With the negative messaging of FHUSD’s “wasteful spending,” the discussion about the old Four Peaks building at the May 2 School Board meeting seemed particularly ill-informed.

Close to a one-hour debate ensued over keeping the Four Peaks site even though, as stated at the meeting, the district loses at a minimum $90,000/year in fixed costs. Costs increase from there with the district responsible for repairs. Worse yet, as described in the 2021 Facilities Assessment (tinyurl.com/FHUSDFacilityReport) there are over $3 million of “high urgency” repairs needed to the building. Given that outlook, costs could be astronomical to FHUSD.

Currently, no students occupy the building, there is no FHUSD educational programming and no direct benefit to the district. How is spending $90,000+ out of the FHUSD budget fiscally responsible? How can that cost to the district and taxpayers be justified?

The current rent is far below fair market value, so clearly advantageous to tenants, even though as one stated, the building “Needs improvements; it is not the cleanest, and needs to be painted.” Looking at all the empty commercial properties in town, would a realtor be willing to provide space at a loss each year? How does this make any business sense?

As stated perfectly by Dr. Jagodzinski, “The district is in the business of educating kids” not overseeing a dilapidated building [my words]. The site served its purpose for many years. Currently, however, given the significant financial loss each year with no utility left for teaching children and no alignment with the needs of FHUSD students, district stakeholders should not be burdened with that cost.

The School Board’s sole priority should be enhancing educational opportunities for students. More than $90,000 a year in rent subsidies with zero positive impact on students’ academic achievement does not meet that commitment.