HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 05-15-2025-Budget Work Session 1
APPROVED 718125
MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
BUDGET WORK SESSION
May 15, 2025
7:00 p.m.
The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Budget Work Session on Thursday, May
15, 2025, at 7:00 p.m. at the Whitted Human Services Center in Hillsborough, NC.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Jamezetta Bedford, Vice-Chair Jean Hamilton,
and Commissioners Marilyn Carter, Amy Fowler, Sally Greene, Earl McKee, and Phyllis Portie-
Ascott
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None.
COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Travis Myren, Deputy County Manager Caitlin
Fenhagen, and Clerk to the Board Laura Jensen. (All other staff members will be identified
appropriately below)
Chair Bedford called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.All commissioners were present.
The Board reviewed and discussed:
• Outside Agency Funding;
• the Durham Technical Community College — Orange County Campus FY 2025-26
Operating Budget;
• the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools FY 2025-26 Operating and Capital Investment
Plan Budget; and
• the Orange County Schools FY 2025-26 Operating and Capital Investment Plan Budget.
BACKGROUND: The County Manager presented the FY 2025-26 Recommended Budget
(https://www.orangecountync.gov/budget) at the Board of Commissioners' May 6, 2025
Business meeting. Since that time, the Board has conducted one (1) public hearing to receive
residents' comments regarding the proposed funding plan. This is the first opportunity for the
Board to discuss next year's recommended funding plan related to Outside Agency and
Education funding.
Outside Agency Funding: The recommended Outside Agency Funding can be found on page
201 of the Manager's Recommended Budget. The recommended budget for FY 2025-26 is
$800,146
Education Operating Funding: The Manager's Recommended Education Funding can be
found starting on Page 148 of the Recommended Operating Budget. Per-pupil Current Expense
funding is recommended to increase from $5,666 to $5,877.
Durham Tech Funding: Durham Tech's recommended funding is also found in the education
section of the Recommended Operating Budget, on Page 148. The Manager is recommending
a 3% increase to Durham Tech's current expense. Durham Tech also receives additional funds
through the Article 46 sales tax.
2
Education Capital Funding: The Manager's Recommended Capital Investment Plan details
the School Funding Summary on Page 131. There are $549.9 million of school capital projects
in the 10-year capital window.
1. Discussion Regarding Outside Agencies Funding for FY 2025-26
Caitlin Fenhagen, Deputy County Manager, made the following presentation:
Slide #1
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
FY2025-26
COUNTY MANAGER
RECOMMENDED BUDGET
Outside Agencies
May 15, 2025
BOCC Work Session
Slide #2
FY2025-26 PROCESS CHANGES
• Inclusion of Orange County Strategic Goals and
Objectives
In Application, Scorecard and Quarterly Progress Reports
• Performance Measures in Application Must Align with a
County Strategic Goal and Objective
• County Strategic Plan Manager Consulted on Revisions
to Materials and Reviewed Submitted Applications and
Scorecards and Provided Feedback to County Manager
• Outside Agencies Coordinator, Relevant Department
Director and Deputy Manager Attended Joint County and
Towns Agency Presentations and Completed Scorecards
• Separate Scorecards for New Agencies
• Manager Received Scorecards and Prioritized
2 Funding for County Needs ORAR GE�COUNTY
3
Slide #3
FY2025-26 RECOMMENDED BUDGET
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
501(c)3 roved Approvedpp
Agencies Funded 42 39 35 4
Total $ 1,037,016 $ 899,439 $ 800,146 $ 119,307 I
• A total of 39 outside agencies applied for FY 25-26 funding These requests
totaled$1,100,157,which is$200,718 above the current FY appropriation.
• There were six(6)new agencies requesting funding of$50,838;four(4)new
agencies are recommended to receive funding for a total of$17,500.
• One(1)outside agency will be moved to Maintenance of Effort(MOE)funds to
improve collaboration with Alliance.Three(3)outside agencies will be moved
to the Visitors Bureau Fund for tourism-related programming.
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
Slide #4
FY2025-26 RECOMMENDED BUDGET
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
Funding Formula
Application Score
90—100(All Agencies) Up to$7,500 plus base
80—89(Existing Agencies) Cut of 10%to base
80—89(New Agencies) $2,500 flat
79 or Below $0
*Funding for existing agencies is based on the requested amount
over or below last year's award(base).For new agencies,the base
is$0.For new agencies with scores between 90-100,they
received the amount requested up to$7,500.For new agencies
with scores between 80-89,they received a flat$2,500.All
agencies scoring below 79 are not recommended for funding.
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAPOUNA
Commissioner McKee asked for clarification on Chapel Hill's participation.
Caitlin Fenhagen said they participated in the Human Services recommendation, but
they chose not to do any in-person interviews with the agencies.
Commissioner McKee asked if there was a reason that they did not interview.
4
Caitlin Fenhagen said that they made significant changes to their process. She said it
was led by staff and they were familiar with those agencies.
Commissioner McKee said he is concerned about agencies that are funded by multiple
sources and that it would be better to have a unified approach.
Caitlin Fenhagen said there was close collaboration between staff.
Commissioner McKee said that he wants to avoid siloing the process.
Melissa Allison, Business Officer in the County Manager's Office, said that Chapel Hill's
Human Services Board met and reviewed the applications last year and they took those to the
Chapel Hill Town Council but this year they chose not to do that. She said that staff scored the
applications this year. She said that she meets closely with the staff members from Carrboro
and Chapel Hill. She said if there are concerns, they discuss those and bring those to the
managers.
Commissioner McKee said it sounds like there was close collaboration.
Commissioner Greene said Chapel Hill eliminated most of their volunteer boards in the
interest of efficiency.
Chair Bedford asked if there was more consistency in the ratings by having staff review
the applications.
Melissa Allison said yes and that it was fair. She said it was good to have the directors
involved. She said directors hear more about the day-to-day operations of agencies.
Chair Bedford said that was one of her biggest concerns.
Melissa Allison said it varied each year because of different members.
Caitlin Fenhagen said it seemed very collaborative and there were subject matter
experts involved and it felt much more aligned.
Commissioner McKee said the process that is used now is far better than the process
that existed when he first joined.
Caitlin Fenhagen said it is more efficient for agencies as well, as they only do one
meeting with the county and towns, and only one application.
Slide #5
FY2025-26 RECOMMENDED BUDGET
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
Transferred to MOE Funds
mmRequest Recommend Score
OE Enterprises $70,000 $80,000 $74,757 92
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
5
Slide #6
FY2025-26 RECOMMENDED BUDGET
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
Transferred to Visitors Bureau Fund
_ , score
Historic Hillsborough $12,000 $12,000 $10,800 80
Commission
(Burwell School)
Alliance for Historic $5,000 $10,000 84,500 8o
Hillsborough
(Visitor's Center)
Historical Foundation $32,500 $34,500 $29,250 8o
of Hillsborough and
Orange County
{Museum)
ORANGE COUNTY
NOR'171 C.AROLINA
Caitlin Fenhagen noted that the three agencies listed in slide #6 receive a lot of out-of-
county traffic.
Vice-Chair Hamilton asked if the agencies that were moved to other funds were subject
to the same standards.
Caitlin Fenhagen said they were subject to the same standards, but their contracts will
be managed by the Visitors Bureau.
Chair Bedford noted that the three listed on slide #6 had the same funding matrix, as
opposed to OE Enterprise.
Vice-Chair Hamilton asked if they would be involved in a different process in the future.
Caitlin Fenhagen said her opinion is that they are kept in the same process. She said
they may want to bring in the Visitors Bureau in the evaluation process next year. She said this
will keep them reviewed by the same people and be consistent.
Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked how an agency can qualify for increased funding.
Caitlin Fenhagen said agencies that score 90 or above could receive an increase.
