Schools
CUSD Staff Executes Purchase Agreement to buy Esencia School Site for $2.42 million per acre without Board Approval
The Contract Should be Void
This article is not in the proper format for the Patch - it can be read here: http://disclosurecusd.blogspot...
![]()
On January 19, 2017 Clark Hampton, Deputy Superintendent of Business and Support Services executed an Agreement for the Purchase and Sale and Escrow Instructions for the Rancho Mission Viejo Development Planning Area 2 School Site, Esencia K-8 School. Clark did so without Board Approval. The proposed scope and cost of the land for Escencia was projected to be $21 million for 14 acres - $1.5 million per acre (an amount that many people started to question). Agenda Item #10 on the up-coming Wednesday February 22, 2017 BOT meeting was a resolution asking the Board for approval for CUSD to execute the sale. There was no price listed on the Board Agenda. When I contacted Clark and asked him to put the price on the agenda he did so. The Board is being asked to approve spending $33.86 million for 14 acres - $2.42 million per acre. I asked for clarification on why the price changed from $21 million to $34 million and have not received a response.
On January 19, 2017 Clark Hampton, Deputy Superintendent of Business and Support Services executed an Agreement for the Purchase and Sale and Escrow Instructions for the Rancho Mission Viejo Development Planning Area 2 School Site, Esencia K-8 School. Clark did so without Board Approval. The proposed scope and cost of the land for Escencia was projected to be $21 million for 14 acres - $1.5 million per acre (an amount that many people started to question). Agenda Item #10 on the up-coming Wednesday February 22, 2017 BOT meeting was a resolution asking the Board for approval for CUSD to execute the sale. There was no price listed on the Board Agenda. When I contacted Clark and asked him to put the price on the agenda he did so. The Board is being asked to approve spending $33.86 million for 14 acres - $2.42 million per acre. I asked for clarification on why the price changed from $21 million to $34 million and have not received a response.
The appraisals for the land valuation are not attached to the agenda item.
A closer look at the documents shows the following:
- The Agreement was executed on January 19, 2017 without Board Approval.
- Clark is asking for Approval at the February 22, 2017 Board Meeting Agenda Item #10.
- The contract is signed by Clark Hampton as Deputy Superintendent of Business Services for CUSD
- Legal Counsel was suppose to review the document but the attorney for CUSD signed his name with an X and no typed name.
- The Document states that CUSD has 30 days from the execution of the purchase agreement to back out of the agreement without consequences. (30 days from January 19, 2017 is Saturday, February 18, 2017) four days before the February 22, 2017 BOT meeting where Trustees were to vote to approve the Resolution.
- The agreement also contains a provision that would allow the school and land to revert back to RMV if CUSD was unable to complete the school by June 30, 2018 (that is a real possibility because the land is currently an empty lot).
CUSD should call an emergency meeting to void this contract to avoid any loss of funds and legal consequences.
page 3 of 77
It appears that Clark Hampton did so without Board approval and without legal review.
What attorney signs their name with an "X"?
![]()
30 days from January 19, 2017 is Saturday, February 18, 2017 (tomorrow Saturday- 4 days before the February 22, 2017 Board Meeting to approve this purchase agreement).
The Resolution giving Clark the authority to enter into this agreement has not been executed yet.
The contract should be voided because of that alone.
BACKGROUND:
The Board is being asked to approve Resolution No 1617-56 which allows CUSD to purchase 14 acres of land in Rancho Mission Viejo to build Esencia K-8 School.
The original Agenda Item was posted without stating how much CUSD was paying for the land:  A request was sent to Clark Hampton, Deputy Superintendent, Business and Support Services asking that the Agenda Item reflect the cost of the land.   The Item was amended to reflect a cost of $33,860,000 to purchase 14 acres of land for the school site.  The November 6, 2013 Resolution referred to in the Agenda Item can be found at the following link on Page 1 of the Agenda: The 2013 Environmental Impact Report presented to the Board on January 28, 2013 stated that the estimated cost of the land was $21 million dollars - $1.5 million dollars per acre.  The 2013 Agreement was based on the following: Source: http://capousd.ca.schoolloop.c... pages 58 - 65        On February 24 2016, CUSD presented the following Negative Declaration Esencia K-8 School to the Board The original agreement was for 19 Acres of land 4 joint use (15 school acres). The Negative Declaration states that their should be 20 acres of land 4 joint use (16 school acres). The February 22, 2017 Board Resolution is stating that CUSD is purchasing 14 acres of land - 4 joint use which would be a total of 18 acres of land?      The Board Agenda did not contain the appraisals for the land which would show how the price of the land went from $21 million ($1.5 million per acre) to $34 million (2.4 million per acre).  The following is the information that is being provided to the public on the February 22, 2017 Board meeting Agenda Item #10 at page 252   The Agreement (at 77 page document) was executed on January 19, 2017 On page 4 of 77:  The School Facilities funding agreement between CUSD and RMV was approved by the Board on November 6, 2013 Resolution No 1314-25 on page 1 SECTION 8.3 states:  The agreement calls for three appraisals if CUSD does not agree with the first valuation. The Board should not vote to approve this item until the appraisals are made public. They are not included in the Board Agenda so there is no supporting documentation for how the price of the land went from $21 million to $34 million. Some additional discussion points: The Size of the Ranch Development is such that it will be a City of well over 50,000 people when complete. The original EIR dated 2004 approved on 2006 stated that the Rancho Mission Viejo projected 9 development areas with 14,000 dwelling units that would generate 4,288 K-12 students. The build out was projected to take 25 - 30 years. After doing an enrollment and capacity study it was determined that CUSD had no capacity at existing school sites to accommodate ranch students. It was determined that the Ranch would require 5 new schools to accommodate its residents:
