County study finds $117 million 20-year facilities need; recommends $7.5–11 million annual investment to avoid decline

Beaufort County officials on April 20 heard the final report from a 66‑building condition assessment that lays out a 20‑year capital forecast and a multi‑year strategy to address accumulated deferred maintenance.

Frank Stronchek, who led the assessment team, told the Public Facilities Committee that the replacement value for the 66 core buildings is about $386 million and that the study produced a data‑driven 20‑year capital plan. "At the push of a button every year for the next 20 years we will know exactly what we need to spend to get all of our assets replaced in a timely manner," Stronchek said. He added the study gives staff the ability to triage work and prioritize critical systems such as HVAC, electrical, fire protection and roofing.

The report showed that if the county makes no additional capital investments it will slip from a B to a C average facility grade within five years. Stronchek presented funding scenarios that ranged from a multi‑year approach to a higher near‑term investment; the study’s midpoint target would mean roughly $11 million per year, while a more conservative interim approach could seek about $7.5 million annually after further data scrubbing. "If we hit the middle mark 3 percent, we're looking at about $11,000,000 a year," Stronchek said.

Committee members pressed staff for immediate prioritization. The detention center was singled out as the county’s most critical need; Stronchek said the detention facility’s condition index was particularly low and that deferred repairs to that facility alone represented a multi‑million‑dollar need. "The detention center by itself is rating 18 percent, which is $10,000,000 in deferred maintenance," Stronchek said, noting larger detention‑related estimates had appeared in earlier planning documents.

Assistant County Administrator Jared framed the assessment as the basis for a revised CIP (capital improvement plan) process. Jared said staff already began moving maintenance‑level projects into operations so the CIP can focus on larger infrastructure, and urged the council to use the report to build a consistent annual maintenance target. "We have a good placeholder in the budget right now for operation and maintenance," he said, adding the next budget cycle will reflect the scrubbed numbers and priorities.

Council members discussed pacing and funding sources. Some urged a millage or dedicated funding stream for facilities; others suggested layering multiple funding sources — impact fees, general fund balance and potential referendum dollars for very large projects — to match the scope of work. One member asked staff to return with a short list of the top five immediate projects and cost estimates to inform next year’s budget decisions.

What’s next: staff said they will finalize the scrubbed cost numbers, identify the top near‑term projects (including the detention center and public works priorities), and present budget options in the next CIP/budget cycle. The assessment and the integrated asset management system are intended to shift county work from reactive repairs to a proactive, multi‑year maintenance program.