Local Planning Committee approves draft facility plan and sends it to KDE; committee highlights four models and funding context

The Local Planning Committee (LPC) for Nelson County Schools voted to approve a draft District Facility Plan (DFP) and sent that draft to the Kentucky Department of Education for review, LPC members told the Nelson County Board of Education at the district’s May 6 work session.

James Nijhoff, the LPC facilitator, and Adam Gossam, the LPC chair and parent representative for OKH, described a process that began in January and included multiple public forums, poster‑board comment periods and data reviews. Nijhoff praised the district’s adherence to the KDE rules that define LPC composition and process, saying the district had conducted the process “by the letter of the law.”

The LPC considered four broad organizational models and used a set of criteria — student access, teacher access, location/busing and efficient use of funding — to evaluate them. The four options the committee studied were summarized in the presentation as:

1) An east‑west middle school model with a new middle school on the west side (near Thomas Nelson land); 2) A 6–12 united campus model (a single campus serving grades 6–12); 3) Nelson County High School as the high school and Thomas Nelson as the middle school; and 4) Thomas Nelson as the high school and Nelson County as the middle school.

The LPC’s small‑group work and public forums produced several findings the committee highlighted for board members: the 6–12 model was described as improving academic and CTE access, reducing student transitions and fostering staff collaboration; committee members noted that fewer building footprints could reduce operational spending and optimize staffing. The committee reported that 544 students participate in high‑school athletics and cited bus‑ride data showing 875 students spend an additional 20 minutes or more on the bus under current routing patterns.

Public concerns and safety: Committee members said public commenters repeatedly raised safety questions about combining middle and high school students on a single campus. LPC and district staff described mitigation strategies the district would include in design if a 6–12 campus proceeds: staggered passing times, digital hall‑pass controls, supervised restroom breaks for younger students, separate restrooms and lunch periods for middle‑grade students, centralized administrative hubs for each school level, controlled‑access doors and assigned SROs (school resource officers). The Kentucky Center for Safe Schools and local law enforcement participated in safety testing and provided assessments; district staff said the center has offered to partner on design and risk assessments.

Funding context: LPC members also reviewed facility revenue mechanics. The board presentation explained that Nelson County’s tax rate was 67.3¢ per $100 of assessed value; three locally retained “nickels” (15.9¢) are designated for facilities and historically produce roughly $7.4 million annually for facility funding, the presentation said. The district’s FY24 debt service on existing projects was presented at about $4.7 million; slides explained how debt payments phase out across the next decade and how that creates additional bond capacity if the board chooses to authorize new borrowing.

Process and next steps: The LPC completed a series of meetings from March through April, held public forums at multiple schools and then voted at the April 30 meeting to approve the draft DFP for submission to KDE. The LPC’s submission triggered KDE review and potential revisions; the LPC set a further public meeting for May 14 at Thomas Nelson and the board was told no board decision was required at the May 6 work session.

Board context and comments: Board members applauded the LPC’s turnout and process. They emphasized that the LPC’s recommendation provides choices for the local board and that facility funding and safety considerations will be part of future design and public engagement. Superintendent Bradley and several board members underscored the district’s ongoing facilities maintenance work and said the LPC’s work informed those long‑range conversations.

What was not decided: The board did not adopt any plan on May 6. The LPC’s draft remains under KDE review; final design choices, bond authorizations and potential tax impacts would require future board votes and public processes.