Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 05-25-2017 - 1.B Public School Forum Local School Finance Study r Pir _ 0 ATTACH Pd�`_4 , s o HO . 1 t•N N. FIN AL UDY Aillik g _ ,IING ]0-.........,...... ��0 yP 99 1986 201fi N PUBLIC SCHOOL FORUM= > INTRODUCTION Under North Carolina's school finance expenses,accounting for 26 percent of the while simultaneously making less taxing system, born more than eight decades ago, combined federal,state,and local total. effort. Because wealthier counties have it is the state's responsibility to pay for in- Counties provided funding for 1,025 princi- more taxable resources,they can keep structional expenses(including personnel) pals and assistant principals(19.4 percent taxes low while still generating significant while county governments pay for capital of the total),6,332 teachers(6.7 percent revenues.Conversely,counties with fewer expenses(buildings and maintenance). of the total),2,694 teacher assistants(12.0 taxable resources need to make greater percent of the total),and 3,268 profession- taxing effort to support their schools. During the Great Depression,through the al instructional support personnel (21.4 Second,there is a widening gap between 1933 School Machinery Act,the General percent of the total). counties with many taxable resources and Assembly attempted to"relieve"coun- those with few,and as a result,a widening ties of the responsibility for operating For more than 25 years,the Public School gap in counties'school spending patterns. and maintaining public schools.In 1975, Forum of North Carolina has isolated local the School Budget and Fiscal Control Act spending from state and federal spending State policy decisions made during the reinforced the primacy of state support, to examine the capacity and actual effort last 25 years have blunted the impact of setting forth the state's policy of using of counties to support public schools. these trends, narrowing the educational state revenue sources for instructional The annual Local School Finance Study investment gap by providing additional expenses and current operations while focuses not only on the amount that coun- funds for the state's smallest and low- expecting county governments to meet ties spend on schools, but also on each est-wealth counties. However,even with public schools'facilities requirements. county's investment in the context of that these important, positive policy steps, county's taxable resources. investments in North Carolina schools still Over time, however,the lines drawn in the vary dramatically by zip code.As a result, 1933 and 1975 laws have become blurred, From the early years of the Study,two young people born into one of the state's and the local role in funding school oper- trends have become evident that have economically thriving counties will have ations has increased. In 2014-15,counties deepened over time.First,wealthier coun- levels of investment in their education not spent$2.7 billion to fund instructional ties are able to spend more on schools shared elsewhere in the state. 1 INTRODUCTION 13 APPENDICES �/ V) 3 2014-15 SPENDING PER STUDENT 13 TABLE 1:RANKINGS OF ADJUSTED PROPERTY VALUATIONS PER STUDENT 4 WHAT'S NEW IN THE 2017 STUDY? 14 TABLE 2:ACTUAL EFFORT Z 15 TABLE 2A:SIX-YEAR AVERAGE OF CAPITAL W 5 2017 RANKINGS-AT-A-GLANCE OUTLAY AND DEBT SERVICE 16 TABLE 3:ACTUAL EFFORT WITH SUPPLEMENTAL 6 A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE FUNDING FOR LOW-WEALTH AND SMALL COUNTIES Z 17 TABLE 4:ABILITY TO PAY WHO PAYS FOR WHAT? 18 TABLE 5:RELATIVE EFFORT 0 U 10 GAPS AND TRENDS 2017 19 GLOSSARY 12 NOTES ON METHODOLOGY 20 DATA SOURCES&ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 1< ATTACHMENT B > INTRODUCTION (CONTINUED) Disparities in resources available to ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................, counties can be illustrated by dividing REAL ESTATE WEALTH AVAILABLE PER STUDENT the state into quartiles according to adjusted property wealth available per child.The top quartile includes high- t500,000 growth Piedmont and mountain and beach resort areas,which had an average of$1,408,923.70 real estate wealth I,000,000 $1,408,924 available per child-$639,159 above the $769,765 STATE AVERAGE state average.The bottom quartile has $416,990 real estate wealth available per soo,000 $727,746 $525,400 child-$352,775 below the state average. $416,990 The map illustrates where counties in each quartile are located throughout the state. TOP QUARTILE SECOND QUARTILE THIRD QUARTILE BOTTOM QUARTILE In 2014-15,34 counties were above the state average property wealth of$769,765 available per child,while 68 counties were below the state average. DISPARITIES IN REAL ESTATE WEALTH , Watauga Ashe Alleghany�■-.■ � ` `' ,1 Warren ��O;111 F 9a ar4uimo Mikhail Avery �ll o, Yancey IIIIKAlb Madison p� Wake Dare \ Chatham tribil*40. Haywood Buncombe ■ treene 4 Hyde Graham Jackson Trans vani ariiiipaqs- ir Polk Cherokee Macon Yl Clay Pamlico Carteret • TOP QUARTILE • SECOND QUARTILE Y�mc,°' ❑ THIRD QUARTILE 'oo Brunswick ❑ BOTTOM QUARTILE >z 2014-15 TOTAL LOCALPeArrittINPENDING PER STUDENT Alamance $1,394 Alexander $1,053 Alleghany $1,663 Anson $1,115 Ashe $1,462 Avery $1,862 Beaufort $1,754 Bertie $969 Bladen $1,355 Brunswick $2,373 Buncombe $2,223 Burke $1,095 Cabarrus 1,660 Caldwell $1,235 Camden $1,080 Carteret $2,457 Caswell $940 Catawba $1,452 Chatham $2,906 Cherokee $1,701 Chowan $1,573 Clay $888 Cleveland $1,313 Columbus $775 Craven $1,376 Cumberland $1,511 Currituck $2,420 Dare $4,091 Davidson $1,435 Davie $1,510 Duplin $977 Durham $3,075 Edgecombe $943 Forsyth $1,919 Franklin $1,477 Gaston $1,331 Gates $1,803 Graham-$514 Granville $1,415 Greene $691 Guilford $2,356 Halifax $1,060 Harnett $1,071 Haywood $1,972 Henderson $1,628 Hertford $1,454 Hoke $524 STATE AVERAGE Hyde $2,256 ($1,537) Iredell $1,632 Jackson $1,739 Johnston $1,489 Jones $1,584 Lee l 541 Lenoir $1,084 Lincoln $1,317 Macon $1,786 Madison $1,021 Martin 4 McDowell $1,244 Mecklenburg $2,448 Mitchell $1,118 Montgomery $1,236 Moore $1,843 N $1,35 New Hanover $2,568 Northampton $1,38 Onslow $1,214 Orange $4,734 Pamlico $1,679 Pasquotank $1,571 Pender $1,476 Perquimans $1,339 Person $1,314 Pitt $1,481 Polk $2,085 Randolph $1,196 Richmond $922 Robeson $523 Rockingham $1,202 Rowan ,615 Rutherford $1,214 Sampson $1,034 Scotland $1,791 Stanly $1,135 Stokes 589 Surry $1,208 Swain-$387 Transylvania $2,864 Tyrrell $938 Union $1,934 Vance $977 Wake $1,989 Warren $1,785 Washington $971 Watauga $2,698 Wayne $985 Wilkes $1,147 Wilson $1,34 Yadkin $1,102 Yancey $1,337 0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000 2250 2500 2750 3000 3250 3500 3750 4000 4250 4500 4750 5000 3< ATTACHMENT B > WHAT'S NEW IN THE 2017 LOCAL SCHOOL FINANCE STUDY? Long-time readers of the annual Local School Finance from Tables 1-5 in a single table,ordered by the Table 5 Relative Study noticed a new look beginning with the 2014 study, Effort rank.The table is accompanied by a brief explanation of the which continues this year. "Under the hood," however rankings,which also serves as an introduction to the more detailed the study is largely the same as in 2013 and previous tables included in the appendices. years, with a few notable exceptions. The rankings in these five columns are calculated in the five tables included in the appendices to this report. Most significantly,since 2014,the study has included charter school enrollment in each county's total Average Daily Membership(ADM). Property Value Rank:The first column shows county rankings Charter schools receive funding based on their ADM,just as district based on the real estate wealth available in each county.Most local schools do.The change reflects that each county's funding for funding for schools comes from property taxes.Counties ranked instructional expenses is divided approximately equally among all higher on this measure have more property available for potential district and charter school students residing in the county. taxation to support education.(See Table 1) For most counties,the new calculation resulted in little change to Actual Effort Rank: Rankings in the second column reflect the the study data.For some counties with large percentages of actual dollar effort of counties to fund schools,without taking into students attending charter schools,however,substantial shifts account property wealth.Counties that spend the most per student occurred.For instance, Person,Pamlico,and Northampton Counties, rank highest on this measure.(See Table 2) each with more than 10 percent of their public school students enrolled in charter schools,saw significant changes in their rankings Actual Effort Rank II:The rankings in the third column serve the in several of the finance study tables compared to 2013 and earlier same purpose as the second column but take into account studies.More detail about the change and its impact can be found in supplemental state funding provided for low wealth and small the report's"Notes on Methodology"section. counties.Counties that spend the most per student based on county spending combined with low-wealth and small county supplemental Also new since 2014,the state average per capita income used in state funding rank highest on this measure.This column can be Table 4 is the statewide average from the U.S.Bureau of Economic analyzed alongside the second column to show the impact of Analysis.Aside from this and the inclusion of charter school supplemental funding on counties'relative rankings.(See Table 3) enrollments,the study's methodology is unchanged.The five main data tables included in past years'studies appear again in this year's Ability to Pay Rank:The fourth column's rankings reflect an study as appendices.The tables appear in the same order as in past analysis of each county's fiscal capacity to support public schools, years,to facilitate comparison with previous studies.The capital taking into account property values(from the first column,adjusted outlay and debt service averages,which appeared in Tables 2 and 5 using the state's average effective property tax rate)and non prior to the 2014 study,and did not factor into the rankings,now property tax revenues.Large,urban counties that combine high appear as a separate Table 2A,with counties ranked to mirror the adjusted property valuations with broad based economic activity order in Table 2 to facilitate comparison with previous studies.Also and high per capita incomes tend to receive high rankings on this since 2014,several redundant table columns have been omitted and measure.(See Table 4) others reordered to facilitate readability. Relative Effort Rank:The final column compares Actual Effort Finally,the 2014 Local School Finance Study pioneered a new (from Table 2)and Ability to Pay(from Table 4).Low-wealth counties summary table,which we include again this year:Local School with comparatively high spending levels tend to rank highest in this Finance Study Rankings-at-a-Glance,which collects the rankings measure.