner insurance premiums by 42% statewide and an eyewatering 99% in beach and coastal areas around Wilmington. Since North Carolina is a regulated insurance market, industry needs to win state approval to raise rates. The proposal, after a public hearing, was swiftly and vocally rejected by N.C. Insurance Commissioner Mike Causey. The commissioner’s action triggered a judicial hearing, which started in October and wrapped up late last year. Causey then had 45 days to announce his decision.

Why such a big, proposed increase?
The N.C. Rate Bureau cited two main factors for the surprisingly large rate increase proposal. First, is the rising cost of pretty much everything, including labor and potential repairs, driven by inflation and the lingering impacts of labor and material shortages tied to the COVID-19 pandemic. The other is climate change, which is causing more frequent and widespread property destruction, particularly tied to bigger and stronger hurricanes, as the warming climate fuels more severe weather events. Damages in North Carolina tied to 2018’s Hurricane Florence, for example, were estimated to top $22 billion, with much of that hitting inland areas. Other factors that are playing a role in the proposed substantial increase include the moratorium that was put into place during the pandemic on any rate increases and the cost of reinsurance − basically insurance for the insurance companies themselves in case a large-scale disaster stretches their financial ability to respond. While a regulated market, theoretically meaning North Carolina just be ring-fenced from some of the issues hammering insurance markets in other states, notably Florida, Louisiana and California, reinsurance operates on a global scale. That means increasing costs of insurance for companies operating, say, in California due to massive wildfire payouts and exposure will be felt by companies operating in North Carolina.

What does the settlement call for?
The deal calls for an average statewide increase of 7.5% this year, effective June 1, and 7.5% next year in homeowner insurance rates. But not all parts of the state are being treated equally.

Here’s the breakdown for the Wilmington area and some other N.C. regions.

• Beach areas in New Hanover, Brunswick and Pender: +16% this year; +15.9% in 2026; Rate bureau had sought a 99.4% increase.
• Eastern coastal parts of New Hanover, Brunswick and Pender: +10.5% this year; +10.1% in 2026. Rate bureau had sought a 71.4% increase.
• Western parts of New Hanover, Brunswick and Pender: +5% this year; +4.8% in 2026; Rate bureau had sought a 43% increase.
• Beach areas on the Outer Banks: +5.1% this year; +4.8% in 2026. Rate bureau sought a 45.1% increase.
• Duplin and Lenoir counties: +13.6% this year; +13.5% in 2026. Rate bureau had sought a 71.4% increase.
• Wake and Durham counties: +7.5% increase; +7.5% increase in 2026. Rate bureau had sought a 39.8% increase.
• Buncombe County (Asheville): +4.4% increase this year; +4.5% in 2026. Rate bureau had sought a 20.5% increase.

Why does the coast look like it’s getting singled out?
Like many things, rate increases lag the big disasters that prompted the industry to re-examine its exposure and business model. In an interview this fall, Causey said this rate increase request was mostly tied to the industry’s costs and payouts associated with the spate of natural disasters, including 2018’s Hurricane Florence, North Carolina saw several years ago. He added that his office is still dealing with claims tied to Florence, having recently paid one out to the University of North Carolina Wilmington (UNCW) tied to that devastating storm. “It takes years from the time a storm hits for the rates to catch up,” Causey said. That means damage from September’s unnamed storm, which dropped historic amounts of rain on parts of the Cape Fear region, and losses associated with Tropical Storm Debby and any from Hurricane Helene aren’t taken into account with this rate filing. Ditto for the devastation Helene caused in Western North Carolina and why this rate increase is heavily weighted toward the coast and Eastern N.C. With some damage estimates for Helene in the mountains pushing $60 billion, that will likely change when the rate bureau asks for its next increase.

Wait, another increase?
According to the settlement, the insurance industry can’t ask for another increase until June 2027. Causey said that is a fair compromise for all parties. “These rates are sufficient to make sure that insurance companies, who have paid out large sums due to natural disasters and face increasing reinsurance costs due to national catastrophes, have adequate funds on hand to pay claims,” he said in a statement. But industry officials made it clear that they didn’t get everything they wanted. In a statement, Jarred Chappell, chief operating officer with the rate bureau, said the approved rate increase isn’t “adequate.” “It’s a step in the right direction, but the North Carolina Rate Bureau asked for a larger increase because that’s what recent claims data called for,” he said. “Storms have gotten stronger and more damaging, more people are living in disaster-prone areas, inflation in the construction industry has been particularly high and reinsurance costs have exploded. “All these cost drivers remain an issue.” With little to forecast that any of those factors will change or even slow down in the coming years, especially with greenhouse gas emissions, the primary source of climate change, still on the rise globally, Chappell said the state and the insurance industry could find themselves at loggerheads again in just a few years. “Unfortunately, when the two years covered by this settlement are up, we will almost certainly be in a similar position, calling for a significant increase to keep the North Carolina market strong and to encourage as many carriers as possible to compete here for customers,” he said.
Read more » click here

Commissioner Causey negotiates settlement on Rate Bureau’s homeowners’ insurance request
Average 7.5% agreement will take effect on June 1
Insurance Commissioner Mike Causey announced today that the N.C. Department of Insurance has ended its legal dispute with insurance companies about their proposed homeowners’ insurance rate increase filed in January 2024. The N.C. Rate Bureau originally requested an average 42.2% increase last year, with proposed increases of up to 99.4% in some areas. Under the agreement signed by Commissioner Causey and the Rate Bureau, the average statewide base rate will increase by 7.5% on June 1, 2025, and 7.5% on June 1, 2026. The Rate Bureau is not a part of the Department of Insurance and represents homeowners’ insurance companies in North Carolina. “The insurance companies wanted to raise our homeowners’ rates up to 99.4% in some areas and an average 42.2% statewide in a single year,” Commissioner Causey said. “I fought for consumers and knocked them back to 7.5% increases over two years with a maximum of 35% in any territory. We consider this settlement a big win for both homeowners and North Carolina.” In addition, the agreement prohibits the Rate Bureau from undertaking an effort to increase rates again before June 1, 2027. “North Carolina homeowners will save approximately $777 million in insurance premiums over the next two years compared to what the insurance companies requested. This also protects homeowners from future base rate increase requests until June 2027,” said Commissioner Causey. “These rates are sufficient to make sure that insurance companies, who have paid out large sums due to natural disasters and face increasing reinsurance costs due to national catastrophes, have adequate funds on hand to pay claims.”

You may view the changes by territory.

Read more » click here

Hurricane Season
For more information » click here

Hurricane season runs from June 1 through November 30

Inlet Hazard Areas
For more information » click here

 .
Lockwood Folly Inlet
For more information » click here.

Seismic Testing / Offshore Drilling
For more information » click here. 

Biden makes protections from offshore drilling permanent
President Joe Biden has permanently closed off much of the nation’s coasts from prospective offshore drilling for oil and natural gas. The move, announced Monday as Biden wraps up his presidency, includes more than 330 million acres of the Atlantic outer continental shelf, from Canada to the southern tip of Florida, and the eastern Gulf of Mexico, as well as the West Coast, and the remainder of Alaska’s northern Bering Sea.
Everyone from coastal advocates to typically opposite-of-the-aisle politicians representing North Carolina coastal communities, which have overwhelmingly opposed offshore oil and gas exploration and drilling, lauded the president’s action. Wilmington City Councilman and Republican Charlie Rivenbark introduced a resolution opposing seismic airgun testing and offshore drilling off the North Carolina coast to fellow board members nearly 10 years ago. The board unanimously adopted the resolution, aligning the Port City with dozens of other North Carolina municipalities and counties opposed to then-President Barack Obama’s administration’s plan to open waters off the Southeast coast to oil exploration. “I would still be opposed to offshore drilling anywhere, particularly along the North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia coasts, and I’m glad President Biden’s doing this on his way out,” Rivenbark said Monday morning. “This to me is almost a nonpartisan issue. I grew up on the coast. I know the other side has got terrific arguments and reasons why, but I just can’t take a chance at an oil spill.” That sentiment has resonated throughout not only coastal North Carolina, but also across the state over the course of the last several years. Concerns about the potential for oil spills were specifically cited in the North Carolina Coastal Resources Commission’s April 2019 resolution that opposes offshore drilling. The resolution, which was adopted unanimously, pointed to impacts from the Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989, the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill and several scientific studies that raise concerns about seismic testing on marine mammals and fisheries. “Seismic surveys and offshore drilling are just not compatible with our coast,” North Carolina Coastal Federation Executive Director Braxton Davis said in an email response to Coastal Review Monday. The Coastal Federation publishes Coastal Review. “Keeping our coast healthy, thriving and free of oil spills is crucial for the survival and prosperity of our communities and is at the heart of our work at the Federation,” Davis said. “For decades now, North Carolina’s opposition to offshore oil and gas has been largely bipartisan. Even under ideal conditions, drilling operations release a number of dangerous pollutants into the ocean, not to mention the potential for larger spills that can devastate local tourism and fisheries.” Governors of both Atlantic and Pacific coastal states pushed back on President-elect Donald Trump’s plan to expand offshore drilling during his first tenure in the White House. In fall 2020, Trump announced he was withdrawing federal waters off the Atlantic Coast from Virginia to Florida from the possibility of drilling for oil and gas. The 10-year moratorium he established ends in 2032. Michelle Bivins, Oceana’s Carolinas Field Campaigns representative, said Monday afternoon that Biden’s announcement “essentially codifies those protections and makes them permanent.” “As for Trump reversing this policy once he’s in office, during his last presidency he protected the South Atlantic from the threat of offshore drilling for almost 10 years, following bipartisan support. He knows that coastal economies and businesses depend on healthy, oil-free oceans,” she said. Shortly after the White House announced the ban Monday morning, the American Petroleum Institute, or API, released a statement calling for the reversal of Biden’s withdrawal the offshore areas from future oil and natural gas leasing. “American voters sent a clear message in support of domestic energy development, and yet the current administration is using its final days in office to cement a record of doing everything possible to restrict it,” API President and CEO Mike Sommers stated in a release. “Congress and the incoming administration should fully leverage the nation’s vast offshore resources as a critical source of affordable energy, government revenue and stability around the world. We urge policymakers to use every tool at their disposal to reverse this politically motivated decision and restore a pro-American energy approach to federal leasing.” Two separate but similar letters – one signed by members of the U.S. Senate, the other signed by House representatives – calling late last year for Biden to implement the ban pointed out that presidential withdrawals had not been successfully challenged in court. Trump in 2017 reversed Obama’s Arctic and Atlantic withdrawals. A district court judge in Alaska ruled presidents do not have authority under the law, in this case the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, to revoke prior withdrawals. “A large-scale withdrawal of the Atlantic, Pacific, and Eastern Gulf from fossil fuel development while maintain the development of renewable energy solutions would provide durable protections for these critical areas,” according to the Dec. 19, 2024, letter signed by nine U.S. senators. The areas included in the withdrawal encompass more than 625 million acres, the largest in the country’s history, according to the U.S. Department of Interior. “President Biden’s actions today are part of our work across this Administration to make bold and enduring changes that recognize the impact of oil and gas drilling on our nation’s coastlines,” Interior Secretary Deb Haaland said in a release. “Today, the President is taking action that reflects what states, Tribes and local communities have shared with us – a strong and overwhelming need to support resilient oceans and coastlines by protecting them from unnecessary oil and gas development.” The withdrawals do not affect rights under existing leases, of which there are about 30 off the southern California coast and about a dozen in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico, according to the release. In fiscal 2023, production in the outer continental shelf resulted in about 675 million barrels of oil and 796 billion cubic feet of gas. Almost all of that production is in the western and central Gulf of Mexico, “where industry has yet to produce on more than 80 percent of the 12 million acres already under lease,” according to the release. The current leasing program that runs through 2029 includes three potential lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico planning areas. Those areas are not included in the withdrawal.
Read more » click here 

What Biden’s big ban on offshore oil and gas drilling means for NC and the East Coast
The president permanently placed off limits significant portions of the country’s outer continental shelf from future drilling activity. The move represents the largest withdrawal in U.S. history.
In one of his most far-reaching and last moves as the country’s top official, President Joe Biden earlier this month announced he was using his presidential authority to permanently withdraw most unleased areas in federal waters to future offshore oil and gas drilling. The move, which covers the East Coast, West Coast, Alaska and the eastern part of the Gulf of Mexico, was hailed by environmentalists and clean energy advocates as a pro-active measure that sets the U.S. firmly on the path of a decarbonized energy future. But the fossil fuel industry and many Republicans, including President-elect Donald Trump, have railed against the move, calling the blanket ban too much and potentially seriously damaging the push toward making the country energy independent. But while the presidential ban generated plenty of headlines and polished Biden’s environmental credentials, what does it really mean for states like North Carolina that have little to no existing offshore oil or gas industry or infrastructure to speak of?

What exactly did Biden do?
Using his authority under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, Biden withdrew significant portions of the country’s outer continental shelf from future oil and natural gas leasing. The withdrawal areas, which are in waters that extend up to 200 miles from the U.S. coastline, encompass more than 625 million acres, more than 330 million of those in the Atlantic, and represent the largest withdrawal in U.S. history. According to the U.S. Department of the Interior, oil production in 2024 on federal lands and water is at an all-time high. In fiscal year 2023, the outer continental shelf produced approximately 675 million barrels of oil and 796 billion cubic feet of gas, accounting for roughly 14 percent of all oil production and 2 percent of natural gas production in the U.S. Nearly all of this production is in the western and central Gulf of Mexico, where industry has yet to produce on more than 80 percent of the 12 million acres already under lease, the department noted. Most of the Gulf of Mexico isn’t included in the president’s drilling moratorium.

What drilling activity takes place in areas that are part of the new ban?
In short, not much. According to the federal government, there is no active oil and gas exploration and development along the U.S. East Coast or in much of Alaska. There are approximately 30 decades-old existing offshore leases off southern California, and approximately a dozen in the eastern Gulf of Mexico. “Nothing in the withdrawals affects rights under existing leases,” stated a release from the Interior department.

So, is this a big deal?
Yes and no. From a practical point of view, the impact is likely to be minimal. Take North Carolina, for example. The Tar Heel State is not believed to have enough hydrocarbon resources in the waters off its coast to make drilling a viable economic endeavor for the oil and gas industry. It’s been decades since any serious survey work has been done, and even with new advanced ways of extracting fossil fuels from the ocean bottom the uncertainty over just how much of the resource is out there − especially when considering the expense of finding out − likely isn’t an attractive proposition for industry.
On top of that, North Carolina doesn’t have the onshore infrastructure to support any serious offshore development of an oil and gas industry and then get any fuels that are brought to land from the coast to more built-up areas inland. That could mean any economic benefit from drilling off the N.C. coast, aside from some royalties to sweeten any concerns state politicians might have, would be enjoyed by the larger and more developed ports of Norfolk, Virginia, to the north and Charleston, S.C., to the south.

What about the optics of the ban?
North Carolina coastal officials of all stripes have been against offshore drilling for decades. That opposition only heightened 15 years ago after the Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico soiled beaches and wetlands in several Gulf Coast states with oil, damaging the environment, killing birds and marine life, and leaving coastal communities reliant on tourism on economic life support. Wilmington and many other coastal communities have passed resolutions opposing offshore drilling, and the N.C. Coastal Resources Commission − which manages development and policies in the state’s 20 coastal counties − also has come out against the practice. Elected statewide officials from both parties in Raleigh and Washington also have pushed back against efforts to open East Coast waters to drilling, both by President Barack Obama and more recently Trump during his first term. That opposition, along with a push for votes, prompted Trump in fall 2020 to announce he was removing federal waters from Virginia to Florida from the possibility of drilling, a ban that was set to expire in 2032.

Can Republicans reverse Biden’s ban?
The fossil fuel industry has come out aggressively against the new moratorium. “American voters sent a clear message in support of domestic energy development, and yet the current administration is using its final days in office to cement a record of doing everything possible to restrict it,” said Mike Sommers, president of the American Petroleum Institute, in a release. “Congress and the incoming administration should fully leverage the nation’s vast offshore resources as a critical source of affordable energy, government revenue and stability around the world. We urge policymakers to use every tool at their disposal to reverse this politically motivated decision and restore a pro-American energy approach to federal leasing.” But the courts historically have said only Congress can reverse a presidential declaration adopted under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, a move that could prove tricky considering how divided and gridlocked Capitol Hill remains. One thing Trump could do, however, and on the campaign trail threatened to do so immediately after taking office, is torpedo a different kind of offshore energy development − wind farms. Steps the incoming administration could take to hamper development of the renewable energy source, long a favorite of Biden and environmentalists worried about the impacts of climate change, is to slow the issue of regulatory permits or opening new lease sites for projects in federal waters and strip wind projects of federal tax credits and other incentives. That could make many of the projects, already costly and facing opposition from some coastal politicians and residents, financially unviable.
Read more » click here

Offshore Wind Farms
For more information » click here

Ports, suppliers in 40 states are invested in offshore wind
The nation’s burgeoning offshore wind energy industry has created thousands of jobs, boosted work in shipyards and ports, and includes a supply chain that spans 40 states, according to a new report. Billions of dollars have been invested in things like new and retrofitted vessels for offshore wind developers, ports infrastructure, and the expansion of renewable energy manufacturing facilities that support offshore wind, according to Oceantic Network, a Baltimore-based nonprofit that advocates growing the country’s offshore renewable energy industry and supply chain. According to the report, “Offshore Energy at Work,” 25 U.S. ports are either taking part in the industry or preparing to support it. Last February, North Carolina State Ports Authority Executive Director Brian Clark signed a record of decision on a proposed plan to create a multi-use terminal that would support manufacturing and operations for offshore wind and automotive industries at the Morehead City port. The proposed project entails developing land the port owns on Radio Island. It includes construction of a 300,000-square-foot manufacturing facility with office space for offshore wind, a roughly 60-acre gravel pad for storage, a new rail spur that would tie into the existing rail, roadway improvements, and the installation of a gas line from Morehead City to the island. The estimated price tag is $250 million to $285 million. “We have no updates to provide at this time,” Elly Cosgrove, N.C. Ports senior communications manager, said in an email Wednesday. “The Record of Decision signed in February is the latest as it pertains to Radio Island.” It is unclear how an executive order President Donald Trump signed in his first day back in the White House pumping the brakes on new offshore wind development might affect the ports’ proposed plans, including four lease areas off the North Carolina coast. Five days after Oceantic Network released its 60-page report, Trump suspended new leases on the entire outer continental shelf. The order will stand until it is revoked. The order also blocks the federal government from issuing new federal permits to offshore and onshore wind projects, including four lease areas off the North Carolina coast, until the secretary of Interior conducts a “comprehensive assessment and review” of the permitting process. Oceantic Network joined other renewable energy proponents in immediately rebuking the president’s order, calling the permitting pause “a blow to the American offshore wind industry.” Trump’s actions threaten thousands of American offshore wind industry-related jobs in shipyards, factories, and ports, and “strand businesses who have reorganized their operations to support the sector,” Oceantic said in a release. “While under a National Energy Emergency created by an unprecedented rise in energy demand, we should be working to quickly bring generation online instead of curtailing a power source capable of providing base load generation and creating new jobs across 40 states,” Oceantic founder and CEO Liz Burdock said in the release. “We urge the administration to reverse this sweeping action and keep America working in offshore energy as part of its commitment to an ‘all-of-the-above’ energy strategy.” A spokesperson for Oceantic Network declined to comment further. In a statement it released following Trump’s order, the Southeastern Wind Coalition called offshore wind “an economic force” in the U.S., investing billions of dollars in reviving previously underutilized ports and creating training programs for the work sector. “Wind energy is critical to achieving American energy dominance, meeting our growing electricity demand, and creating stable manufacturing jobs across the nation,” Southeastern Wind Coalition President Katharine Kollins said in a release. “Wind energy is a vital part of the global electricity system, and ceding the advancement and development of wind technologies to other nations will only set us back.” More than 100 companies in the Southeast produce components for the industry, according to the wind coalition. But at least one of those has turned to the European market to stay afloat. An official with Nexans, a France-based power and communications cable producer, said in an article published earlier this month that the company’s Charleston, South Carolina, plant — the largest subsea cable manufacturer in the U.S. — is shipping its product to Europe. Nexans vice president for generation and transmission told renewable energy publication Recharge that high demand for cables in Europe is “a blessing in disguise” for the plant. Still, all is not all doom-and-gloom for the industry. In an email announcing the dates and location for the International Partnering Forum, the largest offshore wind energy conference in the U.S., Burdock noted that five commercial-scale, federally approved offshore projects are either under or near construction. Another six projects have received federal approvals. “Despite misleading headlines, there is no question that the industry is moving forward,” Burdock wrote.
Read more » click here 

