Residents press board about future of closed school sites as developer pitches pool-and-housing plan for 4 Peaks

At the Fountain Hills Unified School District meeting, multiple public speakers asked what will happen to a school property that the district may close and when a decision would be made; the board said it has not made a formal determination and noted it discussed potential options at an April 3 special meeting and must call any election by June.

John Weimer, a resident, asked directly about the building and land: "What is going to become of the building and the land?" The board president responded that the board is in discussion and will post the issue on an agenda when it is ready for public consideration.

Later in the meeting, developer and community member Michael Shea presented a concept for the 4 Peaks campus. Shea proposed converting the main 4 Peaks building into an indoor, competition‑spec pool and leasing the remainder of the campus under a long‑term lease to support dense starter‑home development. He described a development model with a 99‑year lease, shared HOA responsibilities for an on‑site pool and ongoing lease payments that could create a recurring revenue stream for the district. Shea estimated a potential combined revenue stream on the order of hundreds of thousands of dollars annually (he cited a figure of up to roughly $500,000), and suggested a portion of housing could be reserved or priced to support teachers.

Shea acknowledged major constraints: the property is not currently zoned for residential development at that density, the town's approvals and zoning changes would be required, and initial design and entitlement work could cost tens of thousands of dollars. He said this is preliminary and intended to open discussion, not a formal proposal before the board.

The board and members of the public asked questions about parcel ownership limits (the district clarified it owns from the concrete to the street and not adjacent town parkland), likely unit counts (Shea estimated an eventual 48–68 units depending on layout) and who would manage a pool and housing maintenance (Shea said a lease manager or private operator would run the pool and the HOA would handle maintenance).

The board did not take action on Shea’s concept; staff and board members said any formal project would require additional study, public hearings and town approvals.