✔ What Is the Vision Behind the Bexley Facilities Project?

The Bexley Facilities Project is a long-range, three-phase plan designed to ensure Bexley remains a top-performing school district for the next 100 years. Developed with extensive community input, the plan balances educational needs, necessary facility repairs, and fiscal responsibility.

Our goal is to modernize learning environments, improve aging infrastructure, and make the best possible use of Bexley’s limited footprint while continuing to deliver the high-quality education our community expects.

---

✔ Why Is Bexley Addressing Facilities Now?

Our school buildings are, on average, 85 years old. While they have been well maintained, many now require major repairs to critical systems, including HVAC, roofs, and boilers.

Education has changed since our buildings were constructed and updated over the years. Today’s students need access to collaborative learning spaces, STEM environments, and technology-rich classrooms, spaces our buildings were not originally designed to support. 

We also have highly congested areas within the Cassingham Complex, complicated by having one cafeteria for three schools. That requires elementary students to eat lunch at the same time high school students have lunch. Middle school students eat later after the high school students and while elementary students are finishing their lunchtime. This results in less cafeteria space for high school students. While some high school students find space in the cafeteria to eat, a large number of students eat while sitting on the floor throughout the high school’s second floor.  

Addressing education, structural, and operational needs at once is both mission-driven and fiscally responsible.

---

✔ Is There a Consequence if Nothing Is Done to Upgrade Bexley School Buildings?

There is no zero-cost option. This is a highly important fact regarding our buildings.

Doing nothing is not free. When something breaks, we have to fix it. While the district’s General Fund can cover some repairs, those costs will begin to threaten day-to-day learning operations over time and could expedite the need for an operating levy. Deferred maintenance only becomes more expensive as inefficiencies compound, and every year we wait, the cost and disruption continue to grow.

For example, essential repairs to our facilities within the next five years are expected to cost nearly $22 million. This was determined during a Physical Adequacy Report completed in 2024 by local architectural and construction experts. The report also determined that essential repairs needed within 15 years could total more than $146 million.

---

✔ Why Aren’t All Building Needs Being Addressed in Phase I?

At the end of our two-year facilities-planning process when the needs of all buildings in the Bexley City School district were assessed and documented, cost estimates at the time determined a “total fix” would cost more than $300 million. This is clearly a hefty price tag that could not be done at once.

Members of the Board of Education made a conscious decision to keep any potential Phase I project to under $120 million. With that direction, the combined Facilities and Finance Advisory Committee made a recommendation under that cost directive that would provide the greatest impact and help to solve the most difficult challenges experienced in our schools today. District leaders concurred with the combined committee’s proposal and made the Phase I recommendation to the Board.

✔ What Does Phase I of the Plan Include?

Phase I focuses on the most urgent needs across the district and totals approximately $115 million. It includes:

• Construction of a new, self-contained middle school
• Essential facility repairs across all buildings (HVAC, roofing, boilers)
• Stadium safety improvement and athletic support space upgrades focused on longevity, not expansion
• Turf installation at Maryland and Montrose elementary schools

This phase addresses congestion at both the middle and high schools, safety, and long-term maintenance costs while creating learning environments to better serve students today and in the future.

---

✔ What Stadium Work Is Being Proposed?

Stadium improvements are focused on safety, basic upgrades, and extending the life of a heavily used facility. One of the core areas of improvement is the athletic locker rooms under the bleachers, which are currently in varying stages of disrepair and are not used by athletic teams. The current stadium locker rooms were not built for the number of teams or student athletes we have today. 

---

✔ What Capital Expenditures Are Included?

Phase 1 also addresses essential replacements and upgrades district-wide with our building systems and infrastructure and would be prioritized among all schools. These repairs and upgrades include boilers, windows, roofing, fire alarms, generators, drainage, and aging HVAC systems. These are not cosmetic improvements; they are about safety, reliability, and keeping our schools operational. 

