Fullerton trustees hear divided community on proposed Fistler ARK; staff report majority support, board to consider vote in July

The Fullerton School District board on June 22 heard more than an hour of public comment on a proposed arts-and-recreation center (ARK) at Robert C. Fistler School, with teachers and many parents urging the board to approve a stage-equipped ARK and some community members arguing the district did not meaningfully engage stakeholders on alternatives.

Linda Beecher, an assistant principal at Fistler, told trustees the school — which serves nearly 900 students across TK–8 — lacks a space large enough for assemblies, performances and all-weather physical education and called the ARK “an investment in students today and for the future.” Sixth-grade teacher Katie Omeira said staff had explored a mini gym, full gym and ARK options and reported a staff survey in which 23 respondents rated the ARK an “excellent” fit and six rated it “good”; she said zero staff rated the ARK poor.

Several teachers gave examples of current limits: Elizabeth Ellison, who has taught at Fistler since it opened, said sports teams regularly travel offsite for home games, which undermines school spirit and limits community attendance. Stage teacher Carrie Holbeck asked the board to “preserve the stage and basketball court” in the final design.

Community member Glenn Giggstead challenged the district’s outreach, saying parents were shown the ARK as a near-final design and that the process felt like “notification” rather than true engagement. The district responded that it paused after initial January concerns, conducted additional staff surveys and held a community meeting; staff and the principal, Dr. Caroline Llewellyn, said their May staff survey showed strong teacher support for an ARK with a stage and presented several possible campus locations.

District staff and trustees discussed cost and scope. The ARK construction was estimated at about $14 million in today’s dollars; staff said that estimate covers the ARK itself but that moving a track or library would likely require additional funding and potentially come from developer fees or other sources. The presentation noted Measure N provided the bond authority (district staff reminded the board Measure N total was $262 million and the current draw for the next phase is $71 million).

Trustees debated whether to treat the ARK as a fixed ‘stage’ solution or as a structural shell that could house a variety of interior programs (maker space, additional classrooms, labs). Trustee James urged the board to ask staff and the community to imagine what could occupy the ARK “skeleton” before finalizing details; other trustees stressed the importance of staff input and the practical constraints of project scheduling. Trustees asked staff to cost single-stall/all-gender restroom options and to provide alternatives and detailed cost implications.

By the end of the discussion the board signaled (informal straw poll) it was prepared to bring the ARK with stage back for formal action in July, while asking staff to continue targeted stakeholder work over the summer and to return with location options, alternatives and cost breakdowns. Staff cautioned that additional outreach or major redesign could delay procurement and increase costs.

The district characterized the June presentation as informational only; no final vote was taken. The next formal opportunity for board action is the July meeting, when trustees said they expect staff to present final ARK plans and cost details for consideration.