2021-03-10 Special MeetingNEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35
SPECIAL MEETING, MARCH 10, 2021 PAGE 14
ASSEMBLY
The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners met for a Joint Special Meeting with the New Hanover
County Board of Education on Wednesday, March 10, 2021, at 4:00 p.m. via in-person and remote in the Andre'
Mallette Training Rooms at the New Hanover County Government Center, 230 Government Center Drive,
Wilmington, North Carolina.
Members present: Chair Julia Olson-Boseman; Vice -Chair Deb Hays; Commissioner Jonathan Barfield, Jr.
(remote); Commissioner Bill Rivenbark; and Commissioner Rob Zapple.
Staff present: County Manager Chris Coudriet; County Attorney Wanda Copley; Clerk to the Board
Kymberleigh G. Crowell; and Chief Financial Officer Lisa Wurtzbacher.
School Board members present: Chair Stefanie Adams; Vice -Chair Nelson Beaulieu; Members Judy Justice;
Stephanie Kraybill; Hugh McManus; Stephanie Walker; and Pete Wildeboer.
School staff present: Superintendent Dr. Charles Foust; Assistant Superintendent — Operation Eddie
Anderson; Administrative Assistant Crystal Buie; and Chief Financial Officer Mary Hazel Small.
Chair Olson-Boseman and Chair Stefanie Adams called their respective Boards to order for the Special
Meeting reporting that the purpose of the meeting is to discuss county and school system priorities.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY SCHOOLS (NHCS) INNOVATION
Dr. Foust presented the following information about NHCS Innovation:
• New Hanover County Schools:
• Pursuit of Excellence:
• Dr. Charles Foust, Superintendent: NC native, North Carolina A&T and UNC -Chapel Hill
graduate, and former Superintendent for Kansas City Public Schools
• Relentless Pursuit of Excellence:
• How does NHCS achieve excellence: innovation, audit and acceleration, organization, and
utilization
• Literacy audit: 90% reading on grade level by third grade
• Technology access:
• 1:1 devices: five-year implementation
• Mounted projection device in every classroom
• Professional development
• Community engagement:
• Increased bilingual staff
• Marketing Specialist
• Community Engagement Specialist
• Innovative preparation:
• College and career ready:
• Director of College and Career Readiness
• Partnerships with postsecondary institutions and Wilmington area businesses
• College prep innovation:
• Ensuring students are college -ready:
• Dual Enrollment
• FAFSA
• College campus field trips
• Elevate postsecondary aspirations
• Career and Technical Education (CTE):
• Innovation through CTE: Early -career awareness, identify career pathways, and
industry recognized credentials
• Organization of recruitment efforts: diversity, job fairs, principal pipeline, and incentive pay
• Investing in student achievement:
• All 45 schools will earn an A, B or C rating
• Increased scholarship earnings
• NHCS will rank among the top five districts in North Carolina
• Excellence is required: from theory to practice, we will utilize these concepts to achieve
excellence and ensure our students graduate college and career ready
In response to questions concerning bilingual homes, Dr. Foust explained that when a student enrolls here,
they take an at-home language survey. There are multiple languages spoken in this County and there is a bilingual
2019-2020
Dual Enrollment at
Traditional High Schools
871
Postsecondary Education
84%
Graduation Rate
87.6%
• Career and Technical Education (CTE):
• Innovation through CTE: Early -career awareness, identify career pathways, and
industry recognized credentials
• Organization of recruitment efforts: diversity, job fairs, principal pipeline, and incentive pay
• Investing in student achievement:
• All 45 schools will earn an A, B or C rating
• Increased scholarship earnings
• NHCS will rank among the top five districts in North Carolina
• Excellence is required: from theory to practice, we will utilize these concepts to achieve
excellence and ensure our students graduate college and career ready
In response to questions concerning bilingual homes, Dr. Foust explained that when a student enrolls here,
they take an at-home language survey. There are multiple languages spoken in this County and there is a bilingual
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35
SPECIAL MEETING, MARCH 10, 2021 PAGE 15
department that provides support. However, there are some languages that the department is unable to translate
so it gets help and support from community members.
A brief discussion was held on the A, B or C ratings of the schools and the graduation rate. Dr. Foust stated
that out of the 45 schools, one school is rated as an F and a lot of the schools are in the C range. The graduation rate
is reflective of when students enroll in high school in ninth grade. The school district does have a high graduation
rate and is working towards how to be a better school district to increase the graduation rate year after year.
In response to questions, Dr. Foust stated the audit of the third-grade reading has not been finished. Work
is being done to determine what the costs will be for the 1:1 devices for five years. Five years is used because the
school district would start with high school, then middle school, and then elementary school. The devices could be
computers for grades 3 through 12 and iPads for grades kindergarten through second. The reason five years is being
proposed is that the NHCS Chief Financial Officer Mary Hazel Small commented that devices need to be on a
replacement cycle, ideally a four-year replacement cycle, but the five-year cycle allows for the devices to be
purchased and replaced on a more staggered timeframe.
In response to questions on how the failure rate is assessed, Dr. Foust stated that the failure rate is looked
at on a five-year trend. A three-year trend can also be looked at to see what needs to be done, who needs to be
remediated, and how to get there. Multiple sets of data for multiple years will be reviewed and assessed. He noted
that the 2019-20 year will be the outlier year because of the effects of the pandemic on education.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY SCHOOLS (NHCS) FACILITIES NEEDS SURVEY
Assistant Superintendent — Operations Eddie Anderson presented the NHCS Facilities Needs Survey:
NHCS Facility Needs Survey:
• Thomas Edison stated, "Good fortune is what happens when opportunity meets with Planning."
• The Facility Needs Survey is the first step in good planning. it is a snapshot of the school system's
facility needs as they exist today.
• North Carolina General Statute (NCGS) 115C-521:
• Local boards of education shall submit their long-range plans for meeting school facility needs
to the State Board of Education by January 1, 1988, and every five years thereafter. It was first
implemented in 1988, and it is required to be updated every five years.
• The last NHCS facility update was completed in 2015
• Facility Needs Survey does not consider:
• Funding, schedule, district -wide improvements, program management, and program
contingency.
• It is not a commitment of funds. While projects are prioritized, it does not include an
implementation schedule.
• This survey is what we would go to when considering future projects for a school bond (local
or state), and any other large building program.
• With any large building program, we would also consider district -wide improvements
(technology), program management, and program contingency
Facility Needs Survey does consider:
• Enrollment projections: These projections are provided by the state and built into the
program. NHCS will also get an independent demographer to prepare projections for
comparison. NHCS had planned to do this in 2020 but decided to hold off due to the pandemic.
NHCS is currently working with the County Planning, and plan to have projections done next
year along with a determination of the number of students that can be expected per planned
housing unit.
