Election 2011: Funding to Operate Third High School at Issue in School Board Race

If a third high school is built as scheduled, how do you propose the staffing and operational costs be funded?

In light of the salary, program and operational cuts to draw down the budget deficit in year 2010-2011, I believe a working cash or operational fund via Referendum will ultimately be necessary, yet clearly many "ifs" still abound and many questions still need to be answered.

Before any School Code Article is asserted as a matter of Illinois law, any operational fund should not even be considered nor contemplated prior to contractual finalization for any construction, be it a third high school or additions to the existing schools.

As stated when the Referendum was passed approximately 5 years ago, we informed the voters of the need for an education fund referendum at the end of the term.  

It is important to note that the Ed fund referendum would be required if their core message of more teachers, updated curriculum and smaller class size is to be realized.  The bottom line is that unless there is a rampant change in educational funding at the federal and state levels, the individual property owner will continue to be the source of revenue for our schools.

Either by expanding onto the current high schools or constructing the 3rd we're going to see operations and staffing cost increases into the Operations Fund of the district.

This isn't a simple answer either. Our district uses the entire $12M working cash fund and has taken out a $10M tax anticipation warrants to fund the operating cost for the remainder of the school year. In effect that's $22M dollars that need to be paid back on a yearly basis through tax revenues. We have no ability to work on being fund positive at this rate.  

I'd like to start another formal financial review as soon as possible. To the best of my knowledge the last formal financial review of the District that looks at both the revenue and expenditures was accomplished in 2004. This was established to help justify the 2006 building referendum which included the money to fund the construction of the 3rd high school.  

We also should look at the organization as a whole to see where cost can be cut, have open and upfront discussions with the community about realistic needs of the district in regards programs & curriculums. Partnership with the unions to help address staffing needs, seek creative ideas when it comes to revenue (corporate sponsorships of facilities for example) and to look at raising revenue through a referendum if that direction is warranted.  

I don’t see how they can be funded without an increase in the operational budget through a tax increase.  Given the economy, I don’t see the voters approving that and this is another reason why I’m not in favor of a third high school.

As a new board member who has not had the same opportunity to review the district’s income or expense statement, I would lead this process by looking for ways to generate more revenue as well as a line by line review of our expenses. Because of my regular attendance at school board meetings and my committee work for the district, I understand that there has been discussion of an education/operating rate referendum with or without the construction of a third high school.

Please understand that this is in tune with my professional background (retail finance). I would welcome the opportunity to properly review our financial reports to discover cost savings and manage the bottom line in an effort to avoid going to referendum.

I do not believe that the community would support an operating rate referendum at this time. 

In the unlikely event the third high school was built and the State of Illinois continued to fall behind in payments of educational funds, we would need to look collaboratively at ways to decrease expenditures and increase revenue while maintaining the integrity of our classrooms.

We should require a voice from all staff and administration at the table along with a newfound spirit of trust and solidarity.  Creative discussions including restoration of prior programs (Building Trades) or collaboration with non-for-profit groups could generate revenue and opportunities for students and the district.  Decreasing expenditures could rely upon further thinking outside the box. 

Reverse online bidding for supplies or purchase sharing with neighboring school districts could lower spending.  Equality among health care costs could also save the district a considerable amount of money.    We should also investigate the realities of empty school buildings in other districts, such as Elgin. 

 Though there is no money to open them (for staff, utilities, or other operating expenses) they must still be secured and maintained.  All District 308 spending should be transparent and effectively communicated to our taxpayers to ensure trust and support as we move forward.

In the unfortunate event that the 3rd High School would be built, an automatic ~$2,700,000 per year, would be added to the strained operating budget. Based on the School Board’s Fast Facts publication dated November 2010, the district is operating at a $3,936,685 budget deficit right now.

At the Feb. 24 board meeting that I attended, the Board approved $10,000,000 of Tax Anticipation Bonds for sale, which allows the District to borrow the amount against the collection of our June Tax payments, which increases the District’s budget deficit to $13,936,685 as of that Feb. 24 meeting. The District needs this loan to pay our wonderful teacher and staff salaries, pay vendors and other operating expenses.

I will propose that the District build an operating budget based on the Zero Based Budget Method. This would build the budget from $0.00 forcing each expenditure to be reviewed and justified.

For example, ~$283,000 (per year) could be reduced from the budget if the
Administrate Staff contributed to their healthcare costs at the same 25% as the teachers and support staff do verses the 0% contribution the Administrative Staff does right now. This is only one example of expenses that needs to be scrutinized.

Editor's note: Incumbent school board member did not respond to a request for answers to these questions.