Company pitches drone manufacturing, training at Madison school sites; board and residents raise hiring and process concerns

Aware Defense representatives presented a proposal to the Madison County School Board on Oct. 20 to use district property for manufacturing and training tied to drone and human-performance technologies, promising apprenticeships and job creation while drawing questions from board members and residents about local hiring, fairness of the procurement process and land use.

The company’s presenter, identified in the meeting as Sam, told the board his firm would like to occupy one or more district buildings (the proposal cites Panetta/Pinetta and Lee elementary school sites) and set up three “centers of excellence” for special operations training, technology incubation and multi-domain autonomous systems. The presenter said the plan would begin with about 50 immediate hires for his company, expand to roughly 500 midterm positions and — as a long-range estimate — could support “thousands” of jobs, citing broader industry growth.

The presenter described technical work on a hearable sensor product and a site called Riverbend where an MOA (memorandum of agreement) already allows certain flight activity; he said a separate facility called “Second Bin Labs” would be used for testing, training and manufacturing. He asked the district to approve an exchange/purchase structure the presentation described as a $1 transfer with an initial 10-year in-kind term and two five-year renewal options. Under the terms described in the presentation and by district staff, the company would pay insurance and utilities and allow the district permitted administrative and office use of the site; the proposal document presented to the board said the district would not be allowed to make alterations, reassign or sublet the property without the company’s consent.

Why it matters: the proposal would use public school property and could alter district facility planning, tax revenue expectations and workforce development for the county. Residents and board members pressed the presenters on whether the jobs would be accessible to long-time county residents, how many jobs were realistic, and whether accepting a late proposal violated the RFP timeline for district property.

What the board heard and asked
The presenter, Sam, said Aware Defense develops an ear-based biometric sensor used in military applications and described three elements for the proposed campus: an elite training facility for operators, a technology incubator that pairs engineers with special operations personnel, and a multi-domain autonomous-systems center intended to support aerial, maritime and ground drones. He said Riverbend (his property) is roughly 8,000 acres and that the MOA the county commission put in place allows flight testing on that land. He told the board the company wants to work with the local career center and Madison High on apprenticeships and internships.

Board members and residents raised several concerns: one longtime resident and board member (identified in the meeting as Miss Hagan) repeatedly questioned whether the high-skilled jobs Aware Defense described would be accessible to local residents with felony convictions or without high school diplomas. Hagan said, “Who your jobs will be will not be for the common man. … I don’t see how that could make our community better.” Other speakers asked why the board was considering a proposal submitted after the RFP deadline and whether staff had disclosed any contacts between company representatives and county officials.

Process and next steps
Before the presentation, the board voted on a motion to hear the late proposal; the motion was recorded as opposed by a 3–1 margin. Despite that vote, the presenter made the pitch and the board discussed next procedural steps. District staff told the board that if members decide to move forward they would need to draft a contract, resolve an identified legal conflict, and complete a facility survey that staff said is still pending. The board chair told presenters the proposal “will be taken into consideration with the rest of the contracts” when the district has all relevant data and survey results. A district attorney representative said the board has an attorney (Megan Logan) who would represent the district if a conflict prevents the usual counsel from working on a contract.

Proposal economic and contract claims (as presented)
- Immediate hires: presenter said about 50 jobs to start.
- Midterm hires: presenter estimated roughly 500 jobs.
- Long-term vision: presenter said the project could support “thousands” and later estimated “20,000” as a 10-year aspirational figure; board members and residents described those figures as visionary and questioned the assumptions backing them.
- Property/operations: presenter described Riverbend (about 8,000 acres) and a separate testing/incubation site called Second Bin Labs; he said the county commission revised an ordinance/MOA that allows drone flights over his property.
- Proposed contract terms (as described at the meeting): a $1 exchange or purchase model, an initial 10-year in-kind term with two five-year renewal options, company payment of insurance and utilities, company responsibility for alterations, and a permitted administrative/office use reserved to the district.

Community reaction and board concerns
Board members and members of the public raised three recurring points: (1) local hiring and access — whether residents with felony records or limited formal education could qualify for the jobs being described; (2) procurement fairness — whether accepting a proposal after an RFP deadline disadvantaged other proposers whose submissions were sealed on time; and (3) land use and impacts — whether drone testing and manufacturing should take place on or near community lands and how that would affect farmers and neighborhoods.

Board action on the item
The board did not adopt a contract or commit to an award at the meeting. Members voted on several procedural and routine items during the same meeting (see “Votes at a glance” below). District staff said the presentation and the company’s materials will be taken alongside other proposals and the district will workshop the items after receiving outstanding survey data.

Quotes
“Who your jobs will be will not be for the common man. … I don’t see how that could make our community better,” said Miss Hagan, a board member and resident who pressed the company on local hiring.

“We will take this presentation into consideration with the rest of the contracts when we have all of the data together,” the board chair, identified in the meeting as Carroll, told the presenters.

What’s next
District staff said survey results and other outstanding materials must be collected and reviewed before the board makes any contractual decision. The presenters said they would continue conversations with the district about apprenticeships, curriculum support and facility terms. No contract was drafted or approved at the Oct. 20 meeting; the board signaled it will workshop the proposals and return with recommendations after receiving required data.