Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the School Budget topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Orange County Schools presents FY26 operating budget; requests $4 million from county for continuation and expansions

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

School finance staff presented the superintendent27s FY26 local operating budget and asked county commissioners for about $1.8 million to maintain current services and $2.2 million for expansion requests including teacher supplements, classified raises and bus driver pay.

The Orange County Board of Education heard the superintendent27s recommended local operating budget for fiscal year 2025-26 on March 24, with district staff asking the county commissioners to provide roughly $4 million to both continue current services and fund targeted pay and staffing increases.

The recommendation, presented by Ms. Rath (budget presenter, Orange County Schools staff), outlined that continuing operations as currently structured would require about $1.8 million from the county. On top of that the district is asking for roughly $2.2 million in expansion funding to increase local teacher supplements, raise classified-staff supplements and boost bus driver pay. Together, Rath said, the continuation and expansion requests create a local shortfall of a little more than $4 million for the coming year.

Why it matters: district staff emphasized that staffing and salaries account for the majority of the operating budget, and that state allotments do not cover many locally funded positions the district maintains. Ms. Rath said the district27s budget priorities are to recruit and retain staff, support student proficiency and growth, and allocate resources aligned with student needs.

Most important details: the district projects Average Daily Membership (ADM) for FY26 at 6,909 students and said state law requires local per-pupil funding for students domiciled in the district who attend charter schools. Staff reported that roughly 79% of the operating budget pays salaries and benefits; about 80% of that personnel spending is at the school level.

Staff framed the local ask this way: to continue operations exactly as currently structured, factoring in a planned 3% across-the-board pay increase and projected benefit cost growth, the district needs $1.8 million from county commissioners. The expansion requests would add $2.2 million, primarily split among: a proposed 5-percentage-point increase to certified (teacher) local supplements (estimated $1.6 million), a 2-percentage-point increase for classified staff currently receiving a 7% supplement (about $375,000), and a proposed bus driver pay scale alignment with neighboring Chapel Hill27s starting rate (approximately $305,000). Rath summarized those totals and noted the presentation included a correction to the projected ADM figure on one slide (it should read 6,909). The net effect, staff said, would require roughly a $230 per-pupil increase to cover continuation and about $279 per pupil for continuation plus expansion (district staff rounded that to roughly $500 per student when combined), recognizing that any county appropriation is subject to the commissioners27 approval process.

Board members pressed staff for clarifications and context. Several asked that slides clarify when figures represent state allotments versus district allotments, and that demographic trends be presented using measures such as free-and-reduced-price-lunch counts and multilingual-learner trends rather than race alone. Board members and staff discussed that the state funds positions and dollars differently (some positions are allotments, some are dollar allocations) and that Orange County Schools funds many positions above the state allotment to meet local needs: presenters said the district was funding more than 100 positions over what the state allotment would provide, including instructional support and school-health personnel.

Ms. Rath and human-resources staff explained that certain funding streams are capped (for example, exceptional children and multilingual-learner funding are subject to state caps at specified ADM percentages) and that the district is paying substantially more locally than the state provides to meet student needs. In one example staff said state funding for ELL teachers equates to about $866,000 but the district spends roughly double that to staff ELL needs.

Board members acknowledged the presentation and suggested refinements before the district takes the request to county commissioners. Several requested clearer labeling of "allotment" versus "average" on slides, more emphasis on funding trends that drive need (multilingual learners, free/reduced-price lunch), and additional community comparisons (neighboring districts' supplement decisions). Ms. Rath said the district will present the recommended budget to the board for approval in April, hold a public hearing, and then submit the local operating budget to county commissioners before their May budget hearings.

Ending: The board thanked staff for the detailed presentation and agreed to carry the conversation forward into the April public hearing and into the district27s discussions with the county commissioners.