Momentum continues to build around the long-awaited rebuild of Simon Sanchez High School, as lawmakers gathered last week to consider a measure that would add flexibility to the project’s pre-development stage.

A public hearing was held on Friday on Senator Chris Duenas’ Bill 235-38. The measure seeking to amend a section of existing law tied to a $16.3 million appropriation from the projected unobligated Fiscal Year 2025 General Fund balance. The change would allow the funds to be used not only for developer lease-back payments, but also for pre-development costs.

Lawmakers saying the amendment would give the Department of Public Works and the Guam Economic Development Authority clearer authority to carry out authorized spending, helping eliminate legal uncertainty.

GEDA CEO and administrator Christina Garcia testifying in support of the bill, saying, “By providing the funding in the current fiscal year, the government will be able to begin pre-development tasks ahead of the actual project financing. Pre-development tasks may include, but is not limited to, demolition, clearing, and staging ahead of the actual school construction.”

Garcia adding that the measure would also help mitigate rising construction costs.

Also voicing support was former GEDA administrator Henry Taitano, who offered suggested amendments to the bill. “I listed some rationale for this, but some of these methods are actually used for a more recent school that was built–iLearn Charter school, for example, using the CDFI and the CDE programs that the government has. And that’s really the goal, is to provide all the options for the developer to have in the event to get whatever the best rates are and potential grants and subsidies that are out there as well," he shared.

Garcia refraining from commenting, in an effort to ensure she wasn’t speaking on anything tied to the project’s ongoing protest.

As KUAM News previously reported, demolition and a groundbreaking ceremony were halted in November after a protest was filed.  The protestor citing issues of timeliness or completeness of the procurement record.  This as DPW has since stated it is confident in the record produced and will address any questions regarding specific documents.