(See Table 5) 110, IP • •IP • 001044 I 400k ■ ATTACHMENT B LOCAL SCHOOL FINANCE STUDY RANKINGS-AT-A-GLANCE FROM TABLE 1 FROM TABLE 2 FROM TABLE 3 FROM TABLE 4 FROM TABLE 5 COUNTY PROPERTY VALUE RANK: ACTUAL EFFORT RANK: ACTUAL EFFORT RANK II: ABILITY TO RELATIVE EFFORT RANK: Adjusted Property Total Current Spending Total Current Spending Per ADM with PAY RANK: Current Spending as Percentage Tax Base Per ADM Per ADM Low Wealth and Small County Funding Revenue Per ADM of Revenue per Student Dare 1 2 4 1 95 Jackson 2 27 54 3 98 Watauga 3 6 13 4 84 Avery 4 20 15 8 93 Hyde 5 13 3 9 85 Brunswick 6 11 22 5 92 Macon 7 24 46 7 96 Carteret 8 8 17 2 94 W Currituck 9 10 18 6 90 J Transylvania 10 5 9 11 63 F Clay 11 94 30 25 97 O: Ashe 12 46 42 21 87 Q Yancey 13 59 37 27 86 O Pamlico 14 29 12 18 88 d New Hanover 15 7 11 10 77 O Polk 16 15 14 17 75 Alleghany 17 30 10 22 80 Graham 18 99 45 33 99 Buncombe 19 14 28 16 73 Perquimans 20 58 20 23 91 Chatham 21 4 8 12 58 Haywood 22 17 35 24 61 Madison 23 84 67 39 89 Warren 24 25 21 34 47 Moore 25 21 41 20 81 Henderson 26 33 65 26 74 Mitchell 27 74 38 45 76 Cherokee 28 28 51 40 32 Northampton 29 53 23 49 46 Durham 30 3 7 15 31 Orange 31 1 2 13 3 Tyrrell 32 92 5 48 83 W Beaufort 33 26 47 32 49 J Swain 34 100 99 44 100 I- Person 35 62 86 41 69 O: Mecklenburg 36 33 16 14 67 Q 7 Wake 37 16 34 19 78 0 Iredell 38 32 64 28 71 p Jones 39 36 1 37 55 Z Pender 40 45 62 52 33 O Montgomery 41 65 82 47 66 L1 Catawba 42 49 84 38 64 N Rutherford 43 68 75 62 45 Lincoln 44 61 68 42 68 Davie 45 41 71 35 65 Chowan 46 37 27 46 29 Craven 47 54 92 36 72 Guilford 48 12 25 29 12 Forsyth 49 19 40 30 34 Wilkes 50 72 91 63 54 Stokes 51 35 39 69 8 Davidson 52 50 66 53 37 McDowell 53 64 52 74 24 Rowan 54 34 48 59 13 Bladen 55 56 58 71 16 Caldwell 56 66 60 73 25 Camden 57 79 31 55 70 Stanly 58 73 90 60 60 W Caswell 59 91 59 89 52 4 Cabarrus 60 31 63 43 30 I— Washington 61 88 19 83 53 Q Rockingham 62 70 77 66 40 D Onslow 63 67 97 31 82 O Pasquotank 64 38 50 57 15 O Lee 65 39 53 56 19 = Yadkin 66 76 83 77 38 = Burke 67 77 93 72 48 ~ Union 68 18 33 50 7 Martin 69 47 29 64 17 Alamance 70 52 74 51 41 Alexander 71 82 96 79 44 Gates 72 22 6 88 2 Bertie 73 89 36 91 43 Hertford 74 48 26 84 6 Pitt 75 43 57 54 28 Granville 76 51 70 75 10 Cleveland 77 63 69 81 14 Franklin 78 44 44 87 5 Anson 79 69 32 85 26 Wilson 80 75 70 65 27 Surry 81 69 79 61 50 Randolph 82 71 72 80 23 Halifax 83 81 88 82 39 W Gaston 84 60 87 70 20 J F Lenoir 85 78 56 68 56 O: Edgecombe 86 90 89 90 51 j• Cumberland 87 40 78 58 18 0 Duplin 88 86 80 78 57 Nash 89 55 61 67 21 0 Johnston 90 42 49 86 4 i- Wayne 91 85 94 76 59 I- Richmond 92 93 81 94 35 ro Columbus 93 95 95 93 62 Hoke 94 97 100 98 79 Sampson 95 83 73 92 22 Harnett 96 80 76 95 9 Scotland 97 23 24 97 1 Greene 98 96 55 99 42 Vance 99 87 85 96 11 Robeson 100 98 98 100 36 5< ATTACHMENT B > STATE AND LOCAL SCHOOL FUNDING IN NORTH CAROLINA: A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE North Carolina's first state constitution in 1776 included SUN an education provision that stated, "A School or Schools .)� a ■ A.ENERGy shall be established by the Legislature for the convenient Instruction of Youth." The legislature provided no financial A3 support for schools. �z��� — �- �� A century later, the constitution adopted after the Civil War required the state to provide funding for all children ages 6-21 _ to attend school tuition-free. In 1901, the General Assembly - ■ I appropriated $100,000 for public schools, marking the first 1 r time there was a direct appropriation of tax revenue for 1 public schools. Today, the constitution mandates that the • state provide a "general and uniform system of free public t) ` 4*11.0 schools" and that the state legislature may assign counties mil _ - such responsibility for the financial support of the free public schools as it may deem appropriate." N.C. Const. art. IX, § 2 - -4, (see note, "Sources of Local School Finance Law: The North _ � s Carolina State Constitution"). i , miiiii The constitution adopted after the Civil War required 1 4. i the state to provide funding for all children ages 6-21 to attend school tuition-free. 1 ISOURCES OF LOCAL SCHOOL FINANCE LAW: THE NORTH CAROLINA STATE CONSTITUTION Article IX, Sec.2. Uniform system of schools. (1) General and uniform system:term.The General Assembly shall provide by taxation and otherwise for a general and uniform system of free public schools,which shall be maintained at least nine months in every year, and wherein equal opportunities shall be provided for all students. (2) Local responsibility.The General Assembly may assign to units of local government such responsibility for the financial support of the free public schools as it may deem appropriate.The governing boards of units of local government with financial responsibility for public education may use local revenues to add to or supplement any public school or post-secondary school program. >6 ATTACHMENT B Apart from the constitutional provisions,a major change in the As noted in the introduction,over time the delineations proscribed school funding structure occurred during the Great Depression. by the School Machinery Acts and the School Budget and Fiscal Under the School Machinery Act(enacted in 1931 and amended in Control Act have given way to increased local investment in 1933),the state assumed responsibility for all current expenses instructional expenses. Even so,the North Carolina Supreme necessary to maintain a minimum eight-month school term and Court has made clear that it is the state that bears responsibility an educational program of basic content and quality(instruction- for fulfilling the constitutional obligation to guard and maintain al and program expenses). In exchange for the state's expanded the right of every North Carolina child to receive a "sound basic role, local governments assumed responsibility for school education."Leandro v. North Carolina,346 N.C.336(1997). construction and maintenance(capital expenses).The School Machinery Act established counties as the basic unit for operat- ing public schools,which is maintained today with large coun- The North Carolina Supreme Court has made ty-wide school systems, except in the 11 counties that also have clear that it is the state that bears responsibility city school systems. for fulfilling the constitutional obligation to guard In 1975,the General Assembly enacted the School Budget and and maintain the right of every North Carolina Fiscal Control Act, which delineated responsibility for school child to receive a "sound basic education." funding: To ensure a quality education for every child in North Carolina has been engaged in litigation defending its sys- North Carolina, and to assure that the necessary tem of school finance for almost twenty years.The legal action resources are provided, it is the policy of the State was instigated in part by spending inequities between low-wealth of North Carolina to provide from State revenue and higher-wealth counties.These inequities persist today. In sources the instructional expenses for current 2014-15,the state's ten highest-spending counties spent an aver- operations of the public school system as defined age of$46,321 more per classroom than the ten lowest-spending in the standard course of study. It is the policy counties.This large gap exists primarily because of the variation of the State of North Carolina that the facilities in property wealth across the state.The wealthiest counties requirements for a public education system will have$1,890,059 in real estate capacity available per student, be met by county governments. compared with the poorest counties,which have approximately $354,630 in real estate capacity available per student.This gap has widened by over$1 million since the North Carolina Supreme Court's Leandro decision in 1997. ISOURCES OF LOCAL SCHOOL FINANCE LAW: THE LEANDRO CASE "Because the North Carolina Constitution expressly states that units of local governments with financial responsibility for public education may provide additional funding to supplement the educational programs provided by the state,there can be nothing unconstitutional about their doing so or in any inequality of opportunity occurring as a result...Clearly then,a county with greater financial resources will be able to supplement its programs to a greater degree than less wealthy counties, resulting in enhanced educational opportunity for its students." Leandro v. State,488 S.E.2d 249(N.C.1997). 7< ATTACHMENT B > SCHOOL FUNDING: WHO PAYS FOR WHAT? North Carolina public schools spent$12.6 billion on instructional ............................................................................................................................................................................... expenses in the 201415 school year, using a combination of state, WHO PAYS FOR SCHOOL PERSONNEL? 2014-15 federal,and local resources. State funding accounted for 64 percent of expenditures,federal funding accounted for 12 percent,and local funding accounted for 24 percent of spending. . 100,000 SOURCES OF FUNDS FOR SCHOOLS IN NC, 2014-15 s X92 LOCAL: 6,380 FEDERAL: FEDERAL LOCAL 6,666 $1.45 $3.06 DPI,Financial& 80,000 BILLION BILLION Business Services, z TOTAL: (12%) (24%) Statistical Profile, 0 98,838 z Table 22-North D u_ Carolina Current u_ STATE Expense Expenditures Lu $8.08 BILLION by Source of Funds u (64%) 0 60,000 u, m c w °z STATE: STATE FUNDS 15,729 z LOCAL: In 2014-15,the state provided $8.1 billion to operate 2,583 ° 40,000 2,702 STATE: district,charter,and regional schools in 115 school systems across a FEDERAL: 11,171 4,478 100 counties for 1.52 million students.Approximately 93 percent o LOCAL: STATE: TOTAL 3,276 of state funds were spent on salaries and benefits for 131,751 m 4,412 22,909 FEDERAL: state-funded school personnel. Z LOCAL: 1,232 20,000 1,028 TOTAL: State funding for operations has continually increased from$3.44 FEDERAL: 15,679 14 billion in 1992-93 to$8.1 billion in 2014-15. But while the level of TOTAL: funding has increased over time,the percentage of the state's 5,454 General Fund dedicated to education has continually declined. In _ 2014-15,37.8 percent of the state's General Fund was appropriated for K-12 public education,a significant drop from 1970,when it was PRINCIPALS TEACHERS TEACHER PROFESSIONAL &ASSISTANT ASSISTANTS INSTRUCTIONAL 52.5 percent. If public education were funded at the same percent- PRINCIPALS SUPPORT PERSONNEL age of the General Fund as in 1970,districts and schools would have an additional $3.05 billion to educate our students. Source:North Carolina Department of Public Instruction,Statistical Profile State funding for capital outlays has been relatively small compared with the state's investment in operations,and com- pared with what counties invest in facilities.The amount of funding the state provides for capital outlays has also decreased ............................................................................................................................................................................... drastically since 2012-13,when the state spent$32 million on capital outlays(5.8 percent of the combined local,state,and FUNDING FOR SCHOOL BUILDINGS, 2014-15 federal total. In 2013-14 and 2014-15,the state contributed 2.1 percent of the total capital outlay expenditure in the state, spending$9.6 million in 2013-14 and$12.2 million in 2014-15. STATE $12.2 MILLION ............................................................................................................................................................................... (2%) K-12 SPENDING (%OF GENERAL OPERATING BUDGET) 60% 52.5% 50% K-12 education spending represents the largest LOCAL 40% 37.8% part of the state budget, -572.2 MILLION but its share of the state (98%) budget has declined 30% sharply since 1970. 