As NC wind energy projects advance, uncertainty rules
Wind projects that are leased, permitted or under construction in or near North Carolina are likely to survive buffeting by renewed wind energy skepticism from the Trump administration. Shortly after taking office in January, President Donald Trump issued an executive order barring new offshore wind leases and requiring reviews of existing and permitted wind projects. Although it was not targeting existing leases, industry supporters have questions about what rules, permits or projects it could impact and the potential for broader impacts through the workforce and manufacturing industries. “It’s not that companies are moving on as business as usual, but there’s so much uncertainty that they can’t just come to a screeching halt, and then all of this could change in five minutes,” Karly Lohan, Southeastern Wind Coalition’s senior Carolinas program manager, recently said in an interview with Coastal Review. “They have to keep going and figure this out as they go. And realistically, we’re probably not going to know an answer to a lot of those questions, and the true implications of this offshore wind executive action until … we know.” Lohan noted that the nonprofit coalition she represents is focused on educational outreach about wind energy and does not speak or act as a trade organization for the industry. A wind project off Kitty Hawk along the Outer Banks that’s owned by Avangrid Renewables and Dominion Energy is not yet under construction, but it still has active leases. Dominion Energy’s $9.8 billion Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind, or CVOW, project off Virginia Beach is going full speed ahead. The 2.6-gigawatt project is currently about half done and is expected to be completed on schedule by the end of 2026, according to company spokesman Jeremy Slayton. Duke Energy, along with Total Energies, has leased an offshore area off Southport for a wind farm known as Carolina Long Bay project, but it is in very early permitting stages. “We are still easily at least six or seven years away from construction for any of those projects,” Lohan said. The two land-based wind energy projects in North Carolina — Amazon Wind U.S. East in Elizabeth City, completed in 2017, and Timbermill Wind in Chowan County, completed in 2024 — will not be affected by the orders, Lohan said. Duke Energy has expressed interest in future land-based projects in North Carolina, but no information has been released about potential locations or plans, she said. While Dominion is working to complete its Virginia Beach project, it is keeping its CVOW-South, formerly the Kitty Hawk North project, on hold for the time being, Slayton, the company’s spokesman, said. “CVOW-South provides us with a potential option for additional offshore wind development,” he said in an email. “Our most recent long-term planning document, the Integrated Resource Plan, forecasts this project, if we pursue it, for the mid-2030s. At this time, we do not have a firm timeline or cost for developing this lease area.” Dominion Energy came to an agreement in July 2024 to purchase one-third of the Kitty Hawk North project, which is about 27 miles east of Corolla, the northern end of the Outer Banks, and about 38 miles southeast of the Sandbridge community in Virginia Beach. “Avangrid was willing to sell a portion of the project at a reasonable cost,” Slayton told Coastal Review at the time. “And we believe it was prudent to take advantage of this opportunity to meet the growing needs of our customers with clean energy and also help us achieve the requirements of the Virginia clean Economy Act, which calls for up to 5.2 gigawatts of offshore wind.” If developed, the project will connect to the grid for CVOW-South at a new substation at Corporate Landing in Virginia Beach, near Naval Air Station Oceana, he said. Katharine Kollins, president of Southeastern Wind Coalition, a nonprofit advocacy group, said that wind power production in the U.S. is behind the mature development of both offshore and onshore wind in Europe, but it has the capacity and resources to build a robust wind energy industry. “It requires economies of scale in manufacturing, all of the components it requires, economies of scale in construction and development and even in operations and maintenance,” she told Coastal Review recently. “And so, what the manufacturers have been saying to advocates in the industry for years is, ‘We need a solid pipeline of projects before we can commit a billion dollars to building a manufacturing facility in the U.S. that can then produce the major components, or an offshore wind turbine that would include your towers, your blades.’ Right now, I think the only thing that we can manufacture in the U.S. is foundations.” Like any energy production, wind energy is an equation of risk versus benefits, she said. And wind is economical, clean and safe, she added. “You don’t hear anything about wind spills,” she said. Yes, there are bird mortalities associated with strikes, but far, far less than the estimated one billion annual deaths from birds striking buildings. Kollins said the problem is uncertainty. “You know, uncertainty is not good for investment, and so if you have some significant political uncertainty, which makes it really hard for investors to move forward with any of those components that I was mentioning, whether in components, referencing manufacturing, referencing development, even thinking about leases. “Like, am I going to go pay $100 million to lease a square of ocean that, then I might have another presidential administration that says, ‘I don’t really like this?’ No thanks,” she said. “It does make it hard to overcome. This is an industry that should be nonpartisan.”
Read more » click here 

Things I Think I Think –

Eating out is one of the great little joys of life.

Restaurant Review:
The Dinner Club visits a new restaurant once a month. Ratings reflect the reviewer’s reaction to food, ambience and service, with price taken into consideration.
/////
Name:             Caprice Bistro
Cuisine:          French
Location:       10 Market Street, Wilmington NC (downtown)
Contact:         910.815.0810 / https://www.capricebistro.com
Food:               Average / Very Good / Excellent / Exceptional
Service:          Efficient / Proficient / Professional / Expert
Ambience:     Drab / Plain / Distinct / Elegant
Cost: $25        Inexpensive <=20 / Moderate <=26 / Expensive <=35 / Exorbitant <=60
Rating:           Four Stars
Caprice Bistro looks every bit like a real authentic French bistro.  A bistro is a small restaurant serving moderately priced simple meals in a modest setting. The menu has a great traditional bistro selection of authentic French & Belgian cuisine prepared home-style. The atmosphere is welcoming, warm and inviting. The art-filled upstairs sofa lounge and bar area is great. This is a personal favorite of mine because of the consistent delivery of a fine dining experience every time that we go there. Certainly, it is among the best restaurants in town; you really should put it on your short-list of must try restaurants.   

Caprice Bistro has new owners
With its classic French fare, this downtown Wilmington restaurant is a perennial favorite. The owners have sold the business to well-known local entrepreneurs. Thierry and Patricia Moity opened Caprice Bistro on Market Street in 2001. Now the couple, who were at the restaurant most every day running the front of the house and the kitchen, have decided it is time to pass the business on to new owners. The new owners will add their own touch to Caprice, but they plan to continue the menu, the tradition and the service. 

Dining Guide – Local * Lou’s Views

Dining Guide – North * Lou’s Views

Dining Guide – South * Lou’s Views

Restaurant Reviews – North * Lou’s Views

Restaurant Reviews – South * Lou’s Views

Book Review:
Read several books from The New York Times best sellers fiction list monthly
Selection represents this month’s pick of the litter

HERE ONE MOMENT by Liane Moriarty
On a domestic flight that’s delayed on the tarmac, a mysterious woman walks up the aisle, points at a fellow passenger, and pronounces ‘I expect’ followed by an age at death and a cause of death for several of the people on the plane. There are a few storylines going on in this book which follows the lives of each of the doomed passengers and their reactions to these predictions, questioning how knowledge of one’s fate can alter their behavior.

That’s it for this newsletter

See you next month

Lou’s Views . HBPOIN

.                                         • Gather and disseminate information
.                                    • Identify the issues and determine how they affect you
.                                    • Act as a watchdog
.                                    • Grass roots monthly newsletter since 2008

https://lousviews.com/

Lou’s Views

“Unofficial” Minutes & Comments

BOC’s Special Meeting 01/14/25

Board of Commissioners’ Agenda Packet » click here NA

Audio Recording » click here NA

1.   Executive Session Pursuant to North Carolina General Statute 143-318.11 (a)(6), Personnel and 143-318.11(a)3), Consult with the Attorney – Mayor Pro Tem Myers and Commissioner Thomas

BOC’s Special Meeting 01/21/25

Board of Commissioners’ Agenda Packet » click here NA

Audio Recording » click here NA

1. Interviews for Candidates Interested in Serving on the Audit Committee – Mayor Pro Tem Myers

We had six (6) candidates that applied to fill the two (2) vacancies on the Audit Committee as follows:

• • • Mike Felmly
    • Grace Lam
    • Cedric Scott
    • David Shehdan
    • Kent Steeve
    • Mitchell Varner
      

      ---

BOC’s Regular Meeting 01/21/25

Board of Commissioners’ Agenda Packet click here

Audio Recording » click here NA

The Board of Commissioners Regular Meeting and Special Meeting

scheduled for January 21^st were canceled.

BOC’s Special Meeting 01/28/25

Board of Commissioners’ Agenda Packet click here   (01/21/25 agenda packet)

Audio Recording » click here

1. Public Comments on Agenda Items

There were comments made by fourteen (14) members of the public.

All of them addressed removing the pier building both for and against the proposal.

Almost sixty (60) percent of the meeting time was spent on public comments some were quite contentious.

2. Consideration and Possible Action to Award the Contract for Pier Engineering Services to HDR – Interim Town Manager Ferguson

Agenda Packet – pages 54 – 61

HDR Contract » click here

ISSUE/ACTION REQUESTED:
Consideration and possible action to award the contract for pier engineering services to HDR.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE OF REQUEST:
HDR was one of the companies who submitted proposals in response to the Town’s RFQ for the pier. At the December meeting, the BOC selected HDR after reviewing those proposals. Representatives from the firm will attend the meeting in case the BOC has questions regarding the contract proposal attached.

ASSISTANT TOWN MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
Receive contract and determine whether to award  based on information obtained. Staff was asked to answer few questions by phone from the firm. HOR representatives were encouraged during the call to illuminate for the board any hesitations they may have with outlined deliverables.

FEE

HDR proposes to provide the Task 1-5 services (Option 01) on a lump sum basis for a total amount of Two Hundred and Twenty-Nine Thousand Four Hundred and Thirty Dollars ($229,430). HDR proposes to provide the Task 1-6 services (Option 02) on a lump sum basis for a total amount of Two Hundred and Fifty Thousand Eight Hundred and Seventy Dollars ($250,870). A summary for each major task is listed below. No other services are presently expected. However, if additional services do become necessary, we will acquire authorization in advance from the Town and bill for these in accordance with HDR’s most current rate schedule or at an agreed to lump sum fee. This Proposal is valid for 30 days.

Task Amount Per Task
Task 1: Project Management and Administration                      $38,227.54
Task 2: Geotechnical Services                                                         $17,444.10
Task 3: Coastal Services                                                                    $29,520.66
Task 4: Preliminary Repair Design                                                $92,543.81
Task 5: Preliminary Reconstruction Design                                $51,691.35
Task 6: Preliminary 250-Foot Pier Extension                              $21,442.11
Total Proposed Budget (Tasks 1-5):                                                $229,430.00
Total Proposed Budget (Tasks 1-6):                                                $250,870.00

Previously reported – December
HDR Response » click here

The Town received four (4) responses to the RFQ. The request informed interested parties on what criteria they would use to make their selection. The proposals are for the development of preliminary designs and cost estimates for repair or replacement of the Town pier property. Commissioner Thomas made a motion to direct the staff to award the contract to HDR and move forward as appropriate. Apparently they were ready to move forward, and don’t want to delay this project anymore than it has been already.
A decision was made – Approved unanimously

Editor’s note –
A request for qualifications is a document that asks potential suppliers or vendors to detail their background and experience providing a specific good or service. In this case, the buyer is only concerned about the vendor’s skills and experience. Professionals responding will be selected solely based on their qualifications and not on price. Once a firm is selected the Town will negotiate a contract for the desired services. Therefore, the response is not a bid.

Update –
Representatives from HDR attended the meeting to clarify the contract proposal and address any concerns the Board still had. The Board had already got responses to all of their questions and concerns. Mayor Pro Tem Myers asked them to explain the difference in the proposals. The two (2) options are essentially the same with regards to the repair and reconstruction of the pier. The difference between the two options is including adding a two hundred and fifty (250) pier extension which was the original footprint of the pier structure. Commissioner Paarfus made a motion to move forward with the contract including the pier extension option. Christy pointed out the contract exceeded the amount they previously budgeted for this project and had them include in the motion that any overage would be covered with funds in the BPART account.

A decision was made – Approved unanimously

3. Discussion and Possible Action on Removing the Pier Building – Mayor Pro Tem Myers and Commissioner Thomas

Agenda Packet – pages 24 – 53

ISSUE/ACTION REQUESTED:
Discuss and Possible action on Removing the Pier Building

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE OF REQUEST:
The Pier Building was last inspected by Holden Beach Inspection Dept on Sept 17, 2021 (see attached). At that time the summary was “The structure itself is in disrepair, but the west end may have some potential for modifications, other portions are beyond repair.”

The Engineering Report – Pier Building Assessment dated Sept 20, 202 l (see attached) concluded: “The original section of the building… could not be repaired and may be demolished. It follows that the smaller East side may also be demolished. The west side may be able to be salvaged but would require further assessment and analysis.” Since that time, the cost of construction has increased and the building has continued to decline such that there is no longer any potential for repair under Holden Beach ordinances.

Potential Motion:
Given the current situation and the fact that the Pier Building would be in the way of repairing or constructing a new pier, instruct staff to send out an RFP to remove the Pier Building.

TOWN MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
Supports proposed motion

TOWN INSPECTION DIRECTOR RECOMMENDATION:
Supports proposed motion

Update –
Both the Planning Department and engineering report both support the building being demolished. Based on the buildings deterioration and the increase in building costs it is now beyond repair and a tear down. Commissioner Thomas asked the Planning & Inspections Director Evans to explain why he supports this motion. Timbo stated that the building is a dilapidated structure and can no longer be salvaged. In addition, the building is in the way of repairing or replacing the pier structure. Assistant Town Manager Ferguson supported Timbo and stated that the town position is that steps need to be taken to remove the building. It boils down to not if we need to tear down the pier building but simply when. Commissioner Thomas made the motion to  instruct staff to send out a Request For Proposal (RFP) to remove the pier building.

A decision was made – Approved unanimously

4. Consideration and Possible Action to Formulate Federal Priorities for the Upcoming Year – Interim Town Manager Ferguson

Agenda Packet – pages 94 – 95

ISSUE/ACTION REQUESTED:
Consideration and possible action to formulate federal priorities for the upcoming year.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE OF REQUEST:
In the early part of each calendar year, the BOC is tasked with formulating the  Town’s federal priorities that can be communicated  for federal funding purposes and also to advocate for policy change. The attached memo outlines my recommendations for areas of attention that the board may want to pursue.

TOWN MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
Receive information and direct interim town manager on execution of priorities.

After discussion with our federal advocates, Ward and Smith, the following are my recommendations for our federal priorities in this order.

Funding

• • Ocean Boulevard Stormwater – 5113 Environmental Infrastructure program
  • Lockwood Folly Inlet (LWF) Dredging Funding
  • Exploring Additional Funding Opportunities for Projects- stormwater, pier, etc.
    

Policy

• • LWF Dredging Sand Placement
  • FEMA
    a. Appropriate Funding Levels for Disaster Relief Fund
    b. National Flood Insurance Program- follow developments and advocate for THB

While the board has an additional policy opportunity available, I would suggest leaving this open for other areas of concern that may surface during the year.

Update –
Christy after discussion with our federal advocates Ward and Smith proposed our federal priorities for funding and policy issues. Motion was made accepting what was laid out in the memo and also authority to issue the letters of support for these requests that will go to our congressional delegation. 

A decision was made – Approved unanimously

5.   Discussion and Possible Action on Resolution 25-01, Resolution Prohibiting Viewing of Pornography on Town Networks and Devices – Town Clerk Finnell (Interim Town Manager Ferguson)

Agenda Packet – pages 96 – 97

Resolution 25-01 » click here

ISSUE/ACTION REQUESTED:
Discussion and Possible Action on Resolution 25-01, Resolution Prohibiting Viewing of Pornography on Town Networks and Devices

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE OF REQUEST:
NCGS §143-805 requires all public agencies to adopt a policy governing the use of its network and devices owned, leased, maintained, or otherwise controlled by the Town of Holden Beach. Staff’s proposed usage policy is attached.

Update –
Christy explained that we do not have an issue with any of the town employees. This is simply a housekeeping item. We are  adopting the guidelines set by the North Carolina General Assembly Statutes.

A decision was made – Approved unanimously

Upcoming Events

Town of Holden Beach officially established on February 14, 1969

Celebrating our 56^th Anniversary!

THB Newsletter (01/17/25)
Town Birthday Celebration
The Town of Holden Beach will hold its annual birthday celebration on Friday, February 14^th at 11:30 a.m. Lunch will be served. Please RSVP to Christy at [email protected] by January 31^st so there is an accurate food count.

 Swing Dance Lessons
The THB is taking an interest list for bi-monthly Friday night swing dance sessions
The first two events will be January 24^th and February 14^th

Storm Event

From the Mayor’s Desk (01/20/25)
The NC Department of Transportation is preparing the Brunswick Island bridges for the potential storm and cold weather. Please be mindful and prepare your personal property for extreme cold weather. Forecasted temperatures show a potential for wind chills in the teens.

From the Mayor’s Desk (01/21/25)
The approaching winter storm is expected to bring freezing rain and/or snow late this afternoon about 5:00 p.m. Accumulation of three inches or more is expected. The Holden Beach bridge has been prepped for snow and ice but it is still possible for it to ice over. If this happens, the bridge is subject to be closed for an extended period of time. Make plans accordingly. Be mindful that any weather updates may bring changes to the present expectations. Currently these extreme weather conditions may last through Thursday night. Town Hall will likely close early today. We will continue to monitor the weather.  There will be no meetings at the Holden Beach Town Hall after 4:00 p.m. today. Please limit driving in the hazardous conditions.

From the Mayor’s Desk (01/21/25)
Bridge Closed
Snow and ice have caused the Holden Beach Bridge to freeze, creating a hazard to motorists. A near collision and loss of control has pushed us to make the tough decision to close the bridge to all traffic. We will advise the public as soon as conditions allow for safer travel.

From the Mayor’s Desk (01/22/25)
The Holden Beach Bridge is currently open but is still subject to being closed. The winter conditions have caused unsafe and hazardous traveling conditions on our streets. If you do not have to be on the roads, please stay home.

From the Mayor’s Desk (01/23/25)
Town Hall will remain closed tomorrow (Thursday, January 23rd) due to the weather conditions. Please stay off of the roads. The overnight and early morning commute will likely be treacherous due to black ice. Icy conditions on the bridge could potentially result in closure.

From the Mayor’s Desk (01/23/25)
The roads on Holden Beach have frozen back over and are extremely hazardous. The bridge is currently open but the Town is recommending emergency travel only.

Snow covers Brunswick County, officials warn of hazardous driving conditions
Brunswick County got a rare snow day on Wednesday, Jan. 22, as a winter storm dropped between two and five inches of snow across the county on Tuesday evening, Jan. 21 and into Wednesday morning. The storm’s impacts are expected to linger throughout the week. A rare occasion, a snow storm hit Brunswick County, resulting in significant accumulation. With schools closed and many primary and most secondary roads unsafe for travel, residents have been enjoying a couple days of winter fun. The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) continues working  to clear the roads, but roads remain hazardous on Thursday, Jan. 23. Local and state officials are encouraging residents to avoid travel if at all possible, warning of black ice along local roadways as temperatures dropped overnight and are forecast to barely climb above freezing on Thursday. Temperatures are set to drop well below freezing again Thursday evening and overnight. “The roads are definitely starting to turn into mush and melting, and tonight there is a good possibility for some black ice [into] tomorrow,” Brunswick County Sheriff Brian Chism said in an online statement. “If you don’t have to travel, if you don’t have to be on the roads – please stay home.” The Brunswick County Sheriff’s Office in a Thursday morning statement said road conditions are just as bad as on Wednesday. Other local law enforcement agencies released similar statement Thursday, warning of icy roadways and encouraging folks to stay home if possible. “It is important to remember that below freezing temperatures will remain for the next few days. Any snowfall that does melt will refreeze each evening,” said North Carolina Emergency Management Director Will Ray. “If you do not need to be on the roadways today, please stay home for your safety and for the safety of first responders and NCDOT working to clear the roads.” Additionally, the National Weather Service (NWS) issued a special weather statement warning of “dangerous road conditions through Thursday morning,” as temperatures barely rose above freezing on Wednesday and Thursday. “What limited melting occurs will quickly refreeze this evening with expected lower temperatures in the lower teens,” the statement notes. Brunswick County Government will remain closed to the public Thursday, Jan. 23, and the county is currently operating at Level 2 (Partial Activation), with essential public safety and response staff monitoring and responding. Most area municipalities’ offices will remain closed Thursday as well. The bridges to the town of Holden Beach and to Sunset Beach’s island and Ocean Isle Beach’s island were closed Tuesday night into Wednesday morning due to the storm. The three bridges reopened Wednesday and remained open as of 6 p.m. However, town officials from all three towns have said the bridges are subject to closing again as the sun goes down. “NCDOT has treated the Sunset Beach bridge, and it is now open,” Sunset Beach Town Administrator Lisa Anglin said in a 12:30 p.m. statement on Wednesday. “However, public safety officials warn that if/when conditions deteriorate this afternoon and tonight the bridge is likely to close again. We anticipate conditions will be slow to improve in the morning, expect delays and hazardous conditions if you must travel first thing.” Holden Beach Mayor Alan Holden and the town of Ocean Isle Beach released similar statements on Wednesday morning regarding the town’s respective bridges being subject to re-closure. The three bridges have remained open throughout the day on Thursday. According to National Weather Service (NWS) snowfall reports from last night’s winter storm, five inches of snow fell in Ocean Isle Beach, 4.5 inches in Sunset Beach and Calabash, four inches in Ash, 3.8 inches in Holden Beach, between 2.1 and 3.5 inches in Varnamtown and two inches in Supply. Brunswick Beacon staffers have travelled around the county Thursday and say road conditions are bad across Brunswick County but appear to be the worst in and around Southport.
Read more » click here

General Comments

Mayor Alan Holden was not in attendance
Commissioner Page Dyer was not in attendance
Commissioner Rick Smith – was not in attendance

Posted on the Town Facebook Meeting Audio – Carlton Pittman
Having only 3 commissioners present further illustrates why it is important to have commissioners actually LIVE here, not just have their voting registration here. No offense to Commissioner Smith, but commissioners should actually LIVE here, not just have their voter registration here just to be able to run for a board seat.

