Alamance County manager Heidi York’s proposed allocation to the Alamance-Burlington school system has prompted school officials to begin thinking about possible ways to trim spending for ABSS during the 2026-27 fiscal year that begins July 1.
York’s proposed allocation to ABSS for current expenses, $58.7 million, came in at $4 million less than the $62.8 million that the school board has requested but would still represent a 2.7 percent increase from this year’s funding level for current expenses, superintendent Dr. Aaron Fleming acknowledged during the school board’s latest meeting Tuesday night.
“Things you don’t see in other districts, you see here. It’s 2026, and our gyms are not air-conditioned. . . We know we have deficits of security cameras in our schools. I know we’ve focused on roofs and HVACs in our schools, and I understand why. Here it is 2026, and we don’t have the basic infrastructure in our schools that, quite frankly, other school [districts] have.”
– ABSs superintendent Dr. Aaron Fleming
Yet Fleming also warned that York’s proposed allocation to ABSS would cover the costs for the existing teacher supplement and the portion of county funding that ABSS is statutorily required to share with charter schools currently serving Alamance County students – but little else.
The county manager’s proposed allocation for routine maintenance (capital outlay) came in about $2.2 million less than the $7 million that ABSS requested for routine repairs such as new HVAC controls, roof replacements, window blind replacements, and asphalt patching, based on the proposed county budget and the funding request that school officials forwarded to Alamance County government officials earlier this spring.
At $9.4 million, York’s proposed allocation for big-ticket facility projects (capital improvement plan, or “CIP,” funding) also came in at about half of the $18.3 million in CIP funding that ABSS requested for 2026-27, based on the proposal that the manager presented to Alamance County’s commissioners last week.
Fleming told the board Tuesday night that it would cost ABSS $2 million to maintain the existing county-funded supplement for teachers and administrators, based on the average 8 percent increase in teacher pay currently being contemplated by state budget writers.
“The supplement is based on a percentage of the salary,” he explained. “If the salary goes up, the supplement goes up. We do have an issue there.”
Fleming went on to identify likely cuts to the school system’s budget, if the commissioners adopt York’s proposed county budget without increasing funding for ABSS in 2026-27.
The likely budget cuts that Fleming listed Tuesday night include: $925,149 to increase the county supplement that ABSS administrators, principals, assistant principals, and teachers receive as a percentage on top of their state-funded salaries; $280,000 to bump up a new county-funded supplement for classified employees by $200 (i.e., cafeteria workers, clerical assistants, bus drivers, and other staff whose positions don’t require a state educator’s license); and $425,000 to provide a new $1,500 supplement for speech language pathologists, teachers, and other Exceptional Children’s staff.
ABSS chief operations officer Greg Hook also outlined a list of building repairs and other facility projects that would be eliminated in 2026-27, based on the county manager’s proposed allocation for routine maintenance and big-ticket capital expenses.
[If ABSS doesn’t get more funding] “I would just start chopping off some big items.”
– ABSS chief operating office Greg Hook
Hook told the board that ABSS wouldn’t be able to: continue installing safety vestibules inside the reception area at schools (estimated at $850,000); wouldn’t get $2 million to do design work “on a much-needed new elementary school”; and wouldn’t receive $2.9 million in capital funding to replace teacher laptops that he said are six years old.
“I would just start chopping off some big items,” Hook said.
Among other capital expenses that Hook said would be cut from the budget in 2026-27 include: $500,000 to repair/resurface the track at Graham High School and tennis court repairs/resurfacing at Eastern and Southern High schools (estimated at $500,000 each). Another likely cut would be $430,000 to replace windows at Pleasant Grove Elementary School, which Hook said had not been funded by the $150 million bond package that voters approved for ABSS in November 2018.
Lobbying for quarter-cent sales tax increase
Meanwhile, some school board members began lobbying in earnest Tuesday night for the commissioners to place a quarter-cent sales tax increase placed on county ballots for the fall general election.
The local chapter of the state and national teacher’s union, the Alamance-Burlington Association of Educators (ABAE), had urged the school board in March to ask the county commissioners to put a quarter-cent sales tax increase on the general election ballot, with a proviso that the funds go “directly to local public schools to support essential funding of our school system.”