• Conditions of existing facilities: Needs are identified through a comprehensive evaluation of
each building by design professionals and in-house staff. The results are summarized in the
Existing Conditions Assessment.
• Educational adequacy of existing facilities: This is completed through a space comparison of
the current educational specifications to each existing school building to identify deficiencies.
• All the above items together identify the need for new schools, additions, and
renovations/modernization.
2015 Facility Needs Survey:
• Cost Summary (0 to 5 years) _ $169,034,289
• Cost Summary (6 to 10 years) _ $237,773,498
• Total Needs = $406,807,787.00
Changes in the past five years:
• Student growth/demographics: We are not growing at the same rate. The current population
bubble is in the 8th grade and will be moving to our high schools next year. Development in
the County is not producing the same number of students that it did five years ago. The
average age of the county population has increased, and we see fewer students from multi-
family development. Overall, we see a slower and more manageable growth.
• COVID-19: The pandemic has certainly affected student enrollment this year NHCS still does
not know what the long-term effects of the pandemic may be. However, we believe our
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
SPECIAL MEETING, MARCH 10, 2021
BOOK 35
PAGE 16
numbers will return to pre -pandemic enrollment as we begin to recover and school returns to
normal.
• Kindergarten through third grade (K-3) class size reduction: The 2020-21 school year is the
final implementation year for K-3 class size reductions. This has caused a major reduction in
the elementary school capacities over the past five years.
• Construction Cost: New construction costs for schools have increased 25%, and cost for
renovations have increased as much as 50%. These costs are based on state-wide school
construction averages, and costs are built into the program, and compares the 2015 survey to
the 2020 survey.
• 2020 Facility Needs Survey:
• Cost Summary (0 to 5 years) = $170,732,865
• Cost Summary (6 to 10 years) = $271,912,138
• Total Needs = $442,645,003.00
• This is primarily due to K-3 class size reducing our elementary school capacity, and the
significant increase in construction costs
• Zero to Five Year Priorities:
• The priorities identified in the first five years focus on student capacity, safety and
security, specialty high schools, and modernization of existing facilities
• These projects include:
• New Construction of Riverlights Elementary School (RES). This will replace Mary C.
Williams Elementary School (MCWES) and add needed student capacity.
• Replacement of Pine Valley Elementary (PVE). This will add student capacity, but
must importantly, it will address safety and security concerns, and modernize an
outdated facility.
• Renovation of MCWES to allow for the expansion of our pre -k program, and the
possible creation of a welcome center for new families, pre -k families, and English
learning families.
• Six to Ten Year Priorities:
• The priorities included in years six to 10 focus mostly on safety and security and
modernization of existing facilities.
• It is the goal in both zero to five and six to 20 years to bring all school facilities up to the
same standard for safety and security that is evident in the new schools. This is often not
possible without significant renovations. The best examples of what can be accomplished
is to look at projects included in the last school bond: Myrtle Grove, Trask, and Noble.
• Years six to 20 also include new schools to account for projected growth. This something
that needs to be monitored and closely evaluated in the 2025 update.
• Enrollment Projections:
• Below are enrollment projections provided by the state. The numbers for this school year
will be slightly different since projections were created prior to the pandemic. The
population bubble in yellow will be moving into the high schools next year:
2020-21 DPI Facility Needs Survey
unit
year
K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
650
2020-2021
1,999
1,964
1,976
1,913
2,005
1,938 1
1,908
1,855
2,091
2,336
2,116
1,940
1,897
650
2021-2022
1,924
2,069
1,966
1,990
1,934
1,999
1,808
1,914
1,879
2,593
2,049
2,053
1,859
650
2022-2023
2,000
1,991
2,071
1,980
2,012
1,928
1,865
1,813
1,939
2,330
2,274
1,988
1,967
650
2023-2024
1,969
2,070
1,993
2,085
2,002
2,006
1,799
1,871
1,837
2,404
2,043
2,206
1,905
650
2024-2025
2,020
2,038
2,072
2,007
2,108
1,996
1,872
1,804
1,895
2,278
2,108
1,982
2,113
650
2025-2026
2,093
2,091
2,040
2,087
2,029
2,102
1,862
1,878
1,827
2,350
1,998
2,045
1,899
650
2026-2027
2,128
2,166
2,093
2,054
2,110
2,023
1,961
1,868
1,902
2,265
2,061
1,938
1,959
650
2027-2028
2,161
2,202
2,168
2,108
2,077
2,1041 1,887
1,967
1,892
2,358
1,986
1,999
1,857
650
2028-2029
2,190
2,237
2,204
2,183
2,131
2,071I}-1,963
1,893
1,993
2,346
2,068
1,92.6
1,915
650
2029-2030
2,215
2,267
2,239
2,219
2,207
2,125 1
1,932
1,969
1,918
2,471
2,057
2,006
1,845
Same projection but with added columns to show the projected growth in enrollment
each year along with the total increase over the next 10 years of 5.44%:
2020-21
DPI Facility
Needs
Survey
ly Membership
IN
F
Elementary Schools IK -5
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
SPECIAL MEETING, MARCH 10, 2021
BOOK 35
PAGE 17
Note: the red circle area shows the projected growth at the elementary level
compared to the secondary level. The current projection is to grow at nearly twice the
rate, which is why it will be important to re-evaluate projections and the need for new
schools in the 2025 update.
Capacity Summary and Plan:
The Capacity Summary Report is broken into years zero to five and six to 20 and shows
how planned projects meet the facility needs for projected growth. The first column
shows our current capacity by school, and the second column shows the new capacity for
those schools or projects included in years zero to five.
2020-21 DPI FICglity reeds SL Y
I.EiiT:.
4+93 IWa Lyi4.[�
u
I,
0
0
452
0
..... .a
U
2020-21 DPI Facillty
0
0 52E 0 a
Survey
R.+31a1r�Rm.7rr6wr"-..•
3
0
a
d
Ii
n&�1
'
-
-.
6
a
4
4
a
i1Ra ,E5 Fro. FYwraNsrr„�__.
0
a
a
a
G
a
a
tl
1
0
a
a
a
b
490 IDQ M1e.11 bYddls 5 #M I.+
4 N+Jne NEEEE4
a
@
0
0
a
8
4
a
a
4
@
0
0
aGa }a+ 5Wrtti1' {w1r4, f e+a4e,
4.1L
0'
S4F
a
a
a4.
]
4�
a. 23c•
-
f@a
a
a 1IX1
'tw'm.[kv�r�n..',IIsc N.]tl!c
whP trbl Ca..oaea R i, F Yam
#H
a
]N4
a
G
kW
b
tl
Mua Froud
0
]Ed
4
a
NW
dTr0 ][F{ue4.{ryT,s Eiasma4s
p71
4
a+4
P
0
Lid
5
a
-1-11 haaEad
0
5+4
a
4 -
4
452 },arp.anwFyaryraa.lo
'A9
a
0
Ela
a
613
,
.
wkwa Rw,+aw
6
0
EIG
b
SR.
aR,@ 31# g FYraa, &�, d [rql
253
- �-
41Ya
4
4
+44
o Norm -.am*
•Nyry
G
Faro hrsu4
a'.
