Olentangy Local district leaders on Oct. 29 told voters that a $235 million bond on the Nov. 4 ballot has been structured so the district does not expect to levy additional property-tax mills to service the new debt.

Board President Mister Lester read a statement attributed to Delaware County Auditor George Kaita: “By law, our office is required to show the estimated millage required for any new levy as part of our certification … The estimated millage for this bond levy is 1.77 mills for residential properties. However, the Olentangy Local Board has adopted a resolution to structure the new debt so that no new millage … would be required to service the new debt.”

Why it matters: Superintendent Mister Meyer and other district leaders said enrollment growth — about 400 to 500 new students annually — is creating capacity pressures across elementary and high schools. Without new buildings, officials said class sizes, hallway and cafeteria crowding, and limits on extracurricular and specialized academic offerings will worsen.

School and budget details
- Bond amount shown on the ballot: $235,000,000; the county certification lists an estimated 1.77 mills but the board has adopted a resolution it says will allow the district to avoid collecting new millage to service the debt.
- Planned projects listed in board materials and on the ballot: two new elementary schools (elementary 18 and 27 in materials) and a fifth high school; other improvement projects described in ballot language and the district’s capital plan.
- Recommended building capacities from the district facilities committee: elementary schools 625 students, middle schools 950, high schools 1,800. The district says those figures are higher than Ohio averages and reflect the committee’s recommended footprints.
- Enrollment impact: If no new construction occurs, the district projects average elementary enrollment to keep rising and high‑school averages for four high schools could exceed 2,000 students; adding the fifth high school would bring averaged high‑school enrollment down toward the 1,666–1,800 range the district cites as manageable.

Financing, prior spending and contingency planning
District treasurer Jenkins said the board is not “consolidating or extending” the life of existing bonds to mask new costs. The treasurer said the district has used refundings to lower interest costs and that refundings saved about $34 million over the past decade. Jenkins also explained that the district has performed some pre-construction work and purchases to keep project schedules on track. The board said roughly $5 million has been expended to date on project-start costs; the largest single portion was a 2024 land purchase of about $4.5 million.

On long lead items and reimbursement: the board said it has, per treasury and IRS rules, passed a resolution allowing the district to reimburse pre-bond expenditures from bond proceeds should voters approve the measure.

Short-term options and operating costs
District leaders repeated that trailers will remain a contingency but are not cost-free. The board reported an estimated annual cost to set up and operate a trailer of about $170,000 and presented a table showing multi-year trailer costs that the district said have a substantive fiscal impact when paid from the general fund.

Timing and next steps
The superintendent reminded voters that construction lead times mean the district is planning to open an elementary school in the 2026–27 school year and high school No. 5 in the 2028–29 school year if the bond passes. He encouraged residents to review the district website for ballot-language details and confirmed early voting was already underway.

What the board did at the meeting: the presentation and discussion were informational; no bond authorization vote occurred at the Oct. 29 meeting. Several consent items and personnel actions were approved later in the meeting (see separate summary of votes).