Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Facilities Energy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

ABM presents $4 million district energy plan and a $2.7 million phased service option; board to review in June

Franklin County School Board · May 11, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

ABM told the Franklin County School Board it can deliver a guaranteed energy‑savings project for roughly $4.0 million (projected about $270,000 in annual savings and roughly $7 million over 20 years) or an energy‑as‑a‑service phased option of about $2.7 million with no upfront capital from the division; the board agreed to review questions and consider the proposal again in June.

ABM representatives presented two financing options for districtwide facility improvements at the May 11 Franklin County School Board meeting: a conventional $4.0 million guaranteed‑savings project and an energy‑as‑a‑service alternative that phases work and requires no upfront capital from the division.

Whit Blake (ABM) summarized the scope — LED lighting upgrades across elementary schools and the high school, boiler controller retrofits, piping insulation, and water‑conservation measures — and described the expected economics. "We had been talking about a project that would net about $270,000 in annual savings," Blake said, and he noted the $4.0 million option produces roughly $7 million in guaranteed savings over a 20‑year period.

Nathan Botwright, introduced as a senior leader on the project team, outlined the energy‑as‑a‑service model. "The main difference is it expands on the conventional financing ... it allows us to make that investment, upfront with no upfront capital from the school division," Botwright said. Under that model ABM proposed phasing the first phase at about $2.7 million focused on LED lighting, boiler controls and other higher‑payback measures.

Board members asked whether the work could start this summer to avoid cost increases tied to a prevailing‑wage requirement effective July 1. ABM said early summer work was feasible and that prevailing wage could raise costs if work was delayed. The board did not take final action; trustees asked staff to submit written questions to ABM and scheduled the item for further consideration at the June meeting so the board can decide whether to proceed and, if so, under which financing structure.