THB Code of Ordinances – Quorum
§30.15 VOTING AND QUORUMS.
   (A)   Quorum. The Mayor and three Commissioners, or three Commissioners without the Mayor shall constitute a quorum (simple majority) of the Town BOC

Commissioner-Manager (weak Mayor) form of government
§30.02  FORM OF GOVERNMENT.
   (A)   The town shall operate under the Commissioner-Manager (weak Mayor) form of government.  The legislative authority of the town shall be vested in the Mayor and Town Board of Commissioners, hereinafter referred to as the BOC, which shall consist of a Mayor and five Commissioners chosen as hereafter provided.

§30.04  MAYOR; DUTIES.
   The Mayor shall serve as the chief spokesperson for the town and the chief advocate of formally approved and adopted town policy.  In addition, the Mayor shall preside at meetings of the BOC; shall be recognized as head of the town government for all ceremonial purposes and by the governor for the purposes of disaster or emergency declarations.  The Mayor shall sign ordinances and resolutions only on their passage; shall sign deeds, bonds, contracts and other instruments approved by BOC as required by law. Willful failure by a mayor to discharge their legal duties shall result in those duties being assumed by the Mayor Pro Tem by reason of disqualification, as set forth in § 30.05.  Legal remedies for failure to discharge the duties of Mayor may result in legal censure or charges of contempt and may serve as grounds for impeachment.  The Mayor shall convene the Town BOC in special called session when deemed necessary by the Mayor.  Unless otherwise expressly provided by law or this chapter, the Mayor shall have no vote on any question before the Town BOC except in case of a tie.

North Carolina has created a very limited role for mayors. Our state laws leave many decisions about the management and operation of municipalities to the governing board, or, in jurisdictions operating in a council-manager form of government, to managers.

The council-manager form of government is the system of local government that combines the strong political leadership of elected officials in the form of a council or other governing body, with the strong managerial experience of an appointed local government manager.  The form establishes a representative system where all power is concentrated in the elected council and where the council hires a professionally trained manager to oversee the delivery of public services.

Based on Separation of Functions:
.        • Governing Board is Legislative and Policy Oriented.
.        • Administration is responsibility of professional manager.

Characteristics:
.        • More Businesslike Form of Government
.        • Pinpoints Authority and Responsibility

Mayor’s Role (N.C. General Statute 160A-151)

• • Very Few Formal Powers.
  • Preside at governing board meetings.
  • Voting to break a tie.
  • Sign documents on behalf of the city.
  • Can call special meetings of council.
  • Mayor and all council members are ineligible to serve as manager, interim manager, or acting manager.
    

    ---

    BOC’s Meeting
    The Board of Commissioners’ next Regular Meeting is scheduled on the third Tuesday of the month, February 18^th

    Agenda did not include the following:

    • • Budget Calendar – they have not established the budget meeting schedule yet
      • Rules of Procedures – the Board is required to adopt some version of the Rules of Procedure each year
      • Board Objectives – they have not established an objectives meeting yet

    ---

    

     It’s not like they don’t have anything to work on …

    The following eight (8) items are what’s In the Works/Loose Ends queue:

    • • • • Accommodation/Occupancy Tax Compliance
            
          • Audio/Video Broadcast
          • Block Q Project/Carolina Avenue
            
          • Dog Park
          • Fire Station Project
          • Pavilion Replacement
          • Pier Properties Project
          • Rights-of-Way

    The definition of loose ends is a fragment of unfinished business or a detail that is not yet settled or explained, which is the current status of these items. All of these items were started and then put on hold, and they were never put back in the queue. This Board needs to continue working on them and move these items to closure.

    

    ---

    

    .

    Lost in the Sauce –

    .

     

    ---

    ---

    2024
    Causeway

    ---

    

    Holden Beach Causeway – Facebook
    Sometimes change is out of our control but if we recognize it in time, we can help influence change to have a positive outcome. Our community is special and no longer a secret. The area’s population increase is happening at a rapid pace. The Holden Beach Causeway has become insufficient to meet today’s demand. Spend a little time on the Causeway and it is easy to see it is unsafe for pedestrians and vehicles entering and exiting the local businesses. The crash rating on the Causeway is three (3) times higher than the NC state average for similar roads. Since 2018 I have persistently advocated for a study on developing the necessary changes needed on the Holden Beach Causeway. The Holden Beach Causeway Corridor Study was approved and funded in 2019. The study was developed with the influence of the Causeway property owners working with Brunswick County Planning, the North Carolina Department of Transportation and the Grand Strand Area Transportation Study (GSATS). A special thank you to the Causeway Property Owners who were a part of the Causeway Study Steering Committee. Lyn Holden, Gina Robinson, Steven Parish, Joe Shannon, Andrew Robinson and I dedicated a lot of time working on the study. Communicating with other Causeway property owners and representing what is right for our community, to prevent an unwanted outcome. The steering committee involved Tri-Beach Fire Department in the conversations. Including their opinions on the study’s development to assure they had sufficient access through the Causeway and to the island for emergency response. All headed up by the carefully chosen consulting firm, Bolten and Menk. The consulting firm did an amazing job working with all of the obstacles on the Causeway, consulting with the steering committee and business owners about their concerns of any negative impacts from the project. We are proud to present to you the Holden Beach Causeway Corridor Study. Please visit the link below to review the final draft. Considering all of the obstacles and considerations for everyone, the outcome offers a bright future for our community. It also provides a path for sustainability and safety for our Causeway and its businesses, as our area continues to grow.

    What happens next?
    Chairman to the Brunswick County Board of Commissioners, Commissioner Randy Thompson, has requested an endorsement for the Holden Beach Causeway Project from the Town of Holden Beach. Commissioner Thompson’s position for requesting the Town endorsement is the Causeway is the highway ingress, egress to the island. Next, the study will be presented to the Brunswick County Board of Commissioners for endorsement. Once the study has been endorsed by Brunswick County, the study will go back to the Grand Strand Area Transportation Study for adoption. Once adopted by GSATS, we can begin applying for Funding. It has been a long road to get to this point and we have a long road ahead to receive funding and begin construction. Thank you all for your support for the Holden Beach Causeway Project. We will need your continuous support as we navigate through the next phase of this process. I will keep this page posted as developments are made with the County required endorsements and the road to GSATS adoption.
    Jabin Norris president of PROACTIVE Real Estate
    For more information » click here

    HB Causeway Study Report » click here

    THB Newsletter (01/25/24)
    Holden Beach Causeway Study
    The Grand Strand Area Transportation Study MPO (GSATS) funded a study to improve the Holden Beach Causeway by observing the area and addressing the concerns of Causeway business owners and patrons as well as the community related to vehicular and pedestrian safety, accessibility, right‐of‐way encroachments, and parking deficiencies. This study provides insight as to how the corridor functions and ideas for future improvements from a transportation and land use perspective.

    For more information and to view the study, visit the Brunswick County Planning Department’s website: https://www.brunswickcountync.gov/409/Holden-Beach-Causeway-Transportation-Cor

    The Draft Holden Beach Causeway Transportation Study will go to the Brunswick County Board of Commissioners for a public hearing and for their consideration on February 5, 2024, at 3:00 p.m.

    Previously reported – February 2023
    A popular Brunswick beach road could soon see needed improvements.
    Here’s the first step.
    A popular Brunswick County road could see much-needed improvements if a project more than four years in the making gets its final go-ahead. Since 2019, Holden Beach residents have pushed local and state leaders to fund a study looking at the Holden Beach Causeway, the business strip on the mainland side of Holden Beach. Now, with a contractor in place and funding squared away, state and local leaders are eager for the study to get underway.

    Here’s what to know as officials await the green light to begin.

    What will be studied?
    The Grand Strand Area Transportation Study (Myrtle Beach Metropolitan Planning Organization) is leading the Holden Beach Causeway Study. The GSATS MPO study area boundary encompasses the northern coast area of South Carolina, including portions of Horry and Georgetown counties, and the southern coastal area of North Carolina including portions of Brunswick County. According to Marc Hoeweler, MPO Director at GSATS, the study will focus primarily on access management by studying existing rights-of-way and driveways and how they can best be structured and ordered for better traffic flow. Hoeweler said the project was prompted by a request from the county. The study would also address pedestrian safety concerns and parking deficiencies. Following its completion, the study would serve as a guide for future road improvements and development along the causeway.

    What is the cost?
    The $40,000 study will be funded with both federal and local dollars. According to Hoeweler, 80% (or $32,000) will be funded by federal money, while a 20% (or $8,000) local match will be provided by Brunswick County.

    What’s the hold up?
    According to Brunswick County officials, GSATS is currently working with the North Carolina Department of Transportation to finalize the contract with the consulting firm. Following a “competitive” selection process, Minnesota-based engineering firm Bolton & Menk was selected for the project. Once a final contract is signed by all parties, work on the study will begin. Hoeweler said he expects approval any day now and a kickoff meeting could occur within a week of the contract being signed.
    Read more » click here

    ---

    2023
    Bulkheads
    The discussion was on whether we want to bulkhead the town properties in the 700 and 800 blocks of OBW. If we do it will require bulkheads on approximately 700 linear feet at a cost of $350 per linear foot. The preliminary cost estimate is  $298,925 just for a continuous bulkhead with tiebacks. Pat suggested that we still need to know how many parking spaces could be put there. Brian stated that we have no plans to put parking there now. He also made the point that the area was delineated in order to preserve property, bulkheading is a way to do that. In addition, they pointed out that USACE may require parking in that area, so it is important to minimize erosion and maintain the land there in case it is needed. David said that we will need to submit design in order to get a CAMA permit. Shane was asked to report back additional information regarding the permit process.

    Editor’s Note
    The Town owns ten (10) parcels in the 800 block which we obtained on 04/21/13 ostensibly to be used for parking.

    ---

    2023
    Tri-Beach Fire Department
    The Tri-Beach VFD has been using the four bay Town owned building at 572 Ocean Boulevard West for a number of years to house fire apparatus that is used for firefighting, emergency medical calls and rescue calls on the island and off the island as needed. Housing the equipment on the island has been beneficial to Town of Holden Beach residents and vacationers on the island. Currently, staffing by the department is in place twelve hours a day (7:00 AM to 7:00 PM) during the summer months typically from Memorial Day to Labor Day. The rest of the year, 24-hour staff responds to calls on the island from the off-island fire stations. Due to the increase in permanent residents and renters staying on the island, before Memorial Day, during the summer, and after Labor Day, emergency calls on the island are on the increase. Tri-Beach is working on a plan to provide sufficient staff to man Station 2, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week all year. This will improve the response time to calls on the island during the entire year. To safely house staff 24 hrs./7 days a week, upgrades to Station 2 will be necessary. The Board of Directors of the Tri-Beach Volunteer Fire Department is formally requesting the Town  of Holden Beach to put a plan in place to upgrade (or replace) the existing Station 2 building to provide the necessary facilities (such as a bunk room, kitchen, flood resistance, etc.) to support safely housing onsite staff for 24 hours a day. The Tri-Beach Chief officers and staff stand ready to assist Town personnel in the planning and execution of upgrading the Station 2 building to provide enhanced fire, emergency medical and rescue services to the residents and vacationers in the Town of Holden Beach. Please respond back to the Board of Directors as soon as possible so that we can all move forward on this plan.

    Fire Department Presentation » click here

    Update –
    Assistant Chief David Ward of the Tri-Beach Fire Department made the presentation. As a representative of the fire department, he was there to justify the request for them to either upgrade or replace the existing fire station. Call volumes have significantly increased, and they would like to staff the fire station on the island around the clock all year long so they can adequately provide protection to the public. Timbo pointed out that this is a critical facility and impacts our Community Rating System score which reduces our homeowners insurance costs. The Board members agreed that they need to create a committee so they can make an educated decision about what they should do. Mayor Holden requested additional information from the fire department to know what their options are before they proceed.

    ---

    

    
    
    Hurricane Season
    For more information » click here.
    
    Be prepared – have a plan! 

    ---

    No matter what a storm outlook is for a given year,
    vigilance and preparedness is urged.

    ---

     Board of Commissioners’ – Scorecard

     NYC Mayor Koch used to ask – How am I doing?

     Imagine if the BOC’s asked you – How’d they do?

    The goal of government is to make citizens better off

    ---

    Action Taken – 2024

    January
    Adoption Resolution 24-01, Truist Signature Card

    February
    Ordinance 24-01, Chapter 157: Zoning Code
    .     • Accessory Structures
    Adoption Resolution 24-02, Key Bridge Foundation ADA Mediation Agreement

    March
    Ordinance 24-02, Parking Regulations
    Adoption Resolution 24-03, Participation in the Federal 1033 Program
    Ordinance 24-03, The Revenues and Appropriations Ordinance (#3)
    .     • Grant from the NC Department of Environmental Quality
    Ordinance 24-04, The Revenues and Appropriations Ordinance (#4)
    .     • Transfer unassigned General fund balance over 70%

    April
    Ordinance 24-05, The Revenues and Appropriations Ordinance (#5)
    .     • Lockwood Folly Inlet Dredging
    .     • Budget appropriation of $109,438
    Adoption Resolution 24-04, Lockwood Folly Inlet Water Resources Grant
    Ordinance 24-06, Traffic Code, revisions to paid parking program

    May
    Ordinance 24-07, Chapter 92: Nuisances
    .     • Unlawful Outside Lights
    Ordinance 24-09, The Revenues and Appropriations Ordinance (#6)
    .     • Coastal Storm Risk Management (CSRM) Study
    Adoption Resolution 24-05, Greensboro Seer Lift Station #2 Grant

    June
    Ordinance 24-08, Chapter 154: Flood Damage Prevention
    .     • FEMA Recommendations
    Ordinance 24-10, Chapter 157: Zoning Codes
    .     • Frontal Dune Policies
    Ordinance 24-11, The Revenues and Appropriations Ordinance  / Budget Ordinance
    .     • Approved the town’s $26.2 million-dollar Budget Ordinance
    Adoption Resolution 24-06, Authorizing Upset Bid Process

    July
    Meeting Cancelled

    August
    Adoption Resolution 24-07, Stormwater Master Plan

    September
    Adoption Resolution 24-08, tentative award contract for lift station #2
    .     • Terrahawk lowest bidder for the work in the amount of $3,899,000
    Ordinance 24-12, The Revenues and Appropriations Ordinance (#1)
    .     • Greensboro Lift Station #2 / $4,776,308
    Ordinance 24-13 – Capital Project Ordinance
    .     • Establish a budget for capital projects to be funded by EPA STAG and DEQ grants.
    .     • The project authorized is the upfit of the sewer lift

    October
    Ordinance 24-15, Amending Chapter 72: Parking Regulations

    November
    Ordinance 24-16, The Revenues and Appropriations Ordinance (#2)
    .     • Additional funds of $30,000 for Lift Station #2
    Ordinance 24-17
    .     • Capital Project Ordinance Lift Station #2
    Adoption Resolution 24-09
    .     • DEQ Project No. SRP-W-134-0021 grant
    Ordinance 24-18, The Revenues and Appropriations Ordinance (#3)
    .     • 796 OBW moved funds of $278,710

    December
    Ordinance 24-19, The Revenues and Appropriations Ordinance (#4)
    .     • Beach and Inlet Capital Reserve Fund Transfer moved funds of $2,783,382
    Ordinance 24-20, The Revenues and Appropriations Ordinance (#5)
    .     • Stormwater Additional Areas moved funds of $76,100
    Adoption Resolution 24-10, Truist Signature Card
    Adoption Resolution 24-11, Recycling Fee Schedule

    ---

    

    Wishing you a new year filled with health and happiness 

    ---

    Do you enjoy this newsletter?
    Then please forward it to a friend!

    ---

    Lou’s Views . HBPOIN

    
    .         • Gather and disseminate information
    .         • Identify the issues and determine how they affect you
    .         • Act as a watchdog
    .         • Grass roots monthly newsletter since 2008
    
    

    https://lousviews.com/

Lou’s Views
News & Views / January Edition

Calendar of Events –

Brunswick County invites residents to participate in lifesaving certification training
Brunswick County’s Risk Management and Parks and Recreation departments are partnering to offer First Aid/CPR/AED Certification Training in 2025. This new training program is designed to provide residents with the knowledge and skills needed to recognize and respond appropriately to cardiac, breathing, and first aid emergencies.

“Many accidents at work and at home—such as bruises and cuts sustained from tripping or burns given by heating equipment—can be helped by a bystander with the proper resources and training,” Risk Manager Andy Yoos said. “That’s why it’s important for everyone to know how to perform basic lifesaving care.”

The training is open to any Brunswick County resident 12 years of age and older. Participants under 18 years of age must be accompanied by an adult guardian for the entire training session. Upon successful completion of the course, participants will receive an American Trauma Event Management (ATEM) First Aid/CPR/AED certification card, which is valid for 2 years.

The 2025 training sessions will be held on Feb. 15 inside the Town Creek Park Community Building, April 26 inside the Leland Field House, June 7 inside the Lockwood Folly Community Building, Aug. 9 inside the Waccamaw Park Community Building, and Oct. 4 inside the Leland Field House. Participants must register and pay online before the training date.

There are only 12 seats available per training session and the registration fee is $10 per person. Each class will consist of an AM Session from 9 a.m. to 12 p.m., a 30-minute lunch break*, and a PM session from 12:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. You must attend and complete both sessions to receive certification.

*Participants must bring their own lunch and beverages.

 Upcoming Training Session
Saturday, June 7, 2025 / Supply Area
Location: Lockwood Folly Community Building, 1691 Stanbury Rd SW, Supply, NC 28462
Time: 9 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.
Cost: $10 per person

Learn more and register online on the Brunswick County Parks and Recreation RecDesk website.

For questions or more information about the training program, email Brunswick County Risk Management.

For more information » click here

Discover a wide range of things to do in the Brunswick Islands for an experience that goes beyond the beach.
For more information » click here.

Calendar of Events Island –

THB Newsletter (01/02/25)
Swing Dance Lessons
There have been several individuals who put their name on our interest list. Email Christy at [email protected] if you are interested, indicating whether you are signing up for the lessons or the dance only. Class information is below. Have you ever wanted to take swing dance lessons or do you already know how and wish there were a local dance location? The Town Holden Beach is taking an interest list for bi-monthly Friday night swing dance sessions. There will be a beginner six count jitterbug dance lesson followed by a dance. No partner is necessary and all ages are invited. Anticipated times are as follows: Beginner lesson 7:00 -8:00 p.m. and swing dance 8:00 -10:00 p.m. Price will be $10 per night, per person. Emily Alley will be your instructor. She’s been swing dancing for 10 years as a lead and follow. She loves teaching Jitterbug (also known as East Coast Swing), Lindy Hop, Carolina Shag and Collegiate Shag. Before moving to Holden Beach, she lived in Asheville and was the organizer/teacher/DJ of Swing Asheville and also started a swing dance community in Boone NC. She’s looking forward to sharing her love of swing dance to the area.

The first two events will be January 24^th and February 14^th

Parks & Recreation / Programs & Events
For more information » click here

Reminders –

News from Town of Holden Beach
The town sends out emails of events, news, agendas, notifications, and emergency information. If you would like to be added to their mailing list, please go to their web site to complete your subscription to the Holden Beach E-Newsletter.
For more information » click here

Paid Parking
Paid parking will be enforced in all Holden Beach designated parking areas. It will be enforced from 9:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. daily, with free parking before and after that time. All parking will use license plates for verification. 

Visit https://hbtownhall.com/paid-parking for more information and to view a table with authorized parking areas. 

Solid Waste Pick-Up Schedule
GFL Environmental change in service, October through May trash pickup will be once a week. Trash collection is on Tuesdays only.

Please note:
. • Trash carts must be at the street by 6:00 a.m. on the pickup day
. • BAG the trash before putting it in the cart
. • Carts will be rolled back to the front of the house

GFL Refuse Collection Policy
GFL has recently notified all Brunswick County residents that they will no longer accept extra bags of refuse outside of the collection cart. This is not a new policy but is stricter enforcement of an existing policy. While in the past GFL drivers would at times make exceptions and take additional bags of refuse, the tremendous growth in housing within Brunswick County makes this practice cost prohibitive and causes drivers to fall behind schedule.

Solid Waste Pick-up Schedule –

starting October once a week 

Recycling –

starting October every other week  pick-up

Curbside Recycling – 2024
GFL Environmental is now offering curbside recycling for Town properties that desire to participate in the service. The service cost per cart is $119.35 annually paid in advance to the Town of Holden Beach. The service consists of a ninety-six (96) gallon cart that is emptied every other week during the months of October – May and weekly during the months of June – September. 
Curbside Recycling Application » click here
Curbside Recycling Calendar » click here

Trash Can Requirements – Rental Properties
GFL Environmental – trash can requirements
Ordinance 07-13, Section 50.08

Rental properties have specific number of trash cans based on number of bedrooms.

