Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environmental Health topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents and parents press district over Palm Elementary soil testing and LWCF park grant
Summary
At the Aug. 14 Hacienda La Puente USD board meeting, community members questioned the district’s shallow, composited soil testing at Palm Elementary and pressed the district and a city‑district JPA on a Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) grant they say lacks required funding and meaningful public input.
Community members used the public‑comment period at the Hacienda La Puente Unified School District board meeting on Aug. 14 to challenge the district’s soil testing at Palm Elementary and to demand stronger transparency and legal safeguards around a proposed LWCF grant and joint powers authority (JPA).
Sam Brown, who identified himself during public comment, said the district’s recent Palm results look reassuring only because samples were taken six inches below the surface and composited across locations. "Children do not play six inches underground," Brown said, urging surface dust swipes and more discrete sampling to detect localized "hot spots" of lead and other contaminants.
Community member Nancy Loa, who identified herself as a La Puente resident, detailed concerns about a proposed LWCF application and an associated La Puente open‑space JPA. Loa said the LWCF guide requires a 50% funding match at submission, meaningful community input before project design, and that grants impose perpetual outdoor‑recreation restrictions that could prevent future school use of blacktops or fields without a costly federal conversion process. "If the district wants that land back in the future, it may need to pay for replacement land and appraisal costs," she said, adding that she found no evidence of the required community surveys prior to the maps’ posting.
Other speakers repeated related concerns: commenters said a grant writer described the process as "writing fiction" and asked whether the required match had been secured before a public deadline. Board members and staff responded that a district attorney reviewed the JPA and that legal counsel was present at the JPA meeting; board leaders also encouraged anyone with specific evidence of wrongdoing to bring it forward for investigation.
Why it matters: The LWCF imposes long‑term federal restrictions on grant‑assisted lands; converting such land back to non‑recreational school use requires a formal federal process that can be costly and time‑consuming. Community members asked the board to pause or withdraw the JPA and the grant application until funding, legal exposures and public‑input procedures are clarified.
What the board said and next steps: Board leaders told commenters the district will review legal and procedural questions and noted the JPA vote and grant work were discussed in separate public processes. Trustees asked staff to provide legal guidance and to ensure the district follows statutory notice and public‑input obligations. Several trustees also asked the district to present the grant documentation and JPA maps publicly so residents can review exact maps, match commitments and any perpetual‑use clauses.
Provenance: The public‑comment critiques and requests for legal review appear throughout the public comment segment and the ensuing board discussion (topicintro: SEG 121; topfinish: SEG 283).
