1. Purpose of School Siting
School Board Officials Claim:
“We don’t build schools for specific neighborhoods—we build them to serve the entire attendance zone. Riverdale, for example, serves Lehigh, North Fort Myers, and Buckingham.”
Subject Matter Experts’ Response:
This logic ignores localized impacts. Joel/Tuckahoe is not a central or accessible site for most of the East Zone. It’s rural, disconnected from public transit, and served by a dangerous two-lane road. The road is at a E level of service and with the additional traffic, even before the school opens, the LOS could drop into a failing status.
Community Oversight Concern:
The District committed in 2023 to keeping the public informed on this project and holding future meetings. None occurred. The community was promised transparency—but decisions are being made behind closed doors, without stakeholder input.
2. History and Justification of the Site
School Board Officials Claim:
“The property was purchased in 2007. Alva wanted a high school in 2017, but Gateway was chosen. This site has been on the radar for a long time.”
Subject Matter Experts’ Response:
That may be true, but public sentiment has shifted. In 2023, the public clearly opposed the project. Furthermore, the school district, in August of 2018 declared Joel and Tuckahoe not viable and voted to put the land up for sale. The Joel/David site should have been developed long ago. Instead, delays and inaction allowed the District to claim it’s too late to change course now.
“Basically, that’s our assessment; they are not viable properties,” said Marc Mora, executive director of operations for the school district. “Not that you couldn’t build a school on them. You could possibly do that, but they are not located in advantageous spots for us for transportation purposes, for development purposes.” – https://www.news-press.com/story/news/education/2018/08/29/lee-county-school-district-puts-land-up-sale/1133104002/
Community Oversight Concern:
In 2024, when I requested the environmental report for NNN, I was told I had to file a public records request—and then pay $21. This is public planning data and should be freely shared. The public shouldn’t have to pay to understand what’s being built in their community. Considering that this document was likely delivered to the school district in an electronic format transmitted and stored by computer,, charging for retrieval and production also potentially violates public records laws.
3. Capacity and Immediate Need
School Board Officials Claim:
“High schools in the East Zone are over capacity. Split classrooms and portable buildings are being used. A new school is urgently needed.”
Subject Matter Experts’ Response:
Growth is not the primary issue—student enrollment in Lee County has remained essentially flat since 2014. It’s redistribution and sprawl causing strain. If better planning redistributed capacity effectively, the pressure could be relieved without new construction at the most expensive and remote site.
In fact, in the most recent (2024 Concurrency Report – using LCSB FISH Data), the East district schools were not the most in need of relief. West 2 and 3 showcased 111% utilization, a full 8% greater than East.
Furthermore enrollment in the Lee County School District paints a different picture. The official state enrollment figures list the following:
- 2014-2015
- 88,349 students
- 2024-2025
- 89,053 students
A net difference of 704 students, 10 years difference….
4. Phase 1 Process and Timeline
School Board Officials Claim:
“Phase 1 started the two-year process for design, permitting, and studies. If Phase 2 is approved in October, construction could begin before year-end.”
Subject Matter Experts’ Response:
The District slow-walked viable alternatives like Joel/David for years. They’re only speeding up now because opposition is growing. And once again, no public meetings were held before Phase 1 was passed—despite earlier promises to do so. Furthermore in the 2022 Concurrency report, there was a surplus of 552 seats in East Zone High School with an expectation not to change for the 2023 year.
https://www.leegov.com/dcd/Documents/Studies_Reports/Concurrency/2022Concurrency.pdf
Community Oversight Concern:
At the June 3 board meeting, five of seven board members expressed concern about the lack of public communication. Staff promised private one-on-one briefings and said a workshop would be held if needed. No workshop was scheduled. The bond vote happened anyway despite at least one elected official stating they had no understanding of where the location was. This is not transparency—it’s performative engagement.
5. Joel/David Land Swap and Permitting
School Board Officials Claim:
“Joel/David had property complications. We had to negotiate a land swap with a condo association. Final approval is expected soon.”
Subject Matter Experts’ Response:
Those negotiations should’ve been finalized years ago. Permitting delays are being used as a follow-on excuse, but federal regulations are being relaxed, and there are no wetlands or endangered species on site. The sewer and water permits for Joel/Tuckahoe haven’t even been submitted yet as of board briefing on 07/29/2025. Land swaps are far less cumbersome and time consuming than building 7+ miles of water and wastewater through rural Lee County.
Community Oversight Concern:
If the District claims it would take two extra years to build at Joel/David, where is the permitting timeline? Where is the analysis comparing costs and timelines? There is no clear data showing that it would actually cost $200 million more—just speculation. In fact, if the district were to advance the Joel/David site as the next high school location, the district could stand to save the costs and time of deploying water and wastewater connections to a the Joel/Tuckahoe site.
