Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Energy Efficiency Contracts topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Tunica County approves Johnson Controls performance contract and 15-year financing including aquatic center option

2624950 · February 18, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Tunica County Board of Supervisors approved a performance contract with Johnson Controls and authorized 15-year financing for the proposal that includes the county’s aquatic center, plus an equipment lease-purchase resolution with Capital One.

The Tunica County Board of Supervisors on Feb. 2025 approved an energy performance contract with Johnson Controls and authorized a 15-year equipment financing agreement that funds the project option including the county aquatic center.

The project and financing were presented by Mr. Davis, a representative of Johnson Controls. Davis said the overall project price in the packet was about $6.14 million (a figure discussed in the presentation as roughly $6.14–$6.17 million) and that the county was considering two options: one that excludes the aquatic center and one that includes it. Johnson Controls said financing had been priced at about 5.15% for a 15-year term while guaranteed energy savings are measured over a 20‑year performance period using internationally recognized measurement-and-verification procedures.

Why it matters: The contract would pay for lighting, HVAC and other upgrades across county facilities and—if the board selected the option that includes the aquatic center—would repair and upgrade that facility as part of the same financed package. Company staff told the board the contract blends measured utility savings, nonmeasured savings and operational savings (O&M or “operational savings”) and that capital avoidance is part of how the project offsets debt service.

Key details discussed in the meeting included the overall financed amount discussed (described by Davis as approximately $6.14–$6.17 million), a stated financing rate of about 5.15% over 15 years, and an annual debt payment the presenter described as roughly $863,000 in year 1 for the option that includes the aquatic center. Davis described “capital avoidance” amounts differently by option in the packet: he stated verbally that “the capital avoidance is, $2.96 500. And on option 4, it's 591,000” (as read aloud in the meeting record). Davis also explained that the county elected to finance the project over 15 years while guaranteed savings would be tracked over 20 years.

Board action: The board voted to approve the three related items presented: (1) approve Capital One 15‑year financing for Option 4 (the option that includes the aquatic center); (2) authorize a resolution for an equipment lease‑purchase agreement with Capital One; and (3) approve the performance contract (the energy agreement with Johnson Controls) and to begin negotiations with the financing provider. Each of those three motions was seconded and carried by voice vote (the meeting record shows the board said “Aye” and recorded “Motion carries”). The motions as read in the meeting materials referenced beginning bank negotiations and executing the performance contract tied to the selected option.

What the board did not decide at the meeting: The board approved the package including the aquatic center (Option 4) and the financing mechanics, but did not provide granular written changes to the scope on the record beyond the option selection. Johnson Controls told the board the measurement-and-verification process will substantiate the annual guaranteed savings; the board did not vote to alter the measurement approach.

Next steps and follow up: Staff and Johnson Controls will proceed with the negotiated financing documents, the equipment lease‑purchase resolution steps with the financing partner identified in the materials, and the performance contract execution. The company indicated it will provide meter‑based, measured savings and ongoing verification reports.

Quotes from the meeting: “That total price is about 6.14. Is that correct?” Mr. Davis asked. “Yes, sir. Yeah. Annual payment… you pay 863,000,” Davis said when describing the financed option that includes the aquatic center. "Option 3 does not include the aquatic center, and option 4 does include the aquatic center," Davis said in the presentation.

Ending: The county approved the financing and contract to proceed with the energy efficiency upgrades; staff will return with finalized contract documents and finance papers as they are completed.