In Depth Answers to Your Questions

✔ What Is This Ballot Issue For?

Issue 5, the Nov. 3, 2026, ballot issue, asks Bexley voters to approve funding for Phase I of Bexley Schools’ district facilities plan. Phase I is estimated to cost approximately $115 million and focuses on constructing a new middle school, along with addressing urgent facility repairs and improvements across the district.

---

✔ What Is Included in Phase I?
Phase I includes four components:

• Construction of a new middle school ($82 million)
• Essential facility repairs and system upgrades across the district ($24 million) 
• Surface improvements to Maryland and Montrose elementary school fields (will not include synthetic turf) ($5 million)
• Stadium improvements and maintenance ($4 million)

Note: Funds from any project that is under budget are recommended to go to additional facility repairs.

✔ 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 improvements to Maryland and Montrose play fields.

---

✔ How Would the Project Be Funded?

Phase I would be funded by a combination of a 0.5% traditional school district income tax and a 2.05-mill property tax. 

The 2.05 mills of property tax is a no-new-tax-rate request, because current bond payments totalling 2.05 mills are scheduled to expire in 2027, thus offsetting part of the property tax portion.

• 2.05 mills property tax would generate approximately $29.25 million
• 0.5% income tax would generate 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 most of the property tax portion of the impact, essentially resulting in the same tax rate Bexley property owners are paying today.

---

✔ What Is Meant by a “No-New-Tax-Rate” Property Tax? 

The property tax rate of the Phase I request is the same tax rate of Bexley Schools’ current bond that is due to expire in 2027. Specifically, 2.05 mills of property tax from the 2000 facilities levy will expire in 2027, which would help offset the 2.05 mills of property tax in the Phase I ballot request. This results in the same tax rate Bexley property owners are paying today.

---

✔ What Does This Mean for Individual Households?

Using a hypothetical example:

• A $100,000 home would pay approximately $72 per year from the property tax portion (2.05 mills) (The district’s current bond of 2.05 mills expires in 2027, helping to offset the property tax portion.)
• A household with $100,000 in Modified Adjusted Gross Income (MAGI) would pay approximately $500 per year from the income tax portion (0.5%)

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

---

✔ Can I Estimate My Cost for This Funding Request?

Yes. You are encouraged to use our Phase I Cost Calculator. You can access the calculator online now.

---

✔ Why Did the District Choose a Hybrid Funding Approach for Phase I?

We believe this approach does the following:

• 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 State of Ohio has also been dropping tax brackets and tax rates over the years. See next question for more information.

---

✔ Why Is a “Current Expense” School District Income Tax Specified in the Ballot Language? 

As discussed at the April 8, 2026 Board Meeting, a “current expense” school district income tax offers the district maximum flexibility for the future. 

To be clear, school district income tax revenue collected from this ballot issue would go directly toward funding Phase I facilities projects for the immediate future. But by specifying this revenue for “current expenses,” the district would have flexibility down the road. 

Though this revenue would likely not be available for expenses other than Phase I facilities projects for several years into the future, the use of school district income tax revenue from this 2026 ballot request could put the district in a position to delay an operational levy request or put the funds toward ongoing facility repairs and maintenance. 

---

✔ 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.

---

✔ When Did Bexley Residents Last Approve a Bond Issue for Building Upgrades and/or Repairs and What Was the Amount?

2000 Facilities Bond Levy

In 2000, Bexley voters approved a 5.6-mill bond levy for the Bexley City School District to fund facilities upgrades at Cassingham and Maryland Elementary Schools and Bexley Middle and High Schools.

The approved ballot issue allowed the district to issue $27,050,000 in bonds to finance long-term debt for these school construction and improvements. This is the debt that is expiring in 2027, which would offset part of the cost requested as part of this November’s ballot issue.

2016 Permanent Improvement Levy

In 2016, Bexley voters approved a continuing permanent improvement (PI) property tax levy of 1.38 mills. This ballot measure replaced an expiring 1.38-mill bond issue from 1993, allowing the district to maintain the same tax rate to fund ongoing capital maintenance, building repairs, and major equipment purchases, like buses, without raising overall property taxes. Because of House Bill 920, the effective residential tax rate is now 0.835712 mills.

 

✔ What Is the Vision Behind the Bexley Facilities Project?

Bexley’s District Facilities Plan provides the long-range vision and possible building-upgrade options 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. Through this work, the district’s 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.

The facilities-planning document does not spell out specific or continuous phases. Rather, it recommends upgrade options to address the needs of each building. For the Cassingham Complex, for example, the document shows how the Complex property could be developed in the future, not how it will be. Phase I, now before voters, is considered a stand-alone phase to address the pressing issues the district currently faces. Phase I does not need additional phased work in order to be effective and efficient. It will be up to the Bexley Board of Eduation, whether current or future members, to work with school administrators to consider future phases of facilities upgrades.

