Buncombe County and local school officials spent the meeting reviewing options for a potential general obligation (GO) bond to fund major school capital projects, including building replacements, mechanical system upgrades and districtwide front-office security reconfigurations.

Dr. Jackson, representing the county school staff, said the district has identified potential projects that together "exceed, almost $500,000,000," and argued a GO bond could create a separate funding stream so Article 39 funds could continue to address routine repairs such as roofs and smaller HVAC work. He and other staff presented scenario-based prioritizations for different bond sizes, including examples of what could be completed at $100 million, $150 million and higher levels.

Why it matters: school systems and county leaders must align a bond ask with budget adoption and the Local Government Commission (LGC) timetable. Staff said reliable numbers would be needed by June to support a referendum process tied to the county budget cycle and LGC requirements.

Key priorities and estimates presented

- Glen Arden Elementary School: staff cited a schematic estimate of about $45 million and said design work has started; they estimated roughly 12–18 months for design and another 12–24 months to reach construction start if funding were approved.

- W.D. Williams Elementary School: described as already fully designed and in progress; additional funding would accelerate but not restart the design work.

- North Buncombe mechanical systems: estimated in discussion at approximately $30 million–$35 million, with staff noting phased approaches are possible but can increase cost.

- Districtwide front-office reconfigurations: staff presented an estimate of roughly $30 million to reconfigure secure entries across about 29 schools to improve visitor screening and perimeter control.

- Estes Elementary: cited at about $22 million to address overcrowding.

- Transportation facility: staff said an additional $2 million is needed to complete an existing project serving buses for county and city schools.

Funding context and alternatives

Staff discussed how a GO bond could free Article 39 funds to pay for other maintenance needs and highlighted a possible state funding opportunity. Dr. Jackson said the North Carolina Department of Commerce recently reclassified the county (temporarily) from tier 3 to tier 2 following last year’s hurricane, which could permit the county to apply to the needs-based public school capital fund; officials noted the state recently distributed about $392 million to school systems statewide and cautioned that any application would be competitive, would likely require a local match and would not be guaranteed.

Timeline and process

County staff and commissioners agreed they need a clear, coordinated set of project numbers and priorities by June to align with the LGC and the county’s budget adoption. The group discussed public hearings, outreach and the political considerations of placing multiple schools on a ballot to increase voter buy-in. They also noted that issuing approved debt could occur in tranches rather than as a single lump sum, allowing flexibility in timing.

What was decided

No final policy decision was made. The meeting was framed as a preparatory discussion to inform a January work session with the board of commissioners and upcoming budget discussions. Staff will continue refining cost estimates, reviewing feasibility-study results (deliverable to boards in May) and exploring possible grant applications; commissioners will consider the priorities and affordability as part of the budget process.

Votes at a glance

- Agenda approval: approved by voice vote (Aye). Transcript records a voice vote but does not include a roll-call tally.

- Motion to close meeting: approved by voice vote (Aye). Transcript records the motion, second and an affirmative voice vote; no individual tallies were recorded in the transcript.

Sources and attribution

Direct quotes and summaries above are drawn from remarks by school staff and county participants recorded in the meeting transcript, including statements by Dr. Jackson and county staff who outlined project lists, cost estimates and timing. When precise numeric votes or named motions were not recorded, the article reports that counts or mover/second were "not specified" in the transcript.

Next steps

Staff will finalize study deliverables in the spring, refine estimates and continue coordination with county budget staff and the LGC. Commissioners signaled they will discuss bond sizing and priorities in upcoming work sessions and public hearings prior to any referendum.