Grand Jury Assails Dana School Moves : District Leaders Deny Charges, Blame Point Loma Neighborhood Protesters

By JANNY SCOTT

April 4, 1987 12 AM PT

Times Staff Writer

The county grand jury on Friday issued a sharp condemnation of the San Diego Unified School District’s handling of some of its surplus property, charging that it ignored the community and violated state law in its management of Dana Junior High School.

School district officials lashed back immediately, suggesting the grand jurors were taken in by neighbors of the Point Loma school. They also suggested the grand jury report was timed to sabotage district negotiations with the City Council over disposition of closed schools.

“I am devastated by the grand jury report and the gross amount of inaccuracies in the report,” Kay Davis, president of the school board, said in a press conference. “The dilemma the district now faces is how we will get a fair discussion of the issues after the public at large reads sensational headlines.”

Closing Called Preordained

In its 19-page report, the grand jury charged that the district preordained that Dana should close before consulting the community, as required by law. It then stopped maintaining or investing in the facility and allowed it to deteriorate badly, the report said.

Next, the grand jury alleged, the district neglected to explore alternative educational uses for the vacant building, instead moving to dispose of it on a long-term lease to the highest bidder, without offering it to the city under state regulations.

Fees Went Uncollected

Finally, the grand jurors said, the district neglected to collect from developers in Point Loma the usual fees for funding school repairs and construction. The report states that the district could have raised $2 million in fees from Point Loma alone between 1984 and 1986.

“The jury recommends that the district follow guidelines for the disposal of surplus properties, combine with the city to impose a moratorium on such disposals . . . and negotiate a short-term lease for Dana,” the report said.

Davis challenged each of the grand jurors’ findings.

She called the suggestion that the district “orchestrated” the closing of Dana “absolutely not true. . . . The community decided which site to close. We did, once that decision was made, decide not to put major dollars into new heating systems, plumbing, electrical.”

As for alternative uses for the school, Davis said the district has worked with the city for a year and recently tried for an agreement with the community college. Contradicting the report, she said that the Navy and United States International University have expressed no interest in the property recently.

Davis also contradicted the grand jury on the matter of a long-term lease, saying no lease has been awarded. She said that although Odmark Development Company is the highest bidder, awarding the lease would be contingent upon compatibility with the community plan and completion of an environmental impact report.

Finally, Davis and board attorney Tina Dyer said a city ordinance bars the district from collecting developer fees in “urbanized” areas like Point Loma. They said the City Council decided that such fees are appropriate only in developing areas.

“That’s one of the most blatant errors in the report,” said Dyer.

The grand jury began its eight-month investigation last year after receiving complaints about the district’s management of the Dana property. A community group had sued the district in 1985, charging absence of community input on disposition of the site and lack of an environmental impact plan.

Part of Larger Debate

The Dana controversy is part of a larger debate over the district’s efforts to raise money through management of surplus properties. Davis said the efforts began four years ago after the City Council noted that the district was not capitalizing on some of its holdings.

Davis said 14 of the district’s 16 surplus properties have been leased on short-term leases. She claimed that the district offered Dana on short-term lease but there were no bidders.

In the meantime, the city has approved a so-called “institutional overlay zone” aimed at protecting properties like schools and churches from hasty sale to developers. The zone allows the council to delay any such change in order to give community residents a chance to find another institutional use.

Exemptions Sought

The district, which contends the City Council has exceeded its power, has proposed exempting six closed school sites that it hopes to lease to developers. That so-called memorandum of agreement between the district and the council comes before the council for the third time Monday.

“We have not time now, over the weekend or before the two o’clock hearing before the City Council (Monday) . . . to have a way to correct it,” Davis said of the report. “The damage, I feel, is done. I think the timing is fascinating.”

The only allegation in the report that district officials conceded was that their public relations in the Dana Junior High School community might have been better. Dyer said she had come to believe that the district might have moved more slowly and taken more time listening to neighbors’ complaints.

“I think we should have slowed down and, when people expressed concerns, spent more time with them,” said Dyer. “ . . . I guess I’ve come to accept that that’s a legitimate concern.”

Davis added, “You’re still at a point on controversial issues . . . that certain segments of the community, if they don’t get a decision changed their way, are going to always say there was never enough time. But I think we could have done the process better.”

Nevertheless, district officials also expressed concerns about the grand jury report’s effect on public perception of the district.

“One of the other more damaging things in general is what it does to district and public relations,” said Bertha Pendleton, deputy superintendent of schools. “We are at a time when we are trying to build strong unity in district relations in this whole area. This casts great suspicion about how we operate our business.”

Meanwhile, the fate of Dana Junior High School remains undecided.