* One extra trash can per every 2 bedrooms
..

 § 50.08 RENTAL HOMES.
(A) Rental homes, as defined in Chapter 157, that are rented as part of the summer rental season, are subject to high numbers of guests, resulting in abnormally large volumes of trash. This type of occupancy use presents a significantly higher impact than homes not used for summer rentals. In interest of public health and sanitation and environmental concerns, all rental home shall have a minimum of one trash can per two bedrooms. Homes with an odd number of bedrooms shall round up (for examples one to two bedrooms – one trash can; three to four bedrooms – two trash cans; five – six bedrooms – three trash cans, and the like).

Building Numbers
Ocean front homes are required to have house numbers visible from the beach strand.
Please call Planning and Inspections Department at 910.842.6080 with any questions.

§157.087 BUILDING NUMBERS.

(A) The correct street number shall be clearly visible from the street on all buildings. Numbers shall be block letters, not script, and of a color clearly in contrast with that of the building and shall be a minimum of six inches in height.

(B) Beach front buildings will also have clearly visible house numbers from the strand side meeting the above criteria on size, contrast, etc. Placement shall be on vertical column supporting deck(s) or deck roof on the primary structure. For buildings with a setback of over 300 feet from the first dune line, a vertical post shall be erected aside the walkway with house numbers affixed. In all cases the numbers must be clearly visible from the strand. Other placements may be acceptable with approval of the Building Inspector.

Upon Further Review –

Teetering on the edge: How North Carolina communities are dealing with disappearing beaches
A slow-motion catastrophe is eating away beaches from the Outer Banks to Brunswick County as rising seas and stronger storms batter the state’s coast. But solutions aren’t easy, popular or cheap.
Under sunny and warm late-October skies, Frank Thompson picked the fishing rods out of his pickup while his sons grabbed the bucket and rest of the fishing gear. The Ohio native was making his annual pilgrimage to the N.C. coast, and this year he had decided to give Topsail Island − specifically North Topsail Beach − a try because he had heard the fish were running strong and the beaches weren’t crowded. What he hadn’t expected, though, was finding enough beach at high tide to actually have the space to cast. “We’ve got maybe 2 to 3 feet at the toe of the dunes, so that should be fine,” Thompson said with a smile as waves lapped under some of the threatened oceanfront homes at the Onslow County beach town’s northern tip. “And if we get wet, we get wet.” While Rodanthe on the Outer Banks became North Carolina’s poster child this past summer for collapsing homes and the inevitability of Mother Nature winning the oceanfront battle as seas continue to rise and climate change fuels bigger and stronger storms, it is at the northern end of Topsail Island where the struggle is even potentially more dire. And while erosion has been a problem in North Topsail for a long time, thanks in large part to the adjacent New River Inlet, a permanent answer appears no closer today than in past decades. “No, there really is no long-term solution that will bring the beach back,” said Dr. Robert Young, director of the Program for the Study of Developed Shorelines at Western Carolina University. “These areas near inlets are the most dynamic areas along barrier islands, and unfortunately that’s what we’re seeing and have been seeing in North Topsail Beach.”

‘A tough spot for everyone’
Since 1964 when the first federal nourishment project pumped sand onto Carolina Beach’s eroded beach, mining offshore sand to rebuild battered beaches has been North Carolina’s go-to to keep its sandy strips plump for tourists and to protect pricey oceanfront property. But pumping sand isn’t practical for all parts of the coast and is increasingly becoming more challenging, due to a declining supply of compatible sand to meet all the demands − especially for Brunswick County beach towns − and the rising costs of nourishment projects. These increasing obstacles come as the threats to oceanfront properties continue to rise, notably due to climate change. According to a review of 2020 imagery by the N.C. Division of Coastal Management, more than 750 of the state’s 8,777 oceanfront structures were considered at risk from oceanfront erosion, with no dune or vegetation between them and the Atlantic. In many beach towns, property owners and sometimes local governments have installed sandbags to hold back the encroaching ocean, although environmentalists and other say the temporary structures do little but shift the sand-eating waves to neighboring sections of the beach − often prompting the installation of more sandbags. In places like Rodanthe and North Topsail Beach, where money for beach nourishment is in short supply, another factor is at play. Natural elements have conspired to prevent either area from naturally or easily re-establishing their dune lines. In Rodanthe, the foil is largely powerful ocean currents. At the north end of Topsail Island, New River Inlet and a relatively flat topography combine to work against an easy or cheap solution to the chronic erosion woes. Since 2020, 10 homes, and five just this year, have fallen into the Atlantic in Rodanthe, most recently on Sept. 24. The resulting debris fields have spread far and wide along Hatteras Island, impacting the environment and forcing the closure of beach areas in the nearby Cape Fear National Seashore and Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge due to public health and safety concerns. The potential losses in the more densely populated northern end of North Topsail, where walls of sandbags taller than a basketball net protect some oceanfront homes and condos, could easily exceed those numbers. “It really is a challenging situation, a tough spot for everyone up there because these temporary Band-Aid solutions like adding more sand are providing benefits that are having shorter and shorter lifespans,” said Kerri Allen, coastal management program director with the N.C. Coastal Federation.

Rising costs and limited benefits
North Topsail isn’t the only beach town in Southeastern N.C. − or even on Topsail Island − dealing with a disappearing beach and its knock-on effect on coastal economies that rely on tourists to put heads in beds and valuable beach property to fill local coffers. In Surf City, which occupies the mid-section of Topsail Island, the town is finalizing its plans with the Army Corps of Engineers for a long-term federal nourishment project to boost its eroded strand. The 50-year project, which is estimated to cost at least $187 million over its lifespan, with Washington covering 65% of the cost and the state and Surf City splitting the remaining 35%, could start late next year if all the necessary permits and other regulatory approvals are secured. The first phase of construction would see an estimated 7.9 million cubic yards of sand pumped onto the town’s nearly 6-mile-long beach, with further nourishments taking place roughly every six years. In Topsail Beach, which covers the bottom third of Topsail Island, the town earlier this year wrapped up a roughly $25 million beach nourishment project that it largely paid for itself. North Topsail Beach also has aggressively been moving to shore up its beachfront with several different nourishment projects. But a big chunk of the town is in a Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) zone, a classification that prevents the expenditure of federal dollars on projects − including beach nourishment − in hazardous coastal areas. That means the town has to dip into its own budget to fund the work or seek aid from the state. While North Topsail has a shoreline protection fund, which includes revenue generated from the town’s accommodation tax and paid parking and collects about $5 million a year, and dedicates significant capital funds annually to beach projects, that doesn’t go very far when you have 11 miles of shoreline to maintain and protect. In some cases, the state has stepped up to help out − including a $10.5 million grant to support a 2.5-mile beach nourishment south of the north end that’s going to kick off later this year. Those budgetary pressures played a large role in the town withdrawing from Surf City’s federal nourishment project, which originally was supposed to also include nourishing 4 miles of beach in North Topsail. Town officials said the price tag of North Topsail’s portion jumped nearly 200% between 2012 and 2021 to almost $34 million.

‘Financial calculus just doesn’t work’
The general idea of retreat or relocation of threatened structures isn’t often embraced by local officials, who face challenges from unwilling sellers to a lack of money to fund buyouts to questionable political will to pursue pulling back − especially when it could mean abandoning some of a beach town’s most valuable tax base. Environmentalists and others, though, say retreat is coming. The only question is whether it will be managed, done in a controlled way, or unmanaged as historically has been the case in most areas. Five years ago, Young’s team from Western Carolina came up with a different proposal for North Topsail Beach than simply throwing good money – or sand – after bad money. In short, the authors suggested that instead of spending those resources on 7% of the town’s tax base that is seriously at-risk, dedicate them to the 93% of the town’s tax base that is sustainable over the next 30 years. “It’s clearly cheaper for the town in the long run than simply trying to hold the line,” he said. “The financial calculus just doesn’t work to keep fighting the sea.” The paper suggested the town look into buying out the nearly 300 at-risk properties and parcels at the north end. The 2019 paper said the purchase cost would be nearly $55 million but would generate about $58 million in benefits – representing a savings of roughly $3 million over 30 years. “The fiscal analysis does not include many unquantifiable benefits from the proposed targeted acquisition,” the report states. “These include the transfer of amenity value to other properties, reduced emergency management costs for the municipality, reduced need for consulting engineering fees, improved beach access for all residents and renters, and, quite frankly, no more ugly sand bags and a return of a recreational beach that all residents and guests can enjoy.”

Terminal groin in the cards?
The proposal wasn’t pursued by North Topsail officials at the time, and Town Manager Alice Derian said town officials haven’t discussed a potential buyout program for north end property owners in recent times. Recent efforts to stabilize and enhance the beach at the town’s north end include a 2023 corps’ project that saw 160,000 cubic yards of sand dredged from New River Inlet placed on the north end. Then last year, the town and FEMA paid for trucked-in sand to be dumped in front of some of the threatened structures. In both cases, the sand didn’t last. Derian said North Topsail also is looking to see if it can potentially secure government help to replace roughly 88,000 cubic yards of sand, much of it at the north end, which was washed away by the unnamed storm that pummeled and swamped much of Southeastern North Carolina in September. Future efforts include another injection of fresh sand from the corps’ dredging of New River Inlet and, very far out, potentially the construction of a terminal groin. But that sort of project can take a decade to get permitted, and the construction and maintenance costs could easily reach $20 million or more. Young said North Topsail Beach and Rodanthe aren’t the country’s only coastal communities struggling with how to manage oceanfront areas beset with severe erosion woes. But with sea-level rise and more frequent and stronger storms likely and the rising cost of beach nourishment projects, beach towns are going to have to consider making tough choices. “This is not a proposal that would ruin your coastal economy but preserve your coastal economy by allowing you to invest your finite resources where it makes sense, and that’s so important,” Young said of the buyout study. “Places like North Topsail Beach need to come together as a community and have a real discussion about where they want to go moving forward.”
Read more » click here

Sand dollars: 12 things to know about NC’s coastal economy
The N.C. coast drives much of the economy in Eastern N.C. But maintaining the beaches that attracts millions of visitors a year isn’t cheap.
The coast is an economic engine for Eastern North Carolina, attracting millions of visitors every year who fill rental properties, lure new homeowners to the beach, and keep restaurants, bars and marinas busy in often isolated communities that might otherwise struggle to survive. But maintaining the drivers of that economy, namely keeping the beaches that lure the tourists to the coast wide and attractive, is becoming increasingly expensive and is a challenge that’s expected to increase in complexity and price in coming years as climate change keeps seas rising and storms getting bigger and stronger.

Here are things to know about North Carolina’s coastal economy.

• • • $187 million: Estimated 50-year cost of Surf City federal nourishment project. 
    • $40 million: Estimated cost of Oak Island’s proposed nourishment project, half funded by a state grant.
    • $13.6 million: Cost of 2024 Wrightsville Beach federal nourishment project.
    • 2 million: Visitors to the N.C. coast in 2022.
    • 8,777: Number of oceanfront homes in N.C. as of 2020.
    • 1964: First federal beach nourishment project takes place in Carolina Beach.
    • 1,101: 2023 population of North Topsail Beach. 
    • 750: Estimated number of threatened N.C. oceanfront homes in 2020.
    • 320: Miles of N.C. ocean shoreline, roughly half of which is protected/undeveloped.
    • 22: Number of inlets along the N.C. coast.
    • 10: Homes in Rodanthe that have collapsed into the Atlantic since 2020. 
    • 4: Current number of N.C. beach towns that have federal beach nourishment projects (Wrightsville Beach, Carolina Beach, Kure Beach, Ocean Isle Beach).

Read more » click here

Corrections & Amplifications –

Island Homes Sold – 2024 * Lou’s Views
A complete list of homes sold in 2024

Island Land Sold – 2024 * Lou’s Views
A complete list of land sold in 2024

Island Properties Sold – Comparison * Lou’s Views
A comparison of Holden Beach properties sold through the last three (3) years

Odds & Ends –

A Brunswick beach continues to navigate dangerous ‘cliffs’ and tires.
Here’s why.
Walking along the Holden Beach strand after rough weather could result in some interesting finds. From driftwood, to tires and cliffs, there’s no telling what the tide will bring next. For years, Holden Beach residents have reported seeing “cliffs” along the beach strand and tires washing ashore. Karyn Morrow has been visiting Holden Beach for around 40 years. She said she owns a beach house on the east side of the island with hopes to retire there in the next few years. Morrow said she has seen the “cliffs” come and go since she could remember, noting the dunes eventually return to normal. “I call them the cliffs because it’s literally a drop off, you have to jump down to get to the beach. You jump down and you wonder how you’re going to get back up,” Morrow said. Residents will often carry step ladders with them to ensure they have a way out, said Morrow, noting the cliff could be over somebody’s head at time. Holden Beach Mayor Alan Holden said the “cliffs” are normal and are caused by winter storms. The cliffs will become dunes again as sand migrates back to shore after a few weeks or months. “It’s worrisome to see that happen but it will round out and will be OK,” Holden said. “There’s nothing that the town or anybody can do, it’s just a normal process.” The Holden cliffs are called “escarpment,” Holden said. Escarpment occurs when there is a sudden change in elevation and is caused by erosion by wind or water, according to National Geographic. “This has been occurring my entire life,” Holden said. Asked if the Ocean Isle Beach terminal groin, built in April 2022, could cause escarpment, Holden said no. The terminal groin has no impact on the Lockwood Folly inlet or escarpment, he noted. Holden asks the public to be mindful when walking the beach at night and to pay attention to the drop offs. Do not let children dig tunnels into the cliff either, Holden said. “The possibility of it collapsing on them is a concern,” he said. Storms can also bring tires to shore. In December 2023, a storm left several hundred tires on the Holden Beach strand. The tires come from an “old artificial reef experiment strewn the entire length of the beach,” the town’s Facebook post about the storm said. The metal used to bound the tires together have rust over time and are letting tires free, Holden said. Residents and visitors should not worry about floating or sand tires on the beach, the mayor said. If tires wash ashore, he said, they are immediately picked up. The mayor thanked the staff’s hard work when it comes to maintaining the beach. He also encouraged owners to continue fertilizing grass along the ocean front. “Feed that grass, let it grow,” he said. Read more » click here

Brunswick Community College holds groundbreaking for new first responder training center
Brunswick Community College held a groundbreaking ceremony Friday morning for the new “Alan Holden Public Safety Center,” named after the chair of BCC’s Board of Trustees. The building will be located directly behind the main entrance to the college off highway 17. Construction of the more than 28,000 square-foot facility is scheduled to begin Monday. The state-of-the-art facility will feature a wide array of specialized labs and training rooms. Including a moveable wall tactical firearm room, a self-defense arrest techniques mat room, fire truck and police scenario simulators, and EMS scenario training rooms. College president Gene Smith says the new facility will continue BCC’s mission of expanding with the community. “This facility will provide the opportunity for BCC to continue to serve our students and meet the needs of our community for many, many, many, years to come,” Smith stated. Construction is estimated to finish in March of 2026.
Read more » click here

This and That –

When will the Brunswick County Visitors Center re-open?
The Brunswick County Visitors Center, a state-operated facility in Shallotte, is a popular rest stop for those driving along U.S. 17. Located at the intersection of U.S. 17 and N.C. 130 between Wilmington and Myrtle Beach, the facility is a North Carolina Department of Transportation rest area that serves thousands of patrons each year. But the facility has been closed for renovations and has not yet re-opened. A reader recently wrote to the StarNews and inquired about plans to re-open the facility. Here’s what we found out.

When did the facility close?
The visitors center closed in fall 2023 for construction.

What did the project include?
According to a previous StarNews article, the project involved several improvements, including a new family restroom facility, water line, updated drainage and landscaping improvements. The article stated a construction contract for $981,000 was awarded to Kowen General Contractors out of Maxton for the project.

What was the project timeline?
Kowen was able to begin construction in October 2023, but according to Lauren Haviland, spokeswoman for the NCDOT, the firm did not start groundwork until March 2024. “That delay was due to the contractor had never done work for NCDOT before and was unfamiliar with the processes, such as working with certified sub-contractors,” Haviland said, in an email. “Also, several items of work have been added, extending their agreement to the end of the year.”

What items were added to the project?
Haviland said additional work includes waterline and hydrant installation, additional tile work, removing and replacing existing sidewalks, additional support at one of the entrances, cabinet work in one of the rooms, and removing and replacing the fascia. Haviland noted that while the original contract amount was $981,000, the project was funded for $1.5 million. As of the November 2024 estimate, Haviland said NCDOT had spent about $1,352,000.

When will it be completed?
According to Haviland, construction is expected to be completed in late January 2025.
Read more » click here

Why rising costs have left some Wilmington-area beach nourishment projects high and dry
Carolina and Kure beaches in New Hanover County and Oak Island in Brunswick County could be left waiting for sand due to rising dredging costs and a surge in demand for such projects nationwide
Some Wilmington-area beaches, recently covered by a rare snow storm, will soon again be a hive of activity as officials take advantage of the open environmental window − outside of sea turtle and shorebird nesting season − to pump fresh sand onto the vital economic engines for many coastal communities. The activity, however, will be muted this year, and that has officials in both New Hanover and Brunswick counties concerned.

What’s going on?
Call it the law of supply and demand. Beach nourishment is inherently expensive, requiring lots of pre-project planning and permit work and then securing an acceptable sand source that can be pumped onto a beach. If that borrow site is farther away than say a nearby inlet, like Wrightsville Beach and Carolina Beach mine for their projects, it will cost more to move the sand from the source to the beach. “Sources of sand are drying up in some places,” said Dr. Robert Young, director of the Program for the Study of Developed Shorelines at Western Carolina University. “Borrow areas don’t make sand. These are non-renewable resources. And as you creep offshore even a little, costs go up, often a lot. But another factor that’s helping send the cost of beach nourishment surging is the high demand for projects to rebuild beaches all along the Gulf and East coasts battered by recent hurricanes and the few number of American companies out there in the dredging business. “There are simply a limited number of companies out there that can do this kind of work, and competition is fierce because we’re literally trying to hold the line everywhere from Saco, Maine, to Padre Island, Texas, and that’s only a little bit of an exaggeration,” Young said. “When you have a lot of demand and not a ton of supply, the people who do work like this are really in the driver’s seat.”

What have been the impacts this year?
With prices coming in well above predictions, some Cape Fear-area beach towns are having to adapt and make painful decisions. In New Hanover County, the periodic federal nourishment of Carolina and Kure beaches is one that has fallen victim to the financial headwinds. The Pleasure Island project had an estimated cost of just under $20 million. But the only bid for the work the Army Corps of Engineers received came in at $37.5 million. In a letter to residents, Kure Beach Mayor Allen Oliver said the price differential was just too much to overcome this winter. “Getting additional bidders are slim and since the price was double the estimated project cost, the best possible solution is to postpone the event until next year,” the mayor said. “We should get better pricing and more bidders participating.” The delay means the two New Hanover beach towns will have to go longer than expected without a fresh injection of sand − a worry for officials and residents in a world where climate change is increasingly fueling stronger and bigger tropical storm systems. “This is not the most favorable situation for us and Carolina Beach, but honestly it is the most logical decision based on the lack of bidders and the cost of the single bid received,” Oliver said. In Brunswick County, Oak Island also is feeling the pain of higher prices and not enough competition. When the town opened bids up this fall for a large-scale, end-to-end beach nourishment project to take place this winter, the bids from two companies “were significantly above a feasible budget for the town, which was reflective of the fact that there is essentially no availability of dredging company equipment to conduct the project during that timeframe,” states a post on Oak Island’s website. The project is estimated to cost at least $40 million, with half of that covered by a one-time state grant. Bids for the same work to take place during the 2025-26 dredging window came closer to the town’s budget, and Oak Island officials are now in negotiations to see if the work can get done between mid-November and late April 2026. “If negotiations are not successful, the project will be rebid in 2025,” the town stated online. Now officials and residents have to hope the beach can hold out until then. Hurricane Isaias, which raked the Brunswick County shoreline nearly five years ago, chewed away a lot of the beach. Storms, king tides and gradual sea-level rise has since then added to the pain − not to mention the no-name storm and the remnants of Tropical Storm Helene that hit Brunswick County last September and October, respectively. Big beach projects aren’t the only ones getting caught up in the financial squeeze. A project put out to bid by the corps of engineers to dredge the shipping channel near the mouth of the Cape Fear River this winter and place the sand on Oak Island and Caswell Beach also came in 20% over estimates.

