School board officials presented a long-range facilities plan to Dickson County commissioners during the December work session, describing a strategic framework that prioritizes occupancy, location and building condition when deciding where to invest in remodels or new construction.

Steve Haley, the school board vice chair who led most of the presentation, asked commissioners to view a set of materials that included several "green dot" student-density maps and charts derived from prior capacity studies. He noted the board previously approved a $15,000,000 resolution for four major projects and said those earlier projects remain in process as the board plans the next phase. "If you recall a year ago, a year and a half ago, we passed a resolution for 15,000,000 for 4 major projects," Haley said.

Haley outlined the board's decision framework: occupancy (how full a building is relative to design capacity), location (where growth and student density are occurring) and condition (the physical state of buildings). He described thresholds that prompt planning action: when a school's utilization approaches about 70 percent planning should begin, and at 80 percent a school is effectively full. "When you start getting to the 80% mark, you're ready at a full level," he said.

Presenters showed maps the board calls the "green dot" maps to illustrate student concentrations and discussed likely clusters for future elementary expansions, noting that high schools typically set the framework for feeder middle and elementary schools. Haley said the board expects to return to commissioners with more detailed proposals in January or February and that a county decision could realistically occur by March, depending on scheduling and required approvals. "I think a better target would be February for that, but...if we meet in January it will fall in your work session for February and your vote meet for February. So March, I think, would be very realistic," Haley said.

Commissioners and school board members also discussed procurement approaches. One commissioner asked whether the board intends to use traditional competitive design-bid-build procurement or construction-manager-at-risk/guaranteed maximum price approaches; Haley replied the board intends to use competitive procurement and noted prior use of RFQs on certain roof projects.

No formal county action or binding commitment to specific projects or dollars occurred at the work session; the presentation was described as high-level so commissioners could provide feedback before the board completes more detailed planning.