North Summit petition seeks ballot referendum on multimillion dollar school bond

North Summit neighbors launched a petition drive after the school board approved a lease revenue bond intended to replace or significantly renovate the aging North Summit High School. Under state law constituents can contest the issuance of a bond by submitting signatures from at least 20 percent of active voters to the Summit County Clerk within 30 days of the board action. Petition organizers say they must collect 771 valid signatures by January 2 to trigger a public vote.

Organizers framed the effort as a demand for more rigorous analysis and community input rather than categorical opposition to a new school. Walter Brock, one of the petition leaders, said residents feel their questions about the project have gone unanswered. "I feel, and many others have voiced the same thing, that there has been insufficient rigor and investigation into keeping and remediating the current school or alternatives aside from the proposed massive spend that’s being specified in this lease obligation bond," he said. Brock emphasized his desire to delay funding so the district and community can obtain additional bids and evaluations from other third party firms and form a community committee to examine options.

The school district maintains that a new facility is the most cost effective path. Board President Vern Williams defended the board’s process in an emailed statement, noting years of safety assessments and ongoing spending to extend the current building’s life. "Over the past four or five years, we have collected figures on the needed upgrades to make the building safe for our students and make necessary repairs that will be required by the state," Williams wrote. "We have put hundreds of thousands of dollars into prolonging the life of the mechanical systems. Professionals have been through the school to give their opinions on the best way to solve the problems. To bring it up to code will cost nearly the same as a new building." He also noted that the board has discussed its reasoning at school board meetings and public hearings which were not well attended.

The bond structure matters to voters. The lease revenue bond carries a higher interest burden than the district’s previously proposed general obligation measures and does not require voter approval. Voters rejected general obligation bond proposals in 2024 and 2025. The board’s decision drew public criticism during hearings, where more than 20 people spoke against the move and raised broader economic concerns including potential effects on housing costs.

Summit County election officials say that if petitioners meet the signature threshold the measure would most likely appear on the November 2026 ballot, though timing could prompt a June 2026 special election. Petitioners reported several hundred signatures collected by late last weekend, and organizers are urging more residents to sign so the community can again vote and scrutinize alternatives before taxpayer dollars are committed. The outcome will determine whether voters have the final say on a multiyear financial obligation and shape the district’s approach to school facilities for decades.