LETTER: Lack of due diligence led to quick school sale for only $1

To Ozaukee Press:

Why should we sell a school building for $1?

The Port Washington-Saukville School Board’s decision to sell the Saukville Elementary School was without serious assessment and transparency.

In review of the process, the initial request for proposal (RFP) was issued by the school district on Jan. 6, 2026. It has been reported the only RFP submitted was from Goldfinger Properties on Jan. 13.

The RFP can be found in the School Board minutes for the March 23 meeting.

I was unable to find any other board meeting, committee review or public posting of the proposal presented at that meeting.

In summary, the developer’s motivation for the offer of a $1 purchase price is to offset the cost of converting the building to allow for “reasonably priced housing options” while retaining the aesthetics of the neighborhood. The RFP indicates the $1 purchase price will save the developer the $4.5 million it would take to build the shell of a new structure.

The developer also claims “the floodplain status of the property is problematic for redevelopment.” The sale saves the school district the $650,000 cost (keep an eye on that money) to raze the building and would add up to $4 million dollars of real estate value to the property tax roll, an estimated $50,000 per year in property tax levy.

The School Board did not ask key questions:

Should the school district be involved with providing housing development subsidies? What are the details of the flood plain designation and status of the property that makes development problematic? What is the typical timeline for responses to RFPs and why the expedited process for this project?

If the developer is willing to invest and profit in the development of the structure for residential use, why didn’t the school district refurbish the building in place of spending $40 million on the construction of a new school?

What mechanisms were used to broadcast the RFP? Was the School Board prepared to make this decision after a 12-slide, 10-minute presentation? Was the School Board motivated to make a quick sale so that they will have control over the $600,000 earmarked for demolition?

I commend the single School Board member who asked to delay the vote and then voted no, as she asked for more time to digest the information, which tells me this was the first presentation to the board. I recommend we seek a way to tap the brakes on this project until serious minded people provide all potential alternatives.

Richard Sternhagen

Port Washington