The San Benito County Planning Commission on Tuesday concluded that a 69.25‑acre parcel owned by the San Benito High School District is not inconsistent with the county general plan and directed staff to prepare a formal response recommending further environmental review and a public‑quasi‑public (PQP) overlay.

Bridal Goodspeed, principal planner for San Benito County, told commissioners the parcel — located at Best Road near State Highway 25 and purchased by the district in 1997 — carries a general plan designation of “residential mix” and a rural zoning designation. Goodspeed said state law can make local zoning inapplicable to school uses in some cases, but that the county should still provide a written report and recommendations to the district within 30 days of receiving the notice of the district’s intent to consider the site.

The recommendation matters because the district notified the county on Aug. 20, 2025, that it is considering the property as a future high school site. The commission’s written comments will become part of the record the district uses when it evaluates whether and how to proceed.

Sean Tenenbaum, superintendent of the San Benito High School District, presented a district heat map showing concentrations of student households and said the Best Road parcel is one of several potential sites the district is reviewing. “We are not here saying we are going to build a school tomorrow there,” Tenenbaum said, adding the district sought flexibility to align with county and city growth patterns.

Commissioners and public speakers raised questions about student access, traffic, water supply and environmental constraints. Several speakers noted the parcel is adjacent to Airline Highway (State Route 25) and observed that safe, walkable access would require traffic or pedestrian improvements that could involve Caltrans or other regional agencies. A resident and the water board president warned that on‑site well water may be poor and that sewer/water infrastructure could be required. Another public commenter urged protection of local habitat, saying tiger salamanders breed nearby.

Cesar Placencia, field representative for Carpenters Local 405, urged the district to include prequalification language in any future construction procurement to ensure contractors meet wage, safety and apprenticeship standards. “This school should be built responsibly by with contractors who protect their workers, invest in local community, and reflect the values we all stand for,” Placencia said.

Goodspeed reviewed general plan policies commissioners should consider, including PFS 1.7 (encouraging clustered public facilities), PFS 10.3 (siting schools near residential areas and safe access), and circulation policies (C‑1.x series) that require assessment of impacts to roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities and emergency access. She also cited California statutory sections governing school site notices and county review, including Government Code section 65402, Government Code section 65352.2, Public Resources Code section 21151.2 and Education Code section 17215.5.

After public comment and discussion, commissioners directed county staff to draft a letter to the district stating that the Best Road site is consistent with the county general plan, to recommend that an environmental impact report (EIR) be performed if the district advances a project at the site, and to consider recommending a PQP general plan amendment or overlay so regional agencies and partners are aware the parcel may be used for a public facility. The planning commission voted 4‑0 to authorize staff to prepare that letter and to give the planning director authority to finalize the commission’s written responses.

The commission’s action was procedural: it did not approve any project or commit county funds. Commissioners noted the district also holds other potential sites, including a 64‑acre property near Wright Road, and that any project would require subsequent project‑level environmental review, coordination with Sunny Slope Water District and Caltrans (for State Route 25), and possible infrastructure commitments by developers or other agencies.

The meeting record shows the consent agenda item (posting of the certificate) passed earlier in the special session by a 4‑0 vote, and the later motions to give staff direction and to adjourn also carried 4‑0. No final decision to construct a high school at Best Road was made; the district said it will continue planning and coordinate with county staff and regional partners.