District 300 posts tentative FY26 budget, schedules Sept. 23 public hearing

District 300 administration on Tuesday displayed a tentative FY26 budget and announced a 30-day public review period with a public hearing set for Sept. 23, the board operations committee heard.

The budget presenter (staff member) told the committee the tentative FY26 plan estimates roughly $406 million in revenues and requests about $418 million in spending authority, producing a planned drawdown of about $12.2 million from the district's fund balance. The presenter described that as a “planned deficit, not a structural deficit.”

Why it matters: the district projects a closing FY25 unaudited fund balance of roughly $223.7 million, representing about 43.8% of annual operating expenses — above the board policy target of 30% and more than six months cash on hand. The budget documents and presentation say the district accumulated reserves intentionally to fund a multi-year master facility plan and that capital maintenance needs and possible bond financing could draw on those reserves.

Key revenue and cost drivers - The presenter described three revenue sources: local (primarily property taxes), state (centered on Evidence Based Funding, or EBF), and federal grants. Local revenues are projected at about $281.3 million for FY26, with property taxes making up roughly 95% of that. - The presenter said the district will receive about $81.6 million from EBF in FY26 but noted a substantially smaller year-over-year increase than in recent years because the district moved from EBF tier 1 to tier 2; the presentation said that reduced the district’s new state funding growth to roughly 2% for the year. - The presenter warned that some federal grant figures (notably Title II and Title III) were not yet finalized, so federal revenue in the tentative budget is conservative. - Salaries and benefits remain the largest expense category, about 60% of the budget; capital outlay for maintenance projects is proposed to increase to support 23 capital maintenance projects totaling roughly $32 million over the next period, and capital outlay in FY26 is shown materially higher than FY25 actuals.

Public comment and questions Public commenter Mike Tennis asked the committee to add a language services review and to discuss a proposed $175,000 for English learners consulting services and the scope of work for consultant DMG; the presenter acknowledged the request and the committee said the item would be considered as the budget and related scopes are refined.

Committee members asked about several items the presenter had flagged: the district’s higher-than-expected interest earnings in FY25 (unaudited), timing of tax distributions (the presenter said Cook County timing can vary), the recent purchase of contractor Durham by a hedge fund and the district’s plan to monitor that contract, and whether the district has previously adopted budgets that included planned deficits. The presenter and other staff said auditors are still closing FY25 and that audited numbers will be presented to the board in December.

Next steps and legal timeline The presenter said the tentative budget will be displayed online and in print for 30 days, with the public hearing scheduled for Sept. 23; state law requiring budget action by the end of the first fiscal quarter was cited as the scheduling constraint. Administration will continue refining revenue and expense estimates and will recommend adoption at a future board meeting.

The committee did not record a formal vote during this agenda item; staff released the tentative FY26 budget for public review and scheduled the Sept. 23 hearing as the next procedural step.