---

✔ How Do Turf Fields Help Students

We know turf is also a topic people have strong feelings about. Turf has already been part of our campus at Cassingham for over 20 years, and this proposal is about safe, reliable access in a high use district where grass fields don't have enough space or recovery time.

Turf will provide access during recess to our students after rainy or snowy days at all three campuses.

Currently, and we've talked about this in previous meetings, after inclement weather, students can play on the field at Cassingham while Montrose and Maryland children are limited to the pavement because the grass is too muddy and wet.

Our staff have informed us that we see more injuries reported when students are limited to the blacktop surfaces, as kids want to still run and play games, even if they can't be on the fields.

Additionally, if a new middle school is built at the Cassingham Complex, the softball practice space would need to be moved to our other two elementary locations. Turf at Maryland and Montrose replaces that lost athletic capacity and protects field access for our athletes. Turf access also would support our physical education students, band, and the city’s recreation programs, especially since our new property on Cassady is not yet developed and is not part of Phase 1.

To be clear, turf solves an essential problem for our schools, which is access. A decision not to include turf will show up in students' opportunities, fewer practice, and activity days, more cancellations and less equitable access for the many students who rely on these spaces to practice, compete, and perform. And the impact is not small.

We offer 27 sports supporting 78 athletic teams and over 750 student athletes, plus our marching band. Right now, many athletes and band members practice at Cassingham, but if middle school development moves forward, some of those teams will need to shift practice and competition to Maryland and Montrose, which means those fields will see significantly more wear and demand. Turfing these areas will improve our ability to hold practices and competitions according to the current standards and expectations of our schools and community. Without it, students will be impacted through more lost days and more disruptions.

If we were able to proceed with turf, we are committed to using high-quality materials and best practices.

✔ Why Is a New Middle School the Centerpiece of Phase I?

Approximately 71% of the Phase I scope and budget is dedicated to constructing a new middle school because it provides the greatest educational and operational benefit to the district.

A new middle school would:

• Create modern, collaborative, and STEM-ready learning spaces
• Address highly congested space at the Cassingham Complex
• Provide a self-contained middle school with its own gym and cafeteria 
• Maintain walkable, one-campus middle and high school experience 
• Open future renovation possibilities across the district 

All Bexley students attend Bexley Middle School, making this single investment the most valuable upgrade we can make.

Building a new middle school and moving more than 600 students out of the Cassingham Complex to the new school also creates positive ripple effects and gives the district options it doesn’t currently have.

Having another cafeteria in a new middle school will be one of the largest benefits of this plan. Today, we have high school students literally eating lunch next to Cassingham Elementary students because our one cafeteria must provide lunch to more than 1,800 students within a short time period. This causes our high school lunch period to align with our elementary lunch period. Our middle school lunch period follows after both the high school and elementary students are finished.

In addition, because we do not have enough seating or table space in the cafeteria, a considerable number of our high school students eat on the floors in the second floor of the high school. The other option is to leave the campus during the high school lunch period, which many students do.

---

✔ Where Would the New Middle School Be Built, and Why?

The proposed location is the current softball field at the Cassingham Complex. Building there allows construction to occur more efficiently while minimizing disruption to teaching and learning taking place within the three schools in the Complex.

Design and exact specifications for the building and its impact on the grounds have not been decided. This design process costs about 10% of the total project and would only move forward once financing has been secured. 

---

✔ Why Can You Not Design the New Middle School so Voters Can See What the New Middle School Would Look Like and Include?

It is not fiscally prudent, nor responsible, to spend millions of dollars on a building design that voters may reject at the ballot. As stated before, the design phase of building a new middle school is about 10% of the project’s cost, which would equal $7-9 million. We cannot, in good conscience, proceed with this amount of money for building design until we have voter approval to build a new one.

---

✔ Is Increased Enrollment Driving the Plan for a New Middle School?

No, enrollment is not the driving factor for a new middle school. 

