Posted on June 30, 2025
The Sunset Beach Town Council during a June 13 special meeting voted to approve the special assessment roll for its recently completed dredging project, despite the objections from many assessed property owners about the per parcel method used to charge for the project, among other concerns.
The preliminary assessment roll calls for charging the owners of the nearly 318 affected properties $7,783.05 each to cover the town’s $2,475,010.97 share of the $7,681,194.15 project.
The project entailed the mechanical navigational dredging of South Jinks Creek near the mouth of the Feeder Channel east towards Palm Cove; the bay area along Canal Drive, Cobia Street and abutting the ends of 16th, 17th, 18th and 19th streets; the Feeder Channel along North Shore Drive Extension and Riverside Drive; the Finger Canals along 6th Street, Marlin Street, Dolphin Street and Cobia Street; and Mary’s and Turtle creeks
For the project, the town received $5,235,134.18 in grant funds from the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Shallow Draft Navigation Channel Dredging and Aquatic Weed Fund.
Per the town’s grant application, submitted Aug. 14, 2020, the project sought “to enhance and protect navigation access to residents and guests to waterways on the east side of Sunset Beach” and that “the navigation depths will provide sustainable recreational boating opportunities to visitors and residents of Sunset Beach while also helping to safeguard the small rental businesses and property values at risk within the project area.”
The town was awarded the grant, so it had to provide $2,446,059.97 in matching funds plus another $28,951 for costs outside the dredging fund prior to receipt of the grant for a total of $2,475,009.90, per the agenda item.
The project, which was managed by US-based global infrastructure advisor Moffatt & Nichol, occurred between November 2021 and March 2024, when it was completed. The contractor on the project was R.E. Goodson Construction Company Inc, out of Darlington, South Carolina.
Since the project preliminary assessment roll was released earlier this year, assessed property owners have been raising concerns about the alleged lack of benefit their properties received from the dredging as well as about the town’s per parcel assessment method that does not factor in the amount of an assessed property’s water frontage, among other issues.
One resident, Joe Cantoni of Riverside Drive, even sued the town over the assessment, though that lawsuit was dismissed in April since the town at that time had not approved the assessment.
Throughout the process, the town has maintained that the dredging project was done properly according to the project design and state law and has maintained its method of per parcel assessments — as opposed to based upon linear footage of a property’s water frontage that would result in smaller assessment amounts for lots with less water frontage compared to lots with more — is legal.
“At the end of the day, as I understand it, the project as scoped and as applied for and as limited by the rules and regulations of the state and federal government, was done in accordance with that approval,” said town attorney Grady Richardson, noting state session laws 2004-104, 2005-47, 2005-90, 2011-108 and 2013-69 give the town authority to “impose your fees or dredging district, and you can assess it per parcel or you can assess it per linear foot.”
The town of Sunset Beach had not set up a maintenance dredging district prior to the vote on the special assessment, and Councilman Mike Hargreaves asked Richardson if the town needs to set up a dredging district prior to assessment approval. Richardson said that is not necessary, and the town has followed the law throughout this process.
Assessed property owners disagree, and said so during the June special meeting. They also raised other concerns, including about the alleged lack of benefit to their properties, alleged disparities between the town’s grant application to the state and the project’s results and the switch from maintenance dredging to navigational dredging.
Regarding the per parcel assessment basis, Donna Hewett, of Riverside Drive, said the method is unfair, unjust and shifts the cost burden onto property owners with smaller lots and less water frontage compared to larger lots, including the town’s two properties included in the assessment.
“The town and large canal lot owners would be unjustly enriched by this unlawful change as the cost would be reduced by tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in the burden shift to the small canal lot families,” she said. “The North Carolina law required the specially assessed cost be allocated proportionately to the benefits received. The change of the basis from linear footage to per parcel ignores the statutory language’s intent.”
Cantoni during the public hearing on June 13, spoke about the town’s grant application. “The state grant was awarded with the understanding that the dredging project benefited ‘the residents, visitors, businesses and the town,’ ” he said. “The town would not have qualified for the state grant if its application had stated that only 320 canal families would benefit.”
Dana Reed, also of Riverside Drive, said the council moving to undertake a dredging project was understandable, but she took issue with the switch from maintenance dredging to navigational dredging.
“Somewhere in the process, however, the town council agreed to modify the dredging from maintenance to navigational and also agreed to limit dredging to outside property owners’ docks, hoists and grass lawns,” Reed said. “As a result, the recent dredging has benefited the public use waterways only. No direct benefit has resulted to property owners along the canals.”
Ed Huggins, of 6th Street, said he and his neighbors received no benefit from the dredging. “We understand that the approved dredging plan was a navigational dredging, but … if we cannot access the canal, we do not benefit this. We shouldn’t be forced to pay for it. … Furthermore, I believe that the dredging actually made conditions worse due to the shifting of the mud from the banks under the dock into the center of the canal where the material was removed.”
Jane O’Brien, a Riverside Drive resident, said the town’s stormwater system dumps out into the canals, contributed to shoaling in those waterways.
“The canals that are on the east side of the island serve the town of Sunset Beach by removing stormwater waste from the island,” she said. “The stormwater drains directly into the canal and moves the runoff from the island. It deposits silt and sand in the canal from the island itself. I fail to see how this is the responsibility of 320 families living on the canals.”
Following the public hearing, the council discussed some of the citizens’ concerns. Mayor Pro Tem John Corbett explained the change from maintenance dredging to navigational dredging was dictated by the permitting agencies, as well as because there was grant funding available for navigational dredging but not for maintenance.
“We originally started looking at this as a maintenance dredging project and then we switched over to a navigation project and there’s some different implications,” Corbett said. “Maintenance would have let us go up to, and perhaps underneath, the docks; navigation put us out into the middle. … My understanding is the issue was navigation gave us an avenue to go get grants which could pay a large part of this cost; maintenance, that route did not have the availability of grants that would pay for it.”
Following a lengthy discussion, the council voted 3-1 to approve the special assessment roll, with Councilman Mike Pozdol voting against. Pozdol argued the town should take more time to work with property owners to see if their concerns can be addressed.
“I think it’ll just prolong things with a lot of questions and a lot of people giving opinions again,” said Hargreaves, who made the motion for approval that was seconded by Corbett. “I think we need to move on from the past here and look to the future, set up the dredging district and get moving on the future, and maybe within a year start talking again about future dredging.”
According to the agenda item, the assessment can be paid within 30 days after publication of the assessment roll confirmation or in up to three annual installments with interest not to exceed 3% per annum payable on the date when property taxes are due and payable.
