Vista Murrieta High School

By Austin Linsley

Construction of Vista Murrieta High School has become the major issue of the campaign. Critics of the district have misrepresented the issues.

Murrieta began planning for its second high school years ago. The formal planning process began in 1998 when the community passed a local bond that along with development fees provided 50% of the capital required to acquire the site, build off-site improvements (utilities, streets, etc.), and construct the school. As with all of the schools we have built in Murrieta, we expect the State will provide the other 50%. However, the new rules create an unfair playing field: we have to move the ball fifteen yards for a first down while Los Angeles only has to move the ball 10 yards.

The inequity of the new funding system, however, is not the controversy in this years election. Two candidates have charged the district's facilities department and the current board with failing to process the Vista Murrieta High School application expeditiously. They claim that the site chosen for Vista Murrieta High School was needlessly environmentally problematic and that an alternative site on the west side of the district could have been acquired for less money and been processed before the State changed the funding formula. Both claims are wrong . Both candidates making those claims know they are wrong.

First, any land use planner knows that undeveloped property in Riverside County is environmentally sensitive. Obtaining the environmental approvals for Vista Murrieta High School was, indeed, a demanding process, but as Mayor Jack Van Hasster pointed out in his argument in favor of the site, the obligation of public officials is to accomplish difficult tasks in the public interest. As it turned out the approvals were obtained well within the timeframe necessary to open the school on time.

Second, the site proposed on the west side of the district certainly was not less expensive than the site the city sold to the school district at a discount. There was no environmental documentation on the property so it is simply impossible to speculate on how long it would have taken to get approvals. Access to the property is along unimproved country roads making access to and across the I-15 freeway problematic. Perhaps most important in the long run, we already have a high school on the west side of the district and most of the students live on the east side!

The credibility and competence of the school district's facilities staff has been challenged because the academic performance of the district is unassailable. In fact, the performance of the facilities department is also unassailable. Both candidates attacking the district were present for lengthy discussions concerning site selection and have been well advised about the intricacies of the State school construction program. They have chosen to ignore the facts. This has become an election about credibility. The credibility at issue, however, is not that of the school district.