Picture this: A once-bustling elementary school, now standing empty and echoing with memories of chalkboards and recess bells, is on the verge of a dramatic rebirth as affordable homes for hardworking families. It's a story of adaptation in a world where housing shortages are hitting hard – but here's where it gets controversial, as not everyone sees this as progress. Let's dive into the details of how the Windsor Unified School District is paving the way for this big change, and explore why it might spark heated debates.
The former Windsor Creek Elementary School campus, a sprawling 11.5-acre plot that closed its doors in 2019 because of dwindling student numbers, has just been officially labeled as surplus land by the district's board of trustees. This step is crucial for local governments aiming to sell off property they no longer need for educational purposes, essentially freeing it up for new uses. In this case, the focus is shifting from classrooms to community housing, which could help alleviate the region's tight supply of affordable rentals for essential workers like teachers and service providers.
At the heart of this transformation are exclusive talks between the school district and Gallaher Community Housing, a nonprofit developer founded in 2023 by Sonoma County expert Bill Gallaher. Their vision? Up to 368 housing units, blending studios, one- and two-bedroom apartments, and even some single-family homes, all available at rents lower than what the market typically demands. To put this in perspective, imagine a neighborhood where educators and other locals can finally afford a comfortable place to live without stretching their budgets – a real game-changer for community stability. The project isn't just about buildings; it also promises green spaces like parks, walking trails, and fitness areas, making it a holistic upgrade for the area.
And this is the part most people miss: To qualify for these homes, renters must earn no more than 80% of the local median income, which is a way to ensure the units go to those who truly need financial relief. For beginners navigating housing policy, this means targeting moderate-income households – think nurses, teachers, or retail workers – rather than leaving openings for higher earners.
Board President Stephanie Ahmad, who sparked interest in this idea seven years ago, emphasized the careful deliberation involved. 'We've been really thoughtful about it and we've weighed a lot of options,' she explained, highlighting the district's commitment to making informed choices. The unanimous 6-0 vote came late – after midnight – at the end of a lengthy December 18 meeting, the district's final gathering for the year. With only a handful of attendees left by then, the atmosphere was subdued, but not without its critics.
One vocal opponent, Kevin Scanlon, a longtime Windsor resident of 28 years, didn't hold back. He blasted the board for what he perceives as prioritizing profit over education. 'Your job is to educate our children, not be landowners,' he declared. 'You have just put the children on the back burner so the builder can line the district’s pockets and the builder’s pockets.' It's a viewpoint that underscores a deeper tension: Is repurposing school sites for housing a pragmatic solution to affordability crises, or does it sideline future generations by diminishing educational resources?
The site, last valued at $4.95 million in a 2020 appraisal, currently serves as a makeshift hub for a temporary can recycling center run by United Cerebral Palsy of the North Bay. This setup provides a quick environmental win, turning discarded cans into cash and reducing waste, but it's temporary as plans evolve.
By designating the land as surplus, the district opens the door for other public entities – like the town of Windsor, Sonoma County, or even the California Department of Housing and Community Development – to step in with their own proposals. Under state regulations, these groups have a 60-day window to submit ideas, followed by a 90-day negotiation period if the district shows interest. Chief Business Officer Austin Matzaganian described it as an exploratory phase: 'We’re just seeing what’s out there.'
Windsor Unified's leaders are upfront about their preference: developing housing primarily for district staff, including teachers, alongside others seeking budget-friendly rentals. Matzaganian shared how rewarding the discussions with Gallaher have been, noting the developer's innovative approach to the space. Interestingly, Gallaher wasn't the district's initial pick; earlier contenders were deemed too unpopular with locals. 'We were actually in before with a couple of different developers, but as we were looking at options, there were several that we thought our community would hate. I think that’s worth noting,' Matzaganian added, suggesting a thoughtful vetting process to avoid backlash.
If these negotiations lead to a sale, the Windsor Creek site would mark Gallaher Community Housing's second project in the vicinity – just a half-mile from their ongoing Cora Creek Apartments development, a 106-unit complex that broke ground in November 2024 at 8975 Conde Lane. This clustering could create a mini-neighborhood of affordable options, but it also raises questions about concentrated development and its impact on local traffic or community dynamics.
Financing the vision falls largely on Gallaher, who would handle buying the land, demolishing the old school building, and covering remediation costs. They'd also tackle zoning adjustments and a required California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review – a process that evaluates potential environmental impacts, ensuring projects like this don't harm air, water, or wildlife. Think of CEQA as a thorough environmental checklist, mandatory for major developments to promote sustainability. The district chips in up to $500,000 for CEQA compliance, while the rest comes from the developer. Trustee Rich Carnation, a founding director of Gallaher, wisely recused himself from the December discussion to avoid conflicts of interest.
But here's where it gets really interesting – and potentially divisive: Is turning shuttered schools into housing a clever reuse of assets, or a slippery slope that erodes educational infrastructure? Critics like Scanlon argue it distracts from core missions, while proponents see it as a lifeline for affordable living. What about you? Do you think repurposing old school sites for housing is a bold, community-focused idea, or does it risk prioritizing profits over kids? Could this set a precedent for other districts facing enrollment drops? Share your take in the comments – we'd love to hear if you agree, disagree, or have your own spin on it!
Amie Windsor is the Community Journalism Team Lead with The Press Democrat. She can be reached at amie.windsor@pressdemocrat.com or 707-521-5218.