1970-71 2014-15 Source:North Carolina Department of Public Instruction,Statistical Profile. >8 ATTACHMENT B LOCAL FUNDS The nearly century-old division of state and local responsibility for school funding still shapes the way North Carolina pays for LOCAL SCHOOL FUNDING: public education today, with 64 percent of instructional IMPACTS ON SCHOOLS expenditures coming from the state and 97.9 percent of capital expenses paid at the local level. However, the division has AND CLASSROOMS eroded somewhat, with counties funding 18.8 percent of . . principal and assistant principal positions, 6.5 percent of teachers, 11.8 percent of teacher assistants, and 20.9 percent Differences in counties' levels of investment in their of professional instructional support personnel; and with the school systems translate into dramatically different state paying 2 percent of capital expenses. options at the school and classroom level.As an illus- tration,at a statewide average class size of 20 stu- Considering local expenditures on programs and personnel in dents per classroom,the ten counties that spend the 2014-15, the ten counties that spent the most per student most per student would spend,on average,$60,526 averaged $3,026 per student compared to the ten that spent per classroom. By contrast,the ten counties that the least, which averaged $710 per student. That represents a spend the least per child would spend,on average, gap of$2,316 — and 60 counties are below the state average of $14,205 per classroom -a difference of$46,321 per $1,537. The bottom seven counties combined spend $432 less classroom.At the state's average elementary school than Orange County spends on its own. size of 490 students,that translates to a difference of$1,134,859 per elementary school.At the state's One of the primary challenges from the five low-wealth average high school size of 848, it translates to a plaintiffs in the Leandro case dealt with the inequities between difference of$1,964,002 per high school. varying levels of county support for schools. However, the state Supreme Court ruled in 1997 that "the 'equal opportuni- ties' clause of Article IX, Section 2(1) of the North Carolina FEDERAL FUNDS Constitution does not require substantially equal funding or educational advantages in all school districts. Consequently, Resources from the federal government accounted for 12 percent the provisions of the current state system for funding schools of North Carolina public education spending on instructional which require or allow counties to help finance their school expenses in 2014-15,and totaled $1,449,542,854. Federal resourc- systems and result in unequal funding among the school es are given to states in the form of direct grants,state applica- districts of the state do not violate constitutional principles." tions, state plans,or a combination of the three. ' ! I III ill",; 7 �1 .. thn a I P0. _ - -° -- € ! ,. 0 - . 0 — + 4,zI --�4•'. i J .w�. re , .' ,, ,— „„„A , , r �y.k-- '} / ;it --, ' t ....41 Etk- ' j" ta I e + ►s ilielliP6‘ 4 1 00, \ , .-; 4 _. , • lir , ,... ,r �. ,� ATTACHMENT B > LOCAL SCHOOL FINANCE STUDY 2017: GAPS AND TRENDS The primary source of revenue for county government is local a real estate capacity of$354,630 per student. This gap of property taxes, and this year the study once again revealed $1.54 is marginally larger than last year's gap of$1.52 million. wide variation between the property values of the state's The gap had decreased for the previous four years of the Local wealthiest and poorest counties,and resulting disparities School Finance Study(there was a $1.69 million gap in 2012-13). in revenues generated. This year also saw the continuation Major factors that contributed to the narrowing gap included of marked differences in spending per child between North reductions in real estate wealth in the wealthiest counties,some Carolina's highest-and lowest-spending counties. counties' 2011 revaluations, and increases in student enrollment in several counties. POOREST COUNTIES TAXED THEMSELVES AT HIGHER RATES, BUT STILL GENERATED The ten poorest counties taxed themselves at nearly double the SUBSTANTIALLY LESS FROM PROPERTY TAX rate of the ten wealthiest counties -$0.83 compared to $0.44, Coastal and mountain counties have the highest real estate a 39-cent difference. In spite of this, because of the disparity in wealth capacity in the state. In 2014-15,every county in the real estate wealth capacity, the revenue the poorest counties top ten had a per student real estate wealth capacity above could generate, even at the higher tax rate,was substantially $1.6 million,and together had an average five times greater lower than what the wealthier counties could generate at than the bottom ten counties.The ten wealthiest counties had lower rates. The poorest counties continue raising their tax an average real estate capacity of$1,890,059 per student, rates, while the wealthiest counties lower theirs, and yet the compared with the ten poorest counties, which had,on average, substantial revenue disparity persists. LOW- VS. HIGH-WEALTH COUNTIES TAXABLE REAL ESTATE WEALTH PER CHILD SPENDING PER STUDENT 2,500,000 3,000 2,500 $3,026 2,000,000 $1,890,059 2,000 1,500,000 1,500 1,000,000 1,000 500,000 $710 500 $354,630 TEN TEN TEN TEN WEALTHIEST POOREST HIGHEST-SPENDING LOWEST-SPENDING COUNTIES COUNTIES COUNTIES COUNTIES The wealthiest counties have more than five times the taxable Annual per-student county spending on programs and personnel was property wealth per child available to the ten poorest counties.As $2,316 higher in the ten highest-spending counties than in the ten a result,even though the ten poorest counties tax themselves at lowest-spending counties.This gap is wider than last year,when it double the rate of the wealthiest counties,the revenue they generate was$2,211 per student. through taxation is substantially lower. >10 ATTACHMENT B ,• LARGE SPENDING DISPARITIES REMAIN WIDENING REAL ESTATE WEALTH GAP This year's study found a larger gap between the highest-and lowest-spending counties:$2,316 per student,compared with $2,211 last year.Orange County,at the top of the list,spends more 2,500,000 than twelve times more per student than Swain County at the bottom.The ten highest-spending counties spend 4.26 times more per child ($3,026 per child)than the ten lowest-spending counties 2,000,000 ($710 per child).On average,the highest-spending counties increased their spending by 3.8 percent more per child this year since last year($110 more per student).The lowest-spending 500,000 counties increased their average spending per student by.8 percent($5 per student). SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDING REMAINS CRUCIAL 1,000,000 In 1991,the state enacted supplemental funds for low-wealth and small counties, in part to address the limited capacity that some 500,000 counties have to raise revenues through taxation because of their limited local resources and size. In 2014-15 the General Assembly provided an appropriation of$227.8 million for 68 low-wealth counties(79 districts)and $38.9 million for 25 small counties. o� o,`b cf) 00 O\ Off' OD OP` CP O� 6 CP O� 0 1'� 1v 0 4, 0 1oi *� 1°i 95) 95) q'? ,y0 95) ,y0 ,y0 953 ,y0 ,y0 ,y0 ,yO ,y0 ,15) .y0 ,15) Low-wealth supplemental funding is provided to systems whose The difference in real estate wealth capacity between the ten wealth-ability to generate local revenue per student is below the state iest and ten poorest counties has grown from$477,477 in 1997 to average.Some of the factors used to determine eligibility are $1,535,429.68 in 2015. county adjusted property tax base,square miles in the county, and per capita income. In 2014-15,low-wealth eligible counties received total low-wealth supplemental funding ranging from $10,618 to$17.3 million. Per-student dollars ranged from$9 (Graham)to$734(Robeson). .,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,,..,, Small county supplemental funding was provided in 2014-15 WIDENING SPENDING GAP to those county school systems with average daily membership (ADM) less than 3,200.City school districts are not eligible for this funding. If a school district becomes ineligible due to an ADM greater than 3,200,the funding will be phased out over 5 years. Martin and Anson counties were in the first year of phase-out and received 80%of their 2013-14 allotment. In 2014-15 eligible 2,500 counties received between $1.17 and$1.67 million in small-county supplemental funding. Per-student dollars ranged from $358 (Anson)to$3,048(Tyrrell). 2,000 SPENDING DISPARITIES ORANGE$4,734 CLAY$888 S4,000 COLUMBUS$775 1,500 S3,000 GREENE$691 HOKE$524 $2,000 ROBESON$523 GRAHAM$514 $100 c;)\ a 0 of o ti o h o 1 o 0 w O 1 1� 1 SWAIN$387 D) oovovoovovoovo -6, o1, -0 O If the bottom seven counties'total current spending were combined, The spending gap between the top ten-spending and bottom ten-spending they would still only spend$6 more per child than Orange County counties has grown from$1,094 in 1997 to$2,316 in 2015. spends by itself. n< ATTACHMENT B > NOTES ON METHODOLOGY CHARTER SCHOOL ENROLLMENT SALES/ASSESSMENT RATIO The Department of Public Instruction's Division of School Business' In North Carolina,most residential and commercial property is Report on Average Daily Membership and Membership Last Day by revalued once every eight years. Prior to 1984 it was difficult to LEA(ADM&MLD)provides estimates of charter school enrollment compare tax wealth and effort because of this impediment to in each county.Adding charter school enrollments to the ADM of the estimating the market value of property valuations. In 1984 the county in which each charter school is located produces a base Department of Revenue completed its first statewide Sales/ calculation of total ADM for each county.However,charter schools Assessment Ratio Study,comparing the market value of recently may enroll students from across county lines,with local funding sold property with its assessed value. Using the ratio of assessed flowing from each student's district of residence to the charter property value to market value,the Department calculated an school he or she attends(this is different from state ADM funding for adjusted property tax rate for each county.The longer it has been charter schools).These cross-district enrollments are not captured since a county has undergone reevaluation,the more likely it is by the ADM&MLD report. that the market value of property in the county exceeds its assessed valuation. Therefore,the 2017 Local School Finance