Joint Meeting of DPS and Durham County - March 10, 2026: Public Schools, County Government Face Funding Squeeze and Hard Choices
The Durham Public Schools Board of Education and county commissioners grapple with aging buildings, potential school consolidations, and whether a 2026 bond or other borrowing can cover nearly $2 billion in facility needs. Leaders also debate raising staff pay, growing charter school pressures, and how much more local taxpayers can realistically afford. 52mins
Was this helpful?
Original Meeting
Tuesday, March 10th, 2026
10270.0
#DPSCommunity | DPS Board of Education and Board of County Commissioners Joint Quarterly Meeting
Video Notes
#DPSCommunity | DPS Board of Education and Board of County Commissioners Joint Quarterly Meeting | 3/10/26
In This Video
-
-
Commissioner Wendy Jacobs raised whether interim steps should be considered for school consolidation given financial constraints, and Devin Mitchell explained the logistical challenges of relocating students, noted that partial moves had not been studied, and described how enrollment projections incorporate housing growth data from the city and county.
-
Commissioner Jacobs highlighted resident strain from recent tax increases and broader economic pressures while pressing about implementation costs, and Devin Mitchell responded that boundary adjustments were being evaluated as a tool and that staff were monitoring the results of the Growing Together initiative despite not having detailed cost information.
-
-
DPS Superintendent Dr. Anthony Lewis reported that the UNC School of Government was conducting feasibility studies for several old school sites with community engagement planned, and Chair Umstead requested updating presentation slides so the public would not be confused about possible demolition or future use of those properties.
-
-
County Manager Claudia Hager outlined that while a school bond referendum might not be feasible on the current timeline, the county was assessing cash-flow options—such as limited obligation bonds—to address roughly $2 billion in critical facility needs and decide whether to move forward with a 2026 ballot measure.
-
The county manager explained that rising costs and potential overruns on current projects meant the county needed to recalibrate its capital pipeline and return in the coming months with a cash‑flow plan that prioritized the most pressing school facility needs in coordination with the Superintendent.
-
Board Member Wendell Tabb asked how the boards could change their approach to avoid repeating the same budget dilemmas each year, and the county manager responded that overlapping fiscal and cost pressures required more honest prioritization and a shift from reactive, break‑fix facility maintenance to a proactive, planned replacement strategy.
-
-
Chief Finance Officer Jeremy Teetor reported that the finance team completed two audits to bring Durham Public Schools current on its audit cycle and used the results to update district finance procedures, including the first revised finance manual since 2017, to improve transparency and reduce future audit findings.
-
Chief Finance Officer Teetor reported that the district rebuilt its fund balance by reducing reliance on expiring ESSER funds, began restoring reserves previously depleted by classified pay issues, and expected to recoup about $8 million owed from a program that had returned to positive financial performance.
-
Chief Finance Officer Teetor explained that the district had identified 315 unbudgeted positions representing 4.5% of the personnel budget, reduced its reliance on lap salary from $18.6 million to $7.7 million with a plan to eliminate that practice next year, and warned of reduced state funding and higher charter school obligations due to declining enrollment and new charter openings.
-
-
Chief Finance Officer Teetor explained options for raising the district’s minimum wage, noting that fully adjusting the pay scale to avoid compression would cost a little more than $13 million and require about $10.5 million beyond the current compensation request, reflecting priorities raised through public feedback and the meet‑and‑confer process with the educator association.
-
Chief Finance Officer Teetor clarified that a past miscalculation in the salary schedule, which used 48 instead of 52 weeks to display hourly rates, meant the posted minimum appeared as $18 rather than the actual $17.15 per hour, but emphasized that employees had been paid correctly based on their monthly salaries.
-
Chief Finance Officer Teetor reported that a previously funded $200 monthly bus driver supplement had helped stabilize transportation and explained that administration was recommending a new $100 monthly supplement for safety assistants, estimated to cost just over $86,000, to recognize their roles while differentiating pay from bus drivers.
-
Chief Finance Officer Teetor explained that staff had created a new pay scale for certain employees and aligned occupational therapy assistants with that scale, and noted that the team would revisit these figures as they shifted from an assumed 5% classified raise to a 12% minimum wage increase model.