++a
a
4
+44
15➢ SIG{rpas ryi Clsrrrt.i..
5-2
a
Y
0
0
i2G
b
a
-Niro, N.Ow
0
pie
0
0
424
itla 5i}CMa,hN.dwaa. ksr
4R1
E
SY'
8
0
dp6
a
a
rhw'].FFaM
0
Yi.
0"
0..
°"• .
'[tla'}T4 t: V+4i aaawy+a, F4
:.'
a
3'0
a
a
714
1
E
_.-g-_--___
a
516
0
4
524
it ip'792.f1ti'u OTrW.l6od4
R Nona Noodnd
a
0
:'@
@
nE
]
a
FlxrP�E
a
4
rM
P
P3i
AA&,ShC-"h La NVO,
2',:.
9
P
0
2'015
7015
3
b
r*-raFFPA
P
0
0
3012.
1.017
wS 7[1 J.'.9.
52
p.. P
tl
0
0
IAM
Id]P
I
P Y25
a P
!.]'■
a 9 Parrm laa.dwa
6.
S]il a a
e5alae'6P44+MYL[aem.1F`--
...._
;•'
a
ir
4
a
331
r
ID
'IF. r 4.w be _.
a'
ial `
a
P'
w1
lard
a"
i
alp
8
]11
4 aji
P 9
436
A 4 'r6a+rt r..,a_"_
a
'
3111
m. ,315 s1aa4 Y gear rsi7 Cao
237
1L7b'J.12'xE[ FrnlFer4✓ 5[4me
"
3
9.',
190
4
Fir
a
aP4(
.F rt4►r3e,
a
571
174
a
Rr
656 }]p.hrr/4C HMWp FSs
I.
S.01
115
4
a
•I}
a
8
Roerms'Ralaa�.1
a
.lip
a
P
pd4
G+7@ ai4[f 11W 614'r4p46aF
a
G. 447. a'.
a]['
+}
0
w1E
8
a
b 5Prlo-. iv.+
9
a#F
.
0
a
i0E
'"^ SiO.Yaac Y Nr CiP7 CSo
a a
aT7
a
. 0
273
2Fa
a
4
uH Nri'n31 IIYsy.aolb
0
4
a
P.
543 a�
614i341 Ja1T1 ] F- 01-1'+
•AC° ]+)5.Y 4 p ra.4y roma
Wi
4 4°
R/] E
dda
a . P4ar,u, F..,n,NM
a
a 653 G
- l6GP
CrpEe161r Pl4N 751aarr.3rr � Nl.a Faalw3a�.r
CE4n[6r 41eh[•}li
....d ra�.TSaa
ax y2,syw a.ry4w Ypa
r x
[
9
9
IAr}
1tPh
P
8
slay a.r+NM
a
4
E
1372
117.2..
4}0 ]45 Yana roasts
653 ]a54s.ry, �: R/ssrwaEw7i4
i
_
423
40
a?.S
2
8
.Fwea.,a:e+*,
2'4
a
P
0
0
45b 5W dr4+aro [rnw4a+r
t
ppp"
P
0
90Y'
}
a
Nam ay-.,..sa0
E..
9BE'
a.•
a-
%P]
t.:102Ptl 4p{SM,L11a IR -an¢
Eda'
a.
+YA'
a
4
r+'y^r.wr::
a
a
+1Y0
a
p04
i': }d I rs7.F1 i}ti'"✓* a:
'"
7a2
a
'i4
P
0
Harr .le4ola;
A
4 .
rpp
8
PY]
f.3p5cN11 'wan 0u a,l- nn.. .. 11 S: P_."`
,,.'2"1 m -,,. r
• These projects include RES, PVE, and renovations to MCWES.
• NHCS is currently over capacity in the elementary and middle schools (see chart below).
If projects included in years 0-5 were completed, the school district would be slightly
under capacity at all three levels.
{L¢•
KULVA n.hN-12
0
452
0
R +;8
U
2020-21 DPI Facillty
0
Needs
Survey
@
3
3E4 2r.Y.'
0
541°
B90 aa2 rw'•'...'r rr. a: H.an
n&�1
'
-
-.
:r'
�n�
}
C Hone Nestled
�
Wa.7&9'-:k 11.,-1 Falun Sr Ell
6
0
+36
U
G..
1,11h, Idak,
A
C N- .;dad
,45�1 95+1 C Raa Canlcr
1
0
a
a
178
7:]8
C
4 N+Jne NEEEE4
953355 Ca,cel",id.-]35+0.+1
'C':
54
0
P
288
255
a
l`' Rl,Wslinla'
550354 i?adan Llr'.+n'+1a6y
:2'
a
5M
P
0
544
{.,.: •r,l_I.,r
._a.
--
44d'a42P'nr'/e1Mry F 4nwnl.vly
56.'
aknlw
.
a. 23c•
-
f@a
a
a 1IX1
'tw'm.[kv�r�n..',IIsc N.]tl!c
6ui
0
a
@ 0 4AV a haaa®::
a
•2r G.
525
45a�141 llwr FSwk+'aEv, F:+lti•Y.
454'W'D' � c«6n91a ur
40'.
a
43e
tr
4
+.0
3
4 wme Necaetl
95924'0 :...+srl 1•arF flrn..•rx51
]4:
a
.4aa
4
a
190
1
a M.--*
tea 364}Ya1nt : 'an'Icy Ekmc
9 0'
4 -
4
@ G -Nss s..__.
o
2- 61@ G
E10
tF50 WG,1'•Yr tJ14WElslraa.
45E .184A l+snllrs nracerrr V
3.w
a-
528
a'
a
524'
0
o None F,eeaed
ESa 3521- flsl- Ypolr
72a
o-
- �-
314
9'
813
0
o Norm -.am*
•Nyry
6• G', 31 Vol k lrgln, F 1. Y!n I.@
257
a'.
0•
@'
2E2
222 _..._a
i+W
4 N445atl
0'a: .w!S SF..4-Tr�(f:
I]4
@
0
0
304
aUi
9
0 �Rnx.a.idnna
3.6r54t14 YJ1a1a1 Pa1F M§wel tta
'e84
6
511
a
0
901
9
a Nann NPed6
8504445h'rgNlSoo'a k.amrnla�
5ry3
0
534
a
0
59-0
3
a Mrna"el'a"a
554 445'feTgNlSb+lr (.iy.eel� Fr
530
4
eYY
@
0
25[f
a
a Npna Nnrsdntl
6YJ 424 ";•d Y96 R.ax, Fa11P CP+1
101
3t1
1a&
n
P
103.
