Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Interlocal Agreement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Union County commissioners tie $3.8M of local teacher pay to interlocal agreement with school board
Summary
County leaders proposed setting aside roughly $3.8 million for teacher and teacher-assistant supplements but said the money would be conditioned on a signed interlocal agreement spelling out eligible uses, timing and non-substitution of state mandates. The school board pushed back, saying it has budget autonomy and warning that conditions could withhold needed funding.
Union County commissioners on Monday proposed earmarking about $3,800,000 in local discretionary funds for teacher and teaching-assistant supplements — but only if the county and Union County Public Schools (UCPS) enter an interlocal agreement spelling out what the money may be used for and when it will be paid.
"My recommendation is that if there is not an agreement, then those funds would not be allocated to UCPS," County Manager Brian Matthews said, laying out the county's proposed budget and the conditions he recommended be attached to the supplemental pay.
The county commissioners said the agreement would include three simple terms: the funds must go to classroom teachers and teacher assistants, payments should be made in an agreed-upon timeframe, and the local dollars must not be used to replace any state-mandated increases. Commissioners said the written terms are intended to prevent the confusion they said drove public criticism last year about how local supplement funds were used.
"We're asking this year that the teachers and TA's are the ones who get the additional funds this year," Vice Chair Christina Helms summarized during the discussion, explaining the county's priority and why commissioners favored a narrowly targeted supplement.
UCPS leaders said they share the goal of boosting pay for instructors but warned that the school board cannot be compelled by the county to spend local allocations a particular way.
"When you approve your budget, if that's what you approve, that's what we will work with," UCPS Superintendent Drew Houlihan said, adding that the school board has legal authority over how discretionary funds given to the district are spent. Shawna McLamb, UCPS chief finance officer, told commissioners the system's general-fund balance stood at $7,800,000 as of June 30, 2025 and cautioned against reducing that reserve too far to cover recurring costs.
The exchange grew tense at times, with both sides arguing their actions had been misunderstood in the previous budget cycle. "That's an untruth to the highest degree," one county official said in response to accusations that the county had withheld funds the school board expected. School board Chair Reverend Jimmy H. Benson urged a cooperative tone. "I want our boards to be succinct. I want to say to you that you have my word that we will be good teammates," he said.
County officials said the $3.8 million is in the manager's recommended budget as discretionary local funding and that the board will decide whether to require an interlocal or pursue a different working agreement. They also said any amount committed and allocated to UCPS would become part of the base for state statutory calculations in future years (meaning it could raise the district's future funding floor).
The meeting ended with agreement to keep talking: both bodies pledged to identify representatives to negotiate terms and staff were asked to follow up. The county manager framed the recommendation as conditional rather than final authority, saying the commissioners would make the policy choice at a future meeting.
What happens next: commissioners asked the school board to discuss the interlocal concept with its members and return a position. Staff-level follow-ups and a smaller joint working group were proposed to hammer out timing and legal language.
