Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the City Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
West Chicago committee backs downtown revitalization fund in proposed $68.3M FY2026 budget
Summary
Finance Committee reviewed a $68.3 million FY2026 budget and expressed support for creating a downtown revitalization fund seeded by surplus above the city's 35% reserve; staff proposed an initial $200,000 transfer and a phased surplus allocation over three years.
The West Chicago Finance Committee on Nov. 3 reviewed a proposed $68.3 million fiscal year 2026 budget and signaled support for a new downtown revitalization fund to be seeded with surplus above the city's 35% reserve policy.
Ms. Sima, the staff presenter, said the total FY2026 budget is $68,300,000, an 18.85% increase from the prior year driven largely by capital projects including Community Park and a downtown modernization program. She told the committee the general fund, which supports day-to-day city operations, totals $24.1 million, roughly a 2% increase.
The nut of the staff proposal is a new downtown revitalization fund to be started with a $200,000 transfer from the Community Park Fund and future transfers of any general‑fund surplus above the 35% reserve threshold. "We are proposing a downtown revitalization fund, and that is for supporting downtown capital projects, events," Ms. Sima said.
Staff recommended a phased approach to redirecting surplus above the reserve: 100% of the 2025 surplus above reserves would go to downtown revitalization in year one; in the second year staff proposed an 80% downtown / 20% community-park split; and in year three a 75% / 25% split, with the option to revisit the approach thereafter. Ms. Sima said the Community Park Fund currently holds a little over $6 million and that planned park construction for an initial phase is estimated in the low‑to‑mid‑teens of millions of dollars (staff noted an early estimate around $13 million, with an updated figure closer to $15 million when adjusted for current costs).
Alderman Heller pressed staff on whether directing surplus to downtown would deplete funds for the park. Ms. Sima replied that the city would maintain a 35% reserve balance and that the proposed transfers apply only to surplus above that reserve. "We would still do the 35% reserve balance," she said, adding that the operating budget was balanced through a combination of an early retirement incentive, realigning expenditures, and advancing eligible purchases.
Committee members asked questions about the special-projects account and about how the downtown fund would be capitalized without undermining park plans. Ms. Sima described the special‑projects line as a flexible account (audits, temporary staffing, consultant support, and finishing demolition work) and said staff included the downtown schedule to show commitment to downtown investment rather than to abandon the park.
The committee gave an informal nod to the recommended allocation schedule (a show of hands indicated support), and Ms. Sima said the final proposed budget will be posted by Nov. 10 with city council consideration of the budget set for Dec. 1.
What happens next: The proposed FY2026 budget will be posted for public viewing; the Finance Committee summary of preferences will be carried into the city council budget discussion on Dec. 1.
