Lakota Local board delays levy vote, agrees not to place measure on May ballot
Summary
After extended debate over two master facilities options (C1 and D1) and state CFAP funding, the Lakota Local Board indicated it will not place a 30- or 37-year levy on the May ballot and instead pursue more community engagement and a November timeline; routine financial items and donations were approved.
The Lakota Local Board of Education spent the bulk of its meeting debating two master facilities options, state funding timing and whether to place a bond levy before voters in May or wait for a November election. After hearing a state funding update and extended trustee discussion about plan scope, enrollment, busing and voter turnout, the board signaled it would not pursue a May ballot placement.
Tom Fernandez, who briefed the board on the state program, told trustees "the state did call, and your number is up" and said early CFAP dollars could be available as early as July if the district commits to a plan. Fernandez said the state would fund the majority of the project but that a new master plan agreement requires the district to indicate whether it prefers option C1 or D1 so the state can finalize the agreement.
The discussion focused on two linked choices: which option to select (C1, a plan that impacts certain junior highs, versus D1, which affects different buildings) and whether to pursue voter approval in May or November. Several trustees warned May turnout is low and questioned whether the pared-back plans would persuade enough voters. "It's basically half the plan for about half the price, but the cost and taxes is gonna be much more than half the cost that we originally proposed," said one trustee who opposed a rushed May vote, noting outstanding questions about busing, class sizes and special programs.
Other trustees urged moving forward sooner, arguing inflation and construction costs make an earlier vote more fiscally prudent. One trustee highlighted turnout data and argued a November election would give the community a fuller opportunity to decide: May primary turnout is substantially lower than November general-election turnout, the trustee said.
District leaders and the treasurer reviewed operational implications. The treasurer said bond proceeds could be available if the district pursues May or November, but timing affects repayment schedules; Fernandez said a May timeline generally gives a bit more time for a three-year delivery cycle, while a November approval can still meet the district's construction schedule with a slightly compressed timeline. Doctor Whiteley described possible short-term operational responses — updated enrollment studies, creative sectioning, and selective program changes — but cautioned none would eliminate space constraints overnight.
After deliberation, the chair summarized the board's direction: "It looks like we will not be on the ballot in May." The board did not approve a motion to place the 30- or 37-year levies on the May ballot at this meeting and asked staff to continue planning, community engagement and to work with the state on the master plan agreement and CFAP timing.
Votes at a glance: the board approved the treasurer's recommendations (minutes and monthly financials) and accepted superintendent donations by roll call. Earlier in the meeting the board also voted to enter executive session to discuss personnel matters under Ohio Revised Code 121.22 and later voted to enter executive session to consult with legal counsel; no substantive public action was taken during those executive sessions.
