Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Facility Tax topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board hears overview of 1% County School Facility Occupation Tax and regional funding disparities

Central School District 51 Board of Education · December 8, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Administration reviewed the County School Facility Occupation Tax, describing allowable uses (debt payoff, new facilities, safety, energy efficiency), exemptions, and that 59 of Illinois' 102 counties have enacted it; presenters warned a patchwork of adoptions creates disparities for districts not covered by the tax.

At the Dec. 8 meeting, district administration briefed the board on the County School Facility Occupation Tax, a 1% sales tax some counties use to fund school capital projects.

Dale Heidbreder outlined how the tax works and listed authorized uses including paying off facility debt, land acquisition, building new schools or athletic facilities, additions and renovations, security and safety improvements, architectural planning, parking, energy-efficiency upgrades, durable equipment, fire prevention and life-safety systems, school resource officers and mental-health providers. Heidbreder said, "The funds generated from the County School Facility Occupation Tax are dedicated to improving school facilities and reducing the reliance on property taxes." He also noted exemptions that protect consumers, including qualifying food and groceries and medicine.

Heidbreder observed that 59 of Illinois' 102 counties (58%) have approved the tax and that Tazewell County is now surrounded by counties that have adopted it, creating a potential competitive disadvantage for districts in non-adopting counties. He referenced Eureka School District 140 as an example of a district financing projects with the tax revenue.

The board discussed the topic as informational; Mr. Heidbreder said he co-chaired the Tazewell committee that put a proposition on the ballot in prior years but did not recommend an immediate push. No formal action to place a local question on the ballot was recorded in the provided transcript segments.