The Need for a Master Facilities Plan

The call to develop a master facilities plan (now called the District Facilities Plan) came from Bexley Schools’ Strategic Plan, which also was developed with extensive community involvement and input in 2022 and 2023. Previous school administrations began an assessment of the district’s facilities prior to the COVID-19 pandemic – work that stopped for a period of time – before a renewed interest occurred in 2022, as part of the Strategic Plan development.

Bexley Schools’ current Strategic Plan specifically calls for the district to:

• Initiate a master facilities planning process and establish channels for communicating ongoing feedback to address facility improvements.
• Explore the use of alternative facilities, how spaces can be deployed more creatively, and reequip classrooms as needed.
• Assess space planning and usage across the district through a lens of accessibility, equity, safety, belonging, and joy.

---

✔ Why Is Bexley Addressing Facilities Now?

Our school buildings are, on average, more than 86 years old. While they have been well maintained, the district has identified major repair needs throughout the district involving systems such as HVAC, roofs, boilers, windows, drainage, generators, fire alarms, and water intrusion. The district also has identified space and operational challenges, including congestion within the Cassingham Complex and the use of one cafeteria by three schools.

In addition, 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 labs, and technology-rich classrooms, spaces our buildings were not originally designed to support. 

Addressing education, structural, operational, and safety needs at once is both mission-driven and fiscally responsible and with construction costs climbing, the cheapest, most affordable time to do this work is likely now.

We Have Highly Congested Spaces in the Cassingham Complex

We 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.  

In addition, our hallways in the middle and high school have several extreme choke points during class changes. It is difficult for students and staff to use the restrooms during class changes and get to class on time. At the middle school, the front entrance, which is near the cafeteria, is extremely small. We have significant traffic jams in this space multiple times each day that are of great concern, especially for our students, staff, and visitors who may have physical challenges using wheelchairs or crutches, and for students who may develop anxiety when in tight and crowded physical spaces.

We Have a Lack of Classroom Space

In addition, we do not have enough classrooms for all teachers. Consequently, teachers share classroom space, teachers must find other nooks, lounges or offices to use during their planning periods, and some teachers teach from carts, with the need to wheel their supplies and computer needs to each class throughout each day.

We Have Many Classrooms without Natural Light

As a result of renovations of the Cassingham Complex over the years, more than 20% of our classrooms in the large building do not have access to any natural light. Many faculty and staff members spend all of their workdays in classrooms without windows. Not only is this not a good working environment but we know that students learn better in classrooms with natural light. 

---

 ✔ What Are the Ages of Bexley School Buildings?

Our school buildings are, on average, more than 86 years old.

• Montrose Elementary School is our oldest school. Built in 1921, it was the original Bexley High School. It is now 105 years old.
• Cassingham Elementary School is 99 years old and was built in 1927.
• The current Bexley High School was built in 1931, making it 95 years old.
• Maryland Elementary School is 76 years old; it was built in 1950.
• Bexley Middle School was added to the Cassingham Complex in 1969. It is 57 years old.

---

✔ What Is the Consequence if No Upgrades Are Made to Our Schools?

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 and the Board’s recent action on Aug. 16 to approve emergency funding to fix the water-intrusion issue at Maryland Elementary is an example of this.

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 that we wait will cause the cost and disruption to grow.

The timing of emergency actions to fix unexpected facilities issues also can create concerns. Not only can fixes be disruptive if needed to be completed during class time, but the nature of such unexpected expenses can impact the district’s day-to-day finances for operations. It is highly preferable to get ahead of capital expenditure needs rather than address them only when they break.

Of note is a recent report estimating that 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 with inflation.

---

✔ 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 district’s 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.

✔ Why Is a New Middle School Needed?

The proposed middle school is the centerpiece of Phase I and would be located on the Cassingham Complex property. By utilizing nearby space on the property, this location allows the current school buildings to remain in use during construction and would allow for some existing middle school space to be repurposed for high school and Cassingham Elementary use after construction concludes, including reallocating classrooms with windows to the many teachers who currently teach all day in classrooms with no windows.

The proposed facility would include a standalone, self-contained middle school with its own cafeteria and gym, as well as modern accessibility and safety features. It would also provide updated learning environments designed to support STEM and other current instructional needs, such as hands-on and collaborative learning and could be configured to utilize as much natural light as possible in classrooms and other spaces throughout the building.

More than 70% 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 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 high school students do.

