Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Disposition topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board debates fate of old Quincy High campus amid asbestos, collapse and funding concerns
Summary
Board members raised safety concerns about asbestos and a partially collapsed auditorium at the old Quincy High School site, staff reported two abatement/fencing quotes and the board debated whether to advertise, sell, donate or use a realtor to handle the property; no formal decision was taken at the workshop.
Board members and staff spent substantial time at the workshop discussing the old Quincy High School campus, where board members described exposed asbestos, a collapsed auditorium section and insecure fencing, and district staff reported they had gathered vendor pricing to inform next steps.
"I'm still concerned about the gym site, the old Quincy High School site," Miss Scott said, raising fears about asbestos exposure and the safety of nearby residents. She noted some chain link fencing had been breached and urged the district to take faster action to protect the neighborhood.
Mister Hudson, the district staff member handling facilities inquiries, told the board the district had obtained two vendor quotes and was awaiting a third. "We currently have 2 quotes. We are waiting for 1 more," Hudson said, and he set a deadline for receiving additional pricing so the board would have figures to review.
Board members exchanged options for dealing with the property: abatement and shoring up the collapsed area, advertising the property for sale, donating or gifting it to community groups such as Quincy Main Street, or using a realtor selected via RFQ to manage district properties. Legal counsel cautioned that any donation or transfer should be demonstrably in the public interest and advised documenting the public‑interest rationale to withstand challenge. "The law gives you a lot of flexibility, but it has to be for the public good or in the public interest," counsel said.
Board members stressed abatement costs are high and that the district may lack funds to both abate and redevelop the property; one member said prior attempts to give the property to outside groups did not include clear commitments on who would handle abatement. Staff also said the property was not covered by district insurance for the existing structural damage because the damage predated the relevant coverage window.
What’s next: Hudson said he would continue collecting pricing and related information; the board discussed accelerating the district’s RFQ timeline to have realtor proposals available sooner, and planned to address the property again in the upcoming board meeting. No formal action or vote on disposition or funding was taken at the workshop.
