FJUHSD board hears Measure L update, weighs lease‑leaseback and turf replacements
Loading...
Summary
District officials briefed the Fullerton Joint Union High School District board on Measure L funding, construction delivery options including lease‑leaseback, and plans to replace stadium turf this summer; trustees asked for more design and cost detail before formal delivery‑method decisions.
Fullerton Joint Union High School District officials on Tuesday presented a detailed Measure L and facilities update, describing the district’s funding picture, construction delivery options and planned summer projects including turf replacement at Fullerton Stadium.
Assistant Superintendent for Business Ruben Hernandez and Senior Director of Facility Planning, Development, Maintenance, Operations and Transportation Vince Madsen told trustees the district has access to Measure L proceeds, a roughly $25 million Certificate of Participation and other capital resources, and that, when combined with potential state matching dollars, the presenters estimated a cumulative program on the order of $551,000,000. Hernandez said Measure L proceeds and state matches are being used to pursue seismic mitigation and modernization grants.
The presentation outlined three delivery methods the district is considering: traditional design‑bid‑build, design‑build and lease‑leaseback. Madsen explained the lease‑leaseback approach and its operational mechanics: “So they lease the land from us for a dollar to build their building, and then we lease it back for the first 12 months of us occupying it, which is really just delivering the retention instead of 1 payment over time.” He said that structure can keep a contractor engaged during the first year of occupancy and limit some change‑order risk.
Trustees pressed staff on how lease payments would be funded and whether turf replacement reserves would be affected. Madsen responded that lease payments are paid through the 5 percent retention the district is required by law to hold on each contractor progress payment, and not by tapping Fund 40 replacement reserves. “So we’re not using Fund 40 to pay the leases,” he said, adding that Fund 40 currently has sufficient dollars to replace existing stadium turf when it reaches the end of its lifespan.
Staff also described a product the district has studied for synthetic turf that uses no loose infill. Madsen said the pivot product reduces surface temperature, lowers maintenance and comes with a system warranty the district expects to meet g‑max safety testing requirements.
Several trustees said they favor keeping multiple delivery options available and requested more detailed cost comparisons and contract language as designs progress; presenters said some Measure L projects may be hard‑bid depending on scope. The board did not take action on delivery‑method authority during the presentation; related resolutions (identified by staff as Nos. 29–32) were included on the consent calendar for consideration later in the meeting.
District staff said the next steps are to advance designs, continue community and user collaboration, and return with detailed delivery‑method recommendations as schematic designs and contractor input become available.

