Upper Darby won $2.4M state solar award; board weighs federal aid uncertainty and possible $5M roof costs

District operations staff told the Finance and Operations Committee that Upper Darby School District was awarded approximately $2.4 million in state Solar for Schools funds to install about 1.9 megawatts of solar capacity across six candidate schools, and that the award could be supplemented by roughly $2.3 million in federal incentives under an optimistic scenario.

Marvin Lee, the district's director of operations, presented the grant background and a high-level financial model. Lee said the district solicited more than a dozen companies, selected a feasibility consultant as required by the grant, and estimated solar-installation costs at roughly $6.2 million. When combined with recommended energy-efficiency upgrades the package totaled about $6.7 million; the presentation assumed state award funds plus federal tax credits and a PICO rebate could together subsidize about $5 million of that cost in a best-case scenario.

Lee highlighted environmental and operational benefits: a projected annual reduction of about 1,100 metric tons of CO2 (equivalent cited by staff to removing roughly 240 cars from the road) and the expectation of long-term energy savings over 20'25 years. Staff used a conservative 2024 electricity-cost baseline for return-on-investment calculations but noted electricity prices are expected to rise and that payback estimates ranged widely depending on funding and capital needs (presented payback scenarios ranged from about 5.8 years to as long as 30.7 years).

Staff warned of two major uncertainties: federal incentives and roof conditions. Lee said a draft Senate bill under consideration could impose a short window to start construction or incur a minimum percentage of the project cost (transcript references ranged from a 60-day/5% rule in one draft to a later draft that might allow work through the end of the calendar year). Staff also said roof assessments showed three of the six candidate roofs could need replacement soon, which in the district's worst-case estimate could add roughly $5.2 million and raise the all-in project cost nearer to $12 million.

Given those unknowns, staff asked the committee for permission to continue feasibility work and pursue procurement so the district would be prepared to meet any compressed federal timeline and to return in August with a contract recommendation if appropriate. Committee members agreed that staff should continue vetting vendors and preparing procurement materials, while acknowledging political attention and financial risk.

Public commenter Michael Fortnner asked whether the district could accept the state award and later decline the project if federal funds did not materialize; staff replied that the state requires the district to accept or decline the state award within 45 days of the contract award (staff cited May 20 award and a July 4 acceptance deadline) and that the team was investigating federal vendor requirements and accounting/tax implications.

The committee authorized staff by consensus to continue procurement and feasibility steps and to return with a contract recommendation for the August meeting if staff determine it is prudent to do so.