“If the quarter-cent sales tax would’ve passed, we wouldn’t even be having this conversation [referring to the quarter-cent sales tax referendum that voters rejected in 2010, 2012, 2018, and 2020]. We came pretty close [to passing it in 2018] . . . We need to get that quarter-cent sales tax. I think our local delegation is probably [amenable] to putting it on a local referendum.”
– School board vice chairman Dan Ingle
“If the quarter-cent sales tax would’ve passed, we wouldn’t even be having this conversation,” said school board vice chairman Dan Ingle, referring to the quarter-cent sales tax referendum that voters rejected in 2010, 2012, 2018, and 2020. “We came pretty close [to passing it in 2018] . . . We need to get that quarter-cent sales tax. I think our local delegation is probably [amenable] to putting it on a local referendum.”
“I do think we should revisit the sales tax opportunity because we need to find a way to fund the school system.”
– School board member Avery Wagoner
“I do think we should revisit the sales tax opportunity because we need to find a way to fund the school system,” school board member Avery Wagoner said Tuesday night.
ABSS chief finance officer Tony Messer told the board that the manager’s proposed allocation for current expenses won’t cover annual inflationary increases for other mandatory expenses such as employer matching retirement contributions and utilities, including two successive years of rate increases for which Duke Energy is currently seeking approval by the North Carolina Utilities Commission.
‘Bare-minimum basics’
“A lot is not happening from our state level that pushes so much down to our county level but also us as a school system,” school board member Seneca Rogers said, adding, “Years ago, a lot of this was funded through our state budget.”
“A lot is not happening from our state level that pushes so much down to our county level but also us as a school system. Years ago, a lot of this was funded through our state budget.”
– School board member Seneca Rogers
“We’re operating at the bare-minimum basics,” Messer said. “Those are not our numbers; those are the state of North Carolina numbers.”
Fleming described the potential impact of the manager’s budget as “going backwards,” while also saying he has immense respect for York and “can understand the revenue [predicament] the county is looking at now.”
“We will need to make some decisions, or we’re going to continue to be the lowest-funded district in the state of North Carolina,” the superintendent told the board.
“Things you don’t see in other districts, you see here,” Fleming said Tuesday night. “It’s 2026, and our gyms are not air-conditioned. . . We know we have deficits of security cameras in our schools. I know we’ve focused on roofs and HVACs in our schools, and I understand why. Here it is 2026, and we don’t have the basic infrastructure in our schools that, quite frankly, other school [districts] have.”
“We know we would not be able to do anything we’ve requested in order to fund charter schools and sustain the supplement,” the superintendent reiterated later Tuesday night.
Fleming said that Alamance County’s commissioners had actually lowered the property tax rate (as opposed to a revenue neutral rate of 42.59 cents, versus the actual rate of 43.20 cents per $100 that was adopted for the 2023-24 fiscal year) following the countywide revaluation in 2023.
“I still don’t understand it,” the superintendent opined. “That was such a very poor decision, and here we are today. If we were at that tax rate, with our property value, we would be in a much better place today. I don’t want to exaggerate this, but I see why we’re in the [school funding] ranking we’re in. I don’t know where somebody else could go to live cheaper.”
Alamance County’s commissioners are scheduled to hold a public hearing on the proposed county budget on Monday night and a work session on the budget on June 9, school board chairman Sandy-Ellington Graves pointed out Tuesday night.
“Our job is to advocate for the school system,” Ellington-Graves said, noting that York’s proposed budget calls for “cuts all across county government.”
“My initial thoughts were, ‘all of our people are safe’,” the chairman added. “I don’t see a [reduction in force] in our future. We can’t grow because there’s so much pressure on our district to get out of this low-performing place that we are [in academically] We need some of these resources, the ability to grow, to make that happen…If we don’t start investing in public education, it’s going to impact us countywide in a lot of ways.”
School board member Tameka Harvey also warned of the potential consequences of failing to invest in the school system later during the discussion.
“When we don’t invest, we have to invest somewhere else – more policing, more ambulances, things we wouldn’t have to invest necessarily as much if we poured that into our students,” Harvey said Tuesday night. “They are looking to us to do what’s right by them. We have to cross out the [Republican], and we have to cross out the [Democratic party labels]. We have to do what’s right.”
No one spoke during the public comments portion of the school board’s meeting Tuesday night.