All three schools sharing the Cassingham Complex (Cassingham Elementary, Bexley Middle School, and Bexley High School) are highly congested in under-sized spaces, and less-than-ideal solutions have been put in place to manage sharing the limited space. 

For example, the cafeteria is not adequate to serve the number of students at the facility. Because of this, students are assigned early and late lunch times, many students walk home for lunch, others eat in the hallways and on the floor, and scheduling requires overlapping times in the cafeteria (e.g., kindergarten students eating in the space at the same time as upperclassmen). 

A new middle school with its own cafeteria, for example, would improve operational efficiency that the district currently lacks. With the second cafeteria serving middle school students, the current Cassingham cafeteria could better accommodate elementary and high school students during separate lunch periods, within lunch times that fit each level. 

We also know that high-quality facilities play a critical role in recruiting and retaining exceptional educators in the Central Ohio region, which, in turn, directly impacts student outcomes. 

Our facilities could become an issue with members of our exceptional faculty moving elsewhere because of our building situations. Currently, we have multiple teachers sharing classrooms in some of our schools. In other buildings, some teachers use carts to move their teaching materials from classroom to classroom to teach their students because they do not have dedicated room space.

A new middle school would be built with flexibility in mind in order to accommodate future enrollment fluctuations and teaching and learning needs.

---

✔ Is This Approach to Constructing a New Building Better and More Cost-Effective in the Long Run?

Yes. As buildings age, maintenance and repair costs increase. Compared to major renovations or additions, constructing a new building is a more efficient and cost-effective solution to reduce congestion and provide students with modern facilities that meet today’s teaching and learning needs. 

It is important to note, though, that the district will not achieve a cost savings until the time when part or all of the current middle school space is demolished.

✔ How Much Will Phase I of the Facilities Plan Cost?

The estimated cost of Phase I is approximately $115 million. This includes construction of a new middle school, essential facility repairs across the district, stadium improvements, and turf at Maryland and Montrose elementary schools.

---

✔ How Would the Project Be Funded?

No final funding decisions have been made. One option under consideration is a hybrid funding approach that combines a property tax levy and an income tax levy.

A potential scenario being considered includes:

• 2.0 mills property tax (generating approximately $28.5 million)
• 0.5% income tax (generating approximately $85 million)

This approach spreads the cost across a balance of property owners and income earners, while also providing stability for the district.

It's important to note that our current bond of 2.05 mills expires in 2027, which would help offset the property tax portion of the impact.

---

✔ What Would This Mean for Individual Households?

Any estimates shared at this stage are examples only, not final amounts.

Using a hypothetical example:

• A $100,000 home would pay approximately $70 per year from the property tax portion (2.0 mills)
   
• A household with $100,000 in Modified Adjusted Gross Income (MAGI) would pay approximately $500 per year from the income tax portion (0.5%)

A final determination of the hybrid funding formula is dependent upon review and verification by the Ohio Department of Taxation and the Franklin County Auditor. We expect to have this final information between May and July.

Also, the district’s current bond of 2.05 mills expires in 2027, helping to offset some of the property tax portion.

Important Note: Ohio law excludes Social Security benefits from being subject to local school income taxes

---

✔ Why Consider a Hybrid Funding Approach?

A hybrid approach:

• Balances the impact across homeowners and income earners
• Provides a more equitable funding structure for residents
• Maintains flexibility for the district as financial conditions evolve

The Board of Education will evaluate funding options carefully before making its final decision.

---

✔ Is Social Security Income Taxed as Part of a School Income Tax?

No. Ohio law excludes Social Security benefits from being subject to local school income taxes

---

✔ Has the District Decided on a Final Funding Plan?

A final determination of the hybrid funding formula is dependent upon verification by the Ohio Department of Taxation and the Franklin County Auditor. We expect to have this final information between May and July.

 

✔ What Happens if the Ballot Issue Doesn’t Pass in November?

