Frequently Asked Questions
We will update this section as questions arise
-
That is the same field as the elementary school playground. The Board’s messaging has consistently referred to the space as simply “the softball field” without acknowledging that it doubles as the only playfield at Cassingham. There is no grass field.
The Superintendent and COO have explained that the open space would be sufficiently diminished at Cassingham that the kids would need to use the football field during recess.
-
The short answer is no - not after school or on the weekends. There would be no place on-campus available to kids, as the football field is in constant use by the school and rented to leagues, or even nearby. The closest open outdoor space would be the playground at Montrose, which is a 15-20+ minute walk across Main from Cassingham. That is not realistic for elementary school students who just want to run around with their friends after school.
Central Bexley is unique in that it does not have a city park.
-
No. In April 2024, the District commissioned and released an enrollment projection that anticipates no growth through 2034. The Board has acknowledged that crowding is not a motivating concern.
-
No. All of our elementary schools deserve outdoor space.
Expansion on the Cassingham campus may be the best option some day, but only in a way that retains or replaces the outdoor space for our students. Notably, the earlier proposed designs shared with the community preserved or replaced the open outdoor space (examples: Cassingham Plan, Facilities Plan).
-
The removal of the outdoor space at Cassingham and the installation of turf at Montrose and Maryland are all part of the same proposed Phase 1 Facilities Plan.
The turf plan shows two things:
First, the District has not meaningfully involved or listened to feedback from parents, including those at Montrose who overwhelmingly do not want artificial turf (sign the Montrose and Maryland turf petition here).
Second, although misguided, the District believes outdoor fields at our other two elementary schools are important and worth millions of dollars in further investment - while at the same time taking away the outdoor field at Cassingham.
-
No. The design, while not final, will place the new building on the Cassingham playfield. There is no way for the field to be retained as an open area while simultaneously hosting a new school building.
The Board has estimated a 70% reduction, necessitating children to use the gated football field for recess.
Further, the Board has indicated that it will not be prepared to share a final design until after a levy is passed and it would be too late for the community to demand changes.
-
No. Throughout the public information program in 2024, there were numerous potential designs shared and all of them retained or replaced the playfield.
Examples of these designs, which are still posted on the District website, are linked below:
