Board reviews two solar lease/buyout proposals, asked for more insurance and cash‑flow detail

The committee discussed two solar partnership models for district facilities: a 97% option limited to roof mounts and a 119% option that adds a ground array to produce approximately 119% of the district’s current electric usage.

Mr. Westin reviewed the proposals’ high‑level financials: estimated year‑6 buyouts of about $3,100,000 for the 97% roof option and about $3,800,000 for the 119% roof-plus-ground option. Under the 119% scenario, the administration presented an example first‑year net savings figure of about $118,000 and projected cumulative savings increasing over time; the 97% roof‑only plan produces savings but not net income in the illustrative model.

Westin said the proposals require no upfront taxpayer dollars under the current structures and noted warranties and financing assumptions that tie key buyout and loan milestones to years 28–30. He said insurance and maintenance were included in the vendors’ cash-flow analyses but committed to gathering specific peer‑district insurance experience and any out‑of‑pocket claims data.

Board members asked whether a ground array would limit future property uses and discussed phasing options; staff noted arrays could be sited to minimize building constraints and that phasing increases cost. Members requested tours of schools with similar systems and asked staff to return with explicit insurance-impact figures, a side‑by‑side cash‑flow comparison of 97% vs 119%, and contract language timelines if the board wishes to act by May to meet tax incentive deadlines.

No formal vote was recorded; administration indicated a May voting window would be appropriate if the board authorizes moving forward after reviewing the additional analysis.