Bexley Schools still will have facilities improvement needs if the ballot issue does not pass in November 2026. Specifically, millions of dollars of capital improvements will be needed throughout the district and in each of our buildings within the next 5 years to keep them operational and safe for students and staff. The sum of these capital improvement costs is greater than what the district’s General Fund can support.

By asking for a ballot issue to support the funding of Phase I, we are trying to protect the funds now dedicated to teachers and students. With staff salaries and benefits making up 77% of our General Fund expenditures, we would need to lower spending directed to the education of our students if we have to divert considerable funds toward necessary facility repairs.

---

✔ What Is the Timeframe for a New Middle School if the Ballot Issue Passes in November?

This summer, prior to the November levy vote, we will do some preliminary work to hire an architectural design firm and a construction manager, with both contracts explicit that the work is contingent upon the community approving the November 2026 ballot issue. If Bexley voters pass a ballot issue in November, we plan to administer the following timeline. Overall, we hope to administer the following timeline leading up to the opening of a new middle school in 2030.

Summer 2026

1. Issue RFQ for architects for new middle school design in order to secure a firm, with a contingency of the ballot issue passing;
2. Issue RFP for the CMR (construction manager) following the same timeline and contingency as the architect

Mid-November 2026 & Throughout 2027

3. Begin a 3-month period of school and community focus groups to discuss design, leading into a building design phase that will likely last approximately 12 months

January/February 2028

4. Bid construction project 

Summer 2028

5. Groundbreaking for new middle school

Fall 2030

6. Grand opening of new Bexley Middle School

---

✔ How Long Could the Middle School Construction Last, and When Would Public Spaces Be Restored?

Construction timelines will be shared in more detail as planning progresses after the community approves the plan, though our ideal timeline would be to break ground on a new middle school in the Summer of 2028, with a grand opening of the new Bexley Middle School in the Fall of 2030. We will work with the construction manager to carefully sequence the building construction phases to minimize disruption to the schools and surrounding residents. The recommendation from our combined facilities and finance team is to begin Phase II soon after the Phase I project is complete. A recommendation for Phase II could include demolishing the current middle school to restore the school’s green/public play space.

---

✔ What Comes Next After Phase I?

Phase I is the first step in a three-phase plan. While it is too early to set firm timelines for Phases II and III, the district is committed to transparency and will engage the community before moving forward with any additional phases.

Future phases could include:

• Additional capital expenditure system upgrades prioritized across the district
• Updates to Bexley High School to modernize learning spaces, or a possibly construct a new high school building 
• Updates and possible additions of new space to all three elementary schools
• Use of the current middle school space as “swing space” during future upgrades to other buildings
• Removal or partial removal of the existing middle school structure to create more green space in Central Bexley
• Potential development of athletic and outdoor learning opportunities on the Cassady Avenue land

  ---

✔ What Could the District Do with Vacant Space in the Cassingham Complex if Middle School Students Are Able to Move to a New School?

The district could:

• Reassign vacant middle school space to Bexley High School and Cassingham Elementary
• Save some of the current middle school space to be used as “swing space” during future upgrades to other buildings
•  Reassign targeted vacant space to Bexley High School and Cassingham Elementary AND do a targeted demolition of some vacant middle school space to create additional play space/green space on the Cassingham Complex
•  Demolish the vacant middle school space to create additional play space/green space on the Cassingham Complex.

These options would need to be considered after Phase I is completed.

 

✔ Why Include Turf Fields in the Project?

Bexley City Schools has maintained turf at the Cassingham Complex for more than 20 years to improve access and ensure uninterrupted play time for our students and student-athletes. Turf was first added to the varsity field at Carlton Smith Field and added to the northeast corner of the Cassingham Complex seven years later when a softball field and additional turf space were added to support more athletic teams and the marching band.

Expanding turf to the Montrose and Maryland fields accounts for only about 4.5% of the total project cost, yet it provides significant benefits.

