Board backs move to seek RFP for energy performance contract to address deferred maintenance

Granville County Public Schools board members agreed to move the district into the request‑for‑proposals (RFP) phase for a proposed performance contracting project after a detailed presentation from Graham Lewis of Schneider Electric.

Lewis described a performance contracting approach enabled by state law that allows a pre‑certified company to guarantee utility and operations savings; the guaranteed savings can be used to finance capital upgrades without an immediate local tax increase. "If we say that the school district is gonna save $400,000 a year, and for 1 of those years, you only save $300,000 we have to actually write you a check for $100,000 to cover the difference," Lewis said, describing the legal guarantee embedded in the program.

Lewis presented an energy conservation measure matrix covering all district sites and recommended priorities that include centralized building automation systems, district‑wide LED lighting upgrades (with 10‑year warranties), electrical panel and transformer replacements at selected campuses, HVAC and mechanical replacements, building‑envelope sealing, and demand control ventilation where appropriate. He said the district's energy use index is roughly in the middle of peer districts and that projected annual savings from a combined package range from roughly $427,000 to $517,000, which could translate to roughly $6.4 million to $10.4 million in guaranteed savings over a multi‑year contract if the district pursues the maximum 20‑year guarantee allowed by state legislation.

Lewis noted several financing and funding mechanisms that can expand project scope, including monetizing Section 179D tax deductions, incorporating operations and maintenance (O&M) savings, and using state Repair & Renovation (R&R) funds to leverage additional work. He also described that construction‑period savings (for example, early LED lighting savings) can provide immediate positive cash flow during installation.

School system attorney Eva reiterated the structure in plain terms: "what is being proposed, which is essentially, a financing contract. So, the idea is that whichever company gets this contract, rather than say you doing $7,000,000 of upgrades next year and then your utility bills go down in the future, what they would propose is to do $7,000,000 of upgrades that you pay back over 20 years." She added that the company guarantees the savings and that multiple state approvals (state energy office, Local Government Commission) are part of the process.

Board members and county commissioners asked about procurement, timeline and oversight. Lewis said the procurement and design phases typically take several months (RFP selection, 5–7 month design period) and that most districts choose between 15 and 20 years for the contract term. He also said coordination with the district's utility providers (Duke, Enbridge) and with the Department of Public Instruction for projects using R&R funds would be managed by the contractor.

Following the presentation and discussion, a board member moved and a colleague seconded a motion to proceed to procurement and issue an RFP for guaranteed energy‑savings contracts; the motion passed by voice vote. The board and administration signaled support to solicit competing proposals before any firm selection or contract award.

Next steps outlined at the meeting: board approval to move into procurement; advertise the RFP; receive and evaluate proposals (minimum advertised period expected); select a firm for the design phase (first financial commitment); complete design with state approvals; then proceed to construction and measurement & verification under an International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP) standard.