Is it all bad news?
At least one beach town in the Wilmington area will be seeing new sand this winter. This week, Surf City will begin pumping sand from Banks Channel on the Intracoastal Waterway side of the Pender County beach town onto its beach strand. The nearly $20 million project, which is expected to wrap up in late March, will nourish the town’s entire strand, adding an estimated 60 feet of beach from the Topsail Beach line to 1,000 feet north of the Surf City Fishing Pier. Town Manager Kyle Breuer said although Surf City only received one bid for the work, it was within the town’s estimates and the timing of when the dredging could take place within the fairly narrow fall/winter navigational window also worked. “We were very fortunate and very thankful,” he said. Breuer noted that not only will the project help nourish Surf City’s eroded beach but also piggyback on the earlier dredging of parts of Banks Channel done by Topsail Beach to improve navigation around the southern half of Topsail Island. The breakdown of the project’s cost is roughly $5 million from Surf City and about $14.5 million in funding coming through a one-time state grant.

What does the future look like?
Unfortunately, a lot like today − if not worse − for beach towns desperate to hold back the encroaching ocean, Western Carolina’s Young said. He said the pressures that are driving prices upward are only likely to increase as sea-level rise, more storms and increased development make shore protection efforts more frequent and necessary than ever along many parts of the country’s oceanfront. The new Trump administration’s stated goal of taking a fine-tooth comb to the federal budget and slashing a lot of discretionary spending also could leave many coastal communities hunting for new revenue sources outside of Washington just as dredging prices surge and the need for beach nourishment increases. “Beaches are not stable, they move, so the only future I see is one where costs are increasing because there’s only so much sand and we’re doing it more often and in more places,” Young said.
Read more » click here

Factoid That May Interest Only Me –

People flocked to this North Carolina city in 2024.
Now, it ranks No. 1 in US — again
North Carolina is home to the nation’s hottest place for people to start calling home — again, a new report finds. Wilmington ranks No. 1 on a list of metropolitan areas that attracted new residents in 2024, according to data the moving company United Van Lines shared with McClatchy News on Jan. 2. The city, near popular beach destinations, wasn’t the only North Carolina-based metro to receive recognition. The Charlotte, Raleigh and Hickory areas also ranked among the top places people flocked to last year, according to moving companies. Wilmington topped its list after United Van Lines said it studied thousands of moves in metro areas across 48 states and Washington, D.C. It studied the percentage of people moving into and out of each place to determine where they settled down.

What makes Wilmington rank No. 1?
When compared to all metro areas across the country, Wilmington reigned supreme with 83% of inbound moves compared to 17% outbound, results show. The Wilmington area regained the top spot that it held in the 2022 rankings, when United Van Lines praised the area for its “large historic district, vibrant riverfront” and proximity to the coast. The metro had slipped to the No. 2 spot on the 2023 list, McClatchy News reported. The latest results were published as U-Haul shared similar lists in early January. The moving company in a news release said it studied “net gains of U-Haul customers taking one-way equipment into and out of metro areas” in 2024. On both the U-Haul and United Van Lines lists, North Carolina ranked among the top 10 states gaining new people. “While U-Haul rankings may not correlate directly to population or economic growth, the U-Haul Growth Index is an effective gauge of how well states, metros and cities are attracting and maintaining residents,” the company wrote. Here’s how other North Carolina-based metros fared in the national rankings: Hickory at No. 9 for all metros (United Van Lines) Charlotte at No. 1 and Raleigh at No. 8 for larger metros (United Van Lines) Charlotte at No. 2 and Raleigh at No. 7 for all metros (U-Haul) After Wilmington, these metros rounded out the nation’s top five favorite places to move, per United Van Lines: Springfield, Missouri, at No. 2 Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, at No. 3 Flagstaff, Arizona, at No. 4 Brownsville-Harlingen, Texas, at No. 5
Read more » click here

Study: Wilmington area No. 1 place people are moving to
A national moving company that releases data on where people are entering and exiting annually has put out its 2024 study.
It rates Wilmington, North Carolina, among the top metropolitan statistical area people are moving to, according to United Van Lines. The company has traced migration patterns on a state-by-state basis since 1972 and utilized data from its parent company, UniGroup, handling household moves in 48 states and D.C. Wilmington MSA consists of the tri-county region (New Hanover, Brunswick and Pender counties) and has come in the top 10 for many years now but climbed to the number-one slot in 2022 as well. The 2024 study indicates that 83% of people the company tracked moved to the Wilmington MSA, with 17% leaving in 2024. Only two other North Carolina cities came in the top 25, including Greenville (74% inbound and 26% outbound) and Greensboro-Winston-Salem area (65% inbound and 35% outbound). Located 77 miles south of Wilmington, the area of Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, tracked number three (80% inbound and 20% outbound). Overall, North Carolina was the number five state people moved to, according to the survey, with South Carolina topping out at number three. The company asks surveyors if they are moving due to improved cost of living, to be closer to family, for retirement, as a company transfer or for a new job, or for a lifestyle change. North Carolina came in number seven for people to move for retirement. Neighboring South Carolina came in third for retirement, fifth for lifestyle change and sixth for improved cost of living. West Virginia jumped nine spots since 2023 and came in as the number one state people flocked to, due to its affordable housing, outdoor activities, and the cost of living being lower than the national average. For the seventh year in a row, New Jersey has remained the most highly exited state, with most movers leaving due to retirement.  “As housing costs continue to rise, Americans are moving to lower density, more affordable regions between expensive, economic-driving states,” an economist and professor in the department of public policy at the UCLA, Michael Stroll, noted in the release. See United Van Lines full report here.
Read more » click here

Hot Button Issues –

Subjects that are important to people and about which they have strong opinions

Climate
For more information » click here.

There’s something happening here
What it is ain’t exactly clear

2024 Brought the World to a Dangerous Warming Threshold. Now What?
Global temperatures last year crept past a key goal, raising questions about how much nations can stop the planet from heating up further.
At the stroke of midnight on Dec. 31, Earth finished up its hottest year in recorded history, scientists said on Friday. The previous hottest year was 2023. And the next one will be upon us before long: By continuing to burn huge amounts of coal, oil and gas, humankind has all but guaranteed it. The planet’s record-high average temperature last year reflected the weekslong, 104-degree-Fahrenheit spring heat waves that shuttered schools in Bangladesh and India. It reflected the effects of the bathtub-warm ocean waters that supercharged hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico and cyclones in the Philippines. And it reflected the roasting summer and fall conditions that primed Los Angeles this week for the most destructive wildfires in its history. “We are facing a very new climate and new challenges, challenges that our society is not prepared for,” said Carlo Buontempo, director of the Copernicus Climate Change Service, the European Union monitoring agency. But even within this progression of warmer years and ever-intensifying risks to homes, communities and the environment, 2024 stood out in another unwelcome way. According to Copernicus, it was the first year in which global temperatures averaged more than 1.5 degrees Celsius, or 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit, above those the planet experienced at the start of the industrial age. For the past decade, the world has sought to avoid crossing this dangerous threshold. Nations enshrined the goal in the 2015 Paris agreement to fight climate change. “Keep 1.5 alive” was the mantra at United Nations summits. Yet here we are. Global temperatures will fluctuate somewhat, as they always do, which is why scientists often look at warming averaged over longer periods, not just a single year. But even by that standard, staying below 1.5 degrees looks increasingly unattainable, according to researchers who have run the numbers. Globally, despite hundreds of billions of dollars invested in clean-energy technologies, carbon dioxide emissions hit a record in 2024 and show no signs of dropping. One recent study published in the journal Nature concluded that the absolute best humanity can now hope for is around 1.6 degrees of warming. To achieve it, nations would need to start slashing emissions at a pace that would strain political, social and economic feasibility. “It was guaranteed we’d get to this point where the gap between reality and the trajectory we needed for 1.5 degrees was so big it was ridiculous,” said David Victor, a professor of public policy at the University of California, San Diego. The question now is what, if anything, should replace 1.5 as a lodestar for nations’ climate aspirations. “These top-level goals are at best a compass,” Dr. Victor said. “They’re a reminder that if we don’t do more, we’re in for significant climate impacts.” The 1.5-degree threshold was never the difference between safety and ruin, between hope and despair. It was a number negotiated by governments trying to answer a big question: What’s the highest global temperature increase — and the associated level of dangers, whether heat waves or wildfires or melting glaciers — that our societies should strive to avoid? The result, as codified in the Paris agreement, was that nations would aspire to hold warming to “well below” 2 degrees Celsius while “pursuing efforts” to limit it to 1.5 degrees. Even at the time, some experts called the latter goal unrealistic, because it required such deep and rapid emissions cuts. Still, the United States, the European Union and other governments adopted it as a guidepost for climate policy. Christoph Bertram, an associate research professor at the University of Maryland’s Center for Global Sustainability, said the urgency of the 1.5 target spurred companies of all kinds — automakers, cement manufacturers, electric utilities — to start thinking hard about what it would mean to zero out their emissions by midcentury. “I do think that has led to some serious action,” Dr. Bertram said. But the high aspiration of the 1.5 target also exposed deep fault lines among nations. China and India never backed the goal, since it required them to curb their use of coal, gas and oil at a pace they said would hamstring their development. Rich countries that were struggling to cut their own emissions began choking off funding in the developing world for fossil-fuel projects that were economically beneficial. Some low-income countries felt it was deeply unfair to ask them to sacrifice for the climate given that it was wealthy nations — and not them — that had produced most of the greenhouse gases now warming the world. “The 1.5-degree target has created a lot of tension between rich and poor countries,” said Vijaya Ramachandran, director for energy and development at the Breakthrough Institute, an environmental research organization. Costa Samaras, an environmental-engineering professor at Carnegie Mellon University, compared the warming goals to health officials’ guidelines on, say, cholesterol. “We don’t set health targets on what’s realistic or what’s possible,” Dr. Samaras said. “We say, ‘This is what’s good for you. This is how you’re going to not get sick.’’ “If we were going to say, ‘Well, 1.5 is likely out of the question, let’s put it to 1.75,’ it gives people a false sense of assurance that 1.5 was not that important,” said Dr. Samaras, who helped shape U.S. climate policy from 2021 to 2024 in the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. “It’s hugely important.”  Scientists convened by the United Nations have concluded that restricting warming to 1.5 degrees instead of 2 would spare tens of millions of people from being exposed to life-threatening heat waves, water shortages and coastal flooding. It might mean the difference between a world that has coral reefs and Arctic sea ice in the summer, and one that doesn’t. Each tiny increment of additional warming, whether it’s 1.6 degrees versus 1.5, or 1.7 versus 1.6, increases the risks. “Even if the world overshoots 1.5 degrees, and the chances of this happening are increasing every day, we must keep striving” to bring emissions to zero as soon as possible, said Inger Anderson, the executive director of the United Nations Environment Program. Officially, the sun has not yet set on the 1.5 target. The Paris agreement remains in force, even as President-elect Donald J. Trump vows to withdraw the United States from it for a second time. At U.N. climate negotiations, talk of 1.5 has become more muted compared with years past. But it has hardly gone away. “With appropriate measures, 1.5 Celsius is still achievable,” Cedric Schuster, the minister of natural resources and environment for the Pacific island nation of Samoa, said at last year’s summit in Azerbaijan. Countries should “rise to the occasion with new, highly ambitious” policies, he said. To Dr. Victor of U.C. San Diego, it is strange but all too predictable that governments keep speaking this way about what appears to be an unachievable aim. “No major political leader who wants to be taken seriously on climate wants to stick their neck out and say, ‘1.5 degrees isn’t feasible. Let’s talk about more realistic goals,’” he said. Still, the world will eventually need to have that discussion, Dr. Victor said. And it’s unclear how it will go. “It could be constructive, where we start asking, ‘How much warming are we really in for? And how do we deal with that?’” he said. “Or it could look very toxic, with a bunch of political finger pointing.”
Read more » click here

2024 was the hottest year on record, breaching a critical climate goal and capping 10 years of unprecedented heat
It’s official: 2024 was the hottest year on record, breaking the previous record set in 2023 and pushing the world over a critical climate threshold, according to new data from Europe’s climate monitoring agency Copernicus. Last year was 1.6 degrees hotter than the period before humans began burning large amounts of fossil fuels, Copernicus found. It makes 2024 the first calendar year to breach the 1.5-degree limit countries agreed to avoid under the Paris climate agreement in 2015. Scientists are much more concerned about breaches over decades, rather than single years — as above that threshold humans and ecosystems may struggle to adapt — but 2024’s record “does mean we’re getting dangerously close,” said Joeri Rogelj, a climate professor at Imperial College London. The Copernicus analysis points to a slew of climate records falling last year: The planet endured its hottest day on record in July; each month from January to June was the warmest such month on record; and levels of planet-heating pollution reached unprecedented highs. Last year is part of a pattern of off-the-charts heat. Every single one of the world’s 10 hottest years happened in the last decade, according to Copernicus data. Behind these statistics lies a huge toll. “Every fraction of a degree … brings more harm to people and ecosystems,” Rogelj said. The extreme weather that swept the globe last year shows just how dangerous life in a warmer world already is. Back-to-back hurricanes in the US, fueled by ultra-warm ocean temperatures, killed hundreds of people. In Spain, more than 200 people died in catastrophic floods. Amazon rivers fell to unprecedented lows during the region’s worst drought on record and the Philippines experienced an extraordinary typhoon season, with six in just 30 days. The climate crisis played a role in all of these extreme events, according to scientific analyses. Scientists are still trying to fully understand why global heat has been so extreme for the past two years. The main driver is clear: the human-caused climate crisis, boosted by El Niño, a natural climate pattern that tends to have a warming influence, which began in 2023 and ended earlier this year. But it doesn’t explain all of the heat. Scientists have also pointed to a recent drop in shipping pollution following regulations — a win for human health, but, in a cruel twist, this type of pollution also helps cool the planet by reflecting sunlight back into space. The eruption of a huge underwater volcano in the South Pacific in 2022, which sent plumes of water vapor — a potent greenhouse gas — into the atmosphere may have also contributed. Then there are the clouds. A December study found a dearth of sun-reflecting clouds over the ocean may be another factor. Scientists believe it’s unlikely 2025 will be another record-breaking year. La Niña, a natural climate pattern that tends to have a global cooling influence, was declared Thursday. “But people shouldn’t think that’s climate change hitting pause or plateauing,” said Paulo Ceppi, a climate scientist at Imperial College London. “A small dip doesn’t change the clear upward trajectory we’re on,” he added. Scientists say the decades to come are likely to be hotter still as humans continue to burn planet-heating coal, oil and gas. “The world doesn’t need to come up with a magical solution to stop things from getting worse in 2025,” said Friederike Otto, a climate scientist at Imperial College London. ‘We know exactly what we need to do to transition away from fossil fuels.”
Read more » click here

You just lived through the hottest year on record. Again.
In 2024 temperatures reached 1.6 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels.
This is a climate era when even the most ferocious records are bound to be broken. Scientists in Europe Friday confirmed that 2024 had been the hottest year on record — and the first to surpass a dangerous warming threshold of 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) that nations had pledged not to cross. But even as experts described the year as unprecedented, they acknowledged that it would ultimately become just one more marker in an upward warming trajectory causing havoc on a growing scale. “As long as people keep burning fossil fuels, this will only get worse,” said Friederike Otto, who leads a scientific group, World Weather Attribution, which assesses the role of climate change in amplifying extreme weather events. In 2024, according to data from the European Union’s Copernicus Climate Change Service, temperatures reached 1.6 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels. Aside from Australia and Antarctica, every continent experienced its warmest year on record. So too did sizable parts of the ocean. It is the second consecutive year in which the world has set a temperature record. In 2023, the arrival of El Niño — a natural phenomenon that is known to boost global temperatures — brought a jolt of warming much earlier than scientists had expected, with a temperature 1.48 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels. Then in 2024, temperatures predictably remained elevated in the wake of the fading El Niño, and scientists are debating what other factors may have contributed to the margin of record warmth. Projections suggest that 2025 might not be as hot as the past two years but that it will probably rank in the top five warmest years on record. Despite the year-to-year fluctuations, the general trend is obvious, as is the cause: the emission of greenhouse gases, primarily from fossil fuels. Each of humanity’s 10 hottest years have come over the past decade. At the time, 2016 was seen as an unprecedented scorcher — what one climate scientist called a “wake-up call.” Just nine years later, 2016 is now looking “decidedly cool,” said Adam Scaife, the head of long-range prediction at Britain’s Met Office. In 2024, so many heat-related events caused death and damage that it was hard to keep up. It was a year in which an estimated 1,300 religious pilgrims died under 120-degree Saudi Arabian heat. It was a year when a smoke plume stretched diagonally across nearly all of wildfire-stricken South America, when heat-exhausted howler monkeys fell dead out of trees in Mexico, and when the hottest place on earth — California’s Death Valley — registered its hottest month ever. The heat also transformed the oceans. Marine heat waves, expansive blobs of unusual oceanic heat, covered parts of all ocean basins during the year, reaching extreme levels in the tropical Atlantic, North Pacific and western Indian Ocean. That fostered an atmosphere capable of holding more moisture, which in turn led to one of the year’s most pronounced patterns: intense storms and flooding. Dubai, a hub of luxury in the arid Persian Gulf desert, was hit by a year’s worth of rain in a single day, flooding highways and grounding flights. For the first time on record, four tropical cyclones formed simultaneously in the western Pacific in November — displacing hundreds of thousands of people in the Philippines. In Spain, an extreme rainfall pattern fed on unusually warm Mediterranean waters, leading to the deadliest floods in a single European country since 1967. “It was like a tsunami,” said Mario Martinez, a Valencia barbershop owner, who watched the floodwaters break through the glass windows of his shop. He escaped the rising waters by hopping on a car that had gone into the storefront, and then jumping to a second-floor balcony. “First, you’re just grateful to be alive,” said Martinez, 50. “And then you realize what has happened and how much it has ruined you.” He said the flood threw him back by “20 or 30 years.” He spent weeks in cleanup mode, and when he reopened a month later — still with mud caking the walls — his was the only remaining business on the block.

Will the heat continue?
Though the world broke the 1.5-degree Celsius threshold in 2024, that doesn’t mean the planet has formally breached the most ambitious target set in the Paris agreement. It will take a much longer span for scientists to make that determination. That’s partly because there are many variables that make some years hotter than others. One of those variables is the natural El Niño-Southern Oscillation, based on shifts in ocean trade winds, which can influence global weather patterns. During El Niño periods, sea surface temperatures across the middle of the Pacific Ocean tend to be higher than average. During La Niña periods, they tend to be cooler. Right now, cool water in the equatorial Pacific signals that La Niña has developed. But it is expected to be short-lived. New climate model projections show the cool water in the Pacific eroding and giving way to warmer-than-average seas by the middle part of 2025. Meanwhile, warmer-than-average seas are predicted to continue across most of the rest of the planet. This suggests that the planet will have little, if any, reprieve from record warmth in the months ahead — which could be exacerbated further if an El Niño develops later in the year. El Niño events are known for their warming effect, as heat that builds up along the equator spreads outward. There is some question about what drove the record warmth of 2023 and 2024, besides the emergence of a strong El Niño climate pattern. Scientists have explored contributions from a 2022 volcanic eruption that spewed water vapor into the atmosphere, a spike in solar activity sending more energy toward Earth, and reductions in air pollution around the world, which allowed more sunlight to reach the planet’s surface. They found a mix of influences. But a full understanding is still lacking, said Gavin Schmidt, director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies. That makes it more difficult to predict what trajectory temperatures could take in the years ahead, since some warming factors could be temporary, while others could continue adding to the warmth, said Nick Dunstone, a fellow at the Met Office. “It really depends what the driver is, as to what happens next,” Dunstone said.

A hidden toll
Despite the planetary alarm bells, it was a brutal year for environmental diplomacy. The right-wing shift in many countries, coupled with the victory of former president Donald Trump in the United States, widened divides over who is responsible for climate change and how to deal with it. Several end-of-year events on environmental issues either derailed or failed to make substantial progress. Saudi Arabia used its veto power to push back against the global phaseout of fossil fuels. Wealthy nations offered only a fraction of the money needed by poorer countries to handle the escalating costs of climate change. And indeed, in 2024, extreme events left the greatest toll in places least equipped to handle it. Sudan, torn apart by war, saw flooding that inundated crops and displaced scores who had already fled once because of conflict. Across Chad, Mali and Nigeria, extreme rains killed more than 1,000 and upended the lives of people such as Babakura Bukar, who fled his home when the rainfall started and then returned to it in a rented canoe. The flooding was so vast that in the aftermath, his neighborhood, in the Nigerian city of Maiduguri, resembled a lake. Bukar paddled toward his home and felt his heart drop. The outer fence of his property had collapsed. His furniture and most of his electronics were destroyed. He managed to salvage a solar panel from the rooftop. “It was a nightmare,” said Bukar, 58, a retired journalist. Even several months later, he is still living with his family in the guesthouse of a friend. He received $200 in government assistance, he said. But rebuilding his home will cost about $6,000, he estimated. “And I don’t even think I am halfway done,” he said.
Read more » click here

Flood Insurance Program
For more information » click here

National Flood Insurance Program: Reauthorization
Congress must periodically renew the NFIP’s statutory authority to operate. On December 20, 2024, the president signed legislation passed by Congress that extends the National Flood Insurance Program’s (NFIP’s) authorization to March 14, 2025.

Congress must now reauthorize the NFIP
by no later than 11:59 pm on March 14, 2025.