With limited field space, turf allows for:

• Reliable access even after rain for recess and practice use
• Consistent use across sports, marching band, and outdoor activities
• Reduced cancellations and scheduling conflicts

Natural grass fields at elementary schools are heavily used and frequently closed due to weather, limiting recess, PE, and school programming. 

Turf is about access and durability—fewer cancellations, more consistent use in wet conditions, and a field that can handle daily demand from recess and PE to the needs of our band, as well as our 27 sports, 78 teams, and 750+ student-athletes.

---

✔ Are Health and Environmental Concerns about Turf Being Considered?

Yes. The health and safety of our students are always the district’s first consideration in any plan or recommendation.

Turf, when sourced, installed, and managed responsibly, is widely used in millions of parks, schools, and play spaces nationwide and is considered safe for student use. No major public health organizations have advised against the use of modern turf systems in school settings.

If the plan is approved, the district is committed to responsibly sourcing materials, following safety standards, and properly installing and maintaining high-quality turf to ensure student and community safety, just as it has at the Cassingham site over the past 20 years. 

---

✔ Why Not Keep All Fields as Natural Grass?

Bexley City Schools currently has 78 athletic teams but owns only one regulation field and one softball diamond (which is set to become the new middle school site), along with two softball fields at the other elementary buildings. To support our student-athletes and marching band, who regularly utilize that space, a replacement turf field is recommended. 

Turf significantly improves access even in inclement weather, does not require field recovery time, and has less maintenance needs and costs. With turf, we can continue to allow open community use of our fields; because of the needs associated with natural grass, including recovery time, we could need to limit community use of our fields.

Additionally, students at both Maryland and Montrose Elementaries would benefit from increased access for play space during recess like the Cassingham Elementary students have enjoyed for the last 10 years. After rain or snow in the Winter and Spring seasons, it is common for Maryland Montrose students to be limited to asphalt play areas during recess because their fields are too wet and muddy. At Cassingham during the same time, students have regular play time, taking advantage of the turf field that dries quickly.

 

✔ What Happens to Green Space and Open Play Areas?

Bexley City Schools will continue to offer the community access to the Cassingham playground and the improved green spaces at Maryland and Montrose elementary schools, and we continue to investigate how to maximize our land resources.

During the school day, Cassingham students will have access to the varsity field, giving students approximately 31,000 additional square feet of usable green space compared to today.

Additionally, architects have shared options for demolition of the existing middle school structure in a future phase to create additional green space at the Cassingham location in Central Bexley.

The district respects and values our community’s desire for open green space for our students and residents and will continue to pursue solutions that maximize green space.

We acknowledge the current challenge of balancing our urgent need for modernized learning environments with the limited footprint available in Central Bexley. Please be assured that our ongoing planning will continue to prioritize the availability of outdoor space for our students. We remain committed to maximizing these areas to continue supporting our children’s physical and emotional well-being.

 

What Other Options Were Considered?

Our facilities planning process was community-driven. We received hundreds of data points and comments that were considered and dozens of community members who participated in the work.

At the beginning of our facilities-planning process, there was discussion regarding what is “sacred” among our current buildings and land. A lot of that feedback indicated that preserving the facades of Bexley High School and Cassingham Elementary were desired, as was the preservation of the Cassingham clock tower.

Community participants also provided feedback on the following:

• Creating three grade-level elementary buildings (PreK - 1st; 2nd & 3rd; and 4th & 5th)
• Dividing all elementary students between Maryland and Montrose locations, to free up space on the Cassingham Complex to be used by the high school and middle school

These conversations did not go far, as community feedback was strong that families want to maintain three walkable, neighborhood elementary schools.

Remodeling and adding space at the Cassingham Complex was considered the leading option until our community members and building-team members learned that this process could take several years. It was determined that this was not a viable option and would be detrimental to our students’ learning.

Portable classrooms during a remodeling also were considered, but community input showed this was not a preferred option, especially since students could have been in small, portable classrooms for several years.