Study relies on results of a survey of districts conducted by the Division of School Business in Rapidly growing communities have numerous demands on public 2015 to account for all students within each district who attend services,and the demands tend to outstrip land value increases. charter schools.Survey data are provided at the Office of Charter Therefore,to meet the increase in demands for additional Schools website for information only and are not used for any services, local officials must either revalue property more often financial or budget purposes. or raise taxes. In an effort to make this study as accurate as possible,a three-year weighted average is used to calculate the CAPITAL SPENDING adjusted property valuation.This approach is intended to result in Data from the North Carolina Department of State Treasurer's more accurate valuations for small, rural counties where Report on County Spending on Public School Capital Outlays was relatively few land transactions might have taken place during used to calculate a six-year average of county appropriations for any given year. capital outlay, interest on debt for school construction,and the OTHER REVENUE SOURCES net change in capital reserves.Withdrawals from the Public School Building Capital Fund,Grants from the Public School The primary source of local revenue is property taxes. In addition Building Bond Fund,and the North Carolina Education Lottery to property taxes,this study includes a county's share of local Funds have been removed from the county total.The debt service option sales taxes and fines and forfeitures.Allotments from includes expenditures for school bond repayment and lease the ADM fund and grants for school construction have been purchase agreements.The capital outlay is actual spending on removed to isolate capital spending. Finally,11 counties have capital projects or equipment for buildings. supplemental school taxes,with additional revenue totaling $63.4 million in 2014-15. 44 ..., f - -,-1 ■ - 44)1 , 1 , , / . • t°;P .; AMII ik, v/ 11 J., egi , 1 --..„...,...._....5,„„„y qv 4 it I „ >12 TABLE 1: RANKING OF ADJI5IS�TT11BVALUATIONS PER STUDENT This table reflects the real estate wealth available to counties to support education.The ranking is based on the total adjusted property valuation for each county,divided by the number of students attending public school in the county.The property valuation was adjusted using a three-year weighted average of the Sales/Assessment Ratios. COUNTIES RANK PREVIOUS LAST YEAR EFFECTIVE COUNTY 2014-15 ADJUSTED 2014-15 ADJUSTED PROPERTY YEAR'S RANK REVALUED TAX RATE PROPERTY TAX BASE FINAL ADM TAX BASE PER ADM Dare 1 1 2013 $0.399 $13,773,978,472 4,929 $2,794,477.27 Jackson 2 2 2008 $0.386 $8,565,015,216 3,926 $2,181,613.66 Watauga 3 4 2014 $0.311 $8,856,420,803 4,471 $1,980,859.05 Avery 4 3 2014 $0.477 $3,904,306,609 2,134 $1,829,571.98 Hyde 5 6 2009 $0722 $1,038,680,710 571 $1,819,055.53 Brunswick 6 5 2011 $0.476 $23,656,886,298 13,212 $1,790,560.57 Macon 7 7 2007 $0.357 $7,525,029,837 4,393 $1,712,959.22 Carteret 8 8 2011 $0.325 $14,584,268,350 8,546 $1,706,560.77 Currituck 9 10 2013 $0.451 $6,197,657,449 3,865 $1,603,533.62 Transylvania 10 9 2009 $0.464 $5,920,650,832 1699 $1,600,608.50 Clay 11 12 2010 $0.480 $1,625,667,654 1,295 $1,255,341.82 Ashe 12 11 2011 $0.432 $1881,469,873 3,107 $1,249,266.13 Yancey 13 16 2008 $0.492 $2,604,002,702 2,219 $1,173,502.79 Pamlico 14 14 2012 $0.546 $1,799,956,856 1,539 $1,169,562.61 New Hanover 15 13 2012 $0.530 $30,892,816,238 26,432 $1,168,765.75 Polk 16 15 2009 $0.519 $2,763,595,358 2,367 $1,167,551.90 Alleghany 17 17 2007 $0.549 $1,591,645,095 1,388 $1,146,718.37 Graham 18 18 2010 $0.460 $1,260,320,089 1,190 $1,059,092.51 Buncombe 19 20 2013 $0.532 $32,098,626,632 30,594 $1,049,180.45 Perquimans 20 19 2008 $0.000 $1,782,888,033 1,718 $1,037,769.53 Chatham 21 21 2009 $0.645 $9,062,545,947 9,228 $982,070.43 Haywood 22 22 2011 0.558 $7,108,612,706 7,298 $974,049.43 Madison 23 25 2012 $0.461 $2,304,969,325 2,445 $942,727.74 Warren 24 24 2009 $0746 $2,327,039,290 2,495 $932,681.08 Moore 25 26 2007 $0.486 $11,873,225,659 13,266 $895,011.73 Henderson 26 27 2011 $0.523 $12,314,704,324 11861 $888,442.70 Mitchell 27 23 2014 $0.554 $1,677,882,498 1,943 $863,552.50 Cherokee 28 28 2012 $0.542 $2,942,083,971 3,429 $858,000.57 Northampton 29 30 2011 $0.979 $1,977,625,463 2,383 $829,888.99 Durham 30 31 2008 $0.816 $30,939,621,895 38,551 $802,563.41 Orange 31 32 2009 $0.897 $16,111,418,726 20,123 $800,646.96 Tyrrell 32 29 2009 $0787 $450,243,398 573 $785,765.09 Beaufort 33 34 2010 $0.584 $5,566,100,776 7,221 $770,821.32 Swain 34 35 2013 $0.370 $1,565,402,624 2,033 $769,996.37 Person 35 36 2013 $0707 $4,337,414,806 5,674 $764,436.87 Mecklenburg 36 33 2011 $0792 $119,536,776,063 157,636 $758,308.86 Wake 37 37 2008 $0.621 $120,037,251,515 162,043 $740,774.06 Iredell 38 40 2011 $0.497 $20,735,292,806 28,431 $729,319.86 Jones 39 38 2014 $0749 $814,599,203 1,117 $729,274.13 Pender 40 39 2011 $0.000 $1,782,888,033 8,836 $710,654.80 Montgomery 41 41 2012 $0.598 $2,845,961,681 4,057 $701,494.13 Catawba 42 44 2011 $0.545 $16,239,244,460 24,207 $670,849.11 (/) Rutherford 43 46 2012 $0.618 $6,118,178,876 9,316 $656,738.82 W Lincoln 44 43 2011 $0.620 $8,293,790,238 12,635 $656,413.95 Davie 45 45 2013 $0.669 $4,107,027,038 6,298 $652,116.07 V Chowan 46 42 2014 $0.682 $1,408,518,433 2,176 $647,297.07 Craven 47 48 2010 $0529 $8,959,758,269 14,256 $628,490.34 CI Guilford 48 47 2012 $0.756 $47,158,441,570 76,133 $619,421.82 Z Forsyth 49 49 2013 $0704 $32,599,197,022 56,280 $579,232.36 W Wilkes 50 53 2013 $0.643 $5,691,382,227 9,827 $579,157.65 Stokes 51 54 2013 $0.637 $3,680,998,433 6,426 $572,828.89 a Davidson 52 67 2007 $0.572 $12,842,985,665 22,576 $568,877.82 a McDowell 53 52 2011 $0.532 $3,565,217,616 6,282 $567,529.07 Rowan 54 51 2011 $0.692 $11,259,177,187 19,933 $564,851.11 Bladen 55 56 2007 $0722 $2,754,164,083 4,988 $552,158.00 n Caldwell 56 66 2013 $0.586 $6,529,663,185 11,964 $545,775.93 Camden 57 59 2007 $0735 $1,015,487,998 1,863 $545,082.12 Stanly 58 61 2013 $0.618 $4,673,195,759 8,693 $537,581.47 Caswell 59 60 2008 $0.667 $1,572,693,767 2,927 $537,305.69 Cabarrus 60 57 2012 $0.689 $19,890,707,130 37,428 $531,439.22 Washington 61 62 2013 $0.807 $873,763,562 1,651 $529,232.93 Rockingham 62 64 2011 $0716 $6,870,888,083 13,177 $521,430.38 Onslow 63 55 2014 $0.675 $13,156,558,309 25,397 $518,035.92 Pasquotank 64 50 2014 $0760 $2,960,690,088 5,744 $515,440.47 Lee 65 63 2013 $0708 $5,120,468,379 9,952 $514,516.52 Yadkin 66 65 2009 $0.692 $2,782,452,952 5,426 $512,800.03 Burke 67 73 2013 $0.665 $6,509,738,449 12,734 $511,209.24 Union 68 69 2008 $0.871 $21,932,788,772 43,157 $508,209.30 Martin 69 58 2009 $0764 $1,841,977,261 3,648 $504,927.98 Alamance 70 68 2009 $0.569 $11,981,954,384 23,758 $504,333.46 Alexander 71 70 2007 $0.673 $2,585,542,924 5,127 $504,299.38 Gates 72 72 2009 $0.830 $808,543,771 1,633 $495,127.85 Bertie 73 85 2012 $0.812 $1,273,289,295 2,582 $493,140.70 Hertford 74 77 2011 $0.927 $1,443,565,419 2,940 $491,008.65 Pitt 75 71 2012 $0.682 $11,717,278,616 24,018 $487,854.05 Granville 76 82 2010 $0.878 $4,267,902,029 8,752 $487,648.77 Cleveland 77 74 2008 $0.771 $7,675,904,292 15,850 $484,284.18 Franklin 78 75 2012 $0.841 $4,506,862,776 9,354 $481,811.29 Anson 79 78 2010 $0.834 $1,673,538,984 3,502 $477,880.92 Wilson 80 76 2008 $0799 $6,383,334,626 13,375 $477,258.66 Surry 81 79 2012 $0.578 $5,436,959,608 11,596 $468,865.09 Randolph 82 80 2014 $0.632 $10,638,836,581 22,888 $464,821.59 Halifax 83 81 2007 $0.689 $3,618,719,274 7,859 $460,455.44 Gaston 84 83 2007 $0.932 $14,522,754,080 32,910 $441,286.97 Lenoir 85 86 2009 $0.855 $4,019,401,665 9,133 $440,096.54 Edgecombe 86 84 2009 $0.924 $3,064,749,681 7,009 $437,259.19 Cumberland 87 87 2009 $0770 $22,016,263,541 50,937 $432,225.37 Duplin 88 88 2009 $0709 $4,147,894,351 9,706 $427,353.63 Nash 89 89 2009 $0.674 $7,097,538,045 16,725 $424,367.00 Johnston 90 92 2011 $0.783 $14,367,973,346 35,031 $410,150.25 Wayne 91 90 2011 $0.669 $7,911,148,633 19,323 $409,416.17 Richmond 92 93 2008 $0.829 $3,058,879,036 7,510 $407,307.46 Columbus 93 91 2013 $0762 $3,679,831,524 9,086 $405,000.17 Hoke 94 95 2014 $0733 $3,269,359,196 8,530 $383,277.75 Sampson 95 96 2011 $0.867 $4,242,142,878 11,512 $368,497.47 Harnett 96 94 2009 $0785 $7,473,992,661 20,316 $367,887.02 Scotland 97 97 2011 $1.076 $2,057,998,716 5,928 $347,165.78 Greene 98 98 2013 $0783 $1,073,412,892 3,136 $342,287.27 Vance 99 99 2008 $1.036 $2,342,693,853 7,373 $317,739.57 Robeson 100 100 2010 $0763 $6,163,056,348 21668 $260,396.16 State Total/Average $0.662 $1,000,062,479,472 1,500,399 $769,764. 13< TAB 1 hF1 big-F13ORT This table reflects the actual dollar effort of communities to fund schools,without taking into account property wealth.This ranking is based on 2014-15 total current spending for each county(including supplemental school taxes),divided by the number of students attending public school in the county.High-wealth communities with corresponding high levels of spending tend to rank highest in this measure. COUNTIES RANK PREVIOUS 2014-15 2014-15 2014-15 2014-15 TOTAL 2014-15 2014-15 THIS YEAR'S CURRENT CURRENT SPENDING SUPPLEMENTAL CURRENT SPENDING FINAL TOTAL CURRENT YEAR RANK SPENDING PER ADM SCHOOL TAXES (WITH SUPPLEMENTAL) ADM SPENDING PER ADM Orange 1 1 $73,135,134 $3,634 $22,135,495 $95,270,629 20,123 $4,734 Dare 2 2 $20,163,320 $4,091 $0 $20,163,320 4,929 $4,091 Durham 3 3 $118,563,483 $1075 $0 $118,563,483 38,551 $3,075 Chatham 4 4 $26,818,413 $2,906 $0 $26,818,413 9,228 $2,906 Transylvania 5 6 $10,595,738 $2,864 $0 $10,595,738 3,699 $2,864 Watauga 6 5 $12,062,834 $2,698 $0 $12,062,834 4,471 $2,698 New Hanover 7 7 $67,879,109 $2,568 $0 $67,879,109 26,432 $2,568 Carteret 8 12 $21,000,000 $2,457 $0 $21,000,000 8,546 $2,457 Mecklenburg 9 10 $385,936,594 $2,448 $0 $385,936,594 157,636 $2,448 Currituck 10 11 $9,353,526 $2,420 $0 $9,353,526 1865 $2,420 Brunswick 11 8 $31,349,382 $2,373 $0 $31,349,382 13,212 $2,373 Guilford 12 9 $179,360,398 $2,356 $0 $179,360,398 76,133 $2,356 Hyde 13 15 $1,288,286 $2,256 $0 $1,288,286 571 $2,256 Buncombe 14 13 $59,872,901 $1,957 $8,136,173 $68,009,074 30,594 $2,223 Polk 15 16 $4,934,788 $2,085 $0 $4,934,788 2,367 $2,085 Wake 16 14 $322,372,340 $1,989 $0 $322,372,340 162,043 $1,989 Haywood 17 18 $14,393,249 $1,972 $0 $14,393,249 7,298 $1,972 Union 18 19 $83,457,494 $1,934 $0 $83,457,494 43,157 $1,934 Forsyth 19 17 $108,020,219 $1,919 $0 $108,020,219 56,280 $1,919 Avery 20 21 $3,973,725 $1,862 $0 $3,973,725 2,134 $1,862 Moore 21 20 $24,446,931 $1,843 $0 $24,446,931 13,266 $1,843 Gates 22 27 $2,945,000 $1,803 $0 $2,945,000 1,633 $1,803 Scotland 23 28 $10,614,325 $1,791 $0 $10,614,325 5,928 $1,791 Macon 24 22 $7,845,651 $1,786 $0 $7,845,651 4,393 $1,786 Warren 25 42 $4,385,066 $1,758 $0 $4,385,066 2,495 $1,758 Beaufort 26 25 $12,669,163 $1,754 $0 $12,669,163 7,221 $1,754 Jackson 27 26 $6,826,102 $1,739 $0 $6,826,102 3,926 $1,739 Cherokee 28 30 $5,832,950 $1,701 $0 $5,832,950 3,429 $1,701 Pamlico 29 29 $2,583,812 $1,679 $0 $2,583,812 1,539 $1,679 Alleghany 30 24 $2,308,274 $1,663 $0 $2,308,274 1,388 $1,663 