 In March 2016 a new study painted an even worse picture. In March of 2016 CUSD did a "Residential Development School Fee Justification Study which showed that the CUSD's student enrollment exceeded facilities capacity at all school levels in 2015- 16. at page 6 of the report:  This report clearly shows that CUSD is in violation of Education Code 17071.10(a) with it's 2015-16 enrollment, without including a single new student from the ranch. CUSD is over capacity by 8,555 students without including any Ranch Development. CUSD should NEVER have agreed to be the school District for RMV Development. CUSD has insufficient funds to provide adequate facilities for its existing students. In recent responses to the Grand Jury recommendation for Asbestos abatement discovered in the 1990's; CUSD responded that it would not be able to abate Asbestos issues due to a lack of funds, and asked the Grand Jury to give the District another 20 years to fix the issues. (see: http://cusdwatch.com/index.php...) for more information.  In addition to a lack of existing capacity in CUSD. The Ranch has not been a fair partner in ensuring that CUSD could fund and build adequate capacity for new students. The EIR's continually state that the maximum number of dwelling units is to be 14,000 built over a 25 - 30 year time frame. However- the Ranch continues to add dwelling units to Areas 1 and 2 which will make it impossible for CUSD to accommodate a number of students that has been grossly underestimated. No new schools have been built, and the latest 2015 EIR shows that the number of dwelling units in planning Areas 1 and 2 has increased substantially. According to the latest EIR Planning Area 1 (Sendero) and Planning Area 2 Escencia of the Ranch Development will be adding 3,987 housing units and there are no schools currently within the Ranch development.  I personally drove to Santa Anna to speak with the County to confirm the number of permitted dwelling units that are in Planning Areas 1 and 2. I am waiting on a response. But it looks like RMV is building 1,417 more units in Area 1 and 2 than originally proposed. To add further concern- Addendum's have allowed the Ranch to add "Affordable Housing Units" that are in addition to the 14,000 unit maximum. ADDENDUM 1 July 26, 2006 Increased the number of dwelling units in Area 1 from 1020 to 1,170    Total Units for Area 1: 1,722 Units Total:
Maximum Units in Area 1: 1,170 Sub Area 1.1: 808 total units (219 of those are age qualifying) page 2-16 Sub Area 1.2: 29 total units page 2-16 Sub Area 1.3: Wellness Center for Age Qualifying Residents - in 2011 this property was annexed by San Juan Capistrano and will not be developed Sub Area 1.4: 175 Age Qualifying units + 12 Home based Business dwelling units. Sub Area 1.5: 158 Age Qualifying Units - in 2011 this property was annexed by San Juan Capistrano and will not be developed ADDENDUM 1.1 February 24, 2011 This addendum annexed Plaining Areas 1.3 and 1.5 to the City of San Juan, and it increased the maximum number of units from 1,170 to 1,287 (a 10% increase that was not required to be approved).  Maximum Units in Area 1: 1,287 Sub Area 1.1: 971 (up from 808 total units) 400 (up from 219 of those are age qualifying) page 14 Sub Area 1.2: 16 (down from 29 total units) page 14 Sub Area 1.3: Removed Sub Area 1.4: 300 (up from 175) (100 down from 175 are Age Qualifying units) + 12 Home based Business dwelling units. Sub Area 1.5: Removed ADDENDUM 2 March 27, 2013 This addendum  Maximum Units in Area 1: 3,291 (up from 1,300 on the original EIR) Sub Area 2.1: 850 page 3-5 This will include 850 dwelling units (340 age-qualified units) + 4 acres of affordable housing units Sub Area 2.2: 900 page 3-5 This will include 900 dwelling units (280 age-qualifying units) + 4 acres of affordable housing units Sub Area 2.3: 1,241 page 3-5 This will include 1,241 dwelling units (300 age-qualifying units) + 4 acres of affordable housing units Sub Area 2.4: Urban Activity Center Sub Area 2.5: 300 page 3-5 300 Apartments on 15 acres of the 50 acres  At this point the build out of Planning Areas 1 and 2 total 4578 units which is 33% of the Total Ranch build out. The original ERI projects a total of 4,288 students at build out so it is reasonable to assume there could be 1,415 students in Planning Areas 1 and 2.  ADDENDUM Master Area Plan and Subarea Plans February 2015  Total Maximum Dwelling Units Planning: Area 1: 1,287 Area II: 2,700 Total Units 3,987 That is 1,417 more units than originally anticipated for Planning Area 1 and 2 so CUSD's projection of students is probably low. In addition- CUSD used a student generation load factor that is to low- it was suppose to be modeled after the Ladera Ranch Community. This will also make CUSD's projections of the number of students that need seats to low.   Also effecting student load generation is is the addition of low income housing and apartments that do not appear to be included in the 14,000 maximum units. I am waiting on the County of Orange to verify how many permits for each type of dwelling units have been issued for Planning Areas 1 (Sendero) and Planning Are 2 (Esencia). I went in person on Wednesday and have not received a response to date. It is my concern that CUSD will have well over a thousand kids that may not have a seat at school for the 2017-18 school year. It also concerns me that this item was placed on the Consent Calendar not as a Discussion/Action Item. Clark appears to have stepped beyond his capacity, and this contract should be void. |