Board debates next steps after school bond loss as members call for clearer definition of 'unsafe'

Chair Anne Lacatore opened a discussion after the district's facilities advisory committee reported a range of deficiencies at the high school, including seismic, ventilation and asbestos issues. Director Tom said the report left him convinced that "kids not being safe is not something I'm willing to sit on personally," and pressed the board to act rather than postpone.

Several directors urged caution about how the committee had framed 'unsafe.' One member argued the term could mean failing to meet current seismic code rather than an immediate danger; the board asked the committee to produce clearer, tiered options. Superintendent Andy told the board the FAC would need to be reconvened and outlined election deadlines that would make an aggressive November timeline difficult; he sketched a calendar that could lead to a May 2027 ballot if the board and committee update cost estimates and present scaled alternatives.

Directors suggested presenting a 'bare bones' remediation package alongside a new-build option so voters can compare tradeoffs and costs. Board members also discussed outreach steps—door‑to‑door canvassing and better dissemination of the FAC’s technical findings—to help the community evaluate options before a future vote. No vote was taken to place a measure on an upcoming ballot; the board instead directed staff to ask the FAC for updated, lower‑cost and phased options and to return with a recommended timeline and communications plan.