Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facilities Master Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Laguna Beach board adopts $144–$145M 2026 Facilities Master Plan, prioritizes gym, student services and TK improvements
Summary
The board adopted a 2026 Facilities Master Plan (vote 4-0-1) that lists about $144–$145 million in prioritized capital projects over 20–25 years, with tier‑two priorities including a high‑school student services/classroom building, Thurston Middle School gym expansion and seismic upgrades, and TK/playground and food‑service work at elementary sites.
The Laguna Beach Unified School District board on June 4 adopted the 2026 Facilities Master Plan (FMP), a planning document the district says will guide capital priorities for the next 20–25 years and is required for eligibility for state matching funds.
Staff presented the FMP as a "road map" outlining prioritized projects across the four schools, district office and support facilities, with committee scoring weighted for health and safety, financial feasibility, equity, operational efficiency and sustainability. The committee identified roughly $144–$145 million in projects across the district and categorized them into priority tiers; staff noted no immediate safety (tier‑one) emergencies were identified, and the list instead focuses on tier‑two and tier‑three projects that the committee scored as important.
Top prioritized projects discussed by committee presenters and students included a centralized student services and classroom building at the high school, a gym expansion and seismic upgrade at Thurston Middle School (coded as high priority to address capacity and seismic standards), and TK/UTK classroom and food‑service modernizations at El Morro and Top of the World elementary schools. The plan also lists district office upgrades and a phased approach toward fleet electrification infrastructure and solar/energy upgrades; staff said electrifying the bus fleet and related charger infrastructure is feasible but requires separate coordination and grant/funding steps.
Presenters told the board the FMP is a working document: adoption does not commit funding, but it does enable the district to apply for state matching funds and other grants. Staff highlighted one near‑term funding opportunity noted in the meeting: certain projects completed and submitted can generate state matching dollars (the plan references a $7 million eligibility example tied to prior work such as a pool project). Committee materials show 12 tier‑two and 31 tier‑three projects; the consultant and staff emphasized that the board can change priorities later.
After community and student presenters described site‑specific needs (student accessibility, concession stand modernization, senior quad enhancements, tech lab upgrades, theater and auditorium improvements), the board approved adoption of the plan by roll call vote (4‑0‑1). Board members and staff said the next phase is to align funding options — grants, state matching funds, bond measures or COPs — and to sequence execution based on available resources and priorities.
Next steps: Staff will post the board‑adopted FMP on the district website, begin pursuing grant and matching‑fund opportunities, and work with the board to sequence tier‑two projects given funding constraints.
