Supervisors debate Tabb High School renovation plan and geothermal HVAC cost escalation

York County supervisors spent a substantial portion of their April 8 meeting debating the Tabb High School renovation plan and whether to commit in full to the geothermal heating, ventilation and air‑conditioning (HVAC) option included in the capital improvements plan (CIP).

Supervisors agreed there is broad support for the renovation work that affects the school’s public face — new vestibules, renovated classrooms, a learning commons and the athletic field — but several board members asked for more analysis before the board commits to the high HVAC line item planned in later CIP years.

County staff and school officials (represented in the meeting by county staffers and by references to Dr. Carroll, the division superintendent) told the board that previous planning included geothermal in the HVAC scope and that design work and test wells have already advanced. County staff said bids for wells were due soon. One supervisor summarized the board’s dilemma: the district’s recommended package would get the school work done quickly but increased the HVAC portion from earlier estimates, driving the total project cost significantly higher.

Several supervisors asked whether alternative high‑efficiency HVAC approaches — including modern variable‑refrigerant‑flow/VRF systems and larger solar configurations — had been evaluated against geothermal. One supervisor said the newer VRF technology can offer high efficiency without wells and urged a short engineering review before committing to the geothermal build‑out. Another board member warned that delaying the HVAC decision could risk higher prices later and that some elements of the work (roof, vestibule, learning spaces) are urgent and should proceed.

County staff agreed to compile targeted engineering comparisons and cost estimates and to return to the board with specific answers at a follow‑up budget work session. Supervisors also directed staff to treat the non‑HVAC portions of the Tabb project (entrance, classrooms, turf field, security work) as priorities and said those items could move ahead without the final HVAC decision.

The board’s discussion noted the broader fiscal context: the Tabb project and other school CIP items would be largely debt‑funded across multiple years, producing a multi‑year rise in the county’s debt service. Supervisors who favor additional study said the board needs clear engineering and cost comparisons so it can weigh the trade‑offs (upfront debt and schedule vs. long‑term operating savings). Others said the board has previously approved the geothermal approach and that the county has experience with geothermal systems in other county facilities.

County staff agreed to prepare a concise, comparative analysis of (a) the geothermal option, (b) VRF/mini‑split and similarly modern HVAC approaches, and (c) combined solar‑plus‑HVAC scenarios, including projected payback periods and how each would change the CIP debt profile. The board scheduled follow‑up budget work sessions in mid‑April and late April where staff will report back before the Board finalizes FY26 budget decisions.