---

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

The new middle school would be built on 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. Building near the high school allows the district to continue sharing importnat faculty, staff and other resources between the 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. The district is committed to preserving as much green space as possible on the Cassingham Complex and maximizing green space would be a focus of the middle-school design process.

---

✔ 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. If funding is approved to build a new building, then community input and feedback will be vital parts of the middle-school design phase.

---

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

No, enrollment is not the driving factor for a new middle school, though enrollment is up 5% since the district last upgraded its facilities after the 2000 bond issue. It is important to understand that while our most recent enrollment report predicts flat enrollment for the next few years, our enrollment could also increase in the future.

We have more than 40 years of enrollment data through which we can see the peaks and valleys of Bexley Schools' enrollment since 1980. We believe it is prudent to build for the peaks of future enrollment with flexible and adequate spaces.

 

Today’s Cassingham Complex Is Highly Congested 

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.

---

✔ Why Was a New Middle School Preferred over Renovating the Current Middle School?

During our facilities-planning process, participating residents were adamant that they did not want their students learning in small portable classrooms during renovation. With modular classrooms not an option, then classes would need to continue in the Cassingham Complex with ongoing class and activity adjustments needed during renovation and construction.

Under this scenario, our architects told us, it would likely take up to seven years to renovate the building if space was needed for students to attend classes during the renovation.

With that knowledge, it was determined that a new middle school on current Cassingham Complex property would not only be more cost effective but would allow our students to continue learning unimpeded in their classrooms during the estimated two-year construction process.

---

✔ 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.

✔ 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, windows)
• Carlton Smith Field and Stadium safety improvements and maintenance, as well as athletic support space upgrades focused on longevity, not expansion
• Field and surface improvements at Maryland and Montrose elementary schools; will not include synthetic turf options

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. 

Note: The stadium and varsity field will remain at their current location. Softball and some other athletic practices would shift to other locations if a new middle school is built.

---

✔ What Capital Expenditures Are Included in Phase I?

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 address drainage, boilers, windows, roofing, fire alarms, generators, and aging HVAC systems. These are not cosmetic improvements; they are about safety, reliability, and keeping our schools operational for learning. 

---

✔ Why Is the Cost So High for District Capital Improvements?

District facilities have been well maintained throughout the years, but many building systems are reaching the end of their useful life. Of note is a third-party assessment completed in 2024, as part of our facilities-planning process. This report, which you can review online, estimated that approximately $46 million in building repairs and maintenance across all facilities would be needed within 15 years. Some of these repairs will be remedied if a new middle school is built, but many systemic and operational system improvements will still be required.

The Board has already taken action to fund an urgent fix to the frequent flooding in Maryland Elementary School’s lower-level classrooms that occurs after heavy rain. In addition, boilers in the Cassingham Complex are failing, and the boiler and windows at Montrose Elementary are also of great concern, with boiler replacement urgently needed.

---

✔ How Do Field and Surface Improvements Help Students?

Following inclement weather, which is frequent during the Winter and Spring seasons, our elementary students at Montrose and Maryland children are limited to the pavement because the grass is too muddy and wet. Improved drainage or surfaces will be considered to help ensure regular access for students and activities.

Additionally, if a new middle school is built at the Cassingham Complex, the softball practice space and frequently used practice field would need to be moved. Reliable field surfaces at Maryland and Montrose would be needed to replace lost athletic capacity at the Cassingham Complex.

We are committed to implementing upgraded and safe field options at Maryland and Montrose, without using synthetic turf.

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

We are currently working to hire an architectural design firm and a construction manager, with both contracts explicitly stating that the work and payment are contingent upon the community approving Issue 5. If Bexley voters pass our funding request on Nov. 3, then we plan to administer the following timeline leading up to the opening of a new middle school in 2030.

---

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

The district could:

• Strategically reassign vacant middle school space, particularly classrooms with windows, to Bexley High School and Cassingham Elementary
• Save some of the current middle school space for use as “swing space” that coud be used 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 playspace/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.

---

✔ When Would Public Spaces Be Restored?

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, or a portion of it, to restore the campus’s green/public play space.

---

✔ What Comes Next After Phase I & What Is the Next Phase?

Phase I is the first step in our long-range District Facilities Plan. While it is too early to set firm timelines for future phases, 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 and prioritize natural light, 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

Important Note: There are no final recommendations for a Phase II or other future phases. Instead, there are options for future phases, as outlined in the approved facilities-planning document. It will be up to Board members, or even future Board members, and in collaboration with the district's leaders, to determine when and whether the district should move forward with a new phase and what the district priorioties will be at the time of discussion.