GenX
For more information » click here

Push to regulate ‘forever chemicals’ like GenX stalls as Trump scraps discharge limits
Contamination from manmade chemicals like GenX, which polluted numerous N.C. water sources, is largely unregulated, and scientists have tied the ‘forever chemicals’ to a host of health ailments
Among the slew of executive orders President Donald Trump has signed since returning to the White House, there’s one that has particular resonance for Southeastern North Carolina. The new administration has withdrawn a proposal to set limits on some toxic “forever chemicals” in industrial wastewater discharges. The decision came as the president issued an executive order to freeze any new federal regulations pending a fresh review by Trump officials. The draft rule, which the then-President Biden led U.S. Environmental Protection Agency sent to the White House for review last summer, was seen as a precedent-setting move by limiting releases of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) like GenX, manmade chemicals that have been linked to an array of health problems including certain cancers, liver damage, thyroid disease, immune system dysfunction and other health problems. The withdrawn proposal would have required industry to monitor and reduce PFAS discharges under the federal Clean Water Act. In a historic announcement last spring, Michael Regan, EPA administrator and North Carolina’s former top environmental regulator, traveled to Fayetteville to announce the new draft rules. The location for the announcement wasn’t by accident. Eight years ago, the StarNews broke the story that water in the Cape Fear River downstream of Chemours’ Fayetteville Works Plant contained high levels of previously unknown chemicals. In the years since, PFAS have been found throughout the United States and worries about the environmental, financial and health impacts of this national contamination have seen a raft of proposals at the federal, state and local levels to protect people, punish the PFAS polluters, and learn more about the true health impacts of the compounds that have already been linked to several types of cancer. Chemours and the previous owner of the Fayetteville Works plant, DuPont, have admitted to dumping the toxic chemicals into the Cape Fear River and allowed them to enter the air and local groundwater for decades. The chemicals are used in many household and everyday items, and they “have a place and are important for certain industries and certain practices,” Regan said last year. But decades of uncontrolled dumping of the chemical compounds into the environment, including into waterways and groundwater that serve as drinking sources for millions, and their widespread use, including in fire-fighting foam, has seen PFAS contamination and health concerns proliferate across the country. The substances are often called forever chemicals because they do not easily break down in nature or the human body. But that regulatory push now appears to have stalled − at least at the federal level. “These guidelines would have provided states, like North Carolina, with important information to help manage PFAS producer’s discharge permits,” said Emily Donovan, co-founder of Clean Cape Fear, a grassroots community environmental action group formed in the wake of the PFAS contamination coming to light. “This would help states stop PFAS at the source before these toxic forever chemicals end up in the bodies of water communities use to create tap water.” Although plenty of lawsuits are still working their way through the courts and some industrial manufacturers have settled with some states and local utilities, almost all efforts to control PFAS contamination are still being shouldered by local taxpayers. In Southeastern North Carolina, the Cape Fear Public Utility Authority, H2GO in Brunswick County, and the Fayetteville Public Works Commission all have invested millions in systems to address the contamination − costs that are largely being shouldered by their customers. Efforts at the state level in North Carolina to deal with the contamination also are moving forward with fits and starts as politics and concerns over the economic impacts on businesses clouds the regulatory push. Although state regulators are now slowly moving forward with some proposals, the effort by the N.C. Department of Environmental Quality has been hampered by a lack of guidance at the federal level. An aversion by the Republican-controlled General Assembly to implement any rules or regulations that go beyond federal environmental requirements also has tied regulators hands to adopt new measures. Donovan said that shouldn’t be seen as an excuse, noting that the actions of the Trump administration don’t absolve state officials from regulating PFAS discharges in North Carolina waters. “State regulators have the power and authority to set strong limits on PFAS releases,” she said. “We have not seen (the Department of Environmental Quality) take a clear and strong initiative in their most recent permit writing efforts and that’s a problem worth addressing.” Having adopted temporary limits last fall, state water quality officials are currently working on draft rules setting safe health standards for eight types of “forever chemicals” in groundwater. It will then be up to the Environmental Management Commission, a 15-member state board of political appointees that has dragged its feet in the past on adopting new PFAS regulations, to decide whether to proceed with starting the process of making the rules permanent.
Read more » click here

Homeowners Insurance
For more information » click here

Insurance rates to increase in 2025, and 2026, with Cape Fear beach communities among hardest hit
Insurance Commissioner Mike Causey announced today that the N.C. Department of Insurance has ended its legal dispute with insurance companies about their proposed homeowners’ insurance rate increase filed in January 2024. The N.C. Rate Bureau originally requested an average 42.2% increase last year, with proposed increases of up to 99.4% in the beach areas in Brunswick, Carteret, New Hanover, Onslow and Pender Counties. Under the agreement signed by Commissioner Causey and the Rate Bureau, the average statewide base rate will increase by 7.5% on June 1, 2025, and 7.5% on June 1, 2026. The beach areas in Brunswick, Carteret, New Hanover, Onslow and Pender Counties will see a 16% increase on June 1, 2025, and a 15.9% increase on June 1, 2026. Eastern Coastal areas of Brunswick, Carteret, New Hanover, Onslow & Pender Counties will see a 10.5% increase on June 1, 2025, and a 10.1% increase on June 1, 2026. “The insurance companies wanted to raise our homeowners’ rates up to 99.4% in some areas and an average 42.2% statewide in a single year,” Commissioner Causey said. “I fought for consumers and knocked them back to 7.5% increases over two years with a maximum of 35% in any territory. We consider this settlement a big win for both homeowners and North Carolina.” The Rate Bureau is not a part of the Department of Insurance and represents homeowners’ insurance companies in North Carolina, and the agreement prohibits the Rate Bureau from undertaking an effort to increase rates again before June 1, 2027. “North Carolina homeowners will save approximately $777 million in insurance premiums over the next two years compared to what the insurance companies requested. This also protects homeowners from future base rate increase requests until June 2027,” said Commissioner Causey. “These rates are sufficient to make sure that insurance companies, who have paid out large sums due to natural disasters and face increasing reinsurance costs due to national catastrophes, have adequate funds on hand to pay claims.
Read more » click here

NC, home insurance companies reach deal on new premiums.
Here’s how much you’ll pay.
Homeowners’ insurance rates in North Carolina will increase by an average of about 15% over the next two years under a settlement Insurance Commissioner Mike Causey and the N.C. Rate Bureau announced Friday. The N.C. Rate Bureau, which represents more than 100 companies that write insurance policies in North Carolina, had requested an average 42.3% increase that would have started this month. In some coastal areas, the Rate Bureau was asking to nearly double rates. Setting insurance rates is a delicate balancing act, with consumer protections and the cost of premiums on one side and ensuring that companies will continue writing policies in the state on the other. During a public hearing that started in October, witnesses for Causey’s office argued that rates should be increased by a maximum of about 3% or even lowered. The hearing was the first held during Causey’s eight years in the office. “These rates are sufficient to make sure that insurance companies, who have paid out large sums due to natural disasters and face increasing reinsurance costs due to national catastrophes, have adequate funds on hand to pay claims,” Causey said in a written statement. In Durham and Wake counties, rates will increase by an average of 7.5% in each of the next two years. Orange County’s average increases will be significantly lower, with 3.4% in 2025 followed by an additional 3.2% in 2026. For homeowners in Mecklenburg County, rates will increase by 9.3% in 2025, followed by an additional 9.2% in 2026.

Generally, the settlement’s highest increases will come in places that were hit hard by Hurricane Matthew in 2016 and Hurricane Florence in 2018. Those include:

• • Beach areas from Carteret to Brunswick counties will see average 16% increases in 2025 followed by an additional 15.9% in 2026.
  • Duplin and Lenoir counties, where rates will increase by an average 13.6% in 2025, followed by an additional 13.5% in 2026.
  • Edgecombe and Wilson counties, where rates will increase by an average 11.6% in 2025, followed by an additional 11.6% in 2026.

The areas hit hard by Hurricane Helene last September are poised to see some of the lowest average increases in the state. Buncombe, Watauga and Yancey counties, for example, are all set for a 4.4% increase in 2025 followed by 4.5% in 2026. And Mitchell County’s average increase will be 0.7% in 2025 followed by 0.9% in 2026. Jarred Chappell, the Rate Bureau’s chief operating officer, indicated in a written statement that the Rate Bureau is virtually certain to call for another significant increase once the two-year period covered by the settlement ends. “It’s a step in the right direction, but the North Carolina Rate Bureau asked for a larger increase because that’s what recent claims data called for. Storms have gotten stronger and more damaging, more people are living in disaster-prone areas, inflation in the construction industry has been particularly high and reinsurance costs have exploded. All these cost drivers remain an issue,” Chappell said. Under state law, companies writing homeowners’ insurance have the option to use “consent-to-rate” to set premiums. That allows insurers to charge as much as 250% of the regulatory cap. In 2022, about 40% of the state’s homeowners’ policies were set by consent-to-rate policies, with those homeowners’ average premiums costing 47% more than the caps negotiated by Causey and the Rate Bureau. The Rate Bureau, Chappell wrote, is aiming to keep as many carriers as possible writing homeowners insurance policies in the state. Some companies have already started to pull out of disaster-prone parts of North Carolina, most notably Nationwide, which last year did not renew about 10,000 policies from Pitt and Greene counties to the Outer Banks.

Other recent negotiated increases included:

• • An average 4.8% increase in 2017 after the Rate Bureau had requested 18.7%.
  • An average 4% increase in 2018 after the Rate Bureau had requested 17.4%.
  • An average 7.9% increase in 2020 after the Rate Bureau had requested 24.5%.

In most states, insurance companies file their rate requests independently of each other. But North Carolina is one of very few states — and perhaps the only one — where a rate bureau files for requested rates and negotiates on behalf of the entire industry. Nationally, insurance companies are seeing their profits worn away by large natural disasters coming in quick succession, along with increased building costs. In 2024, there were 27 disasters that caused at least $1 billion in damage, according to the National Centers for Environmental Information. That total is the second-highest since 1980 and includes Helene, which caused an estimated $58 billion in Western North Carolina alone.
Read more » click here 

Homeowner insurance rates set to rise significantly across the Wilmington area
The deal between state regulators and the insurance industry calls for an average 15% increase by mid-2026. But many coastal areas will see much steeper increases.
N.C. Insurance Commissioner Mike Causey recently announced his department and the state’s insurance companies had reached a legal settlement over how much the companies will be allowed to raise homeowner insurance rates over the next two years. Industry had asked for an average statewide increase of 42%, with some areas around Wilmington seeing their rates double. The settlement calls for an average of 15% over the next two years, 7.5% this year and another 7.5% next year, with areas along the N.C. coast seeing double that. Causey hailed the deal as a victory for consumers and a fair settlement for the industry, which has been hammered by a series of natural disasters on both ends of the state in recent years. “The insurance companies wanted to raise our homeowners’ rates up to 99.4% in some areas and an average 42.2% statewide in a single year,” Causey said in a statement. “I fought for consumers and knocked them back to 7.5% increases over two years with a maximum of 35% in any territory. We consider this settlement a big win for both homeowners and North Carolina.” But property owners, especially in and around Wilmington, will still have to dig deeper into their pocketbooks to pay for insurance − and industry officials have said the deal doesn’t solve the underlying problems that are driving insurance companies to seek steeper and steeper rate increases. So, is it a good deal? Let’s dig into the facts.

How did we get here?
In January 2024, the N.C. Rate Bureau, a 14-member board that represents the industry, submitted a proposal to raise homeowner insurance premiums by 42% statewide and an eyewatering 99% in beach and coastal areas around Wilmington. Since North Carolina is a regulated insurance market, industry needs to win state approval to raise rates. The proposal, after a public hearing, was swiftly and vocally rejected by N.C. Insurance Commissioner Mike Causey. The commissioner’s action triggered a judicial hearing, which started in October and wrapped up late last year. Causey then had 45 days to announce his decision.

Why such a big, proposed increase?
The N.C. Rate Bureau cited two main factors for the surprisingly large rate increase proposal. First, is the rising cost of pretty much everything, including labor and potential repairs, driven by inflation and the lingering impacts of labor and material shortages tied to the COVID-19 pandemic. The other is climate change, which is causing more frequent and widespread property destruction, particularly tied to bigger and stronger hurricanes, as the warming climate fuels more severe weather events. Damages in North Carolina tied to 2018’s Hurricane Florence, for example, were estimated to top $22 billion, with much of that hitting inland areas. Other factors that are playing a role in the proposed substantial increase include the moratorium that was put into place during the pandemic on any rate increases and the cost of reinsurance − basically insurance for the insurance companies themselves in case a large-scale disaster stretches their financial ability to respond. While a regulated market, theoretically meaning North Carolina just be ring-fenced from some of the issues hammering insurance markets in other states, notably Florida, Louisiana and California, reinsurance operates on a global scale. That means increasing costs of insurance for companies operating, say, in California due to massive wildfire payouts and exposure will be felt by companies operating in North Carolina.

What does the settlement call for?
The deal calls for an average statewide increase of 7.5% this year, effective June 1, and 7.5% next year in homeowner insurance rates. But not all parts of the state are being treated equally.

Here’s the breakdown for the Wilmington area and some other N.C. regions.

• Beach areas in New Hanover, Brunswick and Pender: +16% this year; +15.9% in 2026; Rate bureau had sought a 99.4% increase.
• Eastern coastal parts of New Hanover, Brunswick and Pender: +10.5% this year; +10.1% in 2026. Rate bureau had sought a 71.4% increase.
• Western parts of New Hanover, Brunswick and Pender: +5% this year; +4.8% in 2026; Rate bureau had sought a 43% increase.
• Beach areas on the Outer Banks: +5.1% this year; +4.8% in 2026. Rate bureau sought a 45.1% increase.
• Duplin and Lenoir counties: +13.6% this year; +13.5% in 2026. Rate bureau had sought a 71.4% increase.
• Wake and Durham counties: +7.5% increase; +7.5% increase in 2026. Rate bureau had sought a 39.8% increase.
• Buncombe County (Asheville): +4.4% increase this year; +4.5% in 2026. Rate bureau had sought a 20.5% increase.

Why does the coast look like it’s getting singled out?
Like many things, rate increases lag the big disasters that prompted the industry to re-examine its exposure and business model. In an interview this fall, Causey said this rate increase request was mostly tied to the industry’s costs and payouts associated with the spate of natural disasters, including 2018’s Hurricane Florence, North Carolina saw several years ago. He added that his office is still dealing with claims tied to Florence, having recently paid one out to the University of North Carolina Wilmington (UNCW) tied to that devastating storm. “It takes years from the time a storm hits for the rates to catch up,” Causey said. That means damage from September’s unnamed storm, which dropped historic amounts of rain on parts of the Cape Fear region, and losses associated with Tropical Storm Debby and any from Hurricane Helene aren’t taken into account with this rate filing. Ditto for the devastation Helene caused in Western North Carolina and why this rate increase is heavily weighted toward the coast and Eastern N.C. With some damage estimates for Helene in the mountains pushing $60 billion, that will likely change when the rate bureau asks for its next increase.

Wait, another increase?
According to the settlement, the insurance industry can’t ask for another increase until June 2027. Causey said that is a fair compromise for all parties. “These rates are sufficient to make sure that insurance companies, who have paid out large sums due to natural disasters and face increasing reinsurance costs due to national catastrophes, have adequate funds on hand to pay claims,” he said in a statement. But industry officials made it clear that they didn’t get everything they wanted. In a statement, Jarred Chappell, chief operating officer with the rate bureau, said the approved rate increase isn’t “adequate.” “It’s a step in the right direction, but the North Carolina Rate Bureau asked for a larger increase because that’s what recent claims data called for,” he said. “Storms have gotten stronger and more damaging, more people are living in disaster-prone areas, inflation in the construction industry has been particularly high and reinsurance costs have exploded. “All these cost drivers remain an issue.” With little to forecast that any of those factors will change or even slow down in the coming years, especially with greenhouse gas emissions, the primary source of climate change, still on the rise globally, Chappell said the state and the insurance industry could find themselves at loggerheads again in just a few years. “Unfortunately, when the two years covered by this settlement are up, we will almost certainly be in a similar position, calling for a significant increase to keep the North Carolina market strong and to encourage as many carriers as possible to compete here for customers,” he said.
Read more » click here

Commissioner Causey negotiates settlement on Rate Bureau’s homeowners’ insurance request
Average 7.5% agreement will take effect on June 1
Insurance Commissioner Mike Causey announced today that the N.C. Department of Insurance has ended its legal dispute with insurance companies about their proposed homeowners’ insurance rate increase filed in January 2024. The N.C. Rate Bureau originally requested an average 42.2% increase last year, with proposed increases of up to 99.4% in some areas. Under the agreement signed by Commissioner Causey and the Rate Bureau, the average statewide base rate will increase by 7.5% on June 1, 2025, and 7.5% on June 1, 2026. The Rate Bureau is not a part of the Department of Insurance and represents homeowners’ insurance companies in North Carolina. “The insurance companies wanted to raise our homeowners’ rates up to 99.4% in some areas and an average 42.2% statewide in a single year,” Commissioner Causey said. “I fought for consumers and knocked them back to 7.5% increases over two years with a maximum of 35% in any territory. We consider this settlement a big win for both homeowners and North Carolina.” In addition, the agreement prohibits the Rate Bureau from undertaking an effort to increase rates again before June 1, 2027. “North Carolina homeowners will save approximately $777 million in insurance premiums over the next two years compared to what the insurance companies requested. This also protects homeowners from future base rate increase requests until June 2027,” said Commissioner Causey. “These rates are sufficient to make sure that insurance companies, who have paid out large sums due to natural disasters and face increasing reinsurance costs due to national catastrophes, have adequate funds on hand to pay claims.”

You may view the changes by territory.

Read more » click here

Hurricane Season
For more information » click here

Hurricane season runs from June 1 through November 30

Inlet Hazard Areas
For more information » click here

 .
Lockwood Folly Inlet
For more information » click here.

Seismic Testing / Offshore Drilling
For more information » click here. 

Biden makes protections from offshore drilling permanent
President Joe Biden has permanently closed off much of the nation’s coasts from prospective offshore drilling for oil and natural gas. The move, announced Monday as Biden wraps up his presidency, includes more than 330 million acres of the Atlantic outer continental shelf, from Canada to the southern tip of Florida, and the eastern Gulf of Mexico, as well as the West Coast, and the remainder of Alaska’s northern Bering Sea.
Everyone from coastal advocates to typically opposite-of-the-aisle politicians representing North Carolina coastal communities, which have overwhelmingly opposed offshore oil and gas exploration and drilling, lauded the president’s action. Wilmington City Councilman and Republican Charlie Rivenbark introduced a resolution opposing seismic airgun testing and offshore drilling off the North Carolina coast to fellow board members nearly 10 years ago. The board unanimously adopted the resolution, aligning the Port City with dozens of other North Carolina municipalities and counties opposed to then-President Barack Obama’s administration’s plan to open waters off the Southeast coast to oil exploration. “I would still be opposed to offshore drilling anywhere, particularly along the North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia coasts, and I’m glad President Biden’s doing this on his way out,” Rivenbark said Monday morning. “This to me is almost a nonpartisan issue. I grew up on the coast. I know the other side has got terrific arguments and reasons why, but I just can’t take a chance at an oil spill.” That sentiment has resonated throughout not only coastal North Carolina, but also across the state over the course of the last several years. Concerns about the potential for oil spills were specifically cited in the North Carolina Coastal Resources Commission’s April 2019 resolution that opposes offshore drilling. The resolution, which was adopted unanimously, pointed to impacts from the Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989, the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill and several scientific studies that raise concerns about seismic testing on marine mammals and fisheries. “Seismic surveys and offshore drilling are just not compatible with our coast,” North Carolina Coastal Federation Executive Director Braxton Davis said in an email response to Coastal Review Monday. The Coastal Federation publishes Coastal Review. “Keeping our coast healthy, thriving and free of oil spills is crucial for the survival and prosperity of our communities and is at the heart of our work at the Federation,” Davis said. “For decades now, North Carolina’s opposition to offshore oil and gas has been largely bipartisan. Even under ideal conditions, drilling operations release a number of dangerous pollutants into the ocean, not to mention the potential for larger spills that can devastate local tourism and fisheries.” Governors of both Atlantic and Pacific coastal states pushed back on President-elect Donald Trump’s plan to expand offshore drilling during his first tenure in the White House. In fall 2020, Trump announced he was withdrawing federal waters off the Atlantic Coast from Virginia to Florida from the possibility of drilling for oil and gas. The 10-year moratorium he established ends in 2032. Michelle Bivins, Oceana’s Carolinas Field Campaigns representative, said Monday afternoon that Biden’s announcement “essentially codifies those protections and makes them permanent.” “As for Trump reversing this policy once he’s in office, during his last presidency he protected the South Atlantic from the threat of offshore drilling for almost 10 years, following bipartisan support. He knows that coastal economies and businesses depend on healthy, oil-free oceans,” she said. Shortly after the White House announced the ban Monday morning, the American Petroleum Institute, or API, released a statement calling for the reversal of Biden’s withdrawal the offshore areas from future oil and natural gas leasing. “American voters sent a clear message in support of domestic energy development, and yet the current administration is using its final days in office to cement a record of doing everything possible to restrict it,” API President and CEO Mike Sommers stated in a release. “Congress and the incoming administration should fully leverage the nation’s vast offshore resources as a critical source of affordable energy, government revenue and stability around the world. We urge policymakers to use every tool at their disposal to reverse this politically motivated decision and restore a pro-American energy approach to federal leasing.” Two separate but similar letters – one signed by members of the U.S. Senate, the other signed by House representatives – calling late last year for Biden to implement the ban pointed out that presidential withdrawals had not been successfully challenged in court. Trump in 2017 reversed Obama’s Arctic and Atlantic withdrawals. A district court judge in Alaska ruled presidents do not have authority under the law, in this case the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, to revoke prior withdrawals. “A large-scale withdrawal of the Atlantic, Pacific, and Eastern Gulf from fossil fuel development while maintain the development of renewable energy solutions would provide durable protections for these critical areas,” according to the Dec. 19, 2024, letter signed by nine U.S. senators. The areas included in the withdrawal encompass more than 625 million acres, the largest in the country’s history, according to the U.S. Department of Interior. “President Biden’s actions today are part of our work across this Administration to make bold and enduring changes that recognize the impact of oil and gas drilling on our nation’s coastlines,” Interior Secretary Deb Haaland said in a release. “Today, the President is taking action that reflects what states, Tribes and local communities have shared with us – a strong and overwhelming need to support resilient oceans and coastlines by protecting them from unnecessary oil and gas development.” The withdrawals do not affect rights under existing leases, of which there are about 30 off the southern California coast and about a dozen in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico, according to the release. In fiscal 2023, production in the outer continental shelf resulted in about 675 million barrels of oil and 796 billion cubic feet of gas. Almost all of that production is in the western and central Gulf of Mexico, “where industry has yet to produce on more than 80 percent of the 12 million acres already under lease,” according to the release. The current leasing program that runs through 2029 includes three potential lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico planning areas. Those areas are not included in the withdrawal.
Read more » click here 

What Biden’s big ban on offshore oil and gas drilling means for NC and the East Coast
The president permanently placed off limits significant portions of the country’s outer continental shelf from future drilling activity. The move represents the largest withdrawal in U.S. history.
In one of his most far-reaching and last moves as the country’s top official, President Joe Biden earlier this month announced he was using his presidential authority to permanently withdraw most unleased areas in federal waters to future offshore oil and gas drilling. The move, which covers the East Coast, West Coast, Alaska and the eastern part of the Gulf of Mexico, was hailed by environmentalists and clean energy advocates as a pro-active measure that sets the U.S. firmly on the path of a decarbonized energy future. But the fossil fuel industry and many Republicans, including President-elect Donald Trump, have railed against the move, calling the blanket ban too much and potentially seriously damaging the push toward making the country energy independent. But while the presidential ban generated plenty of headlines and polished Biden’s environmental credentials, what does it really mean for states like North Carolina that have little to no existing offshore oil or gas industry or infrastructure to speak of?