Travis Myren said they will never get more than they request.
Commissioner Portie-Ascott clarified that if they had scored 90, they would have gotten
the $10,000.
Travis Myren said yes.
Vice-Chair Hamilton said that if the scoring matrix is not adjusted, some agencies may
be disadvantaged because of the services provided.
Chair Bedford said that makes sense because they prioritized a social safety net but it
might be different for tourism funds.
Caitlin Fenhagen said that makes sense and maybe they should look at a separate
scorecard for agencies funded through the Visitors Bureau.
Vice-Chair Hamilton said all the other things that they are doing must also align.
Chair Bedford said that they also give $6,700 annual rent to the Alliance for Historic
Hillsborough, so they get a great deal of in-kind support in addition to this funding.
6
Slide#7
FY2025-26 RECOMMENDED BUDGET
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
Strategic Goal: Housing for All
iApplication
Award Request Recorrunend Score
Marian Cheek
Jackson Center $50,000 $60,000 $57,500 96
Community
Empowerment $30,000 $40,000 $37,500 95
Fund
Hope Renovations
$7,500 $40,000 $15,000 94
Habitat for
$100,000 $120,000 $107,500 91
Humanity
Empowerment, $67,500 $80,000 $75,000 90
Inc.
Oxford House, $9 000 $17,500 $8,100 87
Inc.
Slide #8
FY2025-26 RECOMMENDED BUDGET
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
Strategic Goal: Housing for All
Award Request Recommend
Pee Wee Homes $14,000 $16,000 $12,600 88
Rebuilding Together
of the Triangle,Inc $15,000 $15,000 $13,500 82
TOTAL(AH
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
Slide #9
FY2025-26 RECOMMENDED BUDGET
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
Strategic Goal: Healthy Community
FY2024-25
Award Recommend Score
Table Ministries,Inc $23,000 $27,500 $27,500 99
Meals on Wheels Orange $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 98
County
El Centro 98
$38,377 $44,133 $44,133
Porch Chapel Hill $21,020 $25,000 $25,000 98
Refugee Community $10,000 $15,000 $15,000 98
Partnership
Orange County Rape $51,000 $53,000 $53,000 97
Crisis Center
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
Slide #10
FY2025-26 RECOMMENDED BUDGET
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
Strategic Goal: Healthy Community
FY2024-25i
Award Request Recommend Score
Reentry House Plus 525,000 S25{)()() S25I)I)o ()7
Porch Hillsborough 515,000 $22,000 322,000 95
Exchange Club's Family
Center of the Central $15,901 $16,186 $16,186 93
Piedmont
Refugee Support Center $5,000 $7,500 $7,500 92
Volunteers for Youth
$11,000 $11,500 $11,500 90
Hillsborough
Community Garden N/A $13,338 $2,500 88
(New)
8
Slide #11
FY2025-26 RECOMMENDED BUDGET
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
Strategic Goal: Healthy Community
Award Request Recommend Score
Planned Parenthood 520,000 $20,000 $18,000 52
Swim for Charlie
$9,141 $21,000 $8,227 �2
Charles House $26,000 $28,000 $23,400 81
Association
1
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
Slide #12
FY2025-26 RECOMMENDED BUDGET
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
Strategic Goal: Public Education/Learning Community
FY2025-26 Application
Recommend Score
Family Reading Partners $12,000 $15,000 $15,000 98
YMCA—Chapel Hill and N/A $10,000 $7,500 98
Carrboro(New)
Boomerang
$27,500 $36,000 $35,000 97
Empowering Excellence
Through Exploration(E3) $2,000 $2,500 $2,500 95
Orange County Partnership $8,000 $8,000 $8,000 91
for Young Children
Orange County 1.,iteracy
$20,000 $24,000 $24,000 90
Council
9
Slide #13
FY2025-26 RECOMMENDED BUDGET
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
Strategic Goal: Environmental Protection and Climate Action
Chapel Hill—Carrboro N/A $5,000 $5,000 92
Farmer's Market(New)
Triangle Bikeworks (New) N/A $2,500 $2,500 85
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
Commissioner Fowler asked for more information on Triangle Bikeworks.
Caitlin Fenhagen said they refurbish bikes and distribute them to kids that would not
otherwise have access to a bike. She said applied in the previous year, but were not funded.
Melissa Allison said they offer bike trips for children that otherwise would not get the
experience.
Slide #14
FY2025-26 RECOMMENDED BUDGET
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
Agencies Not Funded*
Recommend Application
Score
Orange County
Disability Awareness $15,000 $30,000 $0
Council
Transplanting
Traditions $15,000 $18,000 $0 76
Big Brothers/Sisters N/A $15,000 $0 70
(New)
Monet Richardson
Community N/A $5,000 $0 51
Foundation(New)
In FY 24-25, 10 outside agencies were not funded.
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
10
Commissioner McKee asked if they could tell by the applications if it was a lack of
understanding of how to complete the application or if it was a lack of meeting the goals.
Caitlin Fenhagen said it is hard to say because they have been funded before and are
not new to the process. She said the two on the top were funded in the past. She said there
were issues with the applications, the numbers they were serving, the sustainability of the
program, the cost of providing the service, and location or service population. She said the Big
Brothers program is located in Morrisville and serving a mostly out of the county population. She
said the Monet Richardson Community Foundation provides backpacks to students, which are
services already provided by the county and would have been a duplication of efforts.
Commissioner McKee said he thought he remembered the OC Disability Awareness
Council from previous years.
Caitlin Fenhagen said the Orange County Disability Awareness Council also receives in-
kind space at the Southern Human Services Building.
Commissioner Carter asked if applicants receive feedback on their application and how
they can improve in the future.
Caitlin Fenhagen said they receive a call from staff and can receive their scorecard.
Melissa Allison said several agencies changed their programs this year. She said it
made it a little more difficult to score. She said that she meets with applicants and helps them
understand the application.
Commissioner Fowler asked if Big Brothers Big Sisters receives funding through JCPC.
Caitlin Fenhagen said they may receive funding from Wake County. She said they are
serving some from Orange County, but it is a very small percentage. She said the application
was for one-on-one tutoring and would be eligible for JCPC funding if they applied.
Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if the Monet Richardson foundation did not receive
funding because there is no unmet need for backpacks in Orange County.
Caitlin Fenhagen said that is correct. She said there are a variety of community groups
that provide the backpack and DSS provides a backpack for anyone that would need one. She
said it was reviewed by the DSS director as well. She said there should not be any students
going without backpacks in Orange County.
Chair Bedford asked what five agencies have direct contracts with the county.
Caitlin Fenhagen said IFC food, IFC Shelter, Compass, Dispute Settlement Center and
Community Home Trust.
Chair Bedford asked if they filled out an application.
Caitlin Fenhagen said those agencies go through the budget process with departments.
Kirk Vaughn said this information will be presented during department budget
discussion.
Slide #15
Questions?
ORANGE COUNTY
.U1 1'H(AM)LINA
11
2. FY 2025-26 Operating and CIP Budget Discussions, regarding:
• Durham Technical Community College
• Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools
• Orange County Schools
President JB Buxton of Durham Technical Community College made the following
presentation:
Slide #1
V.A-r D U R H A M
Io
T E C H
• . .- County Budget Request Briefing
Slide #2
mum
IL
• [9' w \N
t 1 �
�. DURNAMTECH durhamtech.edu
12
President Buxton shared images of the recent commemoration exercises at Durham
Technical Community College.
President Buxton introduced Andy Kleitsch and Jackie Krohn from Durham Technical
Community College.