6. Financial Considerations
School Board Officials Claim:
“The new high school will cost $162 million. If we delay or relocate, inflation and expanded capacity needs could push the cost to $200 million.”
Subject Matter Experts’ Response:
There’s no fiscal transparency. Joel/David would likely cost $50 million less due to the presence of existing infrastructure. A delay or reallocation could actually save taxpayers money. $162 million is only the Phase 2, the school Phase 1 was already approximately 7 million, so the costs of construction are being obscured to lessen the optics behind the cost overruns already occurring from the initial $140 million estimate.
Community Oversight Concern:
Where is the detailed fiscal analysis? What is the breakdown comparing sites? The District continues to assert cost differences and use those differences to say “trust us” without providing the numbers to back them up and the transparent approach that was promised when Phase 1 was voted on and initiated.
7. Middle School Planning
School Board Officials Claim:
“The Joel/Tuckahoe site is master-planned for a future middle school.”
Subject Matter Experts’ Response:
Yes the site was designated for both a high school and a middle school, There are multiple middle schools being planned. Using a potential future need to justify urgent action now is misleading, especially considering the district enrollment numbers over the past 10 years and the most recent FISH data.
8. Topic: Public Engagement and Access to Information
School Board Officials Claim: No Response
Community Oversight Concern:
Advisory committees related to capital planning have been eliminated. Public access to construction, fiscal, and environmental planning information has been shut down. Even project consultants have been instructed not to speak with the public directly.
We were told all inquiries had to go through the media office and were repeatedly stonewalled—even after submitting formal public records requests. These barriers discourage civic engagement and erode public trust.
9. Topic: Transportation and Infrastructure Concerns
School Board Officials Claim: No Response
Subject Matter Experts’ Response:
The Tuckahoe/Joel site is surrounded by inadequate roadways. That two-lane stretch cannot safely handle traffic for 2,000 students, staff, and families. There are no current plans to widen it. This site raises severe safety concerns and flies in the face of the district’s move towards proximity schools where it spent millions of tax payer dollars on designing an approach, only to suggest a clear deviation.
The District has had a decades-long inability to provide consistent, adequate school transportation. This inability to fix or solve the issue led to the creation of proximity zones to introduce greater efficiency in the transportation assets. Building a school in an area far from where the students live complicates this transportation issue, and we continue the now familiar cycle of “we need to do it differently, ok we did now lets do it the same way we always did!”
10. Topic: Broader Motives and Speculative Development
School Board Officials Claim: No Response
Subject Matter Experts’ Response:
The real driver may be speculative growth along SR 80 and SR 82 toward Immokalee and Hendry County. By placing the school near the reservoir, the District may be pre-positioning public infrastructure to benefit future private developments—without admitting it.
Community Oversight Concern:
This pattern—pushing milestones forward with no public engagement, citing inflated costs without analysis, and positioning for future growth—suggests this may be less about students and more about developers.
11. Topic: Past Adaptability and Missed Opportunities
School Board Officials Claim: No Response
Subject Matter Experts’ Response:
In the 2000s, the District solved overcrowding by repurposing commercial buildings like old commercial structures – example Rayma C Page.. It wasn’t glamorous, but it was cost-effective. We need that kind of adaptive thinking again—not a bloated $162 million build on a dangerous road.
The move to renovate commercial properties comes as the county seeks standardize all future school construction. School board members agreed in October to spend an extra $1.25 million to produce standardized blueprints to avoid design costs every time a new school has to built.
“Although they might not look alike on the curbside, the inside will be the same,” Superintendent James Browder said. “A classroom is a classroom, no matter if we mold it into a large building.”
12. Final Reflections
School Board Official:
“This is what’s best for students. We can’t delay.”
Subject Matter Experts’ Response:
Rushing forward with the wrong project is not student-centered. It’s short-sighted, expensive, dangerous, and fiscally irresponsible. A better plan is still possible—but only if the District opens the process back up to the public.
13. Expert Recommendation: Land Swap and Better Site Placement
Community Oversight Concern:
According to the Lee County Property Appraiser’s Office, the most responsible course of action is to execute a land swap—relocating the Joel/Tuckahoe plan toward SR 31, where it better aligns with future infrastructure, and immediately build the new high school at Joel and David, and consider building it up, in a multi level fashion. This would alleviate current overcrowding at Lehigh Senior High, Gateway High, and East Lee County High, all of which are carrying excess burdens now. Riverdale High is NOT overcrowded and is only at 84% of FISH capacity according to the 2024 assessment.
This recommendation supports both the short-term urgency of relieving overcrowding and the long-term planning needs of the region. The District already owns both sites. There is no valid reason—logistically, financially, or educationally—not to implement this smarter and safer approach.