0
R Nona Noodnd
TPbb: 75°940
4 a
W 11.449
5.722
a 9 Fear4, .Ieal.tl
llkwT
2&-316
L3
6 338 12,]41
{L¢•
KULVA n.hN-12
0
452
0
R +;8
U
0
0
39R 3}5
y{.•.
@
3
3E4 2r.Y.'
0
541°
3
a 5.a
U'
S7d
a.
_._. 6. 523
a
Toa"
a 753
6
4.18
a
a 433
44T
1,11h, Idak,
Again, current capacity is compared to planned capacity for years six to 10:
d..+.,
@•
o- iii '
0'
4'
[1a
a 010
in x22
@
911-
0...
hWdr
0..
{.,.: •r,l_I.,r
._a.
0. 534 .
:c ..
aknlw
.
a. 23c•
9a
f@a
a
a 1IX1
d a�
d a�
a
{L¢•
KULVA n.hN-12
15:5 MMIr. HI•R
C-tt4[laalp:
11b49
5..?22 0.'H
39319
7o1NGWCl41
12'_4'
5,722 4.31
2].'4C
AJDM?019.28.
11,772
x,412 R.+riS
2564,
P]W fn-* -i 2824-M
12,24,
66.5]1 0.481
28,253
DME..-
112b1
(071 882
WE
oilfc ano4-_
,06
151 998
44T
1,11h, Idak,
Again, current capacity is compared to planned capacity for years six to 10:
hWdr
{.,.: •r,l_I.,r
Lwur: 6G4
:c ..
aknlw
.
7733 PIeK
R.S
aLaer FY9P-
IS.,L
_
47151-04 R6aw LtaHa L.7�Pr
d a�
d a�
a
@ 0 4AV a haaa®::
a
•2r G.
525
45a�141 llwr FSwk+'aEv, F:+lti•Y.
P . 9.
a . 9' �
4
a #' Me.. .. �_ _.
O
92F 4 @
474
003 Ia2,,iaw Pf'w�'4Ear P+;rti•Y
d a
a 6'
4
@ E -G/wl • nol
a
HF a 4
4%a)
aam-1'o-aei.. ..lyPy 7+]•33.'..6
-
9 0'
4 -
4
@ G -Nss s..__.
o
2- 61@ G
E10
tF50 WG,1'•Yr tJ14WElslraa.
4]■
9 414
4
Jia
a ] Fiax rl..talc
4
3211 P E
58E
4pG�lap CJ,+w.'+Lw Gwm
W}
a ]M
4 E-
Ai]
0 � a-ap�rovabore
4
SRS P a
]Iq
dVFr�'.MECea�.IWr+EWrrW
u1
a W,
P a.
iw.
a - o Para lMwr6
P
W.a� E' a
i+W
EEG 914 CbwaRMa�ra,1"RYP111
r.,q{fQ
q 0
Eta a
419
a Ha�Y+i
P'
a Ela a
71'4
WP 3,3 R Fx3sw1 Sd.a/[lp
]IN]
aad
a a
Mtl
9
4
496 a a
W
tdp ]iF-Geiapa Pah [Fa,�vir
SrY
{ 7366E
a� a
5dp
:' p R�4.w lY..`ilsi
4
}36 4 4
pN
Fi4p 9] 14 Ns3 R IJ•alrsal CY
eav
E50 ] 4'E .RllERraar. 54
21;1
0 510
a a
31':
a Y • .__ P4Y.Idud
a
534 G' P
5]1
.130 ]SLEIrv,v i r.alF-;4y421a
154
4 a
]][ � a
a2F
a 9 Fear4, .Ieal.tl
L
4 ]$i P
AH
GGO ]a6[muYeGR La3a7 N1@3
i;daa
a 4
a 2117
T: P1]
@ h R3rcaa4.am
9
d E ]p15
249}.
Gia ]WT[Spr6•swrh'l Fl fir,
,241
a a
a
0 1Psr6R�ianF
fi
4 a 1L55
1F}6
lssia ]ae R'wrp r+3a C+:w Ewe
551
a +]e
p.. P
ili
a 2 Rlel�'4r61.1wd
&
151 a a
.},
9Sd'S3a aFa'llr'.1 a4F{.4
P Y25
a P
!.]'■
a 9 Parrm laa.dwa
6.
S]il a a
}26
6Sd SSS rti. s',6.�r...'Par19 ".'__
930
a 57"
a
1137
a 4 P'1•,sRsaE+K
a
571 156 4
,Tr'
P'SV yld'Iyr�ara 4. g.E3arF'[!�
42]
4ac5
P O
.15-
a + °Hf FWD,
a"
ice'. aa
8d6
3U, 3'x11 llf TeM FYrr3rWy
]11
4 aji
P 9
436
A 4 'r6a+rt r..,a_"_
a
�H a P
3111
m. ,315 s1aa4 Y gear rsi7 Cao
237
a a
0 273
3Ta
a G w,.14 F.__. _.
a
a a 27@
P1P-
rv,.. 633, J 1-x Ya -4r4'
-i T Ybap9r•1 Mqh
S.01
,N.55a5 ib,r 52a14sr lerdti
W+
@ 5'-
E4-1 a
[a1P
a 5 F4a14 lbasdutl
a
G. 447. a'.
Yi¢.
1,55,9 Y.ar Puwf �3dR'^T
P W
IE a
4a
b 5Prlo-. iv.+
d
.ea I4 5
6a
iy5:5y1544yF{Y4Yawrr C.1.6ti
a]a
4... 42]
a a
aT7
P a
Y'ly..
a 0 3
4
4Aa••34AL'Yw,aWla l44MaF.Y
W+Y
a 5H
4 6
54E
a 9. p1'a6c MrsEN
P.
543 a�
•AC° ]+)5.Y 4 p ra.4y roma
Wi
4 4°
R/] E
dda
a . P4ar,u, F..,n,NM
a
a 653 G
- l6GP
CrpEe161r Pl4N 751aarr.3rr � Nl.a Faalw3a�.r
CE4n[6r 41eh[•}li
....d ra�.TSaa
aya ,
r x
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
SPECIAL MEETING, MARCH 10, 2021
BOOK 35
PAGE 18
• Summary of capacity if all the projects included in years six to 10 were completed:
2020-21 DPI Facility Needs Survey
OHR: BSP
E9p ablay.kaGM Mew!
eW
x414.4,
719
Pra„h
q
4„m5rd nupreuy
e.P . yt,yn H.IA
0 Te] 0 TGT
hinP,H
0
1µ,M1
Si., o-, ROOdP
0 rv,unaru
Pnaf
Pkrv+ad 6e4reiry fluHin]
N.3 kYddlo Iapn
T 1i
•}ems
4 -0 74} P
_—
2,0O0.000
Wp'a520M�llenvw�lalle
X149
q
0
P ,iK
,,TN
0
i �W.nn HeM9tl
P
0
0 1,716
1,744
4dp-a4g�lr 14rbM E„aa 9r Ela.
