Board approves security laminate for ground-level school windows, authorizes $284,503 from fund balance
Loading...
Summary
The Coffee County School Board approved installation of security window laminate on ground-level windows across district schools and a budget amendment to fund the $284,503 contract from fund balance.
The Coffee County School Board voted Jan. 14 to install security laminate on ground‑level windows across district buildings and approved a budget amendment to fund the work.
Mr. Shores and district staff presented the proposal as a second phase of a district window-film program. The contractor will install film on all ground-level windows and interior sidelights; reflective vinyl options for exterior-facing glass were discussed with principals to balance daylight and visibility. The firm and district staff emphasized the product is not ballistic glass but is intended to prevent glass from shattering and falling into interior spaces in the event of forced breakage.
Contract and funding
The purchase and installation contract for the security laminate is $284,503. Board members were told the funds will come from the district’s fund balance; the board approved a budget amendment (141‑2025‑8) to allocate the money. The superintendent said the district would follow with any additional phases if needed, but the Jan. 14 action covers ground-level fenestration and interior door sidelights.
Board questions and context
Board members asked about visibility through the film, exterior graphics and whether the film would be reflective; staff said exterior reflective films are available and that principals could select graphic/color options that preserved desired sight lines. The presenter reiterated the treatment will limit shattering (similar to windshield film) but not stop projectiles.
The board approved the laminate contract and the associated budget amendment by an 8–0 vote. Staff said installation would begin after contracting and that the district would schedule work to limit disruption during school operations.
The board did not approve additional security measures at the Jan. 14 meeting; staff noted some state and federal safety grants used earlier are no longer available as discrete funding lines and that annual state funding rules require a baseline level of safety spending but do not provide a separate large grant for projects like this.

