School district hears Schneider Electric business case; administration recommends phased projects, seeks PDA approval

Schneider Electric told the York City School District committee on Nov. 10 that a district‑wide feasibility study has identified immediate energy‑savings opportunities and a longer list of capital improvements the company says could be bundled to reduce operating costs and address deferred maintenance.

"What we started talking about many months ago ... is the vision for York City School District: create an environment that is both physically and strategically responsible," Schneider representative Steven Burkhart said during the presentation, describing a business case based on site visits, input from plant operators and utility analysis.

Burkhart said the district—s baseline utility and energy expenditure is "around 1,300,000.0 per year," and that the measures highlighted in green in Schneider—s report could deliver an estimated $246,000 to $279,000 in annual energy savings. He added those savings could be leveraged to fund "6.6 to 7,500,000.0 dollars worth of improvements" over the next 20 years, depending on which initiatives the district chooses to pursue.

Superintendent Dr. Barry Brown told the committee the proposal appealed to him because it combines three aims at once: student and staff comfort, energy conservation that yields budgetary savings, and progress on the district—s capital‑improvement list. "That 3‑pronged ability to be able to help our students, to be able to conserve energy, and to be able to chop away at our capital improvement list all at the same time" is what made the partnership attractive, he said.

Board members and staff pressed Schneider on technical points, including what the term "building envelope" covers and which items deliver the fastest payback. Schneider—s team pointed to LED lighting as a typical near‑term example that facilities staff can install rapidly and which produces immediate savings; they also described additional measures that would require design and possible capital investment.

District administration clarified that approving the project development agreement (PDA) would not commit the board to execute every item. Sean (district presenter) said the PDA would allow administration and Schneider to perform 4–6 months of design and cost modeling and then return to the board with specific project proposals and cost‑savings estimates for each item. "We're not going to move forward without your board approval," he told the committee.

Administrators said planned funding for individual projects would come from the capital fund so as not to draw down general‑fund operational dollars, and that each project would be brought to the board for approval before work began.

What happens next: administration asked the committee to approve the PDA so the district can pursue design and pricing for selected items and return with formal project proposals. Some members urged a phased, prioritized approach rather than committing to the full punch list at once.

Provenance: Schneider presentation and the committee—s Q&A appear throughout the meeting transcript (presentation begins at SEG 360; Q&A and administrative responses extend through SEG 799).

Speakers quoted: Steven Burkhart (Schneider Electric, SEG 360); Dr. Barry Brown (district administration, SEG 554); Sean (district presenter, SEG 333).