SPI
q'
4N
0 n
41e
0
8 ,adtl 1..,.a.,wP1,.„
Il
738
0 6
MR
63015.) C RU Carver
e0
9'
0
0 9.98
919
0
9 IT.r,n,narup
a
0
0 aan
NO
639 }igr•...a, Raa4aal1 4446
1W
34
0
0 398'
4ee.
0
pMa,e.w..Drtl
q
0
0 iqe.
I60..
4'S03a❑;6ra EMmwnlrTt
73e
p
y.a
6 0'
61.
0
r Ha,e Pla.4.tl
6
541
0' q
afa
X982 Pa. ValarEbwapury
3H
d
a59
0 0
afe.
0
a IW,. ea.ha
6
639
9. 9.
are.
em991RWrR-E YMIb
PS
9
o
190' 9'
T!q
0ueuNl.ero
2 0..
q
a
*�0 6
iEb
d°�598 ar uhn 9odr19S1n kh
+40
P
.b
0' a
aa9
0
1 JmmMia,llnawi
q
ate
0
585
95059E GnW Palk ENmmle
394
P
500
0' a
ave
0
3 Hua Nleaq
9
aye
b 0
.00
9605 %.. LP—ft Elver
03
P
556'
8 0
aaP
0
6 PmanaAe.,eSvlan
q
'a0
0 9
i�
95i.9M Ar EM1r4 AIa09,n1,W
3P4
0
586
6 P
aat
9
a Han He.,9M
q
y®
0 0
ara
960143 WWamn1,119tlN
Ike
0
0
416 6
11e
B
a RxauaW a
a
0
elm' 0'
e10
tlGOY 'FfYrtege,n fe4r S.pNy
331
0
-0
e a7i
V2
0
Q Hdr Haeada4
0
n
0 ria
erI
G501•i]YLATxn
,i9
6
-0
9 int
994
0
QHdnaHwM1
0
0
0' M4
765
lba lCQ'N+dnR.R eM Or�CY
354
0
SIi
e 0
511
6
a Hon x.pl.a
0
91!
e 0
71,
e691rs. w„plltVwa F.re.a ae,
w1
0
394
0 e
514
6
a 116„s u..a4i
4'
om
p e
6w
eve .ctl'+.+�ew..n n..cir Pr
x4
c
aae
a' a'
n-0'
0
o Ia,.. H4.a.a
a'
rea
po
35e
ase aac-:.a rvPr @;ou Pwry L^,
iC�
Y.
v.«
q a”
1C!'
e
0 14644 Hea9ee
Ta
IW
e a
109
Tal.n n,9.9
50 11,619
s.Taa 9,Y1
1e}ee
N
6
36! Ii,W 4,69.
"m -'MA }lloh LIZ 5f W dM. L1s.^. LMturiaai C!pl41q- 1�MP 9 !)? 1,61] 4661E TwlCaaaelq: Iaaa! ..
99.7.
nPN 381e4k 1i Ya3 4p13 809.5 Ieb10 hal enreYnen13or9.ltr lakik i.el4 9,170 274ap
Oma,an,»- nail (40I ver ma ❑,ue�.,n,w' les 115 om +.694
• Years six to 20 include two new elementary schools and a middle school. They are
prioritized low and include in the last years of this report. They have been included
to account for projected enrollment and this provides the flexibility to possibly
relocate Trask School to the new middle school and combine Trask and Laney School
facilities into a single high school.
• A lot of this depends on how fast proposed developments are built out, and the
availability of water and sewer in the Northeastern portion of the County. Therefore
the 2025 update will be important.
Cost Summary:
• The Cost Summary Report for years zero to five:
• Each report includes a list of projects, the scope (new construction, additions, or
renovation) and the total costs.
• The costs are built into the program and automatically calculated when you enter the
square footage of the proposed new school, addition, or renovation. This is based on
statewide school construction costs and has increased significantly over the past five
years. For example, in the 2014 bond Porters Neck Elementary School was budgeted at
$17 million. A new elementary school in the 2020 Facility Needs Survey is estimated at
$27 million.
Cost summary report for years six to 10:
Un557 Pdedh+ Near School Ad41tJI 8
Ran—tlo—
FurMEgvt
Laad •
Summary
501 New Elernenlary ^xhool A
• PCost
0
❑
2.1-05,297
_—
2,0O0.000
720.120.301
102 New Elemenlary School a
4 24.915 ''00
r4
0
1
2 ❑'❑,❑❑❑
Unfit: 659 Prlo,lly Naw S6M.1
nddiki—,
R,�nnv.11ipna
P,—!Eqpt land
T l
1W River Lghle Elementary
, 2.'.975.%QC
0
0
2.145.291
❑ 52:,120,7&1
309 Bradly C rept rlarrmnls,y
2 0
7.207.031
7,616..795
t,p62.168
0 515,97601.
WA Ed—AAW-an Elornc
2 0•
8453.346-
6,610,6$9
1.035,714:
0 110.102421
55e He3arerd C Bellamy El—
2 _.o
B.C�1,788
7,23,616{.
..10032371.
p• 514.74M,❑41
339,1alry Tme ElpmanWry
2 0'
9
9207.852
30'.0001
0EE502,652
340 Isaac hl 0,—Eady Goling
1 16,127,012.
❑�
01
1,133,707
0 $17.260.779
345 Mary C WIIIIamb Elamanla
't 0
0
7,316,486,
400,0001
0 $7,716,486
355 Career Readl—s Au da
2 0
0
5,021.6751
100,000
0 55721.6%0
3R2 P,rq vnllry ❑InnlcMary
1 25,684,883
...
0'
0
2,145291
❑ 527.DC9.976
364 'Rds d.CeneaM IIVl
2 0
0
7,610,777
700.000
D $7810777
360 Sunset Pa,* Elsmenlary .._:.
7 0
1283,3M
7.714-8 T7
857,230
.
0 59.60",.446
395 SFA. Tech
2 0..
0
6.600,213
290,0001.....
17... 56.8'0.213
4❑4 wrighl4b , I.:om001ery
2 0
0
5.155,793
250.000
0 55,401,793
146116,
44,744,79T
23,564,911
79,079,079 I
1Q.;22. 110
Q' 5170,732,006
• Each report includes a list of projects, the scope (new construction, additions, or
renovation) and the total costs.
