Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Siting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents say Alva high school site will raise costs, lengthen busing and risk student safety
Summary
Multiple speakers at the Aug. 5 Lee County School Board meeting urged the district to reconsider the proposed Alva (Elva) high school site, arguing it lacks infrastructure, will cost tens of millions more and will increase student busing and safety risks for Lehigh Acres students.
Get email alerts on the School Siting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Denise Eberly urged the Lee County School Board on Aug. 5 to halt the district’s proposed high school project in Alva and consider building instead in Lehigh Acres, arguing the Alva site lacks roads, water and other infrastructure and will increase public costs and student travel times.
Eberly told the board the project “is now expected to exceed $160,000,000,” and that the increase is “driven by $22,500,000 in additional infrastructure costs solely because this selected site now lacks the necessary infrastructure, roads, utilities, water services, which now must be built using public funds.”
The comment period drew other residents who raised similar concerns. Amanda Cochran said the district’s “projected growth” rationale does not justify placing a major school in a rural, undeveloped area instead of “the already densely populated community of Lehigh Acres.” Cochran asked the board for “a full and transparent cost analysis comparing the Alva site and the Lehigh site” and said she had documented and sourced the data from the district’s materials.
Parent advocate Sergio Cruz and several other speakers pressed the board about equity and student needs. James Kennedy and other residents said placing a school at the Alva site will raise transportation costs and add wear and tear on buses because the site is farther from where many students live. Kennedy asked the board to publish bus-driver counts, needed drivers, and the projected transportation cost impacts so taxpayers can evaluate the trade-offs.
Katrina Salak (identifies herself as addressing Superintendent Carlin) questioned the district’s water infrastructure planning, saying experts had told her the school would use “about 10,600 gallons of water daily, yet it's getting a 500,000 gallon tank” and that “only 135 homes actually exist nearby,” which she said indicated surrounding development remained speculative.
Speakers linked the siting choice to student safety. Amanda Cochran said her family was personally affected by a roadway fatality near Joel Boulevard and Tuckahoe and that, without “real upgrades,” placing students on longer routes increases the chance of a crash.
Why it matters: Several public commenters said the site decision could cost tens of millions in additional public funds, change bus routing and daily student commute lengths, and raise safety concerns on local roads. Multiple speakers asked the board to re-evaluate site selection using the district’s own data and the Phase 1 site-selection process.
Discussion vs. action: Remarks about the Alva site were made during the public comment period; no board motion, vote or formal change to the site selection was recorded in this meeting. Commenters referenced the district’s Phase 1 site-selection process and urged staff and the board to reconsider the chosen site using comparative cost and safety data.
Supporting details and requested follow-up from speakers - Project cost cited by Denise Eberly: “expected to exceed $160,000,000.” - Additional infrastructure cost cited by Eberly: “$22,500,000.” - Water usage cited by a speaker (Katrina Salak): estimated school use “about 10,600 gallons of water daily”; referenced district plan for a “500,000 gallon tank.” - Nearby existing homes cited by a speaker: “only 135 homes actually exist nearby.” - Public commenters requested: a transparent, side-by-side cost analysis comparing Alva/Elva and Lehigh Acres sites; published transportation impact figures (bus-driver counts, fuel/time costs); and review of the Phase 1 site-selection findings.
Attribution: Quotes and attributions in this article come from the public commenters listed below. The board did not adopt or vote on any change to the high school site during this meeting.
Taper: Commenters said there is still time to revise the decision and asked the board and superintendent to use district-provided data to reconsider alternative sites; no board action on that request was recorded at the meeting.