Slide #3
i
A; DURHAM I it C FI durhamtech.edu
Slide #4
Key Orange County Program Offerings
Curriculum (CU)& Continuing Education (CE)
Health and Wellness
• Anesthesia Technology ICU)
• Nurse Aide ICU&CE)
Peer Support Specialist(CE)
• Human Services and Public Safety
• Emergency Medical Science(CU&CEI(CPk UCEMS Con Ed offerings)
• EMT,AEMT,Paramedic training ICU&CE)
• the Safety(CE)
• Creative and Liberal Arts/Science and Math
• University Transfer Classes ICU)
• Business and Entrepreneurship
• Culinary(CE)
• Notary(CE)
• College and Career Readiness and Continuing Education
• High School Equivalency(CE)
• Workforce Development(CE)
• Upholstery&Motography(CE)
• Center for the Global Learner
• Beyond Basic English as Second Language(CE)
• English Asa Second language(CE)
=' DURHAM TECH durhamtech.edu
13
Slide #5
Orange County Campus
Expansion in Hillsborough
This 14,000-square-foot expansion will provide
additional space for the College's programs in
Emergency Medical Services,Allied Health,and
Skilled Trades.
Building Features
2 new classrooms
2,600 ftz of Skilled Trades labs
2,700 W of Allied Health labs
2,500 ft2 of EMS&Public Safety labs Architect:Katherine Hogan Architects
2,600 ft of support areas Construction Manager:Samet Corporation
1,200 ft1 exterior courtyard
Lobby renovation Project Manager 35 North
Expansion Size:14,000 square feet
Cost:$11 million
Funding:Orange County
=. D U R H A M TECH durhamtech edu
President Buxton said there is an increased need for services at the Orange County
campus. He said there is increasing enrollment for EMS and public safety classes. He said
they are excited for the expanded student and faculty spaces.
Slide #6
Countof Orange County • - Courses at Durham
Tech (any campus)
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024
■CU Students ■CE Students
Academic Year 2020AY to 2021AY 2021AY to 2022AY 2022AY to 2023AY 2020AY
Percent Change +25% -1% +4% 1 +29%
=/ D U R H A M T E C H durhamtech.edu
14
Slide#7
Countof • ' • at Least 1 Class at
OCC
2500
2000
1500
1000
5p0 778
0
2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024
■CU Student Count CE Student Count
Academic Year 2020AY to 2021AY 2021AY to 2022AY 2022AY to 2023AY 2D20AY
Percent Change +83% +10% +15% +132%
D U R H A M TECH durhamtech.edu
Slide #8
Community Impact Events '
- Clients Served
Business planning workshops m
Haw to Write a Business Plan
• Bilingual training sessions °N
Como iniciar mi Negocio
• How to Finance Your Business
ro 5] 59 59
• Tax and finance guidance �
• Your Small Business Taxes
Cash Flow for the Small Business Owner °
• HispanoPreneurship Summit °
• Training Sessions
• Basics of Bookkeeping °
]orom]i ]a�]Q]] xus]°r3 mrs]o]• ]mL]Q:s
• Quickbook5Introduction(2 part)
Donde esta el Dinero?
Hours Counseled
Academic Number of Number of ]
Year Events Hosted Attendees ]so
202t1, 99
]DD IN 1
171
2021-2022 11 88 1�
iW
2022-2023
So
2023-2024 12 66
Q
I0QPN]1 ]Q]I10]] IQ]]]QH M13]°K ]Q]LX1Y.a
2024-20225 21 266
Nr
D U R H A M T E C H durhamtech.edu
15
Slide #9
GEED Grants Awarded
Orange County
Continuing Education Equity by Design(CEED)Data
Number of Number of
Academic Year Students
awarded
Gasses
2022-2023 88 134
2023-2024 89 126
2024-2025' 121 239
'Grants still being awarded
- D U R H A M T E C H durhamtech.edi]
President Buxton said that Durham and Orange counties are the only two in the state
that award CEED grants for short term courses in the amount of$250.
Slide #10
ALL SOURCES
3%3%
V*rp
2% WA
-state •Durham •Orange
•Federal grarns •Private/State/local grants•Student Feesand other
STATE-LOCAL LOCAL
3%
40
•5[a[e •Ourharn •Orange
Al
•Durham •Orange
�. D U R H A M T E C H durhamtech.edu
16
Slide #11
MANAGER'S REQUEST V COLLEGE REQUEST
Budget Item 1Ba5e iRequest IManager Rec. Change v'24-25 Change v Request
Current Expense 945,363 1,192,252 973,724 28,361 (218,528)
Recurring Capital 75,000 75,000 75,000 -
rticle 46
Innovation Hub 20,0001 0,000 20,000 -
Apprenticeship Coordinator 8,755 9,083 9,083 328
Promise 200,000 200,000 200,000 -
Back to Work 100,000 100,000 100,000
Small Business Grant 70,000 70,000 70,000
Debt Service 191,319 183,935 183,935 (7,383) N/A
TOTAL 1,610,436 1,850,270 1,631,742 21,306 (218,528)
Unfunded Items
College liaison 91,549
Sworn officer 82,500
Fixed cost total(without
debt service,college liaison
and police officer requests) 1,419,118 1,492,186 1,447,807 28,689 (44,379)
durhamtech.edt OF,
Chair Bedford asked if the Back to Work grants are funded through Article 46.
President Buxton said that was correct.
Commissioner Fowler asked if the $250 in CEED grants is given to students per
semester.
President Buxton said the tuition is covered, and then the student receives an additional
grant up to $250 for books, materials, or transportation costs.
President Buxton compared the budget request vs. the amount recommended by the
County Manager. He asked that the Board find increased funding for the college, if possible.
Commissioner Fowler asked for clarification on the college liaisons.
President Buxton said that the college has one liaison funded by Orange County, and
funds a second Orange County liaison with other operational funds.
Chair Bedford asked who they liaisons are working with and where they are located.
President Buxton said they are working with students in the high schools to register
students for classes at Durham Tech. He described their activities in the schools.
Commissioner McKee asked how much one liaison costs.
President Buxton said $91,649.
Commissioner McKee clarified that the increase needed to meet the continuation needs
of Durham Tech is $44,379, with an additional $91,649 for a liaison.
President Buxton said yes.
Commissioner Carter asked if the request is for a sworn officer for second shift and if the
college has a sworn officer for first shift.
President Buxton said yes.
Commissioner Carter asked about their shifts.
Jackie Krohn said it was 3 — 11 pm.
Chair Bedford asked how many days the small business is staffed in Orange County.
President Buxton said they are split between Orange and Durham counties, but he did
not know the exact split.
17
Chair Bedford asked if the county could use Article 46 funds to make up some of the
funding needs. She said there may be options to do incremental funding.
President Buxton said Promise funds are reimbursable. He said that the small business
position is filled and there has been significant growth in that program.
Chair Bedford said that inflation has been high. She wanted to know the flexibility of
Article 46 funding.
Travis Myren said he would review options for Article 46.
Chair Bedford asked what would happen if the $44,379 is not funded. She said it seems
that there is flexibility in Article 46.
President Buxton asked for Andy Kleitsch to explain what they might do if they are short
of funds.
Andy Kleitsch said they are limited by state statute to use state funds for the campuses.
He said they have some funding through rental revenue of the facilities. He said those would be
unrestricted funds they could use, but it is not a lot. He said that would mean those funds would
not be available in future years.
President Buxton said they will be under construction next year and will not be renting
the facility out. He said that last year they were short of funding, and the shortfall has
compounded. He said they are a growing campus.
Commissioner Greene said she supported finding increased funding through Article 46.
Vice-Chair Hamilton asked what the assumptions are for salary increases.
President Buxton said they used 3% based on available information from the state.
Andy Kleitsch said salary information would come out the next day from the House
subcommittees.
Chair Bedford said if the state passes a budget with raises less than 3%, Durham Tech
is not in the hole that much, but they just do not know at this point.
President Buxton said that was correct, but they feel good about the assumption given
the information that has come out.