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

If Issue 5 is not approved, then the new middle school, stadium renovations, and improvements to greenspaces will not happen without Board action and a future ballot request. It would be up to the Board to consider whether to pursue another ballot request and possible Phase I amendments.One point is certain: There is no zero-cost option. This is a highly important fact regarding our buildings. Necessary facility maintenance and repairs costing up to $24 million will still be needed within the next few years and the district’s General Fund (for day-to-day operations) will need to be used for those expenditures. The sum of these capital improvement costs is greater than what the district’s General Fund can support and expending that much money toward required repairs and upgrades would likely impact staffing levels and student services, as well as the timing of future operating levies. 

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 Field & Surface Improvements Are Being Considered?

Providing reliable and safe field surfaces for our students is a top district priority because our available field spaces are used so frequently by our students, student-athletes, and our community.

After inclement weather, which is frequent during Winter and Spring, Montrose and Maryland children are limited to the pavement of their playgrounds because the grass is too muddy and wet. Maryland’s field, for example, has been described as a “mud pit” for much of the school year. Not only have our staff informed us that they see more injuries when students are limited to the blacktop surfaces, but kids want to still run and play games, even if they can’t be on the fields.

In addition to our students’ recess and outdoor access needs, Bexley Schools offer 27 sports supporting 78 athletic teams and over 750 student athletes. Right now, many student-athletes and our marching band members practice on the Cassingham Complex practice field. If development of a new middle school moves forward, then some of those teams will need to shift practices and athletic events to other venues, possibly including Maryland and Montrose, which means those elementary fields will see significantly more wear and demand.

We are committed to providing upgraded field surfaces at both Maryland and Montrose Elementary Schools to meet the needs of all of our students, sports teams, and band, without adding synthetic turf.

✔ 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.

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.

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 and residents. We remain committed to maximizing these areas to continue supporting our children’s physical and emotional well-being.

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.

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 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

Remodeling and adding space at the Cassingham Complex was considered the leading option to upgrade the building until our community members and building-team members learned that renovations could take up to seven years if classroom learning continued in the building. It was determined that this was not a viable option and would be detrimental to our students’ learning.

Portable Classrooms

Portable classrooms during renovation also were considered, but community input showed this was not a preferred option. Community members were not in favor of housing portable classrooms on the campus for a lengthy period, especially since students could have been in these small, portable classrooms for several school years.

“Building Up” & Capital University Land

As explained in this In Depth Answers to Your Questions section, the district also considered whether it could “build up,” by adding additional floors to the Cassingham Complex. District administrators also met with Capital University leaders to determine whether a building and/or vacant land was available. Neither option proved 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 small 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 by inquiring whether any current university buildings and/or land areas were available for purchase by Bexley Schools. Capital University officials offered one unused dormitory and a plot of sloped land for the district to consider. Both options were determined to be unsuitable for the schools’ needs and unaffordable for the district to purchase. Further, it was determined that it is 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 Can’t You Move 6th-Grade Students Back to the Elementary Schools?

Bexley’s three elementary schools are currently operating at or near capacity in their available classrooms and today’s elementary buildings would have challenges providing 6th graders with age- and class-appropriate lab and workspaces, as well as the small-group spaces needed for modern middle-school curriculum and classroom opportunities. Further, there likely would not be enough classroom space available to provide the elective courses currently available to 6th-grade students in the middle school.

For example, not only would elementary school classrooms need STEM lab and collaborative spaces for middle-school students, but this move would likely cause larger class sizes throughout all K-6 grades. Also, spaces for small-group intervention or gifted services would not be available and the district would need to consider adding temporary classrooms to meet the needs of such a move. Class schedules would likely need to shift and the district may need to add staff to cover 6th-grade allied arts and intervention and gifted support staff.

In addition, the social-emotional learning and health needs of 6th graders also are different from elementary students as they enter early adolescence. We believe that 6th-grade students being grouped with older peers is a better match with their social and academic interests.

---

✔ 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 for a future phase. 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 Did the Community Shape the District’s Facilities Plan?

Our formal District Facilities Plan was 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.

The work to develop the District Facilities Plan was a direct outcome of the district’s Strategic Plan, which, too, was shaped by the involvement and input of hundreds of Bexley residents. Bexley’s Strategic Plan reflects extensive community feedback, expert analysis, and months of study.

---

✔ How Can I Become Involved if a New Middle School Is Built?

If funding for a new middle school is approved this November, then the district will hold community focus groups on the building design and features to provide feedback to our architects. The district will embark on an estimated six-month design process, through which the community will be asked to provide feedback.

If the ballot issue is approved, we encourage you to watch for district announcements and communication asking for community participation and feedback. We value and welcome your input!

---

✔ 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