• The costs are built into the program and automatically calculated when you enter the
square footage of the proposed new school, addition, or renovation. This is based on
statewide school construction costs and has increased significantly over the past five
years. For example, in the 2014 bond Porters Neck Elementary School was budgeted at
$17 million. A new elementary school in the 2020 Facility Needs Survey is estimated at
$27 million.
Cost summary report for years six to 10:
Un557 Pdedh+ Near School Ad41tJI 8
Ran—tlo—
FurMEgvt
Laad •
Twal
_._
501 New Elernenlary ^xhool A
d 24.9; 5.1,70
0
❑
2.1-05,297
_—
2,0O0.000
720.120.301
102 New Elemenlary School a
4 24.915 ''00
❑
0
2..'.45.2.91
2 ❑'❑,❑❑❑
529,120,391
103 Naw Middle School Fes.
d 45,376,744
4
❑
3,651.674
3,500,000
552.627.9,6
306 CBeach Elemen[ar
< 0'
❑
.
4,51E.234
4.ar0lina
500))00
❑
54,6115.234
310 Charles P Mun,ly rlidoc
3 6
0
11.615.721
400.00LP
0
514.015.721
X12 �R r—an Sp gi Engine
3 ❑
4
7,403.916
300.''6
0
57,793,916.
326 Emslcy A I..aney High
3 9 �
O
20,O02,❑❑5
400,00'
0
520.402.006
327 Eugene A9h1ey N'ipn
3 0
0
37.693.3&'.
501D,❑❑❑
G
538.193.361
-32Q The 15choo' a
3 _��
❑
5,571,396
200.000
❑
$5.771,396
342 JohnTHuggilRl High
3 9
0
11,130,646
4❑0,,]C10
'J
5,"..530.&.6
345 Lake Fa"esl RceGemy
3 0
❑
2..92.065
15C.030
0
52,332.x65'
353 0, Hubert Fw—Sr 0—
3 0--
2.521.W
5,645'79
510.499
0
$11,6775k5
354 —C. Hoe Center
3 _- _..0.
0
2,52'.005
ts❑,oca
0
52.670.009
366 C%, Jahn Ctldinglan El—
3 0-
2,521,547
6,6145,07E
510.66`3
❑
$11.677.315
350 Wal6er L Parsley Elen,enl
d 0
3.664,364
6.127,042
584,967
0
512.576.373
392 Willimon rliddle
3 ❑�
0
17,534.,6,
350,00❑
❑
S1'7.884,161
TaTiI
We: 95.328,344--
6,207,456
147,079,735
12.598,601
7,590,409
$271,942,919
-L
• The new schools that were discussed are included at the top and the remaining
projects are listed below and include renovations and additions at existing schools
Certification Form:
• The form below is required to be signed by the School Board and the County
Commissioners. It certifies the needs to be accurate. It is not a commitment of funds. This
is the same certification that the state has been using for the past 20 years.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
SPECIAL MEETING, MARCH 10, 2021
19 2020.21 DPI Fadlbtyt Needs Svrvey
r%•Irm •.I •. ..v .I..,I ., II.i gr C,n,lr;v'' ,oI9__LQr-I 'N f
-J— -are".I-Ii=bac■Ilan
—4— —waw�..,.�.,,.v.,.'Ja OIk Edk-W4-hw" t,i^•^tn rIa t`0" Nw &--r r
dow NI TION ton@ N ow7m—wtt wa ids&&G W r& DH*1 YFI1 M •0cv�w1W! CgwYw+l
6&to� dv"h "M" I K* W Yax' pN mrgrwnWdr 9a ^7 faatlaw M ham W1•,
0~ 4* D—VN hw Wrt9W I1 M� pryy iltiY
WA' d9 NWRY 9WI fs•" ft Iw00 Ow&'had M1&&at9 i1F a DIP& I W*bb-h l)fi Or" "IM
.kwM—.tib a afiidYl &fid" WWx V4Ad" tho oW lolr ptlw ;W-1bwSm
oMWudWt yWs+�dWWird!hYsodaaw+r4+�rivawa.I�alaaarx,ni`riwrpttlmp�+9s+da
WOW- omv�
G- w.w 00*
So"trr U*ITOo to.
.. Cr•rli11c�14on mtl Boyd tlE {Ywli1'� C911r1111iiF10+rM
1r. N** Han&ak CanrP4 Bove V Co—v a," MIs -ww W1 -d I • ap&a of m t—ft
Mor
to *jx,4 t+', 4a h RN, %wd c! Fd bmdr, T" M" ow nbNmul h [mwW but
rna&ta
al . � as MN IM Fq Ay r4wh S WYW
04— C*"
ma an- d CW. C'wN
BOOK 35
PAGE 19
In response to questions, Assistant Superintendent Anderson confirmed that some of the newer schools
were built with the ability to be expanded. Additionally, the core facility capacity is built larger than current
classroom capacity so that if there is an addition, areas such as the kitchen and cafeteria do not have to be expanded
as well.
A brief discussion was held about the Isaac M. Bear Early College facilities. Assistant Superintendent
Anderson stated that the school is a priority and is included in the survey. What has been included in the presentation
are estimates on construction of the building until a site is identified. He does not know what the site costs may or
may not be, so the estimates in the presentation may have to be adjusted depending on infrastructure costs. Chair
Adams noted that School Board members McManus and Walker are on the Isaac Bear committee and there have
been ongoing discussions that have included Senator Lee, Representative Davis, and UNCW Chancellor Sartarelli at
various stages, and efforts are being made to determine the options to move forward. Commissioner Barfield stated
that he feels this is truly a state conversation and that it is important for the UNCW Chancellor to have a focus on
what UNCW's charge is from the state. He encouraged the School Board members to look at what other school
systems in the state who have received the same state mandate are doing regarding early colleges and then hold
the UNCW Chancellor's feet to the fire as has been done in other community to make it a priority for UNCW to move
forward.
In response to questions about the facility needs assessment and how much funding is being received each
year from the lottery proceeds, Ms. Small stated it is at least $2 million. Mr. Anderson stated that those funds are
currently allocated each year for capital needs. He further stated that the funds must be used for school facilities
and there are some limitations in that they cannot be used for athletic facilities, mobile units, pre -K, administrative
employees, textbooks, technology, etc. The top priorities would be Riverlights, Pine Valley, and MCW elementary
schools. He then provided an overview of the sites:
Riverlights Elementary School
Mr. Anderson stated that the school site it would be adjacent to Arrowhead Park. The developer has already started
putting in the infrastructure and it is an appropriate time to work with them. He knows the developer is excited
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35
SPECIAL MEETING, MARCH 10, 2021 PAGE 20
about the school and he thinks it is a unique opportunity particularly for the County. The development agreement
started with the County and it negotiated the donation of the land for an elementary school that then carried over
to the City agreement and they have honored that. NHCS is excited about it. He then provided an overview of the
conceptual site plan and noted that a lot of innovations learned over the past 10 years will be utilized in the school:
1�r�✓ w��r��l "t.�
.v' � .. i w✓may ruwlwr
ii ,lit, Eleniciawc
Mr. Anderson then provided an overview of the site conceptual site plan for PVE:
He explained that what is being proposed is to build a new school on the playground while school is in session. The
move into the new building would take place over the summer and then old building would be converted into parking
and play fields. It is the same thing that was done for Ogden Elementary.