Travis Myren made the following presentation:
Slide #1
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
Budget Work Session #1
Education
Outside Agencies
Board of Commissioners Work Session
May 15, 2025
18
Slide #2
Durham Technical Community College
• Operating Casts (non-instructional) - page 148
Durham Tech Funding FY 2024-25 Funding FY 2025-26 Request FY 2025-26 Recommend Difference from FY 25
Current Expense 945,363 1,192,252 973,724 28,361
Recurring Capital 75,000 75,000 75,000 -
Debt Service 191,318 183,935 183,935 (7,323)
General Fund Subtotal 1,211,681 1,451,187 1,232,659 20,978
Article 46 Supplement 398,7S5 399,083 399,083 328
Total 1,610,436 1,850,270 1,631,742 21,306
• Current Expense increase of 3% $28,361 does not meet Continuation by$44,379
• Durham Tech Promise Scholarships $200,000 budgeted in Article 46 Sales Tax
• Return to Work Financial Aid $100,000 budgeted in Article 46 Sales Tax
• Small Business Center Support $70,000 budgeted in Article 46 Sales Tax
�1
2 ORAN GE COUNTY
Slide #3
Durham Technical Community College
• Article 46 Investments - page 76
Program FY 2024-25 Funding FY 2025-26 Recommejnd
Durham Tech Promise Scholarship $200,000 $200,000
Back to Work Initiative $100,000 $100,000
mall Business Program $70,000 $70,000
aralina Innovation Hub Rent $20,000 $20,000
pprenticeship Coordinator $8,755 $9,038
otal $398,755 $399,038
3
19
Slide #4
Durham Technical Community College
• Back to Work Initiative — page 76
• $100,000 Recommended Appropriation for FY2025-26
— Scholarships target unemployed and underemployed residents in Orange County
» Short-term offerings with service area industry trends/projected sector growth such as Life Sciences,Construction
Trades,Health Care,Information Technology.
— $500 scholarships to 200 students
» Cover average tuition costs of$250 and funding to support additional student needs such as textbooks,technology,
and transportation.
t 1 1
Cohort by Year 88 98 127
ORANGE COUNTY
4 NORTH CAROLINA
Slide #5
Durham Technical Community College
Back to Work Participants by Age Back to Work Participants by Race
36
35 35 American
Indian/Naske
34 Native
1%
33
32
31 31
31
30
30
29
26
27
18-25 26-35 3645 Over 45
other nmn b P.
Back to Work Participants by Educational Pathway
Science and Math ■2
InformaSan Technology ■2
Human Services and Public Safety 13
Health and Wellness 17
Center fa the Global Leamer 66
Business and Entrepreneurship 18
Building,Engineering,and Skilled Trades 8
0 20 40 60 3n
20
Slide #6
Education Work Session Agenda
• Terminology
• Total Budgeted Students and Enrollment Trends
• Per Pupil Amount
• Impact of the Special District Tax
Funding Recommendations
• Undesignated Fund Balance Policy and Amounts
s ORANGE COUNTY
LINA
Slide #7
Terminology
• Average Daily Membership (ADM)
— Based on Department of Public Instruction's composite best of 20th or 401h day average daily membership
• Out of District Students
— Students from outside of the district attending a traditional Orange County public school
— County is not responsible for funding Out of District Students
• Charter School Students
— Students living in one of the Orange County school districts but attending a charter school including charter
schools in other counties
— School districts must transmit the local per pupil amount to the charter schools serving Orange County students
— County provides funds to the District to pay for those Charter Students through the Current Expense Budget
— If a student transfers from a Traditional School to a Charter School, the amount is prorated for the time the
student spends in each location
• Total Budgeted Students
— Number of students for which Orange County government provides funding on a per pupil basis
ORANGE COUNTY
7 NORTH CAROLINA
Travis Myren said that the district is required to transmit the per pupil rates to the charter
school regardless of district.
21
Slide#8
Total Budgeted Students FY2025 -26
IL I Chapel ,. . City SchoolsSchools
Average Daily Membership 11,114 6,915
Out of District Deduction (318) (115)
Charter Students 222 1,125
Total Budgeted Students 11,018 7,925
%of Total Bud getedStu dents 58.16% 41.84%
• The number of total budgeted students dictates the amount of current expense funding each District
receives.The County must provide the same amount per pupil to each District.
ORANGE COUNTY
8 NORTH CARODLTWA
Travis Myren said the reoccurring capital formula no longer includes charter students.
Slide #9
Student Enrollment History
Total Budgeted Students by District
13,000
12,115 11,242 12,339 12,239 12,160 12,387 12,274 12,236 12,351
12,000
704
11:2
11,920 11,993
1442
11,253
11,141 11,018
11,000
10,000
9,000 -$--CHCC5
8,072 8,011 8,134 8,156 8,110 8,023 8,003 � Oc6
7,863 7,801 7,9fi6 7,936 7,925
8,000
7,227 7,357 7,437
7,148 7,172
7,000
6,000
5,000
2007-08 2w0 2009-10 201 h 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 201415 2015-16 201F37 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 202}24 202425 2026-26
CHCCS Budgeted Student Decrease of 123 Students
Budgeted student percentage decreases from 58.40%to 58.16%
OCS Budgeted Student Decrease of 11 Students ORANGE COUNTY
9 Budgeted student percentage increases from 41.60%to 41.84% NORTH CAROLINA
Travis Myren said they are projecting a decrease in both districts.
22
Slide #10
Student Enrollment Over Time
Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools
Average Daily Membership
15,000
14,000
13,000 12,353 12,355 12,321 12,448
12,129 12,256 12,203 12,017 12,239
12,000 11 66611,740 11,834
11,343 11,393 11,219
11,114
11,000 11,466
10,000
9,000
8,000
7,000
2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2016-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26
Budget
Average Daily Membership decreased by 105 �
ORANGE COUNTY
10 NORTH CAROLINA
Travis Myren said these numbers are physically located in the schools.
Slide #11
Student Enrollment Over Time
Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools
Out of District and Funded Charter Students
400
350
350
309 318
300
241 241 242 250 251 253
250 222 chart..
210
o,n m ort,Kt
200
167 162 lfi9
I55 16b 156 205
150
117 117
100
S0
0
3W]-0B 200&09 2009.10 201P11 3011-12 2012-13 2013-14 201415 2015.16 201F1] 301]-]B 30L&19 2019.20 202P21 2021-33 2022-23 3023-29 202425 2025.26
Budget
Out of District Students increased by 9
Chanter Students decreased by 9 ORANGE COUNTY
1 Charter Students Represent 2.0%of Budgeted Students NORTH CAROLINA
Travis Myren said there in an increase in out of district students.
23
Slide #12
Student Enrollment Over Time
Orange County Schools
Average Daily Membership
10,000
9,000
8,000 7,698
7420 7.501 7,526 7,551 7,544
7,345 7,388 7,381
7.192 7,272 7,299 7,18Z 7,YZZ
6,954 7,030 7,007 6990 6,915
7,000 1— 6 0
6,000
9,000
30D]-08 2008-09 20 40 203tr11 MI-12 20L243 2MM4 201415 2W1 U 201&17 201]-18 2018-19 201420 2W2 21 2WL-22 2022-23 M0 24 20 25 2025-26
Budge.
Average Daily Membership decreased by 75
z ORANIDN GE�COUNTY
Slide #13
Student Enrollment Over Time
Orange County Schools
Out of District and Funded Charter Students
1,200
l�Zr
999
1,000 95
919
885
843
800 769
617
600 �ano�nn.n
600 364
254 254 254 254 254 254 254 254
21)0 110 108 110 116 115
60 57 89 89 84 89 89 89 89 104 89 103 97
0
2B07-08 2006419 200510 201D11 201142 2012.13 2013-14 201415 2MS16 201F]] 1017-16 201F19 202420 2Q2D21 3821-22 2032.23 302524 ]A2436 202526
eid8el
Out of District Students decreased by 30
�1
Charter Students increased by 34 ORANGE COUNTY
13 Charter Students Represent 14.2%of Budgeted Students NORTH CAROLINA
Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked how chronic absenteeism is factored in average daily
membership.
