The Tecumseh Public Schools board discussed potential sales and development options for two vacant intermediate‑learning centers — Herrick Park and Patterson — at its June 9 meeting.

Superintendent Hilton and district staff said they have received purchase interest for both properties and outlined three concrete options for Patterson and a longer‑term approach for Herrick Park.

At Patterson the district received a signed purchase agreement from a local family offering $50,000 for the building “as is,” with the buyer assuming liability and a tentative closing date of July 31, 2025. A different local buyer submitted two additional proposals: a straightforward $150,000 purchase‑as‑is, and a two‑stage offer that would begin with a $150,000 deposit and the district retaining ownership while the buyer seeks a zoning change; if the buyer secures zoning within a year, the buyer would pay an additional $200,000 for a $350,000 total sale price. In the second option, if the zoning change fails, the district would keep the $150,000 deposit and convey the property as is to the buyer.

The buyer who proposed the $150,000/$350,000 pathway described plans to construct new homes along Union Street compatible with the neighborhood and to convert the Patterson building to apartment‑style flats after asbestos abatement. The buyer also signaled an interest in preserving the building’s historic character and potentially opening rooms to community uses.

Trustees asked detailed procedural questions. Trustee Brooks urged that any agreement address the district’s maintenance costs and potential liabilities for the period that ownership remains with the district while zoning changes are pursued. Board members asked about insurance coverage for catastrophic damage and the cost of ongoing grounds maintenance, and asked staff to include title and liability protections in any purchase agreement.

On Herrick Park, district staff described two marketing paths: listing the property with a local realtor or pursuing a multi‑stakeholder development process with the Lenawee County Land Bank and the Michigan land‑bank program. Staff described that both approaches would likely be long term — 12 to 24 months — and would involve outreach, planning and work with city officials to identify development partners rather than approving a specific, ready‑made project.

Why it matters: Both properties are idle assets that create recurring maintenance and security costs; selling or finding redevelopment partners could remove a recurring financial and liability burden from the district and potentially produce housing or community space aligned with city plans.

Trustees requested additional information before any approval: clear documentation on asbestos and environmental testing, insurance coverage limits and transfer timing, sample language covering maintenance and liability during any interim period, and formal purchase agreements from the buyers that include title protections and closing contingencies. Staff said they would work with district counsel to prepare formal agreements and return them to the board for review before a binding sale.

Ending: The board took no vote on either property at the June 9 meeting and instructed staff to provide the requested due diligence materials and draft purchase agreements in advance of the next meeting.