Cabarrus 31 31 $62,112,349 $1,660 $0 $62,112,349 37,428 $1,660 Iredell 32 35 $40,109,402 $1,411 $6,294,517 $46,403,919 28,431 $1,632 Henderson 33 39 $22,560,051 $1,628 $0 $22,560,051 13,861 $1,628 Rowan 34 34 $32,198,980 $1,615 $0 $32,198,980 19,933 $1,615 Stokes 35 36 $10,211,763 $1,589 $0 $10,211,763 6,426 $1,589 Jones 36 59 $1,769,342 $1,584 $0 $1,769,342 1,117 $1,584 Chowan 37 37 $3,421,929 $1,573 $0 $3,421,929 2,176 $1,573 Pasquotank 38 23 $9,021,858 $1,571 $0 $9,021,858 5,744 $1,571 Lee 39 38 $15,338,050 $1,541 $0 $15,338,050 9,952 $1,541 N Cumberland 40 44 $76,985,248 $1,511 $0 $76,985,248 50,937 $1,511 W Davie 41 47 $9,507,445 $1,510 $0 $9,507,445 6,298 $1,510 Johnston 42 40 $52,150,000 $1,489 $0 $52,150,000 35,031 $1,489 U Pitt 43 43 $35,576,287 $1,481 $0 $35,576,287 24,018 $1,481 - Franklin 44 50 $13,818,840 $1,477 $0 $13,818,840 9,354 $1,477 CI Pender 45 41 $13,044,356 $1,476 $0 $13,044,356 8,836 $1,476 Z Ashe 46 49 $4,541,475 $1,462 $0 $4,541,475 3,107 $1,462 W Martin 47 46 $5,305,028 $1,454 $0 $5,305,028 3,648 $1,454 Hertford 48 51 $4,273,524 $1,454 $0 $4,273,524 2,940 $1,454 CL Catawba 49 45 $35,151,688 $1,452 $0 $35,151,688 24,207 $1,452 CL Davidson 50 62 $29,516,340 $1,307 $2,882,031 $32,398,371 22,576 $1,435 Q Granville 51 48 $12,385,287 $1,415 $0 $12,385,287 8,752 $1,415 Alamance 52 55 $33,117,119 $1,394 $0 $33,117,119 23,758 $1,394 ^ Northampton 53 52 $3,300,000 $1,385 $0 $3,300,000 2,383 $1,385 Craven 54 56 $19,615,914 $1,376 $0 $19,615,914 14,256 $1,376 Nash 55 60 $21,892,636 $1,309 $803,836 $22,696,472 16,725 $1,357 Bladen 56 64 $6,757,745 $1,355 $0 $6,757,745 4,988 $1,355 Wilson 57 58 $18,013,038 $1,347 $0 $18,013,038 13,375 $1,347 Perquimans 58 63 $2,300,000 $1,339 $0 $2,300,000 1,718 $1,339 Yancey 59 61 $2,967,225 $1,337 $0 $2,967,225 2,219 $1,337 Gaston 60 57 $43,816,704 $1,331 $0 $43,816,704 32,910 $1,331 Lincoln 61 53 $16,638,846 $1,317 $0 $16,638,846 12,635 $1,317 Person 62 33 $7,456,720 $1,314 $0 $7,456,720 5,674 $1,314 Cleveland 63 54 $9,900,000 $625 $10,908,431 $20,808,431 15,850 $1,313 McDowell 64 65 $7,814,056 $1,244 $0 $7,814,056 6,282 $1,244 Montgomery 65 66 $5,013,616 $1,236 $0 $5,013,616 4,057 $1,236 Caldwell 66 67 $14,778,726 $1,235 $0 $14,778,726 11,964 $1,235 Onslow 67 32 $30,836,918 $1,214 $0 $30,836,918 25,397 $1,214 Rutherford 68 68 $11,310,489 $1,214 $0 $11,310,489 9,316 $1,214 Surry 69 69 $12,295,715 $1,060 $1,709,248 $14,004,963 11,596 $1,208 Rockingham 70 70 $15,834,840 $1,202 $0 $15,834,840 13,177 $1,202 Randolph 71 71 $21,899,017 $957 $5,480,234 $27,379,251 22,888 $1,196 Wilkes 72 72 $11,273,988 $1,147 $0 $11,273,988 9,827 $1,147 Stanly 73 73 $9,863,046 $1,135 $0 $9,863,046 8,693 $1,135 Mitchell 74 74 $2,172,622 $1,118 $0 $2,172,622 1,943 $1,118 Anson 75 75 $3,904,353 $1,115 $0 $3,904,353 3,502 $1,115 Yadkin 76 77 $5,982,160 $1,102 $0 $5,982,160 5,426 $1,102 Burke 77 76 $13,945,431 $1,095 $0 $13,945,431 12,734 $1,095 Lenoir 78 78 $9,900,000 $1,084 $0 $9,900,000 9,133 $1,084 Camden 79 92 $2,012,565 $1,080 $0 $2,012,565 1,863 $1,080 Harnett 80 80 $21,523,700 $1,059 $230,269 $21,753,969 20,316 $1,071 Halifax 81 79 $5,202,231 $662 $3,130,476 $8,332,707 7,859 $1,060 Alexander 82 81 $5,400,000 $1,053 $0 $5,400,000 5,127 $1,053 Sampson 83 83 $10,169,280 $883 $1,733,492 $11,902,772 11,512 $1,034 Madison 84 88 $2,495,560 $1,021 $0 $2,495,560 2,445 $1,021 Wayne 85 84 $19,039,728 $985 $0 $19,039,728 19,323 $985 Duplin 86 89 $9,485,760 $977 $0 $9,485,760 9,706 $977 Vance 87 85 $7,202,440 $977 $0 $7,202,440 7,373 $977 Washington 88 91 $1,603,000 $971 $0 $1,603,000 1,651 $971 Bertie 89 86 $2,503,000 $969 $0 $2,503,000 2,582 $969 Edgecombe 90 87 $6,610,530 $943 $0 $6,610,530 7,009 $943 Caswell 91 94 $2,751,306 $940 $0 $2,751,306 2,927 $940 Tyrrell 92 82 $537,595 $938 $0 $537,595 573 $938 Richmond 93 90 $6,925,000 $922 $0 $6,925,000 7,510 $922 Clay 94 93 $1,150,000 $888 $0 $1,150,000 1,295 $888 Columbus 95 95 $7,040,450 $775 $0 $7,040,450 9,086 $775 Greene 96 96 $2,168,000 $691 $0 $2,168,000 3,136 $691 Hoke 97 98 $4,470,416 $524 $0 $4,470,416 8,530 $524 Robeson 98 99 $12,375,000 $523 $0 $12,375,000 23,668 $523 Graham 99 97 $611,893 $514 $0 $611,893 1,190 $514 Swain 100 100 $786,797 $387 $0 $786,797 2,033 $387 State Total/Average $26,186,526 $1,503 $63,444,202 $2,682,096,826 1,500,399 $1,537 >14 TABLE 2A: SIX-YEAR AVER AVERAII6UMFAI 6UTLAY AND DEBT SERVICE This table provides a six-year average of capital outlay and debt service,ordered according to the rankings from Table 2.In previous years'studies, this data was included in Table 2. COUNTIES ACTUAL EFFORT 2014-15 TOTAL SIX-YEAR SIX-YEAR 2014-15 CAPITAL DEBT RANK THIS YEAR CURRENT SPENDING PER CAPITAL OUTLAY CAPITAL DEBT FINAL OUTLAY SPENDING PER SERVICE (FROM TABLE 2) ADM(FROM TABLE 2) AVERAGE SERVICE AVERAGE ADM ADM PER ADM Orange 1 $3,634 $10,918,516 $16,350,313 20,123 542.59 812.52 Dare 2 $4,091 $1,805,699 $8,724,856 4,929 366.34 1770.11 Durham 3 $3,075 $29,791,932 $13,194,752 38,551 772.79 342.27 Chatham 4 $2,906 $4,766,386 $4,307,209 9,228 516.51 466.75 Transylvania 5 $2,864 $1,459,040 $2,473,179 3,699 394.44 668.61 Watauga 6 $2,698 $1,490,125 $6,885,916 4,471 333.29 1540.13 New Hanover 7 $2,568 $5,493,340 $18,609,988 26,432 207.83 704.07 Carteret 8 $2,457 $4,846,109 $6,459,386 8,546 567.06 755.84 Mecklenburg 9 $2,448 $70,107,827 $128,091,173 157,636 444.75 812.58 Currituck 10 $2,420 $1,305,504 $1,594,715 3,865 337.78 412.60 Brunswick 11 $2,373 $4,079,447 $5,147,376 13,212 308.77 389.60 Guilford 12 $2,356 $49,934,888 $49,132,364 76,133 655.89 645.35 Hyde 13 $2,256 $733,757 $117,795 571 1285.04 206.30 Buncombe 14 $1,957 $24,471,502 $13,831,932 30,594 799.88 452.11 Polk 15 $2,085 $412,122 $780,035 2,367 174.11 329.55 Wake 16 $1,989 $87,781,393 $161,338,167 162,043 541.72 995.65 Haywood 17 $1,972 $772,992 $2,223,302 7,298 105.92 304.65 Union 18 $1,934 $6,127,056 $45,086,772 43,157 141.97 1044.72 Forsyth 19 $1,919 $29,643,031 $28,679,129 56,280 526.71 509.58 Avery 20 $1,862 $1,873,604 $1,454,624 2,134 877.98 681.64 Moore 21 $1,843 $3,123,226 $6,074,051 13,266 235.43 457.87 Gates 22 $1,803 $399,934 $678,649 1,633 244.91 415.58 Scotland 23 $1,791 $743,666 $427,843 5,928 125.45 72.17 Macon 24 $1,786 $3,542,138 $4,348,301 4,393 806.31 989.82 Warren 25 $1,758 $562,535 $356,034 2,495 225.46 142.70 Beaufort 26 $1,754 $1,250,896 $2,399,568 7,221 173.23 332.30 Jackson 27 $1,739 $3,042,521 $2,034,997 3,926 774.97 518.34 Cherokee 28 $1,701 $717,417 $1,017,627 3,429 209.22 296.77 Pamlico 29 $1,679 $138,439 $434,374 1,539 89.95 282.24 Alleghany 30 $1,663 $708,496 $649,777 1,388 510.44 468.14 Cabarrus 31 $1,660 $10,061,275 $28,541,320 37,428 268.82 762.57 lredell 32 $1,411 $5,596,113 $25,108,255 28,431 196.83 883.13 Henderson 33 $1,628 $1,809,253 $4,884,760 13,861 130.53 352.41 Rowan 34 $1,615 $2,176,594 $9,499,356 19,933 109.20 476.56 Stokes 35 $1,589 $4,950,123 $2,448,025 6,426 770.33 380.96 Jones 36 $1,584 $161,339 $27,915 1,117 144.44 24.99 Chowan 37 $1,573 $70,683 $781,191 2,176 32.48 359.00 Pasquotank 38 $1,571 $804,013 $2,506,993 5,744 139.97 436.45 Lee 39 $1,541 $4,648,279 $7,067,244 9,952 467.07 710.13 Cumberland 40 $1,511 $15,370,532 $4,651,086 50,937 301.76 91.31 Davie 41 $1,510 $2,371,894 $1,999,015 6,298 376.61 317.40 Johnston 42 $1,489 $4,907,100 $30,708,154 35,031 140.08 876.60 W Pitt 43 $1,481 $7,444,321 $8,135,344 24,018 309.95 338.72 U Franklin 44 $1,477 $8,803,488 $6,534,027 9,354 941.15 698.53 Pender 45 $1,476 $1,497,102 $5,430,071 8,836 169.43 614.54 Q Ashe 46 $1,462 $636,876 $1,478,316 3,107 204.98 475.80 Martin 47 $1,454 $2,984,945 $797,363 3,648 818.24 218.58 Z Hertford 48 $1,454 $675,922 $0 2,940 229.91 0.00 L1J Catawba 49 $1,452 $13,886,066 $18,406,694 24,207 573.64 760.39 a Davidson 50 $1,307 $7,393,846 $7,391,364 22,576 327.51 327.40 Granville 51 $1,415 $3,149,283 $4,511,949 8,752 359.84 515.53 a Alamance 52 $1,394 $1,702,809 $6,151,115 23,758 71.67 258.91 Q Northampton 53 $1,385 $331,053 $680,306 2,383 138.92 285.48 Craven 54 $1,376 $1,094,392 $4,886,195 14,256 76.77 342.75 n Nash 55 $1,309 $9,695,699 $2,048,139 16,725 579.71 122.46 Bladen 56 $1,355 $423,684 $1,446,956 4,988 84.94 290.09 Wilson 57 $1,347 $558,896 $3,843,783 13,375 41.79 287.39 Perquimans 58 $1,339 $185,977 $696,908 1,718 108.25 405.65 Yancey 59 $1,337 $521,317 $0 2,219 234.93 0.00 Gaston 60 $1,331 $18,471,848 $8,154,216 32,910 561.28 247.77 Lincoln 61 $1,317 $3,239,225 $7,324,867 12,635 256.37 579.73 Person 62 $1,314 $1,336,363 $2,669,257 5,674 235.52 470.44 Cleveland 63 $625 $6,976,262 $1,505,593 15,850 440.14 94.99 McDowell 64 $1,244 $2,463,317 $1,013,806 6,282 392.12 161.38 Montgomery 65 $1,236 $121,860 $1,150,532 4,057 30.04 283.59 Caldwell 66 $1,235 $1,887,503 $2,336,528 11,964 157.77 195.30 Onslow 67 $1,214 $2,140,368 $8,228,560 25,397 84.28 324.00 Rutherford 68 $1,214 $432,420 $5,104,704 9,316 46.42 547.95 Surry 69 $1,060 $3,419,478 $4,459,832 11,596 294.88 384.60 Rockingham 70 $1,202 $3,719,533 $2,915,561 13,177 282.27 221.26 Randolph 71 $957 $3,510,669 $10,620,747 22,888 153.38 464.03 Wilkes 72 $1,147 $1,633,448 $3,913,839 9,827 166.22 398.27 Stanly 73 $1,135 $2,370,033 $1,936,869 8,693 272.64 222.81 Mitchell 74 $1,118 $424,552 $184,732 1,943 218.50 95.08 Anson 75 $1,115 $161,310 $520,269 3,502 46.06 148.56 Yadkin 76 $1,102 $418,064 $1,592,317 5,426 77.05 293.46 Burke 77 $1,095 $2,431,586 $4,163,641 12,734 190.95 326.97 Lenoir 78 $1,084 $1,891,874 $1,732,342 9,133 207.15 189.68 Camden 79 $1,080 $40,847 $389,761 1,863 21.93 209.21 Harnett 80 $1,059 $6,859,429 $8,779,444 20,316 337.64 432.14 Halifax 81 $662 $1,253,399 $1,287,778 7,859 159.49 163.86 Alexander 82 $1,053 $132,753 $1,137,124 5,127 25.89 221.79 Sampson 83 $883 $3,037,244 $7,317,216 11,512 263.83 635.62 Madison 84 $1,021 $316,260 $297,131 2,445 129.35 121.53 Wayne 85 $985 $11,442,507 $676,587 19,323 592.17 35.01 Duplin 86 $977 $1,227,589 $1,234,820 9,706 126.48 127.22 Vance 87 $977 $3,390,138 $1,521,652 7,373 459.80 206.38 Washington 88 $971 $458,720 $132,029 1,651 277.84 79.97 Bertie 89 $969 $542,376 $656,212 2,582 210.06 254.15 Edgecombe 90 $943 $1,257,334 $785,448 7,009 179.39 112.06 Caswell 91 $940 $350,225 $467,866 2,927 119.65 159.85 Tyrrell 92 $938 $62,150 $80,597 573 108.46 140.66 Richmond 93 $922 $1,886,855 $600,283 7,510 251.25 79.93 Clay 94 $888 $273,134 $97,674 1,295 210.91 75.42 Columbus 95 $775 $1,778,613 $276,455 9,086 195.75 30.43 Greene 96 $691 $2,384,690 $454,838 3,136 760.42 145.04 Hoke 97 $524 $3,917,819 $1,156,050 8,530 459.30 135.53 Robeson 98 $523 $3,757,058 $0 23,668 158.74 0.00 Graham 99 $514 $17,446 $333,813 1,190 14.66 280.51 Swain 100 $387 $473,606 $719,432 2,033 232.96 353.88 State Total/Average $1,503 $567,866,312 $821,496,457 1,500,399 $311 $391 15< - TABLE 3:ACTUAL EFFORT WITH SUPPLF1ME�'�Cj'{JcTGBOR LOW-WEALTH AND SMALL COUNTIES - This table uses many of the same figures as Table 2 but adds state supplemental funding for low-wealth and small counties to the total current spending.Counties are ranked based on their total current spending combined with low-wealth and small county supplemental funding. COUNTY RANK PREVIOUS 2014-15 2014-15 2014-15 2014-15 SMALL 2014-15 TOTAL 2014-15 2014-15 TOTAL CHANGE IN SPENDING YEAR'S TOTAL