TL; DR
The board received and discussed two presentations:
Preliminary FY 2026 - 2027 Budget Development Overview: Key Assumptions, Risks, and Uncertainties.
Update on Future Planning Considerations for Elementary Schools
The meeting began with the board reading two proclamations.
1. NATIONAL SCHOOL COUNSELING WEEK
*******************************************************************************************
Introduction: This regularly scheduled board meeting was focused on the status of the annual local budget development process, as well as a discussion of possible school closures. Dr. Trice opened the meeting with some remarks “to set the context for tonight’s discussion and connect it to the broader conversation we have been engaging in as a community.”
He noted that, “…we face ongoing and emerging risks; uncertainty at the federal level, the absence of a state budget, the potential revision of the county’s school funding model, and enrollment projections that suggest continued decline over the next decade. Together, these realities require us to think differently about our long term infrastructure, staffing, and operational model.”
He also said, “In our community conversations, we have been clear: CHCCS will need to become a smaller district, both in terms of facilities and staffing. Our goal as an administrative team is to manage this in a way that preserves the high academic standards, programs, and services our community has long valued. Achieving that will require difficult trade-offs – choices that may not feel good today, but that are necessary to secure a stable and promising future. Simply put, we need newer schools, which our most recent bond helps us achieve, and we need fewer schools, which centers the advancement of the conversation we began this fall.”
The first Work Session item was titled Preliminary FY 2026 - 2027 Budget Development Overview: Key Assumptions, Risks, and Uncertainties.
BACKGROUND (Modified from the meeting Abstract):
This presentation provided the board with an overview of preliminary FY 2026–27 budget assumptions and anticipated continuation costs, including key drivers, risks, and funding scenarios, to inform development of the superintendent’s local budget request. The discussion was intended to support board decision-making, gather feedback and direction, and ensure timely submission of the Board of Education’s annual budget request to the County Commissioners, as required by General Statute, by May 15, 2026.
Development of the FY 2026–27 budget is occurring during a period of significant financial transition for the district. Continued enrollment decline affects both state and local revenue projections, while state-mandated salary increases and rising benefit costs continue to place upward pressure on expenditures. Inflationary impacts on non-salary budget items further contribute to the challenge of maintaining current staffing levels, programs, and services within available resources.
At the county level, broader structural fiscal pressures are constraining overall budget flexibility, and county leadership has signaled increased scrutiny of education funding practices. Ongoing discussions regarding potential changes to local education funding methodologies, including consideration of per-pupil funding approaches, introduce additional uncertainty for future funding growth, particularly in the context of declining enrollment.
In this environment, early examination of budget assumptions, continuation cost scenarios, and potential financial risks is critical to informed board dialogue. Providing this context at the outset of the budget development process supports transparent decision-making and allows the Board of Education to offer guidance as staff begins to shape budget priorities and long-term financial strategies.
The reader is advised to review the accompanying PowerPoint for detailed information. It is available HERE.
*******************************************************************************************
The second Work Session item was titled Update on Future Planning Considerations for Elementary Schools.
The PowerPoint is available HERE. I have highlighted some key takeaways in their order of presentation.
Woolpert Report (2023)
Orange County engaged Woolpert, Inc. to conduct a comprehensive assessment and planning study covering school facilities for Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools (CHCCS) and Orange County Schools (OCS). The main goals were to:
Evaluate the current condition of school facilities
Assess educational adequacy and space use
Prioritize capital investment needs
Support master planning and funding decisions
Develop a long-range facilities optimization plan
The report recommended eight schools for renovation or replacement as follows:
Carrboro Elementary
Ephesus Elementary
Estes Hills Elementary
Frank Porter Graham Elementary
Glenwood Elementary
Seawell Elementary
Culbreth Middle
Phillips Middle
The framework prioritizes replacing old facilities with new facilities and improving the educational adequacy of school buildings verses renovating schools.
The Board of Education unanimously approved (April 17, 2025) the Capital Investment Plan (CIP): 2025-2035. Goals included:Replacing aging school facilities with modern structures.
Addressing high-priority facility needs, such as infrastructure repairs and safety improvements.
Enhancing educational adequacy to support evolving instructional needs.
The CIP, approved by the Board of County Commissioners, identified and included three schools for replacement: Carrboro ES, Estes Hills ES, Frank Porter Graham Bilingue.
District enrollment has declined by 12.6% (1,545 students) in the past six years from SY 2019-20 to SY 25-26.
Enrollment projections for the next ten years (to SY 2035-20236) indicate a decline of an additional 1,310 students.
Elementary level enrollment for the past ten years (2015-2025) has declined by 1, 205 students (22%). This number is expected to “level off” somewhat over the next ten years (2035) with a projected net loss of an additional 325 students.
Current elementary school seat capacity is 5,664 seats for a utilization rate of 75.8%. By 2035 the utilization rate is projected to be 69.9%.
This translates into 1,371 empty seats now (2025), 1,583 empty seats in 2030, and 1,705 empty seats in 2035.
Recurring Annual Savings (projected for one school): $1.7 million per year in ongoing operating savings: staff efficiencies, reduced utility expenses, lower maintenance and custodial costs.
Avoided Capital Investment: roof, windows, electrical, HVAC, water, sewer, stormwater, etc.:~$10-15 million
Budget Levers (Current and Potential Budget Adjustment Strategies):
Reviewing the central office staffing structure
Freezing 25% of non-personnel budget items
Adjusting staff allocation formulas
Reducing expenditure on instructional technology
Examining district-wide staffing patterns to identify opportunities for reducing redundancy and consolidating roles
Exploring opportunities to renegotiate existing contracts and evaluate outsourcing options
Dr. Trice succinctly summarized the charge: “…these realities require us to think differently about our long-term infrastructure, staffing, and operational model.”
We must reduce our recurring budget expenditures. This will be a difficult and at times painful process. We currently have 11 elementary schools, six of which are aging and educationally inadequate (a categorical term in the Woolpert report) , and were identified for replacement or renovation (Woolpert Facilities Plan.)
-END-
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.