As to MCWES, Mr. Anderson stated that he does not have a slide for it, but a major renovation is being
called for the building. When looking at Riverlights and exactly how the building would be done, it was thought about
expanding pre -K, a welcome center for English learners, and becoming a one stop shop for these areas and possibly
some planned development. The exact plans for this facility have not been worked out, but when starting to think
about using the facility in that way, the pods started to make sense. He thinks the site needs some work and the
building will be renovated to meet the needs. The school population currently in MCWES will then go to RES. RES
would be built larger than MCWES so some additional capacity would be gained in the elementary schools. He then
provided an overview of the cost breakdown for each elementary school:
Pine Valley
Total $27,120,391
Total $27.809,976
Total 57,716,486
Initial Design $275,305 Initial Design $279.663 Initial Design $121,950
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
SPECIAL MEETING, MARCH 10, 2021
BOOK 35
PAGE 21
Mr. Anderson stated the estimates are based on real hard data that have learned from past projects. The important
thing in doing this is to identify with each project what will it take just to get the projects started. He then reviewed
how the school district would propose to pay for the various projects:
"'Qk v`iiLIMAIVNI.,°LAAv1,k i+X75 .:5+ll
F"; NCS PE 0:i'I+'.€1-O
wONIPLE-E COMM 1 -ED '--C)NO'PCJ--C
RiverliQ,hu ES, 4eSge thru SCI
"� 1.' '�i7it7
RrJ,ir .C; •.•,r L'. Rrnry vio* . I
Nnb1.� h1, FrrQw, pr 5
51 "!. ;,171117 1717
5.' rl},llr'.71 1.117
9W.9010
Mrtie Grave M,15 Renovations
10.174 a8
900.9011
Vvrghts Ir Brach B Ad;dnsf Mien
5189.317 15
QCG-9048
Br de'l Hall y,v Fluur
$337,000.00
000-90a1
Pttlgrb*m Vlaragerrent- 2 PM's thra FY M-21
5150,000 00
io'.al
51,301,W91.fi3
gOKDBALANCEAFiEkKOPE DENTIFE0ASOV
52,150,934.07
FUNDS REQUIRED FOR ADDITIOMAL PROJEtiTSCOPE
RiverliQ,hu ES, 4eSge thru SCI
5275, 345.40
Pine vallev €5 k0acement- Oesvgn thru 50
5379,653.00
Mary C Williams Rencvamrs, DeW tbru 50
5121,950.00
900-9041 PrpgrEan P.t"cri writ- 2 PM'; Ehm PF 21-21 15vT Nvtr 1)
51112.0m Do
EiellAmy ES Retba t
5572,000.00
Tdtai
$1.460,916.00
BOND 3,61"CE AFTER ADO1110NA1 PROJECT SCOPE {See Noie 2]
$690.a16.07
Matti Ws wowed nerd lobe FurWed for Cl() through ClomovV WmTwty Phases by abler fand5 For Fr
22-23thraugh Fy 14-15, Estimbted fund', rcquirvi 5404.=
Note 2 RemeirnirC bond balance (atEier add' ianal Mjedt) teen be used M arMtm& unforeseen
€ indibord that may arise for ur. ecu vet to be completed
The items in the tan section would be completed relatively soon, total $1.3 million, and leave a savings of
$2.1 million. The blue section reflects the funds required for the initial costs of RES, PVE, MCWES, plus the program
management required to move the project through the initial design. The other item in this section is the roof
recover for Bellamy Elementary. In the last roof evaluations, Bellamy Elementary was identified as a need to recover.
It is known that funding will not be received to replace school roofs on a 20 -year lifecycle, so at 15 -years a roof is
evaluated to see if it is recoverable to get another 10 -years. The bond balance after the additional project scope will
be approximately $690,016. Mr. Anderson then provided an overview of the proposed schedule and funding:
Mr. Anderson stated the school district is asking that for the County Commissioners' approval to use the
bond savings to fund the initial design. The initial design would be done in fiscal year 2021-2022 and then at that
time the school district would come back the County Commissioners with what he thinks will be more realistic
numbers. The future funding would start in July 2022. If funded, the school district would then move into design and
bidding with construction taking place over a three-year period for RES and PVE, which would open in 2025. As soon
as Riverlights opens, the student population would relocate MCWES into the new RES building. The renovation of
MCWES would start with the facility and pre -K program with opening in 2026.
A brief discussion was held about conversations that have taken place with the community around the
MCWES facility plans. Chair Adams stated the Latino Alliance has been a close partner with the school system over
the past year. One of the asks has been for a newcomer center or a welcome center, specifically in that area, because
there are so many new residents coming to this County and many are non-English speakers. This would be an
opportunity to have everything under one roof and to standardize and simplify the process for these families that
are coming in. She knows that has been one of the conversations with that building and why it was, because there
is a high Spanish-speaking population in that immediate area. Mr. Anderson stated that RES would be adjacent to
MCWES and Arrowhead Park. It would be accessible from the same road as Arrowhead Park. In terms of proximity,
he thinks it is close to where the school is and he thinks the community would be excited about a new school, as
well as the pre -K opportunity at MCWES. He does agree with the idea of not wanting to pour money into something
that is not going to be new and will not last another 20, 30, or 40 years. He also thinks with the approval of the school
district starting the initial design phase, there will be a better idea. It is known what a new school would cost, and a
comparison can be done between the renovation needs and the cost of a new school to make sure that the school
district is approaching this in the most efficient and effective manner possible.
A brief discussion was held about the growth and overall population of the elementary cohort. Mr.
Anderson stated that in looking at the capacity numbers, as he previously mentioned growth is at a slower rate and
the projections are showing that. He also believes it is a more manageable growth and in looking to the future,
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35
SPECIAL MEETING, MARCH 10, 2021 PAGE 22
whether it is a bond or any kind of future building program, regardless of how it is funded, he really thinks there is
an opportunity to save money and address that growth by expanding the existing facilities. There really should be a
maximization of every space that currently exists before building a new school, which is an efficient way of spending
taxpayer dollars. The other side is if a school is built where it is needed then there is not the need to redistrict as
much. He thinks people would much rather have their existing school expanded rather than build a new school and
have to relocate. The plan has far more renovations and additions and less new construction than in any previous
plan he has done. As to DC Virgo, he would have to review the original memorandum of understanding, but he
believes the school district is responsible for some maintenance and UNCW is responsible for capital needs and
improvements. It is a five-year agreement that is renewable and there is a dollar threshold tied to it.