CURRENT TOTAL CURRENT LOW-WEALTH COUNTY FUNDING CURRENT SPENDING FINAL CURRENT SPENDING PER PER ADM WI LOW RANK SPENDING(FROM SPENDING FUNDING W/LOW WEALTH& ADM ADM W/LOW WEALTH WEALTH&SMALL TABLE 2) PER ADM SMALL COUNTY &SMALL COUNTY COUNTY Jones 1 5 $1,769,342 $1,584 $11,324,023 1,521,273 $14,614,638 1,117 $13,084 $11,500 Orange 2 3 $95,270,629 $4,734 $95,270,629 20,123 $4,734 $0 Hyde 3 1 $1,288,286 $2,256 $1,330,127 $2,618,413 571 $4,586 $2,329 Dare 4 4 $20,163,320 $4,091 $20,163,320 4,929 $4,091 $0 Tyrrell 5 2 $537,595 $938 $107,667 $1,359,781 $2,005,043 573 $3,499 $2,561 Gates 6 6 $2,945,000 $1,803 $812,031 $1,672,919 $5,429,950 1,633 $3,325 $1,522 Durham 7 7 $118,563,483 $3,075 $118,563,483 38,551 $3,075 $0 Chatham 8 9 $26,818,413 $2,906 $26,818,413 9,228 $2,906 $0 Transylvania 9 12 $10,595,738 $2,864 $10,595,738 3,699 $2,864 $0 Alleghany 10 10 $2,308,274 $1,663 $1,661,631 $3,969,905 1,388 $2,860 $1,197 New Hanover 11 15 $67,879,109 $2,568 $5,299,720 $73,178,829 26,432 $2,769 $201 Pamlico 12 8 $2,583,812 $1,679 $1,605,660 $4,189,472 1,539 $2,722 $1,043 Watauga 13 11 $12,062,834 $2,698 $12,062,834 4,471 $2,698 $0 Polk 14 13 $4,934,788 $2,085 $1,377,058 $6,311,846 2,367 $2,667 $582 Avery 15 14 $3,973,725 $1,862 $1,467,041 $5,440,766 2,134 $2,550 $687 Mecklenburg 16 21 $385,936,594 $2,448 $2,170,121 $388,106,715 157,636 $2,462 $14 Carteret 17 27 $21,000,000 $2,457 $21,000,000 8,546 $2,457 $0 Currituck 18 22 $9,353,526 $2,420 $9,353,526 3,865 $2,420 $0 Washington 19 29 $1,603,000 $971 $687,582 $1,667,130 $3,957,712 1,651 $2,397 $1,426 Perquimans 20 25 $2,300,000 $1,339 $148,130 $1,649,034 $4,097,164 1,718 $2,385 $1,046 Warren 21 26 $4,385,066 $1,758 $265,211 $1,278,094 $5,928,371 2,495 $2,376 $619 Brunswick 22 16 $31,349,382 $2,373 $31,349,382 13,212 $2,373 $0 Northampton 23 20 $3,300,000 $1,385 $795,621 $1,548,523 $5,644,144 2,383 $2,369 $984 Scotland 24 24 $10,614,325 $1,791 $3,413,206 $14,027,531 5,928 $2,366 $576 Guilford 25 19 $179,360,398 $2,356 $179,360,398 76,133 $2,356 $0 Hertford 26 18 $4,273,524 $1,454 $1,375,248 $1,248,984 $6,897,756 2,940 $2,346 $893 Chowan 27 17 $3,421,929 $1,573 $192,836 $1,411,335 $5,026,100 2,176 $2,310 $737 Buncombe 28 31 $68,009,074 $2,223 $68,009,074 30,594 $2,223 $0 Martin 29 23 $5,305,028 $1,454 $1,464,900 $1,327,763 $8,097,691 3,648 $2,220 $766 Clay 30 35 $1,150,000 $888 $1,636,556 $2,786,556 1,295 $2,152 $1,264 Camden 31 41 $2,012,565 $1,080 $358,140 $1,606,936 $3,977,641 1,863 $2,135 $1,055 Anson 32 30 $3,904,353 $1,115 $2,114,044 $1,292,886 $7,311,283 3,502 $2,088 $973 Union 33 38 $83,457,494 $1,934 $3,688,819 $87,146,313 43,157 $2,019 $85 Wake 34 33 $322,372,340 $1,989 $322,372,340 162,043 $1,989 $0 Haywood 35 39 $14,393,249 $1,972 $14,393,249 7,298 $1,972 $0 Bertie 36 28 $2,503,000 $969 $1,371,909 $1,168,750 $5,043,659 2,582 $1,953 $984 Yancey 37 37 $2,967,225 $1,337 $1,342,535 $4,309,760 2,219 $1,942 $605 Mitchell 38 42 $2,172,622 $1,118 $1,582,697 $3,755,319 1,943 $1,933 $815 Stokes 39 40 $10,211,763 $1,589 $2,140,728 $12,352,491 6,426 $1,922 $333 N Forsyth 40 36 $108,020,219 $1,919 $108,020,219 56,280 $1,919 $0 W Moore 41 46 $24,446,931 $1,843 $973,501 $25,420,432 13,266 $1,916 $73 Ashe 42 43 $4,541,475 $1,462 $1,237,965 $5,779,440 3,107 $1,860 $398 U Granville 43 44 $12,385,287 $1,415 $3,865,894 $16,251,181 8,752 $1,857 $442 Franklin 44 51 $13,818,840 $1,477 $3,542,994 $17,361,834 9,354 $1,856 $379 Graham 45 32 $611,893 $514 $10,618 $1,572,068 $2,194,579 1,190 $1,844 $1,330 Z Macon 46 50 $7,845,651 $1,786 $247,031 $8,092,682 4,393 $1,842 $56 W Beaufort 47 49 $12,669,163 $1,754 $610,758 $13,279,921 7,221 $1,839 $85 Rowan 48 48 $32,198,980 $1,615 $4,111,615 $36,310,595 19,933 $1,822 $206 a Johnston 49 47 $52,150,000 $1,489 $11,209,401 $63,359,401 35,031 $1,809 $320 EL Pasquotank 50 34 $9,021,858 $1,571 $1,329,447 $10,351,305 5,744 $1,802 $231 Q Cherokee 51 59 $5,832,950 $1,701 $319,191 $6,152,141 3,429 $1,794 $93 McDowell 52 63 $7,814,056 $1,244 $3,422,705 $11,236,761 6,282 $1,789 $545 ^ Lee 53 54 $15,338,050 $1,541 $2,404,265 $17,742,315 9,952 $1,783 $242 Jackson 54 55 $6,826,102 $1,739 $6,826,102 3,926 $1,739 $0 Greene 55 45 $2,168,000 $691 $1,990,883 $1,265,091 $5,423,974 3,136 $1,730 $1,038 Lenoir 56 85 $9,900,000 $1,084 $5,813,595 $15,713,595 9,133 $1,721 $637 Pitt 57 58 $35,576,287 $1,481 $5,695,141 $41,271,428 24,018 $1,718 $237 Bladen 58 61 $6,757,745 $1,355 $1,752,443 $8,510,188 4,988 $1,706 $351 Caswell 59 53 $2,751,306 $940 $941,234 $1,249,124 $4,941,664 2,927 $1,688 $748 Caldwell 60 57 $14,778,726 $1,235 $5,314,900 $20,093,626 11,964 $1,680 $444 Nash 61 65 $22,696,472 $1,357 $5,299,720 $27,996,192 16,725 $1,674 $317 Pender 62 56 $13,044,356 $1,476 $1,734,869 $14,779,225 8,836 $1,673 $196 Cabarrus 63 62 $62,112,349 $1,660 $260,331 $62,372,680 37,428 $1,666 $7 Iredell 64 67 $46,403,919 $1,632 $46,403,919 28,431 $1,632 $0 Henderson 65 73 $22,560,051 $1,628 $22,560,051 13,861 $1,628 $0 Davidson 66 84 $32,398,371 $1,435 $4,238,464 $36,636,835 22,576 $1,623 $188 Madison 67 66 $2,495,560 $1,021 $212,316 $1,247,150 $3,955,026 2,445 $1,618 $597 Lincoln 68 91 $16,638,846 $1,317 $3,770,983 $20,409,829 12,635 $1,615 $298 Cleveland 69 60 $20,808,431 $1,313 $4,529,239 $25,337,670 15,850 $1,599 $286 Wilson 70 70 $18,013,038 $1,347 $3,086,634 $21,099,672 13,375 $1,578 $231 Davie 71 74 $9,507,445 $1,510 $406,586 $9,914,031 6,298 $1,574 $65 Randolph 72 69 $27,379,251 $1,196 $8,494,082 $35,873,333 22,888 $1,567 $371 Sampson 73 68 $11,902,772 $1,034 $6,120,099 $18,022,871 11,512 $1,566 $532 Alamance 74 75 $33,117,119 $1,394 $3,980,225 $37,097,344 23,758 $1,561 $168 Rutherford 75 76 $11,310,489 $1,214 $3,155,328 $14,465,817 9,316 $1,553 $339 Harnett 76 72 $21,753,969 $1,071 $9,699,718 $31,453,687 20,316 $1,548 $477 Rockingham 77 71 $15,834,840 $1,202 $4,550,251 $20,385,091 13,177 $1,547 $345 Cumberland 78 79 $76,985,248 $1,511 $1,808,886 $78,794,134 50,937 $1,547 $36 Surry 79 77 $14,004,963 $1,208 $3,629,916 $17,634,879 11,596 $1,521 $313 Duplin 80 78 $9,485,760 $977 $5,161,340 $14,647,100 9,706 $1,509 $532 Richmond 81 82 $6,925,000 $922 $4,289,801 $11,214,801 7,510 $1,493 $571 Montgomery 82 83 $5,013,616 $1,236 $973,501 $5,987,117 4,057 $1,476 $240 Yadkin 83 87 $5,982,160 $1,102 $1,971,333 $7,953,493 5,426 $1,466 $363 Catawba 84 80 $35,151,688 $1,452 $35,151,688 24,207 $1,452 $0 Vance 85 86 $7,202,440 $977 $3,380,764 $10,583,204 7,373 $1,435 $459 Person 86 52 $7,456,720 $1,314 $664,875 $8,121,595 5,674 $1,431 $117 Gaston 87 92 $43,816,704 $1,331 $3,232,567 $47,049,271 32,910 $1,430 $98 Halifax 88 88 $8,332,707 $1,060 $2,786,408 $11,119,115 7,859 $1,415 $355 Edgecombe 89 81 $6,610,530 $943 $3,269,073 $9,879,603 7,009 $1,410 $466 Stanly 90 90 $9,863,046 $1,135 $2,389,312 $12,252,358 8,693 $1,409 $275 Wilkes 91 93 $11,273,988 $1,147 $2,548,220 $13,822,208 9,827 $1,407 $259 Craven 92 95 $19,615,914 $1,376 $261,097 $19,877,011 14,256 $1,394 $18 Burke 93 94 $13,945,431 $1,095 $3,644,666 $17,590,097 12,734 $1,381 $286 Wayne 94 89 $19,039,728 $985 $7,074,163 $26,113,891 19,323 $1,351 $366 Columbus 95 96 $7,040,450 $775 $5,070,597 $12,111,047 9,086 $1,333 $558 Alexander 96 97 $5,400,000 $1,053 $1,322,677 $6,722,677 5,127 $1,311 $258 Onslow 97 64 $30,836,918 $1,214 $1,895,644 $32,732,562 25,397 $1,289 $75 Robeson 98 98 $12,375,000 $523 $17,311,222 $29,686,222 23,668 $1,254 $731 Swain 99 99 $786,797 $387 $148,314 $1,532,494 $2,467,605 2,033 $1,214 $827 Hoke 100 100 $4,470,416 $524 $4,165,603 $8,636,019 8,530 $1,012 $488 State Total/Average $2,682,096,826 $1,537 $227,824,376 $$38,860,605 $2,948,781,807 1,500,399 $2,085 $548 >16 This is a measure of a county's per student fiscal capacity to support-puTbk s oTs.�i 7r ne-d meassu a of revenue that would have been generated at the state average tax rate based on 2013-14 property valuations per student(adjusted to reflect current market prices and to account for differences in income levels) and the value of non-property tax revenues.Each county's mandated social services payments were also subtracted from total adjusted revenues.Large,urban counties combining high adjusted property valuations with broad-based economic activity and high per capita incomes tend to rank highest on this measure. COUNTY RANK PREVIOUS 2014-15 2014-15 ADJUSTED 2014-15 2014-15 2014-15 TOTAL 2014 PER PERCENT 2014-15 2014-15 2014-15 YEAR'S ADJUSTED PROPERTY TAX REVENUE NON-PROPERTY MANDATED REVENUES LESS CAPITA OF STATE INCOME FINAL ADM REVENUE RANK TAX BASE (BASED ON STATE AVG. TAX REVENUE SOCIAL SERVICES SOCIAL SECURITY INCOME** AVERAGE ADJUSTED PER ADM EFFECTIVE PROPERTY PAYMENTS* PAYMENTS PER CAPITA TOTAL TAX RATE OF 0.6540) INCOME REVENUES Dare 1 1 $13,773,978,472 $91,183,737 $24,414,821 $4,738,491 $110,860,068 $44,328 113% $125,455,186 4,929 $25,452 Carteret 2 2 $14,584,268,350 $96,547,856 $21,954,796 $4,525,832 $113,976,821 $43,903 112% $127,745,638 8,546 $14,948 Jackson 3 3 $8,565,015,216 $56,700,401 $10,394,524 $2,415,038 $64,679,887 $30,935 79% $51,080,450 3,926 $13,011 Watauga 4 4 $8,856,420,803 $58,629,506 $15,918,173 $2,188,292 $72,359,387 $30,998 79% $57,261,655 4,471 $12,807 Brunswick 5 5 $23,656,886,298 $156,608,587 $31,376,004 $6,429,427 $181,555,165 $35,279 90% $163,515,985 13,212 $12,376 Currituck 6 6 $6,197,657,449 $41,028,492 $8,753,952 $2,323,551 $47,458,893 $38,760 99% $46,960,933 3,865 $12,150 Macon 7 8 $7,525,029,837 $49,815,698 $9,926,707 $2,081,582 $57,660,822 $33,937 87% $49,956,226 4,393 $11,372 Avery 8 7 $3,904,306,609 $25,846,510 $5,066,151 $1,187,415 $29,725,246 $30,715 78% $23,308,338 2,134 $10,922 Hyde 9 9 $1,038,680,710 $6,876,066 $1,395,169 $930,406 $7,340,829 $32,987 84% $6,181,918 571 $10,826 New Hanover 10 10 $30,892,816,238 $204,510,443 $84,466,534 $16,949,629 $272,027,349 $40,076 102% $278,312,222 26,432 $10,529 Transylvania 11 11 $5,920,650,832 $39,194,709 $7,536,385 $2,178,714 $44,552,380 $33,112 85% $37,660,984 3,699 $10,181 Chatham 12 12 $9,062,545,947 $59,994,054 $13,464,443 $3,483,562 $69,974,935 $51,593 132% $92,165,551 9,228 $9,988 Orange 13 13 $16,111,418,726 $106,657,592 $40,312,115 $10,127,296 $136,842,411 $52,989 135% $185,115,073 20,123 $9,199 Mecklenburg 14 14 $119,536,776,063 $791,333,458 $411,090,512 $72,650,312 $1,129,773,657 $49,099 125% $1,416,117,965 157,636 $8,983 Durham 15 15 $30,939,621,895 $204,820,297 $137,297,801 $26,450,028 $315,668,069 $42,830 109% $345,154,921 38,551 $8,953 Buncombe 16 17 $32,098,626,632 $212,492,908 $94,063,078 $28,293,035 $278,262,951 $38,128 97%$270,853,688 30,594 $8,853 Polk 17 18 $2,763,595,358 $18,295,001 $3,603,534 $1,295,137 $20,603,398 $37,842 97% $19,904,363 2,367 $8,409 Pamlico 18 16 $1,799,956,856 $11,915,714 $2,397,413 $1,187,627 $13,125,501 $37,926 97% $12,708,324 1,539 $8,258 Wake 19 19 $120,037,251,515 $794,646,605 $294,252,246 $36,911,221 $1,051,987,630 $49,695 127%$1,334,623,198 162,043 $8,236 Moore 20 20 $11,873,225,659 $78,600,754 $24,531,895 $4,531,192 $98,601,457 $41,613 106% $104,748,472 13,266 $7,896 Ashe 21 21 $3,881,469,873 $25,695,331 $5,650,319 $3,451,834 $27,893,816 $31,215 80% $22,228,318 3,107 $7,154 Alleghany 22 22 $1,591,645,095 $10,536,691 $2,033,763 $808,105 $11,762,348 $32,540 83% $9,771,178 1,388 $7,040 Perquimans 23 