-
-
Chief Finance Officer Teetor outlined a scaled-back technology plan that reduced a Chromebook refresh from 25,000 to about 17,000 devices, proposed funding roughly 1,786 of them through a lease within a $7.8 million capital outlay request, and noted this approach was intended to avoid sharing those funds with charter schools while administration reviewed K–5 delivery models.
-
-
County Manager Claudia Hager described Durham County’s billion‑dollar budget and base‑budget review process, emphasizing reliance on economically sensitive sales taxes, the large share devoted to personnel and education—particularly Durham Public Schools, Durham Tech, pre‑K, and social services—and the sizable number of residents served by DSS and public health programs.
-
A county official reflected on the recurring strain of balancing nearly unlimited needs with limited resources, warning of a cautious-to-pessimistic economic outlook and stalled job growth that could dampen sales and property tax revenues used to fund Durham Public Schools and other county priorities.
-
A county official outlined how the end of ARPA funding and federal policy changes could create millions in losses for pre‑K support, public health, and social services—forcing Durham County either to backfill those dollars locally or reduce services despite potential statewide error‑rate penalties that would cut funding even if Durham’s own performance remained strong.
-
Samuel Lane, director of budget and management for Durham County, reminded School Board members that state law required Durham County to fund school facilities within its financial limits, emphasized that Durham Public Schools already received about four times more county funding than any other department, and warned that recent growth in local support replacing declining federal dollars might not be sustainable without a property tax increase.
-
-
Budget Director Samuel Lane explained that past growth in sales and property tax revenues had masked costs but recent revenue volatility now required repeated property tax rate increases to meet Durham Public Schools and other county needs, warning that additional hikes were already built into the capital plan and that leaders might soon have to either raise taxes annually, cut expenditures, or find new revenue sources.
-
Budget Director Samuel Lane warned that identified county spending needs already exceeded projected new revenue by millions of dollars even before factoring in department expansions or salary increases, stressing that leaders faced an inflection point requiring tough prioritization, limits on midyear fund balance use, and a focus on long-term financial sustainability.
-
-
District administrators addressed misconceptions that charter schools were private or outperforming Durham Public Schools, highlighted the financial impact of charter funding, and described targeted outreach and marketing efforts—such as early engagement with new families, focus groups, and ambassador programs—to better retain and attract students.
-
-
-
-
Commissioner Burton emphasized that rising Durham Public Schools costs were largely driven by labor expenses and benefits like pensions, urged clearer public communication about those hidden costs and state funding versus local charter allocations, and asked how many DPS employees were earning below $20 or at $17.15 per hour.
-
Commissioner Jacobs questioned how the meet‑and‑confer process could be better aligned with the county’s fiscal realities, and a district representative suggested involving county officials in sessions with the committee during budget development to help temper expectations about what funding was realistically possible.
-
Commissioner Jacobs urged clearer communication to the broader DPS community about shared fiscal challenges, asked district leaders to identify internal cost savings—particularly in personnel amid declining enrollment—and emphasized the need to raise classified staff pay even if it required a phased, internally funded approach.
-
Commissioner Jacobs voiced concern about the high share of locally funded school positions and related benefit costs, cautioned that recent crisis-level spending was not sustainable, and emphasized the need for creative funding while maintaining collaborative education-to-jobs initiatives with partners like Durham Tech, local employers, and Duke.
-
Commissioner Nida Allam thanked the DPS finance team for improving financial stability and proposed shifting certain service positions to county employment under MOUs to reduce charter-related costs and free up funds for classified raises, and County Manager Hager agreed to explore those options in the next budget cycle.
-
Board of Education Chair Bettina Umstead emphasized that county school funding supported both Durham Public Schools and charter schools, noting that costs such as benefits and utilities were rising even with declining DPS enrollment, that funding followed students to charters, and that many locally funded positions covered critical roles like assistant principals and counselors beyond what the state allotted.
-
Commissioners, a board member, and a speaker stressed the need to explain how local funds fill state funding gaps for positions like assistant principals, highlighted staff frustration over lagging pay compared to city and county workers, questioned the sustainability of tax-funded raises, and linked investments in education and basic school conditions to long-term community benefits and families’ school choices.
More from this government
Nearby governments