Lewis-Palmer D38 board resists sale of Grace Best facility; directs interim superintendent to draft response

Members of the Lewis-Palmer Consolidated School District No. 38 board reviewed a letter of intent to purchase the Grace Best facility at 66 Jefferson Street and agreed to have the interim superintendent draft a response reflecting the board's concerns.

Dr. Shank, identified in the discussion as a board member, said she was not interested in selling the parcel, particularly because of its central location next to "Big Red" and because the district has previously discussed options for that site. She said, "I am not interested in selling off any of our property," and urged the board to consider long-term uses.

Mr. Brown said he opposed breaking up the central piece of land and expressed doubt that the buyer had completed sufficient due diligence on the building's condition. He cautioned that the district could do something "much better for the community within the long term" if it retained the land.

Another board member noted the letter of intent and praised Monument Academy's contribution to parental choice, but said the offer price appeared low relative to the property's value and the district's asset-utilization goals. That speaker referenced recent engineering input, saying that KPE and follow-up architects produced updated cost quotes in September showing what it would take to bring the building up to code, and stated the district "cannot in good conscience give a building for students to be in until it's brought up to code." The board member said either Monument Academy would need to pay to bring the space up to code or the district would have to do so.

A separate board member clarified a legal point: state statute can require a district to make surplus facilities available to charter schools, but Grace Best has not been declared "surplus"; instead, the record shows it was declared "unsuitable for future educational use," which the member said removes the statutory surplus requirement. The member suggested the draft response should reference the applicable surplus-facilities statute and the district's legal counsel's initial guidance.

After discussion about the property's long-term value, the board agreed the current offer was not feasible and directed the interim superintendent to prepare a letter that summarizes the concerns raised, including building safety and the property's place in district planning. The board did not take a formal public vote on sale authorization during the recorded discussion.

The district also referenced another property (used by TriLakes Cares) that will require a separate vote, but board members treated the Grace Best parcel as a distinct, centrally important asset.

Next procedural steps noted at the meeting were to have the interim superintendent draft the response and to bring additional information (cost estimates, legal references) back to the board for further consideration.