Citizens committee lays out $600M–$708M options, spotlights Leander High Phase II as largest ask

The Citizens Facility Advisory Committee told Leander ISD trustees that its recommendation for a future bond centers on facilities, safety and security, student programs and energy efficiency, and that the work reflected roughly 70 volunteers and multiple subcommittees and a steering committee.

"This was a complicated process," said Jeremy, the staff presenter who introduced the CFAC report, noting the committee met through spring and refined campus‑level lists into prioritized tiers. Co‑chairs Rachel Lille and Clint Pruitt described a three‑tier framework: Tier 1 projects the committee deemed critical, Tier 2 important, and Tier 3 desirable. "Tier 1 were the most critical," one co‑chair said. "We did feel the need to move several of the Tier 2 items up." (CFAC co‑chairs were introduced to the board as Rachel Lille and Clint Pruitt.)

Among the largest single items is the Leander High School Phase II master plan, which committee members said consumed extensive discussion and remains the biggest dollar ask. The steering committee presented two package options: a broader four‑year program (modeled at about $708.5 million) and a narrower three‑year option (just under $600 million) that would reduce scope on some campuses but retain design funds for projects that would fall off the shorter cycle.

The CFAC recommended life‑cycle replacements (fire alarms, roofing, HVAC), targeted modernizations at seven elementary campuses approaching 20–27 years, LED lighting conversions that produce operational savings, track and turf work, and a district fleet replacement to meet the new three‑point seatbelt requirement for buses. The co‑chairs said they intentionally pulled in departmental experts during the process so recommendations reflected technical operating realities and repair life cycles.

Trustees pressed the committee on alignment with the district's long‑range plan, campus tours and whether teacher and campus staff had input on the modernization design. The CFAC co‑chairs said subcommittees conducted campus tours and the steering committee relied on that site work and detailed project binders when finalizing recommendations. "We went back through everything and really dug in," one co‑chair said, describing the multi‑week effort and repeated review.

The committee also flagged safety and security work as a district‑wide priority, including access control, upgraded cameras and law‑enforcement radio infrastructure so first‑responder radios work inside buildings. The CFAC suggested solar on seven metal‑roof campuses as an energy‑cost offset that would deliver measurable operating‑budget savings over time.

Next steps identified by staff include further financial modeling, refining project scopes in response to board questions and preparing communications that translate technical needs into student‑impact narratives for voters.