Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Safety And Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Wayne County board agrees to $500,000 budget allocation for school resource officer expansion; discussion continues over teacher supplements and possible sales‑
Summary
Commissioners allocated $500,000 toward expanding school resource officer coverage across county schools, approved $1.317 million for teacher supplements in the budget and discussed — but did not finalize — placing a quarter‑cent sales tax on a future ballot as a longer‑term funding source.
The Wayne County Board of Commissioners voted to include $500,000 in the county budget to expand school resource officer (SRO) coverage in schools countywide, aiming to provide full-time coverage at each traditional school facility pending detail work with the sheriff’s office, the school district and the City of Goldsboro.
Commissioners discussed the mix of 19 full‑time SRO positions currently on the books, five part‑time allocations that county staff said are funded in other sheriff budget lines, and the city’s current commitment to fund three city SROs next year. At the work session, commissioners and staff estimated full, dedicated coverage across about 30 traditional school facilities would require roughly 30 SRO positions; depending on city participation and conversions of part‑time assignments to full time, the board concluded the county’s allocation of $500,000 combined with school‑ or city‑funded shares could provide countywide coverage.
The board also approved a $1,317,000 allocation in the proposed budget for teacher supplements; commissioners discussed using a future quarter‑cent sales tax as a durable funding stream for school supplements and other priorities but did not take a final vote on placing the sales tax on the ballot during the session. Staff outlined a timeline and regulatory constraints for adding a quarter‑cent question to a ballot (candidate filing deadlines and coordination with the Board of Elections) and recommended aiming for an October decision if commissioners want a primary‑season question.
County staff and some commissioners pushed for agreements with the school district and the city to clarify who pays for which school SROs, and asked the school system to consider using reserves or fund balance to bridge any shortfall in the first year so that coverage can begin in August if the board finalizes funding. Staff said one element of the SRO cost — roughly half a million dollars suggested by commissioners — would cover salaries and initial outfitting; additional one‑time costs such as vehicle upfitting, radios and equipment were discussed separately.
The board’s action to put $500,000 in the budget is reflected in the meeting record; commissioners directed staff to work with the sheriff, the school district and the city to determine exactly how many new full‑time positions, part‑time conversions or floaters would be needed and how existing part‑time payments in the sheriff’s budget will be recaptured or reallocated.
The discussion also reviewed current grant revenue that offsets SRO costs: staff cited roughly $700,000 in recurring grant revenue that reduces the county’s net SRO expense. Commissioners debated whether the county should count the sheriff’s grant‑funded positions as part of overall coverage and how to reflect that in future contracts with the school system.
