Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Finance Audit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Audit shows improved net position; board hears Clarendon Hills TIF revision that cuts scope
Summary
Independent auditors issued an unmodified opinion on District 86's FY2024 finances and reported a positive government‑wide net position after improvement; the board also received a revised Clarendon Hills TIF proposal with reduced scope and a proposed IGA for district review ahead of a December action.
District auditors presented the fiscal-year 2024 annual comprehensive financial report and issued an unmodified (clean) opinion on the financial statements, the district's external partner told trustees.
Scott Benson, the presenting auditor, said the district's government‑wide net position improved by approximately $6.5 million, turning a prior negative position into roughly a $3.1 million positive net position — a result he described as "a little bit unusual for Illinois school districts" where pension and post‑employment liabilities often create negative equity. On a fund basis the district showed a net "loss" of about $5.8 million driven principally by capital project spending (~$7.8 million), and auditors noted normal industry concerns such as inflation and the large state pension liabilities that affect many Illinois districts.
In a related financial discussion the board heard an update on Clarendon Hills' proposed tax-increment financing (TIF) plan and the village's draft intergovernmental agreement (IGA). Administration representatives, including CFO Josh Stevenson, told trustees the village voted to approve a revised TIF that removed major commercial parcels (the Jewel and a PNC Bank site) from the redevelopment area and agreed to a structure that returns the surplus property-tax increment on most residential parcels to taxing districts annually (described in district materials as a 100% annual surplus rebate on the cross-hatched residential parcels). The revised redevelopment focus was described as primarily water-infrastructure work and redevelopment of certain commercial parcels (e.g., the Tracy's Tavern property), and district staff said the village's overall budget for the redevelopment had been reduced from initial proposals (slides discussed a reduction in the water component from ~$17.7M to ~$10M and property-acquisition components near $2M in the revised materials).
There was no board vote on the TIF or IGA that evening; district legal review and requests for a revised budget and scope details were requested and a December board action was anticipated if the IGA and supporting documents satisfy district review.
Trustees thanked the CFO and audit team for timely reporting and asked staff to continue providing materials needed for a December decision on the IGA.