A brief discussion was held about the County Commissioners supporting the plan to use the bond funds as
presented by Mr. Anderson. As to if there are any restraints on the bond funds and if this is an appropriate use,
County Manager Coudriet stated it is an allowable use. Mr. Anderson confirmed that the school district is wanting
to use the savings from the bond funds from other projects for these projects. The Board of Education would also
have to approve using the savings for the new projects. The school district cannot transfer funds between the
projects or out of different projects without approval by the County Commissioners.
In response to questions, County Attorney Copley stated that the County Commissioners would need to
take a vote on the request to proceed with the expenditure as bond funds cannot be spent based on a consensus of
the County Commissioners. County Manager Coudriet concurred stating that the County Commissioners can give
authorization today for design on the three projects, but it would have to be design on those three specific projects
not something different or one or two more projects added in. County Attorney Copley stated the Board of Education
could do a motion as to what its definitive request is and then the County Commissioners could do a motion to make
those expenditures.
In response to questions about if it is correct that the request is to have the opportunity to refine what is
being asked for and then take it to the Board of Education before bringing it to the County Commissioners for
approval, Mr. Anderson stated that he does not think he was correct in outlining the process. This request has been
presented to the Board of Education and the members are in support of it. What would be specifically asked for is
to use $888,918 in savings from the 2014 bonds to fund the initial design for RES, PVE, and MCWES as well as the
program management for the two program managements through fiscal year 2021-2022. This would be a separate
action for the Board of Education as it has already approved the certification form.
Motion by the Board of Education: Vice -Chair Beaulieu MOVED, SECONDED by Member Wildeboer to authorize the
use of $888,918 in savings from the 2014 bonds to fund the initial design for Riverlights, Pine Valley, and Mary C.
Williams elementary schools as well as the program management for the two program managements through fiscal
year 2021-2022. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
In response to questions about what the existing school district fund balance is and if there has been any
discussion on using some of those funds for this request and reserving the bond money for construction, Ms. Small
stated she could provide the County Commissioners a report of the current fund balance and what is recommended
for next year. However, with all that is going on and upcoming enrollment being less than current year state funding,
she would prefer to hold off and provide the more complete response in June to allow time to get through the
budget process. Only in an emergency can funds be moved from general fund to capital outlay.
Motion by the Board of Commissioners: Chair Olson-Boseman MOVED, SECONDED by Vice -Chair Hays to authorize
the New Hanover County Schools to use $888,918 in savings from the 2014 bonds to fund the initial design for
Riverlights, Pine Valley, and Mary C. Williams elementary schools as well as the program management for the two
program managements through fiscal year 2021-2022.
County Manager Coudriet stated as a point of clarification, he knows the motion is specific to the bonds,
but Mr. Anderson also spoke on the Bellamy Elementary School roof replacement. The County Commissioners would
have to, at some point, consent to that as well that if the school district wants to in the future do the $572,000 worth
of roof replacement because of how the order are setup. Chair Olson-Boseman asked that the Bellamy Elementary
School roof replacement be added to her motion.
In response to questions, County Manager Coudriet stated the Bellamy Elementary School roof replacement
was not part of the Board of Education motion, but the County Commissioners would be giving it to them at the
point in time they came forward to do that work. If the school district does not do that work, it cannot spend the
money. Vice -Chair Hays stated she would second the amended motion.
Motion by the Board of Commissioners: Chair Olson-Boseman MOVED, SECONDED by Vice -Chair Hays to authorize
the New Hanover County Schools to use $888,918 in savings from the 2014 bonds to fund the initial design for
Riverlights, Pine Valley, and Mary C. Williams elementary schools as well as the program management for the two
program managements through fiscal year 2021-2022 and to use $572,000 in savings form the 2014 bonds for the
Bellamy Elementary School roof replacement.
Commissioner Barfield stated he is conflicted as he wanted to finish the discussion started by Commissioner
Zapple to fully follow the money just to bring some clarity. At the same time, he thinks it would be good to have this
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35
SPECIAL MEETING, MARCH 10, 2021 PAGE 23
conversation at a regular Board of Commissioners meeting that is televised, such as the upcoming meeting. While
he understands the push and the rush, he would vote "no" today and vote "yes" on Monday.
Commissioner Zapple stated that he is caught in the same bind as Commissioner Barfield. He has no issue
with the bond money being used but wants to make sure it is spent in the appropriate time frame. He wants to
ensure it is clear what pot of money is being pulled from to get the work done. In principle, he is supportive of the
motion that has been brought forward from the recommendation. However, he would like to see the information
that will be coming from Ms. Small along with the average daily membership (ADM) results as that may change the
overall meaning of what is being discussed. He stated he would support the motion on the floor.
Hearing no further discussion, Chair Olson-Boseman asked for a roll call vote on the motion on the floor.
Upon roll call vote, the MOTION PASSED 4 TO 1. Commissioner Barfield dissenting.
WRAP UP AND NEXT STEPS
Chair Olson-Boseman thanked everyone for attending the meeting. She also stated she was committed to
seeing teacher pay increase.
School Board member Wildeboer expressed appreciation for the meeting and recognized school social
workers for their commitment to students during school as this week is National School Social Work Week.
Vice -Chair Hays thanked everyone for attending, this was a great first step and she looks forward to many
more. She expressed appreciation for Dr. Foust and his team for working closely with County Manager Coudriet and
the Health and Human Services (HHS) team to pull off the two days of vaccinations for the school district. It meant
so much to teachers, faculty, staff, and support personnel. The effort and hard work of both teams was phenomenal.
School Board Chair Adams expressed appreciation for the County's partnership and looks forward to many
future collaborations. She hopes these joint meetings could be a quarterly event. She also thanked Dr. Foust and Mr.
Anderson for their presentations.
Commissioner Barfield thanked the School Board members for their commitment and passion for the
students. The relationships between the members of both boards are important to continue building upon.
Commissioner Zapple thanked the School Board members for attending the meeting. He hopes these
meetings will at least be held periodically and today's meeting was positive.
School Board member Kraybill expressed appreciation for the meeting. She knows her fellow board
members, Dr. Foust or anyone on his team will be glad to show the Commissioners around the schools if they so
desire.
School Board Vice -Chair Beaulieu expressed appreciation for the meeting and will be glad to meet with
anyone from the governmental teams to walk through the schools.
ADJOURNMENT
Hearing no further discussion, Chair Olson-Boseman and School Board Chair Adams adjourned the meeting
at 5:41 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Kymberleigh G. Crowell
Clerk to the Board
Please note that the above minutes are not a verbatim record of the Special Meeting of the New Hanover County
Board of Commissioners. The entire proceedings are available online at www.nhcgov.com.