Chair Bedford said it is based on enrollment, not attendance.
24
Slide #14
=nrollment - Budget vs. Actual
Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools
Budgeted vs.Actual Enrollment
Budget Actual Difference Cost Difference
024-25" 11,219 11,083 136 $770,576
023-24 11,393 11,266 127 $678,942
022-23 I 11,466 11,371 95 $456,760
021-22 12,448 11,420 1,028 $4,489,276
020-21 12,321 11,645 067 12,912,789
019-20 12,355 12,270 85 $369.920
018-19 12,474 12,296 170 $741,370
017-18 12,239 12,239 0 $-
2016-17 12,017 12,113 -96 $(37t,328)
Orange County Schools
Budgeted vs.Actual Enrollment
Budget Actual Difference Cost Difference
024-25` 6,990 6,894 96 $543,936
023-24 7,122 6,970 152 $812,592
022-23 7,182 7,066 116 $557,728
021-22 7,299 7,073 228 $986,942
020-21 7,381 7,007 374 $1,633,258
019-20 7,388 7,358 30 $130,560
Of&19 7,345 7,276 69 $287,385
017-18 7,544 7,315 229 $913,939
016-17 7,551 7,413 139 $533,794
hops/-dpi.nc.govldistricts-schools/district-cperations9inanc1al-and-bus iness-services/demographics-and-finances/
`FY2024-25 Actual Average Daily Membership through Month 5 ORANGE COUNTY
14 NORTH CAROLINA
Slide #15
Per Pupil Allocation
Total Current Expense Budget $111,328,011
Total Countywide Budgeted Students 18,943
Per Pupil Amount $5,877
Each budgeted student funded at the same per pupil amount
Ilk"Ai6"'Ill
CHCCS 11,018 $5,877 $64,752,786
OCS 7,925 $5.877 $46,575,225
�1
ORANGE COUNTY
15 NORTH CAROLINA
25
Slide #16
Per Pupil Allocation Over Time
County Per Pupil Funding Amount History
$7,000 -
5271 increase frwn
$6,000 F 25
V202C 55,877
$6,666
$5,346
$5,000
S4 000 $3 868 $3,991
$4,165 $4.352 $4,367 $4,367
$3.571
$2,957 $3,069 $3,200 $3,096 $3,102 $3,167 $3.2fi9
$3,000
u,o6o —
$1,000
� ry�r �Otier ryotiti �titi Sys ryoya �OtiY �,,6' �,,�' �,,� ryo,,�' �tior Otis �,yti ti,;ti �otip' tibe
6 ORAN4DN GE�COUNTY
Slide #17
Impact of the Special District Tax
Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools District Tax Rate History
25M
23.0a
22.00 2200
1.U 2081 M Z0
2020 2035
30.00]o.m 19..Mao
20A0 v.3Q 20,10 20.18 20.18 20-18 1885— 8k Y0MYII.8k-18.84. 38.30}8.+p
1].]5]].]6 1].35 1]35 0]].90
15,75 1,I&W
15A0
2D.00
5A0
o.aa
�1
ORANGE COUNTY
17 NORTH CAROLINA
26
Slide #18
Impact of the Special District Tax
CHCCS Per Pupil History with District Tax
$9,0c0 ,441
$8,217
$B 000 $7,811
$7,00
$7,000
$6 000 $5,769$5,810
$6,085$6,329 ,382
,
$5,093
$5,000 $4,124$4,723$4,770$4,793
59,000
�rmnn aer aa+
$3,000
�rwire.wW
$2,000
$1,000
FY2007-08 FY2009-10 FY2011-12 FYZ013-14 FY2015-16 FVZ017-18 FY2019-20 FY2021-22 FY2023-24 FY2025-26
R-
8 ORANGE G COUCAM�LINTY
Slide #19
Provide Continuation Funding to Schools
SchoolI Total Recommended
FY2024-25 FY2025-26
Approved Recommended $Difference %Increase
Current Expense $108,090,282 $111,328,011 $3,237,729 3.0%
Recurring Capital $3,060,000 $9,521,200 $6,461,200 211.2%
Debt Service $19,182,204 $20,840,115 $1,657,911 8.6%
Health &Safety Contracts $4,004,666 $4,160,806 $156,140 3.9%
+Enrollment Projections
TOTAL $134,337,152 $145,850,132 $11,508,233 8.6%
Calculation of Percentage of General Fund Revenues Dedicated to K-12 Education
Total School Funding Rec. $145,850,132 =47.9%
Total General Fund Revenue $304,784,697
19 ORANGE COUNTY
27
Slide #20
FY2025-26 Funding Recommendations
Education Expenses by Category
120,000,000
111,329,011
108,090,282
102,942,576
20010001000 93,578,73
88,820,720 88,829,114 99,353,19]
84,957 670
90,745,847
80,000,000 77,201,412 —Total Current Expense
]4,09],465
Total Rxurrir,g Capital
KOW,000
TT—I 0615—lu
—h-I-11h aye.1-y
40,000,000
eenerans
23,738,246 21,907,353 21,922,130 20,840,155
20,000,000 15,696,915 15,372,363 15,074,910 17,625,421 17,770,542 18,507,336 19,182,204
3,354,000 3,354,000 3,558,428 3,629,597 3,629,597 3,629,597 3,738,485 3,888,025 4,004,666 ,806
0
FY 2015-16 FY 201&17 FY 2017-18 FY201&19 FY2019-20 FY2020-21 FY2021-22 H2022-23 FY2023-24 FY202425 FU025-26 Rec
ORANGE COUNTY
20 NORTH CAROLINA
Slide #21
FY2025-26 Funding Recommendations
Operating Budget Funding as a Percentage of General Fund Revenue
Funding Target-48.1%
52.00%
50.68% 50.5B%
50.00% 49.0% 49.68% 50.05% 49.49%
49,38%
48.91% 48.99%
48.30% 4s.10% 48.O6X 4822% 48.07% 47.95%
47.09% 46.74%
46.00%
44.00%
42.00%
40,00%
ti° ti� �Y ti3 tin Y0 ya v� tie P .y°
,yN ,yl y'Y ,y^a '1V by yb ,yA ,ti9f y9 ti� .1h ,Sl ti� ,yK y
�1
ORANGE COUNTY
21 NORTH CAROLINA
28
Slide #22
FY2025-26 Capital Funding Recommendations
iBudget
Total .. District
Article 46 Sales Tax $3,259,920 Proportion of Budgeted Students,less
Charter Students
Debt Financed—School Improvements $13,518,312 Project Based
Debt Financed—Bond Proceeds $6,000,000 Planning and Design—Borrowed
Lottery Proceeds $1,807,908 Proportion of Budgeted Students
Recurring Capital & Pay-Go $9,521,200 Proportion of Budgeted Students
Represented in Transfer from General
Fund
TOTAL $34,107,340
ORANGE COUNTY
22 NORTH CAROLINA
Travis Myren said Article 46 Sales Tax funding for schools goes toward technology.
Vice-Chair Hamilton asked for clarification on the source of the $6,000,000 listed on
slide #22.
Travis Myren said the general obligation bond and it counts against the $300 million.
