The Saugus Union School District asset management advisory committee met Wednesday night to discuss potential options for the site of Santa Clarita Elementary School, emphasizing that the site is not planned to be used for housing.
After postponing its meeting last month due to the Hughes Fire, the committee met to hear a presentation on joint use leases, joint occupancy leases and the Community Recreation Act, and were informed of how the process would go for each option.
“The 7-11 or asset management committee’s role is to provide a recommendation to the board of education about this position options relating to the property,” said Sarine Abrahamian, an attorney with Orbach, Huff & Henderson. “In order to develop those recommendations, the committee has to know what a school district can legally do so we’ve been working through and trying to provide information to the committee step by step.”
Abrahamian presented to the committee the legal procedures behind each of the different options while simultaneously answering questions from committee members.
During the presentation about joint use leases, committee member Jennifer Larson asked, given the structure’s seismic concerns, would it even be possible to lease part of the property.
Nick Heinlein, assistant superintendent of business, answered by saying the whole building isn’t red tagged for danger. He said parts of the property need a lot of work but there isn’t anything that would prohibit it from being used again.
Committee Chairman James Shea asked for clarification about the buildings’ integrity and committee member Al Reano asked for clarification on whether Santa Clarita Elementary School was closed because it was dangerous.
“The buildings required upgrade to ensure that if there was a seismic event, we were in a properly maintained building and to do any further improvements we would have to meet those requirements,” said Superintendent Colleen Hawkins.
She added that it was a combination of both safety concerns for the students and that the district needed to decide whether to retrofit the buildings.
Shea followed up by asking if there was a legal aspect to leasing one of the buildings as it is and if it were to come down.
Abrahamian responded by saying that the interested party would have to do their own due diligence on the structural integrity of the property and then feel confident enough to enter into a lease agreement and then there would be protections built in.
Reano asked if the joint use lease can even be applied to the situation because the school was not being used for anything.
“When we say, for example, in operating school buildings under the law that has a pretty broad meaning,” said Abrahamian.
Hawkins said it would mean the Saugus Union School District would still own the property, but some other party uses it.
Committee member Kathi Lund asked if community members will have a chance to weigh in again on the options being discussed.
Abrahamian said yes, they would be given another chance for public comment again and be able to speak about the option before it is approved.
Hawkins asked Abrahamian if the committee could include a public document in their recommendation that states what the board cannot consider to do with the property based off the community feedback they’ve received at past meetings.
Abrahamian answered yes, the committee could provide a document stating what they don’t want the property to be considered for so that it is noted when the board looks at their recommendation.
Shea said he wanted to put an emphasis on how the property cannot be used for residential or commercial use in the document.
“One of the main things that came out of the public meetings was that they wanted no residential development on that property or commercial building on that property,” said Shea. “Can we recommend that be written into the lease agreements that whoever uses that (the property) is not going to be using it for residential or commercial use.”
Abrahamian said the committee can write it in the recommendation report for it to be considered by the board, so it shows the board what the property was intended to be used for and not used for. Hawkins added that she highly encouraged the committee to include that document.
After all the presentations, several committee members discussed wanting more time to review the terminology that was presented so they can understand what the options would entail. They are planning to begin discussing the drafting process at the next meeting.
Committee member Brandon Holtzclaw asked if the committee can be kept up to date on what is going on at the elementary site after several reports of vandalism on the property to possibly make a plan on what to do with sentimental features on campus such as the statue and memorials.
Hawkins said that, in compliance with the Brown Act, the item needs to be agendized so it can be formally introduced to the committee.
The next asset management advisory committee meeting has not been announced at the time of this story’s publication.
