Lakota Local leaders present master facilities plan, outline $506M bond, $200M state support and $93.10 annual tax impact per $100,000

Superintendent Ashley Whiteley and Treasurer Adam Zent held a virtual public session explaining Lakota Local Schoolsmaster facilities plan and the bond question set for the Nov. 4 ballot. Whiteley said the plan aims to address aging facilities, ADA compliance, overcrowded classrooms and limited flexible learning spaces by reducing the district footprint from 21 buildings to 16 and constructing four new K5 schools.

"We are not here to persuade. We are merely here to inform," Whiteley said at the start of the presentation, describing community listening sessions that produced four priorities: safety and security (including ADA upgrades), flexible instructional spaces, fewer student transitions and smaller class sizes. She said many classrooms now seat 27 or more students and cited examples of teachers using stairwells and hallways for instruction.

Zent summarized the funding approach and timeline. He said the districts bond portion is currently estimated at $506,000,000 and that the OFCC expedited local partnership (ELP) program could return roughly $200,000,000 from the state later in the project, producing an all-in project figure in the neighborhood of $700,000,000. Zent described a three-phase schedule in which construction could begin in 2026, phase 1 (grades 612) would be ready for the 202829 school year and state reimbursement would arrive in the early-to-mid 2030s.

The presenters gave specific scope and fiscal figures: Whiteley said the plan would add about 1,169,546 square feet across the project, with roughly 222,000 additional square feet at each high school site and approximately 102,000 square feet for each new elementary school. On the ballot, Zent said the district certified a bond ask of 4.99 mills plus a 0.95-mill permanent-improvement levy; presenters showed a modeled taxpayer impact of $93.10 per $100,000 of auditor-appraised value in the scenario that reflects rollbacks and delayed collection, and also displayed the ballots headline figure of about $208 annually per $100,000 based on how the county certifies the ask.

Whiteley and Zent addressed board actions and taxpayer protections. They said the Board of Education adopted a June 30 resolution of intent that the district would not begin collection until calendar year 2029 and that the board planned a public vote on July 21 to formalize timing; the presenters described the resolution as a public, board-level action that could be rescinded only at a public meeting. Zent said the district models opportunities for refinancings and annual millage adjustments by the county auditor, and he said the bond issuance would be sized to meet debt obligations with a modest reserve.

During a lengthy Q&A, the presenters confirmed demolition costs are included in the bond and that OFCC participation covers demolition as part of the program. They said the maximum modeled bond term is about 37 years (depending on interest rates) and that interest costs and final debt-service tables will not be fixed until bonds are sold. On transportation, Whiteley said the current plan would eliminate high-school busing (busing would continue for K8) for logistical and cost reasons (she cited an annual cost of about $100,000 per bus) but added the district is studying whether full k12 busing could be feasible with a reduced footprint and reconfigured bell schedules.

Whiteley and Zent pointed audiences to the district master facilities page (lakotaonline.com) and an FAQ that contains detailed building-by-building breakdowns, minutes and independent financial reviews. They said the district will post session recordings and that staff will add requested details (for example, the precise square footage being retired) to the FAQ when available.

The presentation closed with Whiteley urging turnout without advocacy: "We cannot legally persuade you, but we do ask that you please vote on Nov. 4," she said, noting historically low turnout expectations and encouraging community review of materials before the election.

Provenance: The presentation and the Q&A referenced above were introduced early in the session and run through the end of the transcript; topic material appears throughout the transcript beginning with the presentation introduction and concluding with final remarks and the Q&A.