Slide #23
FY2025-26 Funding Recommendations
Operating and Capital Budget Expendiures
$200,000,000
00 $278,235.243
$1S0,000,0
$186,622,223
$160,000,066 $156,W,974
$144,225,894 '
$140,000,W0 $227,929,460131,353,350
$120,257,320
6
$120,000,WO ■Capital
106,587,36
$99,191,737$]01,831, Budget Total
$1W,0W,000
44
■Operating
$80 OW O 0 Budget Total
$60,000,000
$40AWAW
$20,000.OW
$0
FY 2013-14 FY 2024-15 FY 2015-16 FY 2016-17 FY 2017-13 FY2019-19 FY2019-20 FY2020-21 FY2022-22 FY2022-23 FY2023-24 FY2024-25 FY2025-26
FY200-17ex W.N20,i N 2016 Sand Ft-
�1
23 ORANGE
COOLINTY
29
Slide #24
FY2025-26 Funding Recommendations
School Budget Requests and Manager's Recommended Budget
■PY2024-25 Budget ■Continuation Request ■Manager's Recommended •Npansion Request
$80,000000
$73,428,061
$70,000,000 563,124.9 $56,9a9,691 $64,75z,7a6
06
$fi0,000000
$50,000,000 $46,780,376 $46,575,225 $49,055,745
544,965,376
$40,000,000
$30p00,000
$20,000,000
$107000,000
Chapel Hill-Carrbora City Schools Orange Counry Schools
• CHCCS Orange County Schools
Recommended Budget-$64,752,786 Recommended Budget-$46,575,225
$1,815,697 below Continuation Request $205,151 below Continuation Request
$8,856,197 below Expansion Request $2,480,521 below Expansion Request
ORANGE COUNTY
24 NORTH CAROLINA
Commissioner Fowler asked if this includes the special district tax.
Travis Myren said that there is new Special District Tax revenue due to natural growth.
Commissioner Fowler asked if the budget for CHCCS includes the Special District Tax
revenue.
Travis Myren said yes.
Commissioner Fowler asked if they are still $1.8 million short on their continuation
budget.
Travis Myren said yes.
Commissioner Fowler said this uses a 3% raise and the senate has a 2.3%. She asked if
they knew the difference if they got that amount from the state. She said that Jonathan Scott
indicated there would still be a shortfall.
Travis Myren said that he does not have those numbers but will check with Jonathan
Scott.
30
Slide #25
FY2025-26 Funding Recommendations
Top Twenty County Per Pupil Appropriations for School Education Year 2024 by
Local Educational Agency (LEA)
Chapel-Hill/Carrbo o City Schools 8,822
Asheville City Schools $8,020
Dare County Schools 1 1 $6,074
Orange County Schools 5,848
Durham County Schools $1,740
Mooresville City Schools $5,51
Chatham County Schools ,875
Hyde County Schools $4,307
New Hanover Ccunty Schools $4,177
Transylvania County Schools $4,113
Watauga County Schools 1 $3,975
Thomasville City Schools $3,900
Wake County Schools $3.859
Guilford County Schools $3,853
Carteret County Schools S3,827
Polk County Schoo S3,8211
Buncombe County Schools $,754
Forsyth County Schools $3 690
Charlotte-Mecklenburg County Schools $3, 65
Warren County Schools $3.50 Link l0 Data
$- $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 $7,000 $8,000 $9,000 $10,000
Slide #26
Fund Balance
• Joint policy between the County and the School Districts
— Last amended in 2018 to increase Orange County Schools undesignated fund balance target from
3%to 5.5%
Each District has targeted undesignated fund balance target of 5.5% of budgeted expenditures for
"cash flow purposes only"
Undesignated fund balance may exceed targeted amount for"unseen events or opportunities" and
other non-recurring purposes
Extraordinary emergency needs may exhaust fund balance
• School Districts will take appropriate action to address the problem
• County will reimburse the Districts for the necessary expenditures to address emergencies
26 ORANGE
CA.OUN TY
31
Slide #27
Fund Balance
• Audited undesignated fund balance amounts for FY2023-24
— Does not represent fund balance appropriations made during FY2024-25 Year to Date
— Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools -$445,968 -.5%of FY2023-24 actual expenditures
— Orange County Schools $2,612,690 6%of FY2023-24 actual expenditures
27 ORANGE,ROLIN COUNT Y
Commissioner Carter referred to slide #25. She asked what services other school
districts are not providing compared to OCS and CHCCS.
Travis Myren said he would need to look into the comparative analysis. He said that it
represents the top 20 statewide and the range is broad.
Commissioner McKee said other counties do not have the resources that Orange
County has and might not have the ability to pay especially those in the eastern part of the
state. He said that east and west that needs to be kept in mind. He noted that the list in slide
#25 shows only the top 20. He said the very lower ones are in the extreme east and extreme
west and he thinks that is about the ability to pay.
Danielle Jones, OCS superintendent, said most of the funding would be used for making
up the difference for special populations. She said the recommended caseload might be 50
cases per EC teacher, and OCS would try to cut that caseload down to at least half to try to
provide support to EC staff. She said that the increased funding would also be used for multi-
lingual students, where there is less state funding available. She said they use the funds for
counselors and social workers. She said that OCS has a social worker in every school, which is
not the case in other districts.
Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if the superintendent could share any outcomes and
effects of the increased funding in the school district.
Danielle Jones said that at the end of the 22-23 school year they had five low performing
schools. She said the current year has been about assessing where they are as a district. She
said they ended this last year with three low performing schools. She said 90% of schools met
or exceeded growth and that was higher than any other neighboring district. She said that the
data shows growth in areas like math and they look forward to seeing the final information at the
end of the year.
32
Kirk Vaughn, budget director, continued the presentation:
Slide #28
Recommended School Capital Funding
FY 2025-26 Major Project Funding
• CHCCS to begin design on replacing Carrboro Elementary
— Initial designs to build on other side of campus to allow current school to continue
operations during construction
• OCS to begin design on replacing Elementary School
— May 5th Board of Education voted to progress on a K-5 replacement plan that targets
county owned land next to Soccer-corn campus.
— Conflicts with Soccer-corn expansion in County CIP
ORANGE COUNTY
28 NORTH CAROLINA
Slide #29
Recommended School Capital Funding
FY 2025-26 Major Project Funding (cont.)
• Board of County Commissioners would have to agree to transfer land to OCS
— Agreement could include a joint-use gym at new Elementary School, and to transfer land
of surplus Elementary School back to County
• If Board does not wish to provide that land to OCS, safest course is to delay
funding planning of OCS Elementary School to FY 2026-27
ORANGE COUNTY
29 1*I0R'rH CAROLINA
Commissioner Fowler said it seems like a reasonable request and fits the Woolpert plan
which showed growth in the western part of the county. She said that they had also talked
33
about expanding soccer facilities at Millhouse Road. She said this would bring soccer further
into Orange County and have an economic development impact.
Commissioner McKee said he agreed with Commissioner Fowler. He said there could be
joint uses between the proposed uses and the existing. He said he applauds the schoolboard
for considering that.
Commissioner Carter said she was generally supportive, but she had questions about
property tax rate implications.
Chair Bedford said it would remove $5 million from the CIP. She said the county has the
right of first refusal if there is a surplus of land at the schools. She said currently there are no
taxes collected from the land.
Vice-Chair Hamilton said she is open to the idea, but would like to look more carefully.
Commissioner Greene said it would be beneficial to the existing middle school and
residential community.
Commissioner Portie-Ascott said she is open to the idea. She asked for clarification of
the joint use of the gym.
Kirk Vaughn said one of the things in the planning document is the Board wants the
school boards to reach out to the municipalities that could do a larger gym that could be turned
over to the recreation departments.
Commissioner McKee said it would be in the off hours of the day.
Chair Bedford said it would be for after school hours when school is out. She said that it
would be the city or the county that is using them rather than individual groups. She said if the
county did it, the county would cover the cost of making it bigger and increased utility costs.
She said that CHCCS has already talked with the Town of Carrboro. She asked what the
timeline would be.