What exactly did Biden do?
Using his authority under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, Biden withdrew significant portions of the country’s outer continental shelf from future oil and natural gas leasing. The withdrawal areas, which are in waters that extend up to 200 miles from the U.S. coastline, encompass more than 625 million acres, more than 330 million of those in the Atlantic, and represent the largest withdrawal in U.S. history. According to the U.S. Department of the Interior, oil production in 2024 on federal lands and water is at an all-time high. In fiscal year 2023, the outer continental shelf produced approximately 675 million barrels of oil and 796 billion cubic feet of gas, accounting for roughly 14 percent of all oil production and 2 percent of natural gas production in the U.S. Nearly all of this production is in the western and central Gulf of Mexico, where industry has yet to produce on more than 80 percent of the 12 million acres already under lease, the department noted. Most of the Gulf of Mexico isn’t included in the president’s drilling moratorium.

What drilling activity takes place in areas that are part of the new ban?
In short, not much. According to the federal government, there is no active oil and gas exploration and development along the U.S. East Coast or in much of Alaska. There are approximately 30 decades-old existing offshore leases off southern California, and approximately a dozen in the eastern Gulf of Mexico. “Nothing in the withdrawals affects rights under existing leases,” stated a release from the Interior department.

So, is this a big deal?
Yes and no. From a practical point of view, the impact is likely to be minimal. Take North Carolina, for example. The Tar Heel State is not believed to have enough hydrocarbon resources in the waters off its coast to make drilling a viable economic endeavor for the oil and gas industry. It’s been decades since any serious survey work has been done, and even with new advanced ways of extracting fossil fuels from the ocean bottom the uncertainty over just how much of the resource is out there − especially when considering the expense of finding out − likely isn’t an attractive proposition for industry.
On top of that, North Carolina doesn’t have the onshore infrastructure to support any serious offshore development of an oil and gas industry and then get any fuels that are brought to land from the coast to more built-up areas inland. That could mean any economic benefit from drilling off the N.C. coast, aside from some royalties to sweeten any concerns state politicians might have, would be enjoyed by the larger and more developed ports of Norfolk, Virginia, to the north and Charleston, S.C., to the south.

What about the optics of the ban?
North Carolina coastal officials of all stripes have been against offshore drilling for decades. That opposition only heightened 15 years ago after the Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico soiled beaches and wetlands in several Gulf Coast states with oil, damaging the environment, killing birds and marine life, and leaving coastal communities reliant on tourism on economic life support. Wilmington and many other coastal communities have passed resolutions opposing offshore drilling, and the N.C. Coastal Resources Commission − which manages development and policies in the state’s 20 coastal counties − also has come out against the practice. Elected statewide officials from both parties in Raleigh and Washington also have pushed back against efforts to open East Coast waters to drilling, both by President Barack Obama and more recently Trump during his first term. That opposition, along with a push for votes, prompted Trump in fall 2020 to announce he was removing federal waters from Virginia to Florida from the possibility of drilling, a ban that was set to expire in 2032.

Can Republicans reverse Biden’s ban?
The fossil fuel industry has come out aggressively against the new moratorium. “American voters sent a clear message in support of domestic energy development, and yet the current administration is using its final days in office to cement a record of doing everything possible to restrict it,” said Mike Sommers, president of the American Petroleum Institute, in a release. “Congress and the incoming administration should fully leverage the nation’s vast offshore resources as a critical source of affordable energy, government revenue and stability around the world. We urge policymakers to use every tool at their disposal to reverse this politically motivated decision and restore a pro-American energy approach to federal leasing.” But the courts historically have said only Congress can reverse a presidential declaration adopted under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, a move that could prove tricky considering how divided and gridlocked Capitol Hill remains. One thing Trump could do, however, and on the campaign trail threatened to do so immediately after taking office, is torpedo a different kind of offshore energy development − wind farms. Steps the incoming administration could take to hamper development of the renewable energy source, long a favorite of Biden and environmentalists worried about the impacts of climate change, is to slow the issue of regulatory permits or opening new lease sites for projects in federal waters and strip wind projects of federal tax credits and other incentives. That could make many of the projects, already costly and facing opposition from some coastal politicians and residents, financially unviable.
Read more » click here

Offshore Wind Farms
For more information » click here

Ports, suppliers in 40 states are invested in offshore wind
The nation’s burgeoning offshore wind energy industry has created thousands of jobs, boosted work in shipyards and ports, and includes a supply chain that spans 40 states, according to a new report. Billions of dollars have been invested in things like new and retrofitted vessels for offshore wind developers, ports infrastructure, and the expansion of renewable energy manufacturing facilities that support offshore wind, according to Oceantic Network, a Baltimore-based nonprofit that advocates growing the country’s offshore renewable energy industry and supply chain. According to the report, “Offshore Energy at Work,” 25 U.S. ports are either taking part in the industry or preparing to support it. Last February, North Carolina State Ports Authority Executive Director Brian Clark signed a record of decision on a proposed plan to create a multi-use terminal that would support manufacturing and operations for offshore wind and automotive industries at the Morehead City port. The proposed project entails developing land the port owns on Radio Island. It includes construction of a 300,000-square-foot manufacturing facility with office space for offshore wind, a roughly 60-acre gravel pad for storage, a new rail spur that would tie into the existing rail, roadway improvements, and the installation of a gas line from Morehead City to the island. The estimated price tag is $250 million to $285 million. “We have no updates to provide at this time,” Elly Cosgrove, N.C. Ports senior communications manager, said in an email Wednesday. “The Record of Decision signed in February is the latest as it pertains to Radio Island.” It is unclear how an executive order President Donald Trump signed in his first day back in the White House pumping the brakes on new offshore wind development might affect the ports’ proposed plans, including four lease areas off the North Carolina coast. Five days after Oceantic Network released its 60-page report, Trump suspended new leases on the entire outer continental shelf. The order will stand until it is revoked. The order also blocks the federal government from issuing new federal permits to offshore and onshore wind projects, including four lease areas off the North Carolina coast, until the secretary of Interior conducts a “comprehensive assessment and review” of the permitting process. Oceantic Network joined other renewable energy proponents in immediately rebuking the president’s order, calling the permitting pause “a blow to the American offshore wind industry.” Trump’s actions threaten thousands of American offshore wind industry-related jobs in shipyards, factories, and ports, and “strand businesses who have reorganized their operations to support the sector,” Oceantic said in a release. “While under a National Energy Emergency created by an unprecedented rise in energy demand, we should be working to quickly bring generation online instead of curtailing a power source capable of providing base load generation and creating new jobs across 40 states,” Oceantic founder and CEO Liz Burdock said in the release. “We urge the administration to reverse this sweeping action and keep America working in offshore energy as part of its commitment to an ‘all-of-the-above’ energy strategy.” A spokesperson for Oceantic Network declined to comment further. In a statement it released following Trump’s order, the Southeastern Wind Coalition called offshore wind “an economic force” in the U.S., investing billions of dollars in reviving previously underutilized ports and creating training programs for the work sector. “Wind energy is critical to achieving American energy dominance, meeting our growing electricity demand, and creating stable manufacturing jobs across the nation,” Southeastern Wind Coalition President Katharine Kollins said in a release. “Wind energy is a vital part of the global electricity system, and ceding the advancement and development of wind technologies to other nations will only set us back.” More than 100 companies in the Southeast produce components for the industry, according to the wind coalition. But at least one of those has turned to the European market to stay afloat. An official with Nexans, a France-based power and communications cable producer, said in an article published earlier this month that the company’s Charleston, South Carolina, plant — the largest subsea cable manufacturer in the U.S. — is shipping its product to Europe. Nexans vice president for generation and transmission told renewable energy publication Recharge that high demand for cables in Europe is “a blessing in disguise” for the plant. Still, all is not all doom-and-gloom for the industry. In an email announcing the dates and location for the International Partnering Forum, the largest offshore wind energy conference in the U.S., Burdock noted that five commercial-scale, federally approved offshore projects are either under or near construction. Another six projects have received federal approvals. “Despite misleading headlines, there is no question that the industry is moving forward,” Burdock wrote.
Read more » click here 

Things I Think I Think –

Eating out is one of the great little joys of life.

Restaurant Review:
The Dinner Club visits a new restaurant once a month. Ratings reflect the reviewer’s reaction to food, ambience and service, with price taken into consideration.
///// January 2025
Name:               Joseph’s                                                                                                                  Cuisine:           Italian Bistro
Location:        5003 O’Quinn Boulevard, Southport NC
Contact:          910.454.4440 / https://www.josephsitalianbistro.com
Food:               Average / Very Good / Excellent / Exceptional
Service:           Efficient / Proficient / Professional / Expert
Ambience:      Drab / Plain / Distinct / Elegant
Cost: $23        Inexpensive <=20 / Moderate <=26 / Expensive <=35 / Exorbitant <=60
Rating:            Three Stars
It is probably easier to get there by boat than by car but don’t be discouraged by the trip because good things can be found in out of the way places. Located at the South Harbour Marina, the view overlooking the marina and ICW is outstanding. Outside seating is available, weather permitting. It’s a very busy place; they do accept reservations but they only have three (3) seatings. Serving some of the best Italian cuisine in the area since 2003, the menu reflects home-style interpretations of their family favorites. The food is very good, the portions are generous, and the prices for both the food and wine are reasonable. We have always enjoyed the dining experience there, it’s an exceptional value.

Oldest restaurants in the area:

1978: Inlet View Bar & Grill, 1800 Village Point Road, Shallotte
This spot was a grill / motel / marina even before C.W Hughes, Jr. and his wife Allison bought the property in 1978. It became the Hughes Marina and home to a small restaurant and tackle shop with 13 bar stools. Their daughters took over the business in 1992. It reopened as the seasonal Inlet View with a bigger restaurant serving local seafood in 2009. 

1974: Silver Hill Grill, 2049 Holden Beach Road SW, Supply
If you know, you know it’s worth seeking out this kitchen / trailer that’s been serving up shrimp burgers, oysters, and fresh fish for decades. You can order and sit at one of the picnic tables on the screened-in porch. Or get it for take-out. Real pros call in their orders ahead when the restaurant is busy.  

Dining Guide – Local * Lou’s Views

Dining Guide – North * Lou’s Views

Dining Guide – South * Lou’s Views

Restaurant Reviews – North * Lou’s Views

Restaurant Reviews – South * Lou’s Views

Book Review:
Read several books from The New York Times best sellers fiction list monthly
Selection represents this month’s pick of the litter

THE GREY WOLF by Louise Penny
This is the nineteenth entry in the Chief Inspector Gamache, the head of homicide of Quebec’s provincial police force, series. This time around, the Canadian detective is investigating a plot to poison Montreal’s water supply, with unsettling connections to high-ranking officials. This is a departure from Three Pines village where most of the other books in the series take place. At the center of the tale is the legend of two wolves—the “grey wolf” and the “black wolf”—symbolizes the dual forces of good and evil within everyone.
.

The story concludes with a cliffhanger revelation.
Although the battle may seem won, a war has yet to be waged.

That’s it for this newsletter

See you next month

Lou’s Views . HBPOIN

.                                         • Gather and disseminate information
.                                    • Identify the issues and determine how they affect you
.                                    • Act as a watchdog
.                                    • Grass roots monthly newsletter since 2008

https://lousviews.com/

Lou’s Views

“Unofficial” Minutes & Comments

BOC’s Special Meeting 12/06/24

Board of Commissioners’ Agenda Packet » click here NA

Audio Recording » click here

1.   Executive Session Pursuant to North Carolina General Statute 143-381.11 (a)(6), Personnel – Mayor Pro Tem Myers and Commissioner Paarfus

2.   Discussion and Possible Action to Appoint Interim Town Manager – Mayor Pro Tem Myers and Commissioner Paarfus

 The Holden Beach Board of Commissioners held a special meeting on Friday to select an interim town manager. The board had previously voted to terminate David Hewett as town manager. The motion was made to hire Assistant Town Manager Christy Ferguson as the interim town manager effective immediately with an annual salary of $140,000.

A decision was made – Approved unanimously

They just hired our Assistant Town Manager Christy Ferguson as the interim town manager effective immediately with an annual salary of $140K. There are forty-five (45) City Manager’s in North Carolina with a town population below 2,500. The average NC town manager salary for that size community is $114K. Christy as Assistant Town Manager is currently making $99K. Understand that a salary adjustment was needed but the Board just gave Christy a $41K raise, that’s a whopping +41% increase and 93% of David’s salary of $151K. Are.. You.. Kidding.. Me?! Who is responsible for this debacle? What were they thinking? Frankly, they really should consider taking a negotiating course. It was my understanding that David did not get any salary increases recently because of a reduction in his work load, having hired both an Assistant Town Manager for $99K and a Finance Officer for $86K. The Board just had an opportunity to adjust the manager’s salary to account for those two positions. Granted for the time being she will be attempting to do two (2) jobs, both her Assistant Town Manager and David’s Town Manager responsibilities. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics promotional increases typically average between 7% and 12%. A 10% increase would have paid her $109K, which is pretty close (87%) to the NC town managers average salary. That makes more sense especially since the position no longer has the Finance Officer responsibilities. Based on her lack of experience it is usual and customary to come in at the entry pay level for this position. Therefore, she should be paid closer to the bottom of the pay window not the top. There are only six managers that make more than that in the entire state. The flip side is that 87% of the NC town managers make less than that salary of $140K. Unfortunately, they have now set the bar for her or anyone else that they hire to expect the minimum salary of $140K, which is too high. What are they mashugana? Although Christy has the inside track she still needs to demonstrate that she is up to the task and that they should hire her to fill the position. Meanwhile I don’t think we have to promote her and definitely don’t think that it should be a foregone conclusion. We still need to search for the best qualified candidate. I believe we need to  hire a headhunter company that provides employment recruiting services to find talent and to locate individuals who meet the specific job requirements we have for our town manager position. There’s a lot of experienced, competent people, with the desired skill sets required, that are out there who would be able and willing to serve our community. We certainly should have plenty of options especially since we now will be paying at least $140K.

Brunswick beach town hires interim manager following recent termination
Less than a month after firing the town manager, one Brunswick beach town board has decided who they want to fill the position temporarily. The Holden Beach Board of Commissioners have chosen an interim town manager before beginning the search for a new, permanent town manager. Here’s the latest.

Recap on what happened in November
Following a less than five-minute closed session to discuss personnel during the Holden Beach Board of Commissioners regular Tuesday, Nov. 19 meeting, Commissioner Rick Paarfus motioned to fire former Town Manager David Hewett. Hewett was with the town since 2008. Commissioners Paarfus, Tracey Thomas and Mayor Pro-Tem Tom Myers voted in favor of Hewett’s termination while Commissioners Page Dyer and Rick Smith voted against. Hewett’s termination became effective Dec. 4. However, the board placed Hewett on administrative leave from Nov. 21 until Dec. 4. Smith, Dyer and Holden said the decision blindsided them and that Hewett was a solid town manager.

What’s new?
Commissioners held a special meeting on Friday to discuss and hire on an interim town manager. The meeting began with a public comments section. “You went about it all the wrong way,” resident Sylvia Pate said about the board’s action toward Hewett, noting it was humiliating. Following public comments, meeting attendees were pushed to stand in the hallway before the doors to the chambers were locked by Town Clerk Heather Finnell. Commissioners then filed into a separate room dedicated for closed sessions – without unlocking the glass doors to the chambers. The closed session was approximately an hour and a half long. Commissioner Dyer was seen reentering the commissioners’ chambers in frustration twice. At one point she was seen speaking to Finnell with anger and another time Dyer exited the room with Holden behind her. Commissioners finished their closed discussion and resumed the open meeting shortly after 10 a.m. Paarfus motioned to hire Assistant Town Manager Christy Ferguson as the interim town manager, effective immediately, with an annual salary of $140,000. Commissioners voted in favor unanimously. “Through the years, Christy has been dedicated, straight forward, couldn’t ask her to have anything any better than what she has done, and she has proved her love for the people and the town of Holden Beach over and over again,” Mayor Alan Holden said. Asked if there were other candidates discussed, the mayor said no. Holden said Hewett did a good job as town manager and constantly encouraged staff to educate themselves in preparation for promotions. “Holden Beach has come a long way in the last 14, 15, 16 years and we appreciate what David did,” he said.

Next steps
The board must follow a process to hire the next town manager, and Holden said the town plans to fulfill all requirements. The start of the process is advertising the town manager position. “I think it’s a good day for the public in the fact that Christy has agreed to stay with us a little while longer,” Holden said. Though Ferguson has only been hired as the interim, Holden said the town is encouraging her to apply for the permanent job.
Read more » click here

BOC’s Regular Meeting 12/17/24

Board of Commissioners’ Agenda Packet click here

Audio Recording » click here

1.   Conflict of Interest Check

2024 Rules of Procedure for the Holden Beach Board of Commissioners
(e) Conflict Check. Immediately after the approval of the agenda, the Presiding Officer shall poll each member to disclose any potential conflicts of interest. In the event that a potential conflict is disclosed, the members will vote on a motion to allow or excuse that member with respect to the agenda item. If excused, the member may not participate in any discussion, debate, or vote with respect to the agenda item.

The Board was polled by Heather our Town Clerk. All of them declared that there was no conflict of interest with any agenda item at this meeting.

2.   Consideration and Possible Action on the Termination of the Coastal Storm Risk Management General Revaluation Corps of Engineers Study – Bob Keistler and/or Brennan Dooley, Corps of Engineers and Interim Town Manager Ferguson

Agenda Packet – pages 14 – 25

USACE Presentation » click here

ISSUE/ACTION REQUESTED:
Consideration and possible action on the termination of the Coastal Storm Risk Management General Reevaluation USACE study

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE OF REQUEST:
Data produced through Beach-FX and G2CRM modeling conducted by the Corps reveals that a CSRM project is not in the national interest at this time. The Corps will go through its rationale and give the BOC a chance to decide if they want to continue the study effort.

INTERIM TOWN MANAGERS RECOMMENDATION:
Receive report and consider termination of study.

