Lakota schools seek voter ok of combined tax bond issues for new schools

Lakota plans call for four new K-5 schools to be built on the current campus sites of: Shawnee Early Childhood School; Hopewell Early Childhood School and nearby Hopewell Junior School; Lakota West Freshman and adjacent Creekside Early Childhood School and Lakota Central High School and at the Liberty Junior School and adjacent Woodland Elementary School, officials announced last month.

The district’s sweeping facilities plan also calls for reducing Lakota’s 21 schools to 16 buildings in West Chester and Liberty townships should the tax hike win voter approval.

But winning voter approval on Nov. 4 is the critical component of facilities plan for Butler County’s largest school system, said the leader of the 17,000-student district.

“The Master Facilities Plan is a comprehensive plan to relieve overcrowding in our schools, allow for enhanced programming, like new electives and consistent specials, and to bring operational savings to the district,” said Lakota Superintendent Ashley Whitely.

Lakota officials also cite an opportunity to use state school construction funding to offset millions of dollars in cost to local taxpayers should voters decide to approve the proposed 4.99-mill-bond issue.

And besides the 4.99-bond issue, voters will also decide on a proposed .95-mill permanent improvement tax to raise $4.98 million. Both are 37-year tax issues and both will be listed as one proposed ballot issue on the Nov. 4 ballot.

Early voting in Ohio begins Oct. 7.

If the proposed, two-part bond issue were to pass, homeowners would not see any increase in the tax bills until January 2029, said school officials.

And if the ballot issue wins Nov. 4, the total, combined millage of the two new tax increases would amount to a 2.66-mill jump in school taxes due to the maturation and phase out of an existing school bonds in 2029, said Adam Zink, treasurer of Lakota schools.

The resulting 2.66-mill property tax increase would mean annual school taxes for the owner of a $100,000 house would increase by a total of $93.10.

The last time Lakota voters approved a bond issue for new school construction and building renovations was in 2005.

Whitely cited aging buildings, inadequate learning spaces and projected enrollment growth and overcrowding as some of the main reasons the district is asking for more local tax monies.

“Right now, we have class sizes sitting consistently at the 27-plus number, especially in our elementary schools. In many cases, that number is more like 29, 30 and higher. Without the Master Facilities Plan, we are out of room (and) we cannot add additional classes because we have already converted any available space,” she said.

“If the bond issue is unsuccessful, when we get to a point where 30 and higher is the norm for class sizes, space has to come from somewhere. The quickest, certainly not the easiest, way to do that is to eliminate all specials (art, music and gym classes) at the K-6 grades or eliminate all-day kindergarten and go with just a half-day model. Neither of these are good options, but to find space, we have to look at programming that is not core instruction (and) not required by the state,” said Whitely.

Adam Zink, treasurer for Lakota Schools, said the two tax issues combined into one ballot issue, along with the factors of current school bond maturation and a delayed start of property tax collection until 2029 can be confusing to some voters.

“Any increase to taxpayers is significant. We live here and understand that. We have worked extremely hard to build a comprehensive plan that will shift operating dollars to support academics at the lowest cost possible,” said Zink.

“But neither the forecasted operating levy nor this bond issue would begin collections until calendar year 2029. This is intentional. By delaying the bond issue collection, we are timing it with debt rolling off in 2028 to minimize the impact to Lakota taxpayers.”

Adding to the complexity, said Zink, is ballot language stating tax collection would begin in 2026 and that is not the case he said.

“We get a lot of questions about the tax calculator on the auditor’s website and why the ballot language says the cost will be $208, which is higher than the actual net impact to taxpayers. This is because the ballot language and calculator must reflect what the cost would be if the bond would begin collecting in 2026,” he said.

“The Nov. 4 ballot issue will not collect until 2029 which lowers the net increase to $93.10. The Lakota Board of Education passed a resolution of intent in June to ensure that it will not collect more than 2.66 mills and a second one in July to ensure that collection would not start until 2029, said Zink.

But Lakota resident Bill Lack said beyond the perceived complexity, a more important issue persists because in his opinion the tax hike for new school buildings is ill-timed and unneeded.

Lack, who has lived in Liberty Twp. since 1998, said: “My first thought would be that asking for two levies right now, with just having had a huge property tax increase is unbelievably tone deaf by this school board,” said Lack referring to a recent county-wide property tax increase.

“My other issues with it are varied. One is the size and scope of this levy is unprecedented in the state. And I believe the board’s reasoning is flawed for saying so many of these buildings need to be replaced and question their cost estimates for upkeep and maintenance,” said Lack.

But fellow Lakota resident and school parent Christy McFarlane Webster said she will vote “yes” on the proposed tax increase.

“I am in full support of the levy because I believe this is what is best for our students and our community. I am in the buildings often and I see the lack of space and much needed repairs,” said McFarlane Webster.

“Building new with the assistance from the state will be more cost efficient than trying to continue to put band aids on our aging buildings. I’m concerned that if this levy doesn’t pass, we will be faced with a much bigger levy proposal just for maintenance.”