Kirk Vaughn said they can move funding based on timing. He said the budget could be
amended later in the fiscal year.
Chair Bedford asked if the site is county or in the Mebane city limits.
Travis Myren said that it receives water and sewer from Mebane.
Kirk Vaughn noted that the members of the OCS Board of Education in attendance
indicated that the site is in the Mebane city limits.
Chair Bedford asked if the policy specifies guaranteed use.
Travis Myren said he thinks that would have to be negotiated because he does not think
the policy is clear at this point.
Commissioner Portie-Ascott said she was open to the discussion.
Chair Bedford noted the benefits of a K-8 complex. She said the transition to middle
school is eased by proximity. She said it is also a benefit to teachers. She suggested making
the entire area more parking friendly. She said the Soccer.com expansion is a good project, but
this use is better. She said that residential does not pay for itself, but having a school there
builds a neighborhood. She said she wanted to explore the joint-use gym. She said she was
not concerned about the land swap. She said she thinks this is a win-win for the water and
sewer and she thinks this is a really good location.
Kirk Vaughn said he was considering the terms of the financials. He said if they are
providing a piece of land for free are they getting that back.
Chair Bedford said they are providing a site at the Greene Tract for Chapel Hill Carrboro.
She said if a school became available downtown, they could do a larger field and have
additional uses like a baseball field.
Vice-Chair Hamilton asked when a decision needs to be made.
Travis Myren said they have planning money available in July, and they would want to be
able to make sure the money is not wasted. He encouraged the Board to decide before July 1.
Vice-Chair Hamilton said it makes sense to decide as part of the budget cycle.
Commissioner McKee said that he agreed.
34
Chair Bedford said they do not need to decide on the gym part and that can be part of
the design and discussions with Mebane.
Slide #30
Recommended School Capital Funding
• Pre-Design Maps of School Projects
Carrboro Elementary OCS Proposed Elementary
t 'I
r ,
1
�Nt)K I H UA Rt LI NA
Slide #31
Recommended School Capital Funding
Major Projects are funded using a combination of Pay-Go and Bond Funds.
CHCCS Projects Bond Funds Pay-Go Funds Total Funds OCS Projects Bond Funds Pay-Go runds Total Funds
Carrboro Elementary $ 47,700,000 $ 5,300,000 $ 53,000,000 Elementary Replacement 1 $ 57,283,000 $ 2,817,000 $ 60,100,000
Estes Hills Elementary$ 51,547,000 $11,283,000 $ 62,830,000 Major Elementary Renovation $ 27,000,000 $ 3,000,000 $ 30,000,000
Frank Porter Graham $ 63,901,300 $ 6,240,000 $ 70,141,300 Major Middle School Renovation $ 37,340,000 $ 7,660,000 $ 45,000,000
Contingency+HPN $ 11,551,700 $31,050,999 $ 42,602,699 Contingency+HPN $ 3,677,000 $22,649,001 $ 26,326,001
Total $174,700,000 $53,873,999 $228,573,999 Total $125,300,000 $36,126,001 $161,426,001
Pay-Go funds provide four major uses to support the Bond Program:
- Absorb soft costs like Design, Project Management
• Project Management included in separate$1 M/year project not allocated to either district
- Extend project budgets above what the Bond could support on its own.
- Improve County debt metrics once county debt exceeds 15% of GF revenues
- Once bond projects are done, support the districts'High Priority Needs
ORANGE COUNTY
31 NORTH CAROLINA
35
Slide #32
Recommended School Capital Funding
Four possible adjustment frameworks:
1. Reduce Pay-Go in early years, reallocate funds for additional Pay-Go in
backend to maintain $100 M over 10 years.
Impact: Less funding available to Major Projects, increased funding for later High Priority
Needs.
2. Reduce Pay-Go in early years, do not reallocate funds to future years.
Impact: Less funding available to Major Projects.
3. Delay district projects by a year, requiring later pay-go introduction.
Impact: Increased Major Project costs due to inflation, less time to complete projects.
4. Reduce Pay-Go allocation across ten-year plan. No longer target $10 M/year.
Impact: Less funding available total.Worse debt metrics.
�1
32 ORoRrH GE COUNTY
Slide #33
Recommended School Capital Funding
• Current Output of Debt Model based on Recommended CIP
- Updated to reflect new value of a penny, FY 25-26 Recommended General Fund revenues,
final 2025 borrowing size.
- Anticipating a 3.49 cent tax increase in FY 26-27 between Pay-Go and Debt.
Year Debt to AV DS to GF Debt Tax Rate Pay Go Tax Rate
Revenues Equivalent Equivalent
2026 1.24% 11.20% - 1.94�
2027 1.50% 13.10% 2.42 1.074
2028 1.77% 14.16% 1.42� -
2029 1.78% 16.50% 2.844
2030 1.61% 17.78% 1.55�
2031 1.62% 17.87% 0.180
2032 1.81% 17.75% -
2033 1.69% 18.61% 0.99�
2034 1.46% 19.16% 0.8N
2035 1.35% 18.00% -
Total Impact 10.190 3.0U
ORANGE COUNTY
33 NORTH CAROLINA
Kirk Vaughn said the debt service chart in slide #33 shows the potential pressure on the
General Fund.
Chair Bedford noted that the Pay Go Tax Rate Equivalent chart shows a 3.01 cents total
increase, and that will fund $10 million each year.
36
Commissioner Greene asked if they are talking about $100 million over ten years, where
are the additional funds for the $6.4 million this year.
Kirk Vaughn said they are not doing the full $10 million this year. She said they are doing
the full $10 million starting next year. He said in years 6-10 there is an incremental increase and
likely wouldn't push the county towards a tax rate increase because it is less than the natural
growth they have planned in revenue.
Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if it is the 1.07 cents plus the 2.42 cents.
Kirk Vaughn said yes and that between the pay go and the debt they would anticipate a
3.5 cent tax increase before they look at operations.
Vice-Chair Hamilton noted that the debt service is for all capital spending not just the
school capital spending.
Kirk Vaughn said that is correct. He said that it includes items that have already been
approved in addition to the CIP. He said there is a larger than usual borrowing in this year and
they will start paying principal payments in 2027.
Commissioner McKee said the rates do not go down and remain cumulative from the
starting point.
Commissioner Carter asked if the Board would not see a debt tax rate equivalent for the
$6 million bond debt.
Kirk Vaughn said no because that is for planning, and they don't borrow for planning
because there is no hard cost at that time. He said they wait until construction has occurred
and they borrow for planning and construction together so it would be in fiscal year 2026-27. He
said they will start making interest payments in fiscal year 2027-28. He said that in capital there
is a lag between making decisions and paying.
Commissioner McKee said that interest does not kick in until after they take their first
draft of the borrowed funds.
Commissioner Carter asked if the debt tax rate equivalent is an estimate.
Kirk Vaughn said yes, and that in a 10-year debt model there are a lot of assumptions
made. He said they try to be more conservative than not. He said they will often be more
conservative than what might end up happening.
Chair Bedford said that is why they went with $100,000 of pay-go because that provides
flexibility every year for the next ten years. She said this was intentional.
Commissioner McKee said this is all before operating. He said there will be additional
taxes if they have to increase spending.