23 $1,782,888,033 $11,802,719 $2,034,790 $720,574 $13,116,935 $35,742 91% $11,968,688 1,718 $6,967 Haywood 24 24 $7,108,612,706 $47,059,016 $16,711,752 $6,386,297 $57,384,470 $33,930 87% $49,706,545 7,298 $6,811 Clay 25 27 $1,625,667,654 $10,761,920 $2,051,249 $1,100,232 $11,712,937 $28,176 72% $8,425,205 1,295 $6,506 Henderson 26 25 $12,314,704,324 $81,523,343 $25,695,583 $7,840,986 $99,377,939 $35,518 91% $90,110,175 13,861 $6,501 Yancey 27 26 $2,604,002,702 $17,238,498 $3,412,286 $1,686,627 $18,964,157 $29,783 76% $14,419,072 2,219 $6,498 Iredell 28 28 $20,735,292,806 $137,267,638 $46,762,370 $9,932,649 $174,097,359 $40,747 104% $181,101,966 28,431 $6,370 Guilford 29 30 $47,158,441,570 $312,188,883 $141,810,153 $27,301,417 $426,697,620 $40,344 103% $439,475,346 76,133 $5,772 Forsyth 30 33 $32,599,197,022 $215,806,684 $102,944,388 $18,568,761 $300,182,311 $41,437 106% $317,547,534 56,280 $5,642 Onslow 31 29 $13,156,558,309 $87,096,416 $48,834,537 $10,128,549 $125,802,404 $44,538 114% $143,039,174 25,397 $5,632 Beaufort 32 31 $5,566,100,776 $36,847,587 $11,301,255 $4,372,316 $43,776,526 $36,372 93% $40,648,434 7,221 $5,629 Graham 33 32 $1,260,320,089 $8,343,319 $1,564,396 $634,680 $9,273,035 $28,264 72% $6,690,997 1,190 $5,623 Warren 34 38 $2,327,039,290 $15,405,000 $5,922,818 $2,055,901 $19,271,917 $28,356 72% $13,950,997 2,495 $5,592 Davie 35 34 $4,107,027,038 $27,188,519 $8,360,149 $1,990,081 $33,558,587 $40,542 104% $34,733,150 6,298 $5,515 Craven 36 35 $8,959,758,269 $59,313,600 $23,460,885 $6,476,503 $76,297,982 $39,436 101% $76,814,154 14,256 $5,388 Jones 37 37 $814,599,203 $5,392,647 $1,359,285 $792,537 $5,959,394 $38,925 99% $5,921,969 1,117 $5,302 Catawba 38 36 $16,239,244,460 $107,503,798 $47,297,113 $18,211,815 $136,589,096 $36,742 94% $128,119,184 24,207 $5,293 Madison 39 42 $2,304,969,325 $15,258,897 $3,312,612 $1,699,341 $16,872,169 $28,964 74% $12,475,696 2,445 $5,103 Cherokee 40 43 $2,942,083,971 $19,476,596 $6,586,044 $2,301,770 $23,760,870 $28,064 72% $17,023,437 3,429 $4,965 N Person 41 40 $4,337,414,806 $28,713,686 $8,132,232 $3,775,222 $33,070,696 $33,113 85% $27,956,140 5,674 $4,927 W Lincoln 42 41 $8,293,790,238 $54,904,891 $16,811,628 $4,509,540 $67,206,979 $35,879 92% $61,558,786 12,635 $4,872 V Cabarrus 43 44 $19,890,707,130 $131,676,481 $65,071,963 $13,961,548 $182,786,896 $38,521 98% $179,753,747 37,428 $4,803 Swain 44 47 $1,565,402,624 $10,362,965 $3,243,258 $1,142,498 $12,463,725 $29,712 76% $9,453,989 2,033 $4,650 Q Mitchell 45 39 $1,677,882,498 $11,107,582 $3,543,872 $2,930,614 $11,720,840 $29,501 75% $8,827,360 1,943 $4,543 Chowan 46 46 $1,408,518,433 $9,324,392 $2,867,738 $1,172,814 $11,019,316 $35,054 89% $9,861,150 2,176 $4,532 Z Montgomery 47 53 $2,845,961,681 $18,840,266 $5,301,597 $1,909,421 $22,232,442 $32,334 83% $18,351,938 4,057 $4,524 Lii Tyrrell 48 45 $450,243,398 $2,980,611 $775,156 $467,955 $3,287,812 $30,098 77% $2,526,271 573 $4,409 a Northampton 49 48 $1,977,625,463 $13,091,881 $2,857,901 $2,712,046 $13,237,735 $31,042 79% $10,490,561 2,383 $4,402 Union 50 55 $21,932,788,772 $145,195,062 $43,623,986 $10,259,772 $178,559,276 $41,166 105% $187,653,395 43,157 $4,348 a Alamance 51 51 $11,981,954,384 $79,320,538 $45,175,614 $8,400,826 $116,095,326 $34,801 89% $103,143,485 23,758 $4,341 Q Pender 52 50 $6,279,345,854 $41,569,270 $10,538,113 $4,554,479 $47,552,904 $31,366 80% $38,077,772 8,836 $4,309 Davidson 53 63 $12,842,985,665 $85,020,565 $31,523,819 $6,953,333 $109,591,052 $34,650 88% $96,942,379 22,576 $4,294 n Pitt 54 52 $11,717,278,616 $77,568,384 $44,459,602 $9,836,448 $112,191,538 $35,410 90% $101,419,478 24,018 $4,223 Camden 55 54 $1,015,487,998 $6,722,531 $1,570,043 $506,393 $7,786,181 $39,320 100% $7,815,798 1,863 $4,195 Lee 56 56 $5,120,468,379 $33,897,501 $16,204,894 $3,562,107 $46,540,288 $34,648 88% $41,166,370 9,952 $4,136 Pasquotank 57 49 $2,960,690,088 $19,599,768 $10,121,067 $3,180,829 $26,540,007 $34,331 88% $23,260,703 5,744 $4,050 Cumberland 58 59 $22,016,263,541 $145,747,665 $93,997,424 $27,057,476 $212,687,613 $37,592 96% $204,114,083 50,937 $4,007 Rowan 59 58 $11,259,177,187 $74,535,753 $30,973,719 $7,098,945 $98,410,527 $31,587 81% $79,357,007 19,933 $3,981 Stanly 60 62 $4,673,195,759 $30,936,556 $13,015,988 $3,002,374 $40,950,169 $32,571 83% $34,050,394 8,693 $3,917 Surry 61 61 $5,436,959,608 $35,992,673 $20,641,122 $3,829,267 $52,804,527 $33,538 86% $45,210,953 11,596 $3,899 Rutherford 62 65 $6,118,178,876 $40,502,344 $13,625,086 $4,597,077 $49,530,353 $28,379 72% $35,884,248 9,316 $3,852 Wilkes 63 64 $5,691,382,227 $37,676,950 $15,281,069 $5,426,809 $47,531,210 $30,988 79% $37,601,724 9,827 $3,826 Martin 64 57 $1,841,977,261 $12,193,889 $5,615,091 $2,037,488 $15,771,493 $34,567 88% $13,917,776 3,648 $3,815 Wilson 65 60 $6,383,334,626 $42,257,675 $20,363,421 $7,348,676 $55,272,420 $36,044 92% $50,860,052 13,375 $3,803 Rockingham 66 66 $6,870,888,083 $45,485,279 $18,345,508 $5,493,216 $58,337,571 $32,638 83% $48,607,941 13,177 $3,689 Nash 67 68 $7,097,538,045 $46,985,702 $23,095,616 $5,957,129 $64,124,189 $37,505 96% $61,396,893 16,725 $3,671 Lenoir 68 67 $4,019,401,665 $26,608,439 $13,110,759 $4,848,407 $34,870,792 $37,297 95% $33,202,520 9,133 $3,635 Stokes 69 70 $3,680,998,433 $24,368,210 $6,860,985 $2,484,076 $28,745,118 $31,742 81% $23,293,445 6,426 $3,625 Gaston 70 69 $14,522,754,080 $96,140,632 $48,065,025 $17,179,305 $127,026,352 $36,404 93% $118,053,339 32,910 $3,587 Bladen 71 71 $2,754,164,083 $18,232,566 $6,222,992 $3,361,990 $21,093,568 $32,743 84% $17,632,093 4,988 $3,535 Burke 72 74 $6,509,738,449 $43,094,469 $17,148,975 $5,614,931 $54,628,513 $31,827 81% $44,386,451 12,734 $3,486 Caldwell 73 78 $6,529,663,185 $43,226,370 $16,443,154 $5,423,467 $54,246,057 $30,091 77% $41,671,596 11,964 $3,483 McDowell 74 73 $3,565,217,616 $23,601,741 $9,079,544 $3,265,547 $29,415,738 $28,985 74% $21,766,490 6,282 $3,465 Granville 75 77 $4,267,902,029 $28,253,511 $9,802,278 $2,889,321 $35,166,468 $33,123 85% $29,736,768 8,752 $3,398 Wayne 76 72 $7,911,148,633 $52,371,804 $27,580,252 $6,874,907 $73,077,149 $35,181 90% $65,633,432 19,323 $3,397 Yadkin 77 76 $2,782,452,952 $18,419,839 $6,557,383 $2,617,619 $22,359,603 $31,890 81% $18,203,460 5,426 $3,355 Duplin 78 75 $4,147,894,351 $27,459,061 $11,136,431 $2,894,504 $35,700,988 $35,546 91% $32,397,113 9,706 $3,338 Alexander 79 81 $2,585,542,924 $17,116,294 $5,997,453 $2,920,924 $20,192,823 $32,956 84% $16,988,963 5,127 $3,314 Randolph 80 79 $10,638,836,581 $70,429,098 $29,391,208 $6,903,221 $92,917,085 $31,896 81% $75,660,140 22,888 $3,306 Cleveland 81 80 $7,675,904,292 $50,814,486 $21,673,606 $8,189,037 $64,299,056 $31,699 81% $52,033,794 15,850 $3,283 Halifax 82 84 $3,618,719,274 $23,955,922 $12,722,265 $5,759,477 $30,918,709 $32,376 83% $25,555,235 7,859 $3,252 Washington 83 83 $873,763,562 $5,784,315 $2,389,988 $1,687,220 $6,487,083 $32,221 82% $5,336,098 1,651 $3,232 Hertford 84 82 $1,443,565,419 $9,556,403 $5,722,746 $2,429,407 $12,849,742 $28,752 73% $9,431,870 2,940 $3,208 Anson 85 90 $1,673,538,984 $11,078,828 $4,375,722 $1,631,220 $13,823,330 $31,230 80% $11,020,975 3,502 $3,147 Johnston 86 85 $14,367,973,346 $95,115,984 $38,251,095 $9,901,096 $123,465,982 $34,930 89% $110,098,460 35,031 $3,143 Franklin 87 86 $4,506,862,776 $29,835,432 $10,245,738 $3,941,122 $36,140,048 $31,826 81% $29,363,385 9,354 $3,139 Gates 88 87 $808,543,771 $5,352,560 $1,556,336 $730,667 $6,178,229 $32,368 83% $5,105,229 1,633 $3,126 Caswell 89 89 $1,572,693,767 $10,411,233 $2,867,138 $1,417,822 $11,860,549 $29,443 75% $8,915,017 2,927 $3,046 Edgecombe 90 88 $3,064,749,681 $20,288,643 $10,336,997 $4,651,938 $25,973,701 $32,176 82% $21,335,422 7,009 $3,044 Bertie 91 94 $1,273,289,295 $8,429,175 $2,849,180 $1,755,378 $9,522,977 $32,312 82% $7,855,466 2,582 $3,042 Sampson 92 93 $4,242,142,878 $28,082,986 $12,895,691 $5,197,032 $35,781,644 $35,821 91% $32,721,510 11,512 $2,842 Columbus 93 91 $3,679,831,524 $24,360,485 $10,835,754 $3,819,419 $31,376,820 $30,852 79% $24,713,121 9,086 $2,720 Richmond 94 92 $3,058,879,036 $20,249,779 $9,244,820 $2,897,926 $26,596,674 $29,991 77% $20,363,556 7,510 $2,712 Harnett 95 95 $7,473,992,661 $49,477,831 $21,255,977 $5,747,294 $64,986,514 $31,324 80% $51,967,975 20,316 $2,558 Vance 96 96 $2,342,693,853 $15,508,633 $10,723,520 $3,339,991 $22,892,163 $30,024 77% $17,546,509 7,373 $2,380 Scotland 97 97 $2,057,998,716 $13,623,951 $7,492,264 $2,690,056 $18,426,160 $29,039 74% $13,660,035 5,928 $2,304 Hoke 98 98 $3,269,359,196 $21,643,158 $6,777,107 $3,113,762 $25,306,503 $28,790 73% $18,599,837 8,530 $2,181 Greene 99 99 $1,073,412,892 $7,105,993 $2,766,656 $1,314,986 $8,557,663 $31,087 79% $6,791,557 3,136 $2,166 Robeson 100 100 $6,163,056,348 $40,799,433 $27,215,853 $14,107,595 $53,907,691 $26,639 68% $36,660,973 23,668 $1,549 State Total/Average $1,000,062,479,472 $6,620,413,614 $2,745,693,422 $660,623,729 $8,705,483,307 $39,171 $89,599,645 1,500,399 $5,577 *Beginning with 2016 study,includes only WC302 report.Medicaid payments from WD667 no longer included. **County and state averages from the Bureau of Economic Analysis 17< TABI TTANM FAI ftORT This is a measure comparing Actual Effort(from Table 2)and Ability to Pay(from Table 4).Actual effort includes county appropriations for current expenses,and,when appropriate,supplemental tax levies for schools.Low-wealth counties with comparatively high spending levels have tended to rank highest on this measure. COUNTY RELATIVE EFFORT ABILITY REVENUE EFFORT TOTAL EFFORT AS PERCENTAGE RANK:CURRENT RANK PER ADM RANK CURRENT SPENDING OF REVENUE PER STUDENT: SPENDING PER ADM CURRENT SPENDING Scotland 1 97 $2,304.32 23 $1,791 77.7% Gates 2 88 $3,126.29 22 $1,803 57.7% Orange 3 13 $9,199.18 1 $4,734 51.5% Johnston 4 86 $3,142.89 42 $1,489 47.4% Franklin 5 87 $3,139.13 44 $1,477 47.1% Hertford 6 84 $3,208.12 48 $1,454 45.3% Union 7 50 $4,348.16 18 $1,934 44.5% Stokes 8 69 $3,624.87 35 $1,589 43.8% Harnett 9 95 $2,557.98 80 $1,071 41.9% Granville 10 75 $3,397.71 51 $1,415 41.6% Vance 11 96 $2,379.83 87 $977 41.1% Guilford 12 29 $5,772.47 12 $2,356 40.8% Rowan 13 59 $3,981.19 34 $1,615 40.6% Cleveland 14 81 $3,282.89 63 $1,313 40.0% Pasquotank 15 57 $4,049.57 38 $1,571 38.8% Bladen 16 71 $3,534.90 56 $1,355 38.3% Martin 17 64 $3,815.18 47 $1,454 38.1% Cumberland 18 58 $4,007.19 40 $1,511 37.7% Lee 19 56 $4,136.49 39 $1,541 37.3% Gaston 20 70 $3,587.16 60 $1,331 37.1% Nash 21 67 $3,670.97 55 $1,357 37.0% Sampson 22 92 $2,842.38 83 $1,034 36.4% Randolph 23 80 $3,305.67 71 $1,196 36.2% McDowell 24 74 $3,464.90 64 $1,244 35.9% Caldwell 25 73 $3,483.08 66 $1,235 35.5% Anson 26 85 $3,147.05 75 $1,115 35.4% Wilson 27 65 $3,802.62 57 $1,347 35.4% Pitt 28 54 $4,222.64 43 $1,481 35.1% Chowan 29 46 $4,531.78 37 $1,573 34.7% Cabarrus 30 43 $4,802.65 31 $1,660 34.6% Durham 31 15 $8,953.20 3 $3,075 34.3% Cherokee 32 40 $4,964.55 28 $1,701 34.3% Pender 33 52 $4,309.39 45 $1,476 34.3% Forsyth 34 30 $5,642.28 19 $1,919 34.0% Richmond 35 94 $2,711.53 93 $922 34.0% Robeson 36 100 $1,548.97 98 $523 33.8% Davidson 37 53 $4,294.05 50 $1,435 33.4% Yadkin 38 77 $3,354.86 76 $1,102 32.8% Halifax 39 82 $3,251.72 81 $1,060 32.6% Rockingham 40 66 $3,688.85 