As explained in these Frequently Asked Questions, the district also considered whether it could “build up,” by adding additional floors to the Cassingham Complex and met with Capital University leaders to determine whether a building and/or vacant land was available. Neither option was practical or affordable.

---

✔ Why Is the District Not Just Adding Additional Floors to the Current Cassingham Complex?

“Going vertical” was considered during the Facilities Planning phase and a Vertical Expansion Feasibility Study by Korda/Nemeth Engineering was completed in May 2024. The purpose of this report was to analyze and offer an objective review regarding the structural feasibility of vertical expansion of the Cassingham Complex. The engineering firm evaluated the 1953 Cassingham Addition; 1970 Junior and Senior High Addition; 1992 High and Middle Science Addition; 1993 Multi-Purpose Media Addition; and 2001 Cassingham Addition.

The study found that none of the areas of study were designed to support future vertical expansion, except for two smaller areas. The report stated that vertical expansion overall was “impractical and cost prohibitive” but not impossible. The engineering firm said vertical expansion “would require a complete retrofit of roof structure, vertical structure, and foundations that would be expensive and disruptive to the spaces below.”

The following is the report’s Executive Summary: 

“The Bexley Cassingham Complex is a compilation of various construction projects over its lifetime. The original Junior High and Senior High structures were once separate buildings that have been connected with additions through many years of construction projects. Our study focused on the structural potential for vertical expansion above a number of these additions, specifically the 1953, 1970, 1992, 1993, & 2001 additions. 

None of the areas within the limits of our study were specifically designed to accommodate vertical expansion. Some areas have light steel framed roofs and many of the areas have sloped roofs. The sloping configuration is not conducive to be used as a floor. Furthermore, the existing roof structure and most foundations do not have capacity to support the proposed additional floor loading without remediation. There was clearly no consideration for future expansion at the time these structures were originally designed.   

Korda has identified all areas as impractical and cost prohibitive to expand vertically except for portions of the 1953 addition. An expansion of the two-story Classroom Wing is challenging but it is plausible and a second-floor addition is feasible at the low roof area to the south of the 1953 addition. The term impractical and cost prohibitive does not mean that it is impossible to expand areas vertically, but it would require a complete retrofit of roof structure, vertical structure, and foundations that would be expensive and disruptive to the spaces below.” (May 10, 2024) 

---

✔ Why Isn’t the District Considering Working with Capital University to House or Build a New Middle School?

District officials consulted with Capital University leaders ahead of finalizing the board-approved facilities plan, inquiring whether any current university buildings and/or land areas were available for purchase by Bexley Schools. One unused building and a plot of sloped land was offered by university officials. Both were determined to be unsuitable for the schools’ needs and unaffordable for the district to purchase. Further, we determined it was not in middle-school students’ best interests to go to school and learn within a college environment.

---

✔ Why Not Use Portable Classrooms (Pods) During Renovation of the Middle School, rather than Building a New Building?

Utilizing portable classrooms during a remodeling of Cassingham Complex space was discussed during the facilities-planning process. However, this option was not favored by the community.

---

✔ Why Not Move Central Office Staff Members and Administrators Out of the Cassingham Complex to Free Up Space for Learning?

We have discussed moving Central Office staff and administrators from the Complex and that option is still being considered. We believe, though, that moving Central Office staff and all district administrators will not add enough space to help alleviate the highly congested areas of the building.

✔ How Has Community Input Shaped This Plan?

This work is a direct outcome of the district’s Strategic Plan, which was shaped by the involvement and input of hundreds of Bexley residents. It reflects extensive community feedback, expert analysis, and months of study. Our formal District Facilities Plan also is the work of our community, with dozens of community members participating in our community engagement sessions and on our building teams. Members of our faculty, staff, students, and alumni also provided input into this process and our final plan.

---

✔ How Can I Ask Questions or Learn More?

We want to hear from you. If you have a question or want more information, please reach out.

Email us at: facilities@bexley.us

All messages will receive a prompt response from a district administrator.