Henderson County Board approves site development for seven outdoor classrooms and Scotts Hill baseball building; moves forward on two high‑school LEAP centers

HENDERSON COUNTY — The Henderson County Board of Education on a special-called meeting approved site development for seven elementary outdoor classrooms and voted to build a baseball support building at Scotts Hill High School, and authorized planning work for career and technical ‘LEAP’ centers at both county high schools.

Board members voted 7-0 by roll call to approve site development for the seven outdoor classrooms and later voted 7-0 to approve construction of the Scotts Hill baseball building. The vote to move forward with planning for the two LEAP centers was approved by voice vote; board members said final site development and detailed scoping for the LEAP centers will return to the board for formal approval.

The projects are funded primarily from an Innovative School Models (ISM) grant accepted by the board in March 2023, board staff said. The outdoor classrooms are designed to work with the district’s STEM trailer program, providing permanent concrete pads with water and electric hookups at each elementary school so the trailer can be parked and used without relying on its generator. "In the 2 years that I've been director of schools, we haven't actually had site development come before the board," said Mr. Beechman, Director of Schools, explaining why the board was asked tonight to approve site development steps that staff said were overlooked earlier in the projects.

District staff described proposed locations for the outdoor classrooms at seven elementary campuses, listing site options including Beaver, Bargainville (transcript spelling), Pin Oak (referred to as Pinnock/Pinnock School in discussion), Scotts Hill Elementary, Southaven, Southside Elementary and Westover. Mr. Rainey, a district staff member participating in site evaluations, said the proposed outdoor classroom spaces would be pavilion-style with attached concrete pads offering shore hookups for the STEM trailer. "With it being attached to an outdoor classroom... you have the opportunity to have more students and rotate them out," Rainey said.

District staff said the STEM trailer itself does not include plumbing for sewage; water would be limited to hand-wash stations and a hose bib for cleaning. "The stem trailer does not have restrooms," a staff member clarified during board discussion.

On the Scotts Hill baseball building, staff described a need to attach locker rooms, showers and restrooms to serve baseball practices, visiting teams and nearby athletic facilities, noting soil tests in one earlier location failed to perk and that tying into an existing sewer line made a different site viable. The low construction bid reported to the board was $294,000; staff said they were working with the district's design/construction manager to value-engineer the project and reduce costs by about $25,000, bringing a potential net cost to roughly $270,000. Board staff identified Fund 07/6100 as the capital outlay source used in planning; they said the fund had received $2.6 million in capital outlay allocations this past year and that available balances were sufficient to fund the baseball project without compromising other identified needs.

Board members and staff also described the LEAP centers — described as non-occupied, career-and-technical training spaces tied to the district’s LEAP (Learn and Earn Advancement Program) work-based learning initiative. Staff said the intent is to create places where high-school students can do hands-on activities aligned with agricultural programs, health sciences, criminal justice simulations, culinary arts, welding and other vocational courses. "We wanted to be able to put more effort, a direct effort in that at both high schools," Rainey said, describing the centers as a bridge between classroom curriculum and physical training opportunities.

Board and staff repeatedly emphasized the ISM grant as the primary funding source for the projects. "Once again, I want to say in terms of money, all of this comes from grant. This is no longer money involved whatsoever with the outdoor classroom site development," Beechman said.

Public comment raised security concerns about stand‑alone structures on campuses. "These, stand alone buildings themselves present a security risk to me," said Mr. Miles, a member of the public, citing a recent school shooting elsewhere and asking how the district would ensure students in detached buildings are protected. Board staff responded that proposed sites were generally behind school fences or would be sited within existing fenced areas where possible, that exterior LED lighting and visibility screening were being considered, and that school resource officers already escort students between locations at many elementary sites.

Board members said the district has engaged with federal and state security officials. Beechman said Homeland Security had completed an assessment of the district’s schools and that the district plans a more detailed briefing for the board in February that could include recommendations and possible budget requests for metal detection, additional fencing and other security measures. "We are going to need to cut some money in the budget this next year for... some metal detectors and some additional fencing and other security managers," he said, noting that any budget decisions would require board approval.

Board discussion also touched on procurement and bid specifications. Local contractors had raised questions about bid requirements — including documentation like prior employee drug‑testing histories cited in some bid packages. Staff said bid specifications come from the architect/engineer firms contracted to prepare construction documents and that the district would review the specs with its A&E firms (named in discussion as Pertle/Perdle/Perla and Associates and TLM) to consider whether requirements could be adjusted while remaining compliant with state procurement rules.

The board’s approvals tonight authorized site development for the seven elementary outdoor classrooms and the Scotts Hill baseball building and directed staff to proceed with planning and site surveys for the two LEAP centers; staff said final site scoping and formal site development approvals for the LEAP centers will be brought back to the board. The board did not approve finalized footprints for the LEAP centers at the meeting and said locations could change pending surveys and further review.

Votes at a glance

- Outdoor classrooms (site development for seven elementary campuses): motion to approve site development; outcome: approved by roll call, 7-0. Notes: Funded from ISM grant; installations will include concrete pads with water and electric hookups; sewage not required for STEM trailer (handwashing stations only).

- Scotts Hill High School baseball building (construction of locker rooms/restrooms/showers): motion to approve construction; outcome: approved by roll call, 7-0. Notes: Low bid reported $294,000; value engineering could reduce cost by about $25,000; funding identified from Fund 07/6100 (capital outlay) and ISM-related allocations.

- LEAP centers at two high schools (authorization to proceed with planning/site survey): motion to authorize planning; outcome: approved by voice vote. Notes: Final site development, scoping and utility tie-ins (sewer/water) to return to board for vote.

Next steps and context

Staff said architects and engineers will proceed with site surveys and refined bid specifications; staff also committed to reviewing A&E bid documents to address local‑contractor concerns and state procurement compliance. A district briefing on security assessments and any recommended budget adjustments is slated for a future meeting. Several board members noted that insurance and ongoing maintenance costs will increase with additional structures and that those recurring costs should be tracked as planning continues.

(Reporting in this article relies on statements made at the Henderson County Board of Education special-called meeting and on documents discussed at the meeting. Funding amounts and project estimates were presented by staff during the meeting; where staff presented ranges or possibilities, language in this article reflects those characterizations.)