The Town of Holden Beach executed an agreement with the Corps to engage in a Coastal Storm Risk Management (CSRM) study in August of 2021. The Corps has been working through various tasks and alternatives since that time to establish if a beach project is in the national interest. As part of all CSRM studies, the agency is also mandated to consider back bay flooding. Modeling analysis reveals neither project fits the economic model to be in the national interest. The Corps will  present  this information , and the BOC will need to provide direction  on  terminating  the study  effort  that  is scheduled  to conclude  in July of 2026. Presentation slides from the agency are included as an attachment.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Conclusion:

• • This analysis has not identified a supportable Coastal Storm Risk Management project. The recommendation for this study is the “no action”
  • The Corps will finalize study products that are in progress and share all data with the Town of Holden

Recommendation:

• • The town should continue its local Coastal Storm Risk Management

Previously reported – April 2021
In order for us to become a USACE beach requires a new study be authorized
Three (3) years / Three (3) levels of review / Three (3) million dollars

• • $1.5 million Feds and $1.5 million Town of Holden Beach

Why consider doing a study?

• • FEMA is not an insurance policy
  • The rule book is changing
  • We have to consider risks

Coastal Storm Risk Management Study
This attached draft agreement for a Coastal Storm Risk Management Study (Attachment 1) between the USACE and the Town of Holden Beach represents the inclusion of the study in the Corps work plan for this federal fiscal year. The study was the Town’s number one advocacy priority at the federal level as a proposed means of storm damage reduction . The Town will not know if it is economically and environmentally feasible for us to become a federal beach unless the study is conducted. The attached budget amendment (Attachment  2) in the amount of $500,000 represents the town’s commitment for the upcoming FY for the Town’s share of the total non-federal (Town) study cost of $1,500,000.

If the BOC chooses to pursue the study, a motion will need to be made to authorize the Town Manager to execute the contract document and self-certification of financial capability with the USACE and approve the attached budget amendment.

Christy went through a slide presentation briefly reviewing how we got to this point. The abridged version is that FEMA continues to change the rules for engineered beaches maintenance programs. The study with the USACE gives us another option if we can’t count on FEMA moving forward. Commissioner Kwiatkowski was prepared as usual and had a number of questions for the USACE representatives that were in attendance at the meeting. The Corps representative walked them through the process. Commissioner Sullivan asked a couple additional questions regarding funding. An important takeaway is the federal government contributes 65% of the costs for initial construction, the cost split is 50% between federal and non-federal funding for maintenance nourishment projects. Of course, the major concern is whether there will be adequate funding for not only the study but for an approved project. The Corps rep made it very clear that there is no guarantee, but he felt confident that they both would be funded. He understands that the Town is looking to obtain the best deal possible. FEMA and USACE organizations are both here to help and each have a place. The difference between them is that the USACE is more of a designed project, build, and maintain whereas FEMA is primarily there to help cover emergencies. The BOC’s decided to fund the  $1.5 million study and take the funds from the BPART account instead of the Capital Reserve account.

A decision was made – Approved unanimously

We just approved spending $1.5 million to potentially switch to USACE—wait for it—after we just received $45 million for FEMA projects. I have some reservations about making the change and was really disappointed that there was not more serious discussions prior to spending that kind of money.  Just to be clear I’m for beach nourishment, but I am generally opposed to moving forward with the federal project due to the uncertainty of the funding. Congressional authorization of a project does not necessarily mean that the project will receive federal construction funds. Project authorizations over the years have far outpaced the level of federal appropriations provided. Our portion is $1.5 million just for the Storm Risk Management study, which is a huge amount of money when we don’t even know if the study will be completely funded let alone whether the project will be approved or funded.

Previously reported – September 2022
The Army Corps of Engineers will be presenting recently communicated proposed changes in the Coastal Storm Risk Management Study duration, scope, costs, and potential funding options (slides included in agenda packet) . The board should consider this as an opportunity to obtain clarity on its options going forward. The board may need to consider a letter of intent regarding changes to study para meters.

Additional scope required for the study
EIS, borrow source investigations, backside waterway flooding analysis
This resulted in an additional 11 months of study and a cost increase of – $1.25 M.

USACE briefly reviewed the process and gave us a status update. Hat in hand, they said they are not able to get it done as presented to us; neither in the time frame three (3) years nor for the budget of three (3) million dollars. Additional work beyond what they planned is needed. They realize that they need to take other variables into consideration, and they need to address it now. Colonel Bennett stated that they were not here to advocate for or against the project but were here to communicate capability. The sooner that they get Board approval the better, it would likely be a greater opportunity to be selected. The Board allowed the public to ask any questions that they had. Town Manager will draft letter of intent and the BOC’s will discuss at the Special Meeting scheduled for September 28^th.

No decision was made – No action taken

Let me get this straight we already committed $1.5 million for our portion just over one (1) year ago and now they want us to ante up another 1.25 million? The additional cost prohibits us from doing other things that we planned on doing.

Previously reported – October 2022
Colonel Bennett, representing the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, presented proposed changes in the Coastal Storm Risk Management Study duration, scope, costs, and potential funding opportunities at the September board meeting. Attached please find the letter of intent  the Wilmington  District  would  like from the Board (Attachment 1) to apply for 2019 Disaster Relief Act funding. Prior to the  regular September meeting staff consulted with Ward and Smith /Ferguson Group to develop the attached draft letter of intent at Attachment 2; however, the Wilmington District  has communicated “HQ  would  like  to see full acknowledgement of the additional time and  costs”  (Christine  Brayman ).  Also included  is what we have obtained since the meeting to describe actions/costs to date (Attachment 3).

Christy went over the information presented at the last meeting and the potential options available to us. USACE Wilmington District would like the first letter in the packet to be sent from the Board to apply for the 2019 Disaster Relief Act funding. Board approval of  the letter of intent is an acknowledgement of the additional time and costs. Motion was made to send the first letter in the packet to the USACE.

The Town of Holden Beach, NC, supports the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District’s request for Disaster Relief Act of 2019 (DRA19) funding to complete the Brunswick County Beaches, Holden Beach Portion, General Reevaluation Report (GRR) at 100% Federal cost . We understand the current study cost is $4,250,000 and will now require an additional 11 months to complete the study for a total of 47 months due to additional requirements. If DRA19 funding is approved, the Town understands that no further non-Federal contribution would be required to complete the GRR and the cost sharing agreement would be adjusted to reflect this change to 100% Federal funding requirements.

A decision was made – Approved unanimously

Commissioner Kwiatkowski recommended that we need to consider revisiting our decision because of all the changes that have been made. She questioned whether this is the best thing to do now. Also, she would like them to consider working together with Oak Island on moving forward together with just one project.

If I understood correctly, they did not agree to ante up any additional funds. They are applying to the federal government to produce the money. In addition, I was not really clear if the USACE was asking us for the full $1.25M or to split this amount with them. For the time being we have not committed any additional funds and have just spent $500,000 for the study so far. Stay tuned …

Update –
Representatives from the USACE gave a presentation. The bottom-line is the government requires that the project BENEFITS be greater than the COST, they are not.  The project is not in the national interest, which simply means the analysis does not support a Coastal Storm Risk Management project. USACE plan to wrap up the study, close it out, and transfer data to the town. The motion was made to receive the report and initiate termination of the study.
A decision was made – Approved unanimously

The Town has spent a total of $1,775,000. Turns out this was a very costly roll of the dice. Both our lobbyist Mike McIntyre and the USACE both assured us that they wouldn’t propose to move forward if they didn’t think that Holden Beach would qualify for the program. What the termination means to us is that we need to reevaluate and change the game plan. The transfer of funds to the Beach & Inlet Reserve Fund is a good start for us to manage and pay for beach nourishment moving forward.

3.   Police Report – Chief Jeremy Dixon 

Agenda Packet – pages 26 – 30

Police Report » click here

Jeremy reviewed the actions that were taken by them last month
Business as usual for this time of the year

.

Previously reported – October 2024

We are in the shoulder season, they experienced a normal seasonal decline of activity

The Chief reminded everyone that runners and walkers should be on the sidewalk not in the bike lane

Hunting season is underway, it is prohibited within Town limits

Personnel announcement

Not only did they not fill the open detective position, but another officer has resigned

The department now has four (4) vacancies 

The police department currently has only seven (7) officers of the eleven (11) they are budgeted to have

 Having the full complement of eleven (11) police officers seems to be an elusive goal.

What he did not say –

Public Service Announcement
Requested that we all use caution if driving during the holiday season. There is lots of traffic during the holiday and statistically the country has an average of 119 fatalities a day. Please drive safely!

The National Safety Council estimates 720 people may be killed on U.S. roadways during the upcoming holidays: 345 during the Christmas holiday driving period and an additional 375 during the New Year’s holiday driving period.\\

‘Booze It & Lose It’ underway through holidays
Recognized as one of the nation’s most effective anti-drunk-driving campaigns, Booze It & Los​e It has created increased awareness of the dangers and the consequences of drinking and driving through innovative education campaigns and extensive enforcement of impaired-driving laws. During each campaign, law enforcement agencies increase the number of patrols and officers in an area, set up checking stations and use local news media to reach out to drivers. Motorists caught driving while impaired could face jail time, lose their driving privileges and pay an average of $10,000 in fines, towing fees and other expenses associated with a DWI. That’s not a small price, and it doesn’t even count the heftier price: the potential cost of a lost life. Even with the success of Booze It & Lose It, more than 9,000 people have lost their lives in alcohol-related crashes in North Carolina since the program’s introduction in 1994. During enforcement campaigns, law enforcement agencies increase the number of saturation patrols, set up checking stations and use local news media to reach out to all drivers.

It’s that time of year, rental season ends, and break-in season officially starts
Requested that we all serve as the eyes and ears for law enforcement.

If you know something, hear something, or see something –
call 911 and let the police deal with it.

4.   Inspections Department Report – Inspections Director Evans

Agenda Packet – pages 31 – 33

Inspections Report » click here

ACTIVE NEW HOME PERMITS                                                               = 29
OTHER ACTIVE PERMITS                                                                         = 445
PERMITS ISSUED OVER $30,000                                                             = 47
* AMOUNT INCLUDED IN ACTIVE TOTAL
PERMITS ISSUED OVER $100,000                                                           = 5
* AMOUNT INCLUDED IN ACTIVE TOTAL
PERMITS ISSUED SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENTS                            = 0
* AMOUNT INCLUDED IN ACTIVE TOTAL
PERMITS ISSUED WAITING PICK UP                                                     = 20
TOTAL PERMITS                                                                                         = 494

PERMITS IN REVIEW                                                                                = 4
CAMA ISSUED                                                                                             = 3
ZONING ISSUED                                                                                         = 19

PERMITS SERVICED FOR INSPECTIONS FROM 11/07 – 12/06            = 100
TOTAL INSPECTIONS MADE                                                                 = 219

Update –
Timbo briefly reviewed department activity last month, the department has not been as busy. Right now, they have a steady stream of work, they’ve seen a pickup in construction.

5.   Finance Department Report – Finance Officer McRainey

Agenda Packet – pages 34 – 37

Finance Report » click here 

Revenues to Watch

AD VALOREM TAX
FY 24 / 1,839,859
FY 25 / 1,030,109

PARKING REVENUE
FY 24 / 423,057
FY 25 / 439,956

OCCUPANCY TAX
FY 24 / 3,254,203
FY25 / 3,314,590

Ad Valorem tax collections through November are still behind from last year but this is not concerning considering bills went out later this year and we should have a better picture of Ad Valorem collection in January/February.

Parking revenue is trending higher as it should being the first year of paid parking through the winter months.

Occupancy tax revenues continue to trend slightly higher than last year.

Revenues vs. Expenditures by Fund

Three graphs were presented, with fiscal year comparisons of the following funds:
.     1) General Fund
.     2) Water/Sewer Fund
.     3) BPART Fund

GENERAL FUND – REV / EXP
FY 24 / 2,382,151 / 1,323,474
FY 25 / 1,475,715 / 1,261,172

WATER/SEWER FUND – REV / EXP
FY 24 / 2,010,247 / 1,353,835
FY 25 / 2,085,302 / 1,554,170

BPART FUND – REV / EXP
FY 24 / 4,001,321 / 2,960,723
FY25 / 3,920,667 / 2,438,503

BPART Fund – Beach Preservation / Access & Recreation / Tourism
BPART is a Special Revenue Fund authorized by act of the General Assembly which allows the Town to collect six cents of an Accommodations Tax for the purposes of funding beach preservation and tourism related expenses.

Update –
Daniel briefly reviewed the status of each of the three (3) funds. 

6.  Town Manager Report – Interim Town Manager Ferguson

Agenda Packet – pages 38 – 39

Town Manager Report » click here

Greensboro Street / Sewer Lift Station #2
Department of Environmental Quality offer to fund signed and returned to the State
Copy of Insurance and Exhibit 8 executed by contractor, updated certificate of insurance
Notice to proceed processed and returned

Previously reported – November 2024
Action item to increase state funding on November meeting agenda tonight
Engineer and Staff had meeting with contractor and DWR representative
Awaiting contractor’s final insurance documents before issuing Notice to Proceed

Previously reported – October 2024
We have approvals from both the EPA and NCDWQ
Awaiting TerraHawk contract review
David anticipates having it by the end of the week
The next step is for the Town Attorney to review the documents
The Town can then execute the contract  with the subsequent Notice to Proceed

Key Bridge Mediation Agreement

Mediation Agreement Quarterly Meetings
Meeting was held on 12/4/24

Ave E – Public/Emergency Beach Access and Restroom Facility
Contractor started work 

Previously reported – November 2024
Notice to Proceed issued with due date of February 1^st

THB Newsletter (12/12/24)
Advisory
Reminder, the lot at the end of Avenue E is closed to complete ADA improvements until further notice. Access will be impacted in the area during this timeframe. Barriers will be placed in the area to facilitate the work. Work is estimated to last until February.

THB Newsletter (11/15/24)
Advisory
The lot at the end of Avenue E will be closed to complete ADA improvements beginning Monday until further notice. Work is estimated to last until February. Access may be impacted in that area during this time frame.

Previously reported – October 2024
Notice to Proceed issued to Babson contract for $168,365
Due date of February 1^st

Previously reported – September 2024
This is the area at the far east end of the island. They have obtained the necessary permits for ADA compliant parking, public and emergency accesses, and  restroom facilities. Request for Proposal has been drafted. Anticipate construction would begin in the fall and must be completed by the March 2025 deadline.

801 OBW – Public Beach Access
Final inspection was completed
The Town plans to do matting there, although it is not part of the agreement

Previously reported – November 2024
Walkway construction has been completed
Handrails were installed today
Access is not open at this time

Previously reported – October 2024
Notice to Proceed issued to Jesse & Meyers contract for $48,900
Due date of November 15^th

Previously reported – September 2024
They have made some design refinements for the Emergency and Public Access there to accommodate the adjacent properties. A CAMA permit has been applied for. We still need to build a walkway there.

Coastal Storm Risk Management Study
Update in the packet for tonight
Depending on action, follow up required at the federal level 12/18/24

Recycling Program
Action item on agenda this evening
Be mindful to get renewals in

Emergency Operations Center
The EOC building is being used by Tri-Beach Fire Department while they renovate their fire station on Sabbath Home

Congressionally Directed Spending (Senate)
Community Project Funding (House)
Funding formally known as earmarks
BOC’s should begin to consider upcoming requests
Potential  January agenda topic
Timing of federal forms release unknown
BOC’s needs to consider things like the 5113 Environmental Infrastructure program, Stormwater, LWF Inlet, and continuation of other policies  

Employee Updates
Public Works gained an employee in mid-November.
Replaces the Public Services Supervisor vacancy left when Scott Cunningham retired

The current Fiscal Operations Supervisor Margaret Lancaster is retiring
Agenda item has change in work responsibilities for our Finance Officer

Canal Subdivisions
CAMA permit renewals are staggered and being processed

Ocean Boulevard Bike Lane
Should have maintenance agreement for the January meeting
NCDOT will pick up the tab

Do not think that quarterly maintenance is really adequate although it is better than nothing

Previously reported – November 2024
DOT reviewing requirements for agreement needed for Town to conduct street sweeping
Quote in hand for maintenance cleaning

Previously reported – October 2024
NCDOT cost overrun
Estimate $1,722,364: actual $1,797,424
The delta is $75,060 with the Town’s share being 42%, which would be $31,525
David is coordinating with DOT to review the project and identify potential alternative funding to satisfy overrun

Maintenance –
DOT advises that state’s standard of care is not what Town will require
Staff reviewing options for service provision: in-house versus contract for sweeping
We will need an agreement with the DOT  for the Town to conduct street sweeping

Bike Lane Maintenance

Good news: We have a bike lane now

Bad news: We are not even doing routine maintenance of the bike lane

A significant number of locations of the bike lane have sand, gravel, rocks, and broken glass from recycling trucks. Therefore, it is UNSAFE especially for young and/or inexperienced bicycle riders. Not a good situation, if someone goes down they could easily slide into the traffic lane, which would have some serious negative consequences. NCDOT only provides maintenance service a few times a year. Standard protocol is for the town to take care of the bike lane with their staff. If Public Works is unable to get it done perhaps we should consider a contract with a vendor to handle routine maintenance until they are able to do it. Any lawn maintenance service with a blower should be able to take care of it in the interim. This is a safety issue that needs to be addressed, sooner rather than later.

Tracking Tool
Previously reported – October 2024
The BOC’s are looking for a status report on a monthly basis, for the eight (8) items listed, in order to track the progress of projects that they have prioritized.

• • • #2 ADA Self-Assessment
    • #6 ADA bathroom (at block Q)
    • #7 Fire station Upgrades
    • #8 Improve Audio/Video for Town Meetings
    • #14 Block Q Site Plan
    • #18 Update Town Website
    • #19 Pier Repair/Replacement
    • #26 Investigate vacuum bypass system
      

Christy briefly reviewed the status of each of the eight (8) items listed
The current status is in the Town Manager Report

What she did not say –

Stormwater Project Partnership Agreement (PPA)
Previously reported – March 2024
Town staff met with USACE Program Manager in February to develop a draft PPA. Awaiting draft PPA for about a half dozen projects for  an estimated cost of two (2) million dollars. The intent is to position the Town to receive federal stormwater funding for these projects.

Coastal Resources Commission
Previously reported – October 2024
Meeting will be held on OIB in mid-November
They are tracking the Inlet Hazard Area revisions closely
Probably won’t be addressed until sometime next year

Previously reported – September 2022
Discussion of the changes Coastal Resources Commission approved last month to both the rules and Inlet Hazard Area boundaries. Commissioner Kwiatkowski was asking the staff  what will be the impact on us here at Holden Beach. Timbo informed us that the boundary and vegetation line overall impact will be minimal to us.

In Case You Missed It –

Public Works have put up snowflake decorations on the boulevard light poles

• • • Purple streetlights are not part of the
      holiday decorations they are the LED’s failing

Town Hall Holiday Schedule
Town Hall will be closed December 24^th, 25^th, 26^th and January 1^st in observance of the holidays. 

Pets on the Beach Strand
Pets – Chapter 90 / Animals / 90.20

Effective September 10^th

• • • Pets allowed back on the beach strand during the hours of 9:00am through 5:00pm
    • Dog’s need to be on a leash
    • Owner’s need to clean up after their animals

Solid Waste Pick-up Schedule –
starting October once a week 

Recycling –
starting October every other week  pick-up 

National Flood Insurance Program: Reauthorization
Congress must periodically renew the NFIP’s statutory authority to operate. On December 20, 2024, the president signed legislation passed by Congress that extends the National Flood Insurance Program’s (NFIP’s) authorization to March 14, 2025. 

News from Town of Holden Beach
The town sends out emails of events, news, agendas, notifications and emergency information. If you would like to be added to their mailing list, please go to their web site to complete your subscription to the Holden Beach E-Newsletter.
For more information » click here

Upcoming Events –

NA

7.   Discussion and Possible Approval of 2025 Board of Commissioners’ Meeting Schedule – Town Clerk Finnell (Interim Town Manager Ferguson)

Agenda Packet – pages 39a – 39b

Meeting Schedule » click here

ISSUE/ACTION REQUESTED:
Discussion and Possible Approval of 2025 Board of Commissioners’ Meeting Schedule

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE OF REQUEST:
Enclosed is the proposed 2025 Board of Commissioners’ Regular Meeting Schedule. All dates reflect the third Tuesday of the month.

2025 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS’ MEETING SCHEDULE
Regular Meetings are held at 5:00pm on the third Tuesday of each month

January 21^st
February 18^th
March 18^th
April 15^th
May 20^th
June 17^th
July 15^th
August 19^th
September 16^th
October 21^st
November 18^th
December 16^th

Update –
The proposed monthly meeting schedule was adopted as submitted.

A decision was made – Approved unanimously

8.   Discussion and Possible Action on Selection of Mayor Pro Tem – Town Clerk Finnell (Interim Town Manager Ferguson)

Agenda Packet – pages 40 – 41

ISSUE/ACTION REQUESTED:
Discussion and Possible Action on Selection of Mayor Pro Tem

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE OF REQUEST:
Per Section 30.05, Mayor Pro Tempore of the Holden Beach Code of Ordinances, the Board shall elect from one of its members a mayor pro tem. The normal term of office is one year, commencing with the December meeting.

If the Board chooses to elect a new mayor pro tem, you can vote by ballot or verbally, whichever is the Board’s preference. If the Board votes by ballot, please make sure to sign your ballot.