70 $1,202 32.6% N Alamance 41 51 $4,341.42 52 $1,394 32.1% Greene 42 99 $2,165.68 96 $691 31.9% W Bertie 43 91 $3,042.40 89 $969 31.8% (, Alexander 44 79 $3,313.63 82 $1,053 31.8% Rutherford 45 62 $3,851.89 68 $1,214 31.5% Q Northampton 46 49 $4,402.25 53 $1,385 31.5% Warren 47 34 $5,591.58 25 $1,758 31.4% Z Burke 48 72 $3,485.66 77 $1,095 31.4% W Beaufort 49 32 $5,629.20 26 $1,754 31.2% EL Surry 50 61 $3,898.84 69 $1,208 31.0% a Edgecombe 51 90 $3,044.00 90 $943 31.0% Caswell 52 89 $3,045.79 91 $940 30.9% < Washington 53 83 $3,232.04 88 $971 30.0% Wilkes 54 63 $3,826.37 72 $1,147 30.0% Jones 55 37 $5,301.67 36 $1,584 29.9% Lenoir 56 68 $3,635.45 78 $1,084 29.8% Duplin 57 78 $3,337.84 86 $977 29.3% Chatham 58 12 $9,987.60 4 $2,906 29.1% Wayne 59 76 $3,396.65 85 $985 29.0% Stanly 60 60 $3,916.99 73 $1,135 29.0% Haywood 61 24 $6,810.98 17 $1,972 29.0% Columbus 62 93 $2,719.91 95 $775 28.5% Transylvania 63 11 $10,181.40 5 $2,864 28.1% Catawba 64 38 $5,292.65 49 $1,452 27.4% Davie 65 35 $5,514.95 41 $1,510 27.4% Montgomery 66 47 $4,523.52 65 $1,236 27.3% Mecklenburg 67 14 $8,983.47 9 $2,448 27.3% Lincoln 68 42 $4,872.08 61 $1,317 27.0% Person 69 41 $4,927.06 62 $1,314 26.7% Camden 70 55 $4,195.28 79 $1,080 25.7% Iredell 71 28 $6,369.88 32 $1,632 25.6% Craven 72 36 $5,388.20 54 $1,376 25.5% Buncombe 73 16 $8,853.16 14 $2,223 25.1% Henderson 74 26 $6,500.99 33 $1,628 25.0% Polk 75 17 $8,409.11 15 $2,085 24.8% Mitchell 76 45 $4,543.16 74 $1,118 24.6% New Hanover 77 10 $10,529.37 7 $2,568 24.4% Wake 78 19 $8,236.23 16 $1,989 24.1% Hoke 79 98 $2,180.52 97 $524 24.0% Alleghany 80 22 $7,039.75 30 $1,663 23.6% Moore 81 20 $7,896.01 21 $1,843 23.3% Onslow 82 31 $5,632.13 67 $1,214 21.6% Tyrrell 83 48 $4,408.85 92 $938 21.3% Watauga 84 4 $12,807.35 6 $2,698 21.1% Hyde 85 9 $10,826.48 13 $2,256 20.8% Yancey 86 27 $6,498.00 59 $1,337 20.6% Ashe 87 21 $7,154.27 46 $1,462 20.4% Pamlico 88 18 $8,257.52 29 $1,679 20.3% Madison 89 39 $5,102.53 84 $1,021 20.0% Currituck 90 6 $12,150.31 10 $2,420 19.9% Perquimans 91 23 $6,966.64 58 $1,339 19.2% Brunswick 92 5 $12,376.32 11 $2,373 19.2% Avery 93 8 $10,922.37 20 $1,862 17.0% Carteret 94 2 $14,948.00 8 $2,457 16.4% Dare 95 1 $25,452.46 2 $4,091 16.1% Macon 96 7 $11,371.78 24 $1,786 15.7% Clay 97 25 $6,505.95 94 $888 13.6% Jackson 98 3 $13,010.81 27 $1,739 13.4% Graham 99 33 $5,622.69 99 $514 9.1% Swain 100 44 $4,650.26 100 $387 8.3% State Total/Average $5,577 $1,537 31% >18 ATTACHMENT B > GLOSSARY Ability to Pay:A measure of a county's per student fiscal capacity agreements. Using the Public School Capital Outlay report, to support local public schools. It is a combined measure of withdrawals from the Public School Building Capital Fund and revenue that would have been generated at the state average tax North Carolina Education Lottery Funds have been removed rate based on 2014-15 property valuations per student(adjusted from the county total. to reflect current market prices and to account for differences in income levels)and the value of non-property tax revenues,such as Debt Service per ADM:Six-year average of debt service spending the county's share of local option sales tax,local tax aid(including for a county divided by the ADM for the county. reimbursements for inventory tax revenues,homestead exclusions, food stamp distribution,and the intangibles tax),and fines and Income-Adjusted Total Revenues:The total revenues for a county, forfeitures.Each county's mandated social service payments were minus the amount paid in mandated social security payments, subtracted from the total adjusted revenues.(See Table 4.) multiplied by the percent of state average per capita income. Actual Effort: Includes 2014-15 current expenses(including Low-Wealth Funding:Supplemental state funding intended supplemental school taxes); reflects the actual dollar effort to enhance instructional programs in counties designated as of counties to fund local public schools without taking into low-wealth based on a formula that examines the ability to account property wealth.(See Tables 2 and 3.) generate revenue per student below the state average. In addition, the formula takes into account county adjusted property tax base, Adjusted Tax Base:The total valuation of real,tangible,and public square miles in the county and per capita income. utility property for a county,adjusted using a three-year weighted average of the sales assessment ratio. Notes about adjustment and Mandated Social Services Payments:The amount of money weighted average:In North Carolina,residential and commercial each county pays in the health and human services categories property typically is revalued once every eight years.The longer it mandated by the state. These categories include public y yp y y g y g assistance and Work First services. In previous studies,the has been since properties in a county have been revalued,the more likely it is that the market value of property exceeds the assessed Mandated Social Services Payments reported in Table 4 included valuation.To help remedy this difficulty of estimating the market county Medicaid payments in addition to other required social value of property valuations,the Department of Revenue computes services payments. For the last two years the Local School an adjusted property tax rate for each county by using the ratio of Finance Study has not included Medicaid payments as part of the assessed property value to market value.Typically,the longer the overall Mandated Social Services Payments.The WD667 report gap between revaluations,the larger the difference between market from the NC Department of Health and Human Services Office and assessed value.In effort to be as accurate as possible,this of the Controller,which includes county Medicaid payments,was study uses a three-year weighted average to calculate the adjusted not available for the 2013-14 or 2014-15 year. In almost every property valuation. county,the Medicaid total from the WD667 in previous years was less than 0.5%of the total Mandated Social Services Payments, Average Daily Membership(ADM):The sum of the number of days which itself is a small piece of the revenue calculation in Table 4. in membership for all students in each county's local public schools, divided by the number of school days in the term. City school Non-Property Tax Revenue:Sources of revenue for the county districts are combined with the county system and charter school other than property taxes. Examples include the sales tax,fines/ enrollment is included(see Charter School Enrollment under"Notes forfeitures,and local tax aid. on Methodology"). Relative Effort:A measure comparing the Actual Effort of a county Capital Outlay:A six-year average of public school capital outlay to its Ability to Pay.In general,low wealth districts with comparatively using proceeds from local option sales taxes and other sources high spending levels rank highest in this measure.(See Table 5) to fund actual spending on capital projects or equipment for Small County Funding: In 2014-15 supplemental state funding buildings.Withdrawals from the Public School Building Capital was provided to county school districts with ADM less than 3,200. Fund,Grants from the Public School Building Bond Fund,and the This is a change from previous years,when funding was provided North Carolina Education Lottery Funds have been removed from to two categories of local education agencies:those with less the county total. than 3,239 ADM,and those with 3,239-4,080 ADM who have an Capital Outlay per ADM:Six-year average of capital outlay adjusted property tax base less than the state average. spending for a county divided by the ADM for the county. State Average Effective Property Tax:The average of all 100 Current Spending:The most recent current expense appropriation counties'adjusted tax rates. by the county to the public schools,as reported in the audited Supplemental School Taxes:According to GS 115C-501(a),"a financial statement of the local board(s)of education. special tax to supplement the funds from State and county Current Spending per ADM:The total amount of spending for a allotments and thereby operate schools of a higher standard by county divided by the ADM for the county. supplementing any item of expenditure in the school budget." Debt Service: A six year average of public school debt service Total Current Spending per ADM:The sum of the current expense outlay using proceeds from local option sales taxes and other and the supplemental school taxes for a county,divided by the sources to fund school bond repayments and lease purchase county's ADM. 19< ATTACHMENT B > DATA SOURCES ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The 2017 Local School Finance Study examines data from the This year's study was authored by Emma Swift Lee and 2014-15 school year. Every effort has been made to verify Joe Ableidinger. The authors thank Keith Poston, Forum that the data included in this year's study is accurate and President and Executive Director; Lauren Bock, Research reflects what it intends to measure. Director; Dr. Michael Priddy, Forum Board Chair;and Aaron Beaulieu, Forum Member, for their guidance and The primary source of financial information is the Division of thought partnership throughout the research and drafting School Business at the Department of Public Instruction, which provided data on non-property tax revenue, low-wealth processes that resulted in the new study format in 2014. and small county supplemental funding information, final The Forum also thanks the following individuals for their average daily membership(except as noted above for charter insights and contributions to this year's study: Kesha B. school enrollments),effective county tax rate, adjusted Howell, Preeta Nayak, Michael Connolly, Sharon Phelan. revenue tax base, current expense,and other data found in All errors are our own. the Division's Highlights of the NC Public School Budget and The 2017 Local School Finance Study and prior years' online Statistical Profile. versions are available online at http://www.ncforum.org. Other sources include the North Carolina Department of Contact the Forum to inquire about pricing information Revenue's County Property Tax Rates and Revaluation for hard copies of the study. Schedules and Sales Assessment Ratio Studies,which provided the 2014-15 property tax valuations and tax rates; the Department of Revenue's data on Local Government /// Sales and Use Tax Distribution;and the North Carolina III I Department of State Treasurer's Report on County Spending on Public School Capital Outlays. The North Carolina SIJ1'1E'IIJSI' Department of Health and Human Services provided data for the mandated social services expenditures,and the North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts provided data on 2017 Local School Finance Study fines and forfeitures. Per capita income was obtained through Sponsor the United States Bureau of Economic Analysis. BPS I N G 30 V 1986 2016 v+ PUBLIC SCHOOL FO R U M of north carolina Public School Forum of North Carolina 3739 National Drive,Suite 100,Raleigh,NC 27612 Phone:919.781.6833 Fax:919.781.6527 www.ncforum.orq