In 2006, the then Board of Education assumed that the new growth anticipated by housing projections would eventually bring new property tax revenue into District 200. Therefore, the debt was back loaded so taxpayers at that time would not bear the brunt of paying for the new buildings. But because of the U.S. housing market crash in 2008, the growth did not materialize to near the extent that was expected.

This issue was examined at length by the Facilities Review Committee made up of community members and district staff in 2016. Out of that process the District took the committee’s recommendations to end the lease on an administrative annex and sell its administrative building moving its offices to Woodstock North High School.  One factor that the Board and the committee both weighed was that regardless of any steps taken the issue of the debt would not go away.  While some savings are possible the debt from the new buildings must be dealt with in the coming years regardless of savings.

If the Board takes no action then taxes paid for the district’s debt in calendar years 2021 through 2025 will increase significantly. Taxes paid on a $200,000 home for the district’s debt in 2020 are $495.  Taxes are estimated to increase to $1,275 in 2021, $1,326 in 2022, $1,408 in 2023, $1,459 in 2024, and $1,514 in 2025. After 2025, taxes would drop considerably for eight more years and then the district’s debt would be paid off.

• Pro: The debt would be paid off faster and at less cost. Property taxes would be reduced significantly after five years.
• Con: Property tax bills would rise significantly for five years and could increase by as much as $1,514 for a typical homeowner

The Board of Education and administration were aware of the looming construction debt, so over the years they set aside funds to help alleviate the approaching debt burden. In recent years, the State of Illinois has also been late with some payments to District 200, so reserve funds became necessary to pay for operating expenses. The board is considering using the reserve funds on an annual basis to help pay down debt to lower the property tax impact. However, some of the surplus should remain in case of financial hardship if a situation arose when the State of Illinois was again late or unable to make payments owed.

• Pro: Debt payments could be lowered by using reserve funds to decrease the  tax burden.
• Con: Depleting reserve funds could put District 200 in a vulnerable financial position.

It does. Each year staff numbers are adjusted based on annual enrollment projections. Deeper staff cuts would lead to a reduction in programs and/or an increase in class sizes. The teacher to student ratio in District 200 is about equal to or slightly higher than the state average in Illinois. The administrative average in District 200 is 180 students to one. The state average is 173 students per administrator.

• Pro: Cutting staff would have a budget savings.
• Con: Larger classroom sizes and program cuts would be a detriment to education.

Pay raises for teachers are scheduled according to contracts negotiated with the teacher’s union. Administrators in District 200, with the exception of the Superintendent, generally work on one-year contracts. The administration recommended and the Board has adopted a general salary freeze for District 200 administrators for the 2020-2021 school year.  At the June 2020 Board meeting Dr. Moan asked for and the Board approved his pay freeze for 2020-2021 despite the previous agreement for a raise in his current contract.

The Board is looking at various options for extending the debt out to future years.  Options range from extending the debt three years up to eight years.  The longer the debt is extended into the future the greater the cost of paying off the debt.  Conversely, the more reserves that are used to pay down the debt, the lower the cost. The increases in interest to extend the debt out range from $18.3 million dollars to $37 million dollars if the debt is pushed out with no fund balance used in future payments. 

• Pro: The immediate impact on property tax bills would be reduced depending on other factors.
• Con: The overall cost of the debt will go up since the interest on debt payments is being extended to future years

While schools are the largest portion of anyone’s property tax bill in Illinois, they don’t represent the entire bill. Other portions may include city, township, fire protection district, county and other taxing bodies. Property taxes are how Illinois has primarily chosen to fund education. Over the past six years, District 200 has either reduced its property tax levy or kept it flat. Since 2014, the district has actually lowered the tax rate by 19.5 percent. The District has also abated more than $16 million in taxes since 2010. The tax rate is the only part of a property tax bill the District can control. What District 200 cannot control is how your property is assessed. The value of your property is determined by the assessor in your township. Some people’s property taxes have gone down, while others have gone up. But increases in recent years did not come as a result of decisions made by District 200.

The Board is looking at all areas for potential savings and not necessarily an all or nothing approach. Could budgets for some programs be reduced by combining them or by other means? Unless increases in class sizes are considered, there isn’t much room in the education fund budget for cuts outside of program cuts. There are other areas of the budget to explore, but the board and administration are trying to look at the entire picture. Whether these options are viable is up to the board and the community.

The decisions this board makes in the coming months will shape the direction of how District 200 will approach the debt over the next several years. Over the past year, the board has been looking at a variety of debt repayment options including flattening the debt spike over a longer period of time or large increases over a shorter period of time. Board members are trying to get a sense of how the community feels about potentially extending the debt, cutting programs to ease the debt burden or some combination of approaches in the interest of having a lesser effect on property taxes. The  debt must be paid; it’s just a question of the community’s preference on the best approach.