Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Surplus Land topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves surplus‑land waiver application for Peralta site after contested public hearing
Summary
After a public hearing with residents and students both supporting and opposing possible dispositions, the Orange Unified board authorized submittal of a surplus property waiver application to the State Board of Education for the Peralta parcel (2190 North Canal St.); vote was 6–1 (Trustee Yamasaki opposed).
The Orange Unified School District board voted 6–1 to authorize submission of a surplus land waiver application for the Peralta property at 2190 North Canal Street, a step required by state law before the district may sell or lease surplus school property.
Staff told the board the site has not been used as a school for many years and that the waiver would be sought under Education Code section 33050 to exempt the parcel from the Surplus Land Act process. The board held a public hearing during which neighbors, former trustees and other community members described potential uses and urged preservation for future district needs; several speakers supported exploring a sale or lease to bring community benefits.
Speakers at the hearing included neighborhood residents who voiced support for the district pursuing the waiver so the site could be repurposed for institutional uses or community facilities, plus former Trustee Kathy Moffett who urged the board to preserve the property for future district needs. A student board member, Alexander Tran, opposed prioritizing private parties (specifically naming Orange Lutheran) for access to the site, saying that awarding the parcel to private schools could harm Orange Unified's enrollment and athletic programs.
Trustee Pelley moved to approve the resolution authorizing submittal of the waiver application; Trustee Thomas seconded. The board recorded six votes in favor and one opposed (Trustee Yamasaki), and the motion carried. Board members reiterated that the action does not itself obligate the district to sell the site but opens options that staff and the board can pursue publicly and transparently.
Board materials and public comments noted potential community uses discussed during the hearing, including joint‑use athletic facilities, performing arts space, and indoor venues for district events. Several speakers urged consideration of community partnerships and a transparent RFP process if the district seeks proposals.
