Rock Inc. asks to run I.E. Johnson community center; commissioners push for open RFP and public forum

Nicole Preuss, a representative of Rock Inc., asked the Scotland County Board of Commissioners on April 30 to designate Rock Inc. as the executive agent to manage programming, maintenance and the physical operations of the I.E. Johnson Community Center. The proposal, presented during a scheduled agenda item, prompted detailed discussion among commissioners about facility condition, permitting, existing grant restrictions and the need for a competitive, public process before making any designation.

Rock Inc. said the organization would “assume our responsibilities for programming, maintenance, and physical management, while keeping the center open and accessible for community use.” Preuss described Rock Inc. as a 501(c)(3) that provides day treatment, after-school tutoring and summer enrichment programs and said the group serves children across multiple nearby counties.

The request prompted commissioners to outline constraints tied to the facility. Commissioners noted that, as currently permitted, usable space at I.E. Johnson is limited to the gym, the old library and single-occupancy bathrooms; classrooms and the cafeteria are not usable without major upgrades. One commissioner summarized the county’s assessment of capital needs: bringing the annex up to code was described in the meeting as “well over a million dollars,” and upgrades to bathrooms in the front portion of the building were estimated in discussion at about $500,000. Commissioners also said parking and paving work required for permitting cannot proceed until an environmental study tied to an existing NCORB grant is completed.

Several commissioners urged an open process before selecting any single nonprofit as executive agent. “If we’re gonna make a decision about changing the model for I.E. Johnson, I think that ought to be a community decision. And I think we ought to have a public forum,” one commissioner said during the discussion. Commissioners suggested advertising a request for proposals (RFP), holding a public meeting or special forum to hear local nonprofits, and requiring proposers to disclose how they would fund and operate the facility.

Board members discussed practical next steps suggested in the meeting record: preparing a public advertisement or RFP that lists specific proposal requirements (financing plan, program descriptions, maintenance responsibilities), confirming legal and procedural steps with county staff, and allowing proposers a set turnaround time to submit responses. A commissioner referenced a tentative 10-day advertising window as a starting point to be confirmed with county staff.

Rock Inc. representatives said they were prepared to invest in facility improvements if chosen, and noted prior program investments and state funding complexities from earlier efforts. They also said some financial and contract details would require confidentiality safeguards, including non-disclosure agreements, before sharing full financial statements.

No formal motion or vote to designate Rock Inc. as executive agent was recorded during the discussion. The board conversed about tabling a final decision until a transparent solicitation process and a public forum could be organized; no formal tabled motion or action appeared on the transcript for this agenda item.

The matter remains under discussion; commissioners directed staff-level follow-up (confirming permitting and grant constraints with county counsel and other staff, drafting advertisement/RFP language, and scheduling a public forum or special meeting) but did not record a final decision at the April 30 session.