Board hears solar update; operations recommends PPA with Michigan firm and to pursue federal grants

Operations staff presented a solar feasibility update and recommended pursuing a power purchase agreement (PPA) with Energy Products (ESU) of Madison Heights, Mich., after an RFP and follow-up interviews with multiple bidders.

Matt Madison (operations department) said the district received bids from four qualified companies, held second-round interviews and used evaluation criteria that included experience, technical design, financial stability and accompanying curriculum for student engagement. "There is no upfront cost to the district," Madison told trustees when describing the PPA option that would include new roof work rolled into the agreement.

The recommended project scope included rooftop systems sized at roughly 700 kW at the middle school (projected annual production reported as about 920 MWh) and about 740 kW at the high school; the operations presentation showed an estimated new roof allowance of about $1.45 million for the middle school and about $830,000 for the high school rolled into the PPA. Staff also showed an alternative amortization with the roofs excluded; that scenario reduced PPA payments but required the district to fund roof replacements separately.

Federal funding would materially change the project economics, staff said. Madison outlined two primary sources: the USDA REAP grant program (applications open at the time of the briefing) and tax/credit provisions under the Inflation Reduction Act. Staff said the project could qualify for approximately 30% support under the Inflation Reduction Act for meeting prevailing-wage and apprenticeship requirements; an additional 10% domestic-content bonus and a further 10% energy-community credit could raise the federal support to around 40–50% depending on sourcing and eligibility. The presentation noted that grant decisions and tariff risk (module sourcing) are material contingencies.

Operations described the PPA terms used in financial modeling: an estimated district payment escalator of 1.5% annually versus an assumed 2% utility escalation in the district model (staff described 2% as conservative compared with recent utility trends). Over a 20-year modeled period staff reported roughly $257,000 in net savings in the base scenario that included roof costs and federal support assumptions; staff emphasized that savings would be greater if federal incentives were secured or if roofs were funded outside the PPA.

The proposal included educational components: classroom-ready curriculum, real-time production monitors and community displays to show energy production, carbon-offset metrics, system health and historical trends. Madison said vendors will pursue required federal grant applications on the district’s behalf and that awarded federal funds would reduce the PPA capital base paid by the PPA investor. Project timelines provided by bidders anticipated roof replacement and panel installation over summer months with commissioning and final electrical work extending into the fall.

Trustees asked about warranty, roof impacts and decommissioning. Staff said panels would be ballasted (non‑penetrating racking) and that roofing and solar equipment would be warranted for the PPA term; detailed engineering and bonding/decommissioning language would be negotiated in contract documents. Several trustees urged moving quickly to apply for federal funding while programs are open.

At the start of the meeting the board unanimously approved a motion to amend the agenda to add this solar update as a discussion item (roll call: Trustee Brooks, Trustee Simpson, Trustee McGee, Trustee Miller, Trustee Davis and the chair all voted aye). No final project award or contract was voted at the March 17 meeting; staff recommended next steps of further due diligence, pursuing grant applications and returning with a contract recommendation if federal awards and final pricing align with board expectations.