Now that Raynor specifically has been ruled out, I am re-posting this article which had previously included many images of the Raynor site. The thoughts it contains are still applicable, as Raynor was just an attempt at saving money on a new site, purportedly one of the lease costly ideas LASD Board members could locate.
The problem with the recommendation of the enrollment growth task force is that it is not grounded in reality as to what funds are available. LASD can only support an additional $120M in total bond spending, even if it goes with a bond requiring a 2/3 majority to pass. Bonds that can pass at only 55% approval have an even smaller limit.
LASD has unreasonably focused on Raynor in Sunnyvale as an option for one of the two recommended sites. This location is unreasonable because it is so far away from the district. It creates an elitist attitude in that it makes it appear that LASD can shunt its traffic and other school negatives outside the community, impacting others. It is environmentally bad because of all of the commute traffic it will cause, and it is quite close to the new Apple campus planned to open in 2016. The Raynor site offers cheaper land than can be found in LASD, but it is no bargain at all with regard to school construction. The Raynor site would end up costing $50Million at least, and perhaps more. It is only 32,000 square feet with no room to add portables. This means that it is smaller than any existing LASD school apart from Gardner. For $50Million, LASD gets another Gardner, but more run down and far away. The site does not even include the playground, but relies on a deal to gain access to the former grounds of Raynor, or part of them, which are now a separate Sunnyvale Park. No doubt LASD will be paying the upkeep on the park, which is then available to Sunnyvale residents.
Even if LASD spends $50M on Raynor, that leaves only $70M available from bond funds for other uses. LASD has stated that its existing campuses need $65M in upgrades as of 2012, and that cost can only rise over time. This leaves nothing with which to acquire a 2nd new campus. The cost of a 2nd new campus would be at least $50M for a small footprint of land if a location can be found, and more likely $75M for 7 acres minimum, in the NEC area. So, LASD just cannot afford to branch out onto newly acquired land, even if shortcuts are taken to reduce the land costs.