37
Slide #34
Pay-Go Phase-in Options
Board Option - Half Pay-Go in FY 25-26 using framework 1
Staff Assumptions: FY 25-26 Pay-Go is reduced to$3.2 M, FY 26-27 Pay-Go is still$10 M,$3.2 M Pay-Go is added to years
7-10 incrementally
Impact on School Projects DStoGF Debt Tax Rate Pay Go Tax Rate
No changes to either district major projects Year Debt to AV Revenues Equivalent Equivalent
Slight delay to districts ability to use Pay-Go on 2026 1.24% 11.32% - 0.971
High Priority Projects 2027 1.51% 13.10% 2.420 2.020
2028 1.78% 14.19% 1.45¢ -
Impact on Tax Impact 2029 1.78% 16.55% 2.870
2030 1.61% 17.82% 1.530
Incremental Debt comes in slightly quicker in 28 and 29 2031 1.611/. 17.87% 0.130 -
(.03 cents a year), but total debt doesn't change 2032 1.81% 17.66% - 0.084
Pay-Go impact in 26 reduced to.97 cents, but total tax 2033 1.69% 18.56% 0.880 0.084
for both Pay-Go and Debt would total 4.44 cents in 27. 2034 1.46% 19.12% 0.900 0.07a
Incremental increase in 32-35 would exceed natural 2035 1.35% 17.95% - 0.074
growth in revenues, so may require slight tax increase. Total I_m_p et 10.18� 3.284
ORANGE COUNTY
34 NORTH CAROLINA
Slide #35
Say-Go Phase-in Options
Board Option -Almost no Pay-Go in FY 25-26 using framework 2
Staff Assumptions: FY 25-26 Pay-Go is reduced to$500 K for project management, FY 26-27 Pay-Go is reduced to$6 M,
FY 27-28 remains at$10 M. No additional Pay-Go is added back.
Impact on School Projects DStoGF Debt Tax Rate Pay Go Tax Rate
Year Debt to AV• $9.9 M reduction in total pay-go funding for schools Revenues Equivalent Equivalent
over 10 years, pushing out multiple High Priority Needs 0.154
2026 1.24% 11.42%
Major Project budgets left intact, but flexibility is mostly 2027 1.53°i 13.27% 2.420 1.634
removed from plan. Putting pressure on either 3rd 2028 1.81% 14.26% 1zu 1.16*
project or rest of district portfolio 2029 1.81% 16.74% 3.02a
2030 1.62°A 18.05% 1.58t
Impact on Tax Impact 2031 1.63% 18.06% 0.09t
Borrowing is accelerated so tax increases for debt 2032 1.80% 17.79% -
come in faster in 28-30, but same total. 2033 1.691A 18.67% 0.68�
16% 0.8U46% 19.
• Pay-Go impact in 26 reduced to.15 cents, but 2034 1. _
consecutive multi-cent tax increases between 27-29, 2035 1.34% 17.99%
including 4.05 cent tax increase in 27. Total Impact 10A80 2.954
ORANGE COUNTY
35 NORTH CAROLINA
38
Slide #36
Pay-Go Phase-in Options
Board Option — No Pay-Go in FY 25-26 using framework 3 — delay projects
Staff Assumptions: FY 25-26 Pay-Go is reduced to$0, FY 26-27 Pay-Go is reduced to$6 M, FY 27-28 remains at$10 M.
Pay-Go will be$100 M over 10 years of 26-36, rather than 25-35.
Impact on School Projects Year Debt to AV DStoGF Debt Tax Rate Pay Go Tax Rate
Revenues Equivalent Equivalent
$10.4 M reduction in total pay-go funding for schools
over 10 years. 2026 1.24% 11.44%
3 Major Projects delayed one year, adding $5.4 M 2027 1.19% 13.27% 2.424 1.780
• $15.8 M reduction in total funding for High Priority
2028 1.64% 13.17% 0.270 1.164
Needs or V project. 2029 1.801/. 14.54% 1,624 -
2030 1,63% 17.30% 3.135
2031 1.64% 18.101/0 1.024
Impact on Tax Impact 2032 1.82% 17.85% -
Borrowing is delayed so tax increases for debt 2033 1.71% 18.73% 0.714
comes in slower in 28-30, and .13 lower overall 2034 1.48% 19.24% 0.894
No Pay-Go tax in 26,4.2 cent total increase in 27 2035 1.36% 18.07% -
Total Impact 10.060 2.9U
36 ORANGE
COUNTY
NOR`FHCA
Kirk Vaughn listed the three major projects that would be delayed under the scenario
described in slide #36. He said that results in $15.8 million not available for school high priority
needs.
Slide #37
Questions?
ORANGE COUNTY
NC]R"r'H C'ARC7L1NA
Vice-Chair Hamilton said that one of the reasons she did not want to do pay-go in year
one is due to the revaluation. She said there is a perfect storm of tax situations that are not
39
good. She said she wants to be sensitive and look at the alternatives to take the pressure off
the budget for this year. She said that it is important to remember that they are investing in their
community and children and that does require higher taxes. She said she hopes they can better
explain the different options so that residents understand. She said they make decisions
annually and they may look different and requirement different decisions in the future. She said
this is a plan and the commissioners can decide how they can do it to make it work for
everyone.
Commissioner McKee said frameworks 2 and 3 would decrease the tax rate impact.
Chair Bedford noted that would be more taxes spread out but less to spend on schools
in those frameworks.
Commissioner Greene said the bond was explained to voters with the county
contributing pay-go. She said she does not want to transfer any pay-go into borrowed funds.
She said she is interested in #2 because it cuts pay-go this year and it gets added later on. She
asked if this would allow planning to go as planned and would not increase the amount
borrowed.
Kirk Vaughn said they would be borrowing $3.2 million for the first project but they would
add the pay-go later and reconfigure the budget. He said that they are still spending the same
amount of money in the 10-year plan in comparison to what is in the recommended CIP.
Vice-Chair Hamilton said the $300 million bond includes projects and they can borrow
for design costs. She said this would be borrowing more from the bond, but the pay-go would
pick up later on.
Kirk Vaughn said that is how he looks at it, but the school districts have not looked how
any of their plans would fit within the models. He said that he is estimating that they can still do
the projects and is not speaking for the school districts.
Commissioner Greene said she supported the original plan and would not be able to
decide without hearing from the school boards.
Commissioner Fowler said she preferred to stay the course vs. considering any of the
other frameworks. She said if she had to choose one, she would pick the first framework.
Chair Bedford asked about the impact of taking out pay-go in year one and just adding it
to the debt.
Kirk Vaugh said the problem with that is if you take out $6 million in year 1, and do not
go to the full $10 million, they will have to find $10 million to incrementally add back in to the
plan and he does not know how to do that without a tax increase.
Chair Bedford said she preferred continuing with what the County Manager
recommended.
Kirk Vaughn said it had an effect on the back of the plan rather than anytime in the next
four years.
Commissioner Carter said these discussions are not easy ones. She said she
appreciates that they are looking at flexible alternatives. She said there are people that are
financially stressed and if not, they will feel impacts based on what is happening globally and at
the federal level. She said she would like to continue this discussion so they can try to do as
much as they can while also keeping the tax rate as low as possible.
Commissioner Portie-Ascott said when the bond was approved, the community was not
dealing with what they are dealing with at the federal level now. She said she would like to
eliminate the pay-go tax increase, but she wants to be a good fiscal steward of the county's
funds.
Chair Bedford noted that commissioners can make changes through the amendment
process. She said that Kirk Vaughn and Travis Myren can explore ideas or questions
commissioners might have. She said the Board will wrestle with this every year for the next 10
years.
40
Commissioner McKee said that in the second year there will not be an increase due to a
revaluation. He said people would not be wrestling with a compounded effect.
Chair Bedford asked the County Manager if he would consider options for Durham Tech.
Travis Myren said he would bring that information back to the Board.
Chair Bedford explained how to suggest amendments to outside agency funding levels.
Commissioner McKee asked that the Board not do excessive changes to the outside
agency process. He said the current process is a fact driven process and is fair.
Adjournment
A motion was made by Vice-Chair Hamilton, seconded by Commissioner McKee, to
adjourn the meeting at 9:22 p.m.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Jamezetta Bedford, Chair
Recorded by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board
Submitted for approval by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board