- About Us
- Local Savings
- Green Editions
- Legal Notices
- Weekly Ads
Connect with Us
CKSD mulls options on vacant Tracyton, Seabeck school sites
Final decision expected at August board meeting.
If the Community Finance Committee’s preliminary recommendations hold true, the Central Kitsap School District will surplus the Seabeck Elementary School site, but keep the Tracyton Elementary building.
As CKSD juggles options, the sites remain vacant.
At a school board study session Wednesday, CFC presented facts, assumptions and considerations for the district-owned sites, making recommendations on each. It also posed questions about possible demographic growth, property values, maintenance costs, potential commercial value, demolition and removal costs and the legal implications of renting or leasing.
While no formal decisions were made, district personnel digested the committee’s presentation and will reevaluate both sites in the coming months.
The board will hear an updated presentation of the Tracyton property next winter and will discuss Seabeck in mid-August, according to CFC’s report.
“Because of a number of unknowns, it’s prudent at this point to retain the (Tracyton) property,” Superintendent Greg Lynch said. “It’s not a good idea right now to make a decision, other than to retain it.”
Maintenance costs to keep each building “mothballed” during the 2007-08 school year totaled $95,000, with Tracyton costing $50,000 and Seabeck $40,000, according to the committee’s report.
Those numbers are expected to rise, the committee estimated to $92,000 and $98,000 respectively during the 2008-09 school year if the district retains both sites.
Because the district owns 28 acres of land on Larson Lane in Seabeck, it could surplus the vacant site, but maintain a presence in the Seabeck community, the report stated.
“This is an easier decision to make,” Lynch said, acknowledging Larson Lane as a future building site. “We’re recommending the surplus of the Seabeck Elementary property because we don’t need it and it’s a liability.”
The committee also cited community development possibilities, eliminating maintenance costs and freeing up additional capital project funds as benefits to a surplus of the Seabeck site.
Demolition costs, however, would reduce possible capital projects gains, the report said.
The tentative date to further discuss the surplus of the Seabeck site is Aug. 13, with board action to follow.