Proviso 209 finance staff outline referendum, life-safety and nonreferendum borrowing options and set tentative June timeline for FY26 budget

Finance staff presented a high-level overview of capital funding options for Proviso Township High Schools District 209, explaining referendum bonds, life-safety borrowing, nonreferendum bonds tied to debt-service-extension limits, and a nonborrowed fund-balance contribution alternative. The briefing was delivered as part of a committee of the whole discussion about long-range capital priorities.

The finance presentation summarized four funding approaches: use of fund balances/operating budget (nonborrowed); a referendum bond asking voters to approve debt; life-safety bonds tied to Illinois school building approvals; and nonreferendum bonds issued against the district’s debt service extension base. Staff also walked the committee through sample tax-impact matrices comparing homeowner effects at different bond sizes. For example, the packet showed that an $8 million referendum would raise the owner of a $100,000-home’s annual tax by about $76 under the example presented.

Reserves and timing: Staff reported the district’s cash-on-hand had fallen from a reported 14 months at an earlier presentation to approximately 5.9 months as of recent reporting, and that the district expects to close the fiscal year around six months of reserves. Staff said a life-safety fund had been used in recent projects (including a roof replacement at Proviso West) so the district avoided taking a loan for some work.

Life-safety borrowing and legal limits: The presentation explained that life-safety borrowing requires ISB-style approvals (transcript referenced an approvals process) and that nonreferendum borrowing is constrained by the debt service extension base — a statutory borrowing capacity. Staff said the district’s current nonreferendum borrowing capacity was roughly $7 million as of February 2025 per the materials shown to the committee.

Budget calendar: The district intends to present the tentative FY26 budget to the board in June. Staff said the tentative budget will be placed on public display for 30 days and then follow the statutory process — a public hearing and final adoption by the legal deadline (September 30); staff said their aim is to adopt earlier where practicable so the district can implement the budget before staff return in the fall.

Outcome and next steps: The committee received the overview and asked clarifying questions. Staff said they would invite PMA Securities (the district’s municipal advisor, represented in the materials by Mr. Bob Lewis) back for a more detailed in-person presentation if the board asks for it. No formal vote or commitment to a financing path was recorded in the committee transcript.