Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
ORANGE COUNTY <br />BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS <br />ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT <br />Meeting Date: May 15, 2001 <br />Action Agenda <br />Item No. I~~ <br />SUBJECT: Follow-up Report on Student Population Projections <br />DEPARTMENT: County Manager/Budget/ PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No <br />Planning <br />ATTACHMENT(S): <br />Student Projection Graphs <br />(under separate cover) <br />INFORMATION CONTACT; - <br />Rod Visser, ext 2300 <br />Donna Dean, ext 2151 <br />Crai Benedict, ext 2592 <br />TELEPHONE NUMBERS: <br />Hillsborough 732-8181 <br />Chapel HiII 9fi8-4501 <br />Durham 688-7331 <br />Mebane 336-227-2031 <br />PURPOSE: To review and consider additional information requested by the BOCC regarding <br />the results of various methods of projecting future increases in the student population in the <br />Orange County Schools and Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools. <br />BACKGROUND: At their April 30, 2001 budget work session, the Board of Commissioners <br />received a report an the number of students expected to need seats at the elementary, middle, <br />and high school level of both school systems for each year through FY 2010-11. Detailed <br />graphs were presented depicting the results of several alternative projection methods ("tools") <br />that were prepared by school staffs, County staff, and external consultants. The Board directed <br />the Manager to convene a meeting with the two Superintendents to develop additional data <br />regarding several projection methods. <br />Several observations noted at the April 30 work session are repeated here. One observation is <br />that time will be the best measure of which projection method proves to be the mast accurate. <br />There is no clearly superior tool to be relied upon primarily out of the various approaches <br />demonstrated. Given that, there is a solid basis for assuming that the timing of the need for <br />various new school facilities based on the projected increases in student population will fall into <br />a fairly narrow "bracket" of several years. For example, one or two projection methods might <br />indicate the need for a new school atone level in 2004, while one or two others might suggest <br />the need to have that new school open instead in 2005 or 200$. <br />In response to various Commissioner requests at the April 30 work session, staff will present an <br />updated set of student projection graphs that reflect the following information, in addition to that <br />presented in the April 30 version of these graphs: <br />• Projections based on Fall 2001 enrollments, plus the potential additional space needs that <br />could be created if charter school students were to leave those charters and enroll in either <br />OCS or CHCCS. A projection line for this "tool" was shown on the April 30 graph for OC5 <br />