Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Wheaton Warrenville CUSD 200 adopts amended FY25 budget after $76 million bond issuance
Summary
The Wheaton Warrenville CUSD 200 Board of Education on May 8 approved an amended fiscal year 2025 budget incorporating $76 million in bond proceeds from a successful post‑referendum issuance; the amended budget reimburses pre‑referendum expenditures and transfers $10.9 million to the capital projects fund.
The Wheaton Warrenville Community Unit School District 200 Board of Education on May 8 adopted a resolution approving an amended fiscal year 2025 budget that incorporates $76,000,000 in net bond proceeds issued after last November’s referendum.
Board members opened and closed a public hearing on the amended budget with no public comments and then voted to adopt the resolution (motion by Dave Long; second by Eric Jerpi). The roll call vote on adoption was recorded as affirmative by members present.
The amendment reflects the district’s March bond closing and refined projections of tax receipts and interest earnings. District presenters said the bonds had a winning bid yield of 3.55 percent from a pool of 12 bids, with a very tight spread between bids. The issuance is tax‑exempt, carries a call provision (callable beginning Jan. 15, 2034), and the district’s rating with S&P was reported as double A plus. PMA served as municipal advisor, Chapman and Cutler as bond counsel, and JPMorgan acted as underwriter.
Administrators told the board the operating side of the amended budget shows a projected $1,563,000 deficit, but that amount reflects planned use of previously received TIF surplus dollars from the City of Wheaton to fund safety and security upgrades (cameras, door swipes and related measures) and therefore does not represent a cash shortfall for the district this year. The board will transfer approximately $10,900,000 into the capital projects fund to pay for referendum‑related construction and earlier out‑of‑pocket referendum expenditures; staff said prior out‑of‑pocket costs were a little less than $1,300,000 and that when bond proceeds were received the total was a little less than $3,000,000.
Board members and staff noted the district was reimbursed for out‑of‑pocket expenses related to referendum work incurred before and after the referendum and that refinancing could be considered in the future, given the call provision.
The board’s action follows a timeline presented by staff: tentative amended budget work began in January; the bonds closed March 25; the public hearing took place during the May 8 meeting; and the board voted the same night to adopt the amended budget. No further formal directions or follow‑up assignments were recorded in open session beyond adoption of the resolution and the standard administrative steps to implement the budget and capital transfers.
The adoption places the district’s amended FY25 budget into effect as the board recorded. Future board discussion could include any decision to exercise the call provision if market conditions make refinancing attractive.
