School district must move with caution

Mill Valley School District leaders say they want to hear from the community, one that has repeatedly backed school taxes and bond measures for their local public schools.

The dilemma facing the district is local reaction to its proposal that it build a new middle school on part of Friends Field, a complex of sports fields built and maintained as a result of a civic-spirited collaboration of the district, the city and a local nonprofit called Friends of the Field.

That collaboration turned land into a heavily-used field that has become a recreation hub for local youth.

Losing the fields and the effect that loss will have on youth sports programs are two reasons the district has been getting blowback to its consideration of a plan that would build the school on all or part of the field, which has remained in district ownership. Providing the land was the district's part of the collaboration.

The district was hardpressed for the money it was costing to maintain the field. In response, the city and Friends of the Field paid for improving the site, creating ballfields and its maintenance.

Building the school on the site would potentially unravel a successful civic partnership with the district backtracking on its side of the bargain.

At best, it would be awkward.

District officials say they haven't made up their minds, but are considering the site because it promises to save the district money and it would distance students away from the noise and dust of an estimated two years of construction.

The field was not under consideration until it was recently discovered the school district still owned the site.

Building the middle school there wasn't under consideration in 2022 when Mill Valley voters — with a 66% majority — passed Measure G, the $194 million capital bond measure, part of which is paying for rebuilding the school.

Had the site been part of the bond, would Measure G have passed?

The politics certainly would have been more challenging.

Marin voters have repeatedly shown that they treasure their parks and sports fields.

For months, the district's focus has been on building the new school in phases, on its existing 13.5-acre site — 425 Sycamore Ave.

The work would include building temporary classrooms and facilities — an estimated $15 million to build and connect to utilities.

Building on the field site would alleviate that cost.

The building of temporary classrooms has drawn opposition, including criticism that they would be environmentally wasteful.

At the same time, the district has a fiduciary responsibility to explore every option, including those that could save taxpayers money.

The district also has a civic responsibility to consider the viewpoints of its partners, the city and Friends of the Field, and work with them to reach a consensus.

They have a stake in the district's decision.

The city already has offered its assistance in exploring possible alternatives.

In a letter that reminded the district of its role in the successful community collaboration that led to the creation of Friends Field, City Manager Todd Cusimano wrote: “Continuing this partnership maintains a tradition of working together for the common good. Our aim is to uphold this long history of collaboration for the benefit of the community, ensuring its continuation into the future and for generations to come.”

Response to invitations for public comment certainly serves as a reminder that the community treasures the fields.

The decision-making goal should be what is best for the community for years to come.

The district's consideration of the Friends Field site certainly has stirred up a hornet's nest.

Turning that energy into a collaborative process and a community-based consensus is going to take time, patience and listening.

But decisions should reflect community support instead of being the source of public outcry.