Alamance County’s manager has unveiled a one-year spending plan for capital improvements that envisions more than $30 million in outlays on behalf of the county and the local school system.
County manager Heidi York rolled out this eight-figure capital budget on Monday as a prelude to a more complete spending plan that she’s scheduled to present to the board of commissioners in May.
York told the commissioners that she had several reasons for breaking out these capital expenditures from the rest of the county’s finances.
“We have more capital needs now than we have ever had before,” she explained when the commissioners convened their latest regularly-scheduled meeting that morning. “We’re trying to develop a cost-efficient plan that’s sustainable in order to decrease those emergency repairs that we’ve had to do on the fly. We’re also separating these needs out of the general fund to provide greater transparency and visibility.”
York reminded the commissioners that the county is ultimately responsible for the capital needs of Alamance Community College, the Alamance-Burlington school system, and the local court system in addition to the construction and repair of its own buildings. She added, however, that her plan for the next fiscal year zeroes in on the county and local school system – with no immediate projects on tap for the courts. In the meantime, the community college has requested no additional capital funds from the county while it conducts an internal assessment of its facilities.
York went on to lay out the $11.4 million in capital outlays that she has recommended for the school system in the financial cycle that begins on July 1. This figure includes $1.4 million for computer technology, $4.8 million for HVAC replacements, and $5.1 million for reroofing projects. The county manager added that the latter two items are part of the county’s ongoing commitment to facility improvements that are meant to prevent a repeat of a massive mold infestation that struck the school system at the beginning of the 2023 school year.
York noted that her proposed capital outlays for the schools don’t include any funds for routine upkeep and maintenance. She told the commissioners that she’ll incorporate this revenue into her set-aside for the school system’s operations, which she’ll present along with the rest of her budgetary recommendations on May 19.
The county manager went on to hint that her forthcoming operational outlay for the schools shouldn’t cause too much hyperventilating for the county’s governing board.
“I’m recommending,” she said, “that the county concentrate on capital funding for ABSS and taking care of their facility needs in the upcoming budget.”
York also excluded routine maintenance and upkeep from the $18,974,863 that she recommended on Monday for the county’s own capital needs. She observed that this figure includes about $13.6 million for Alamance County’s landfill, which foots all of its own capital needs through the service fees it charges its customers.
The county manager earmarked another $5.4 million or so for capital outlays that have traditionally come out of the county’s general fund. York acknowledged that actual facility improvements comprise about $2 million of this figure – with $500,000 set aside for the design work on a new EMS station in the eastern part of the county. She also called for $878,000 in technology upgrades and roughly $2.5 million for vehicles and equipment, which she conceded have historically been lumped in with the county’s operating expenses.
York told the commissioners that she thinks that the county can cover all of these capital outlays without recourse to a tax increase in the next fiscal year. She argued that the county will be able to fund most of these items through revenue sources like grants, general fund savings, and the county’s “occupancy” tax on hotels and motels. She also alluded to a potential bank loan to pay for the new EMS station.
“All of the projects that are recommended in the upcoming fiscal year budget,” she added, “are sustainable without needing additional revenues – whether that be from your property tax base or [something] else.”
York nevertheless conceded that, two years from now, the county will need to absorb $1.5 million a year in additional operating expenses for the proposed EMS base.
The county manager went on to assure the commissioners that her proposed capital outlays are quite modest when contrasted with the actual sums that the commissioners have allocated to facility improvements this fiscal year. She recalled that the county has spent more than $20.9 million this year on the school system’s capital needs, while it has allotted another $46.2 million to various county facilities – for a total of $67.1 million that York compared to the $30.4 million she has proposed for the next fiscal cycle.
In any event, York advised the commissioners to let her recommendations “marinate” until June, when they can approve them along with the rest of the county’s next annual budget. But the county manager’s proposals already seemed ripe for the pot to one member of the county’s governing board.
“There’s a lot of forethought that has gone into this,” commissioner Pam Thompson told York after she presented her recommended capital outlays. “You have really listened to everybody.”
