District 66 to take different approach in second referendum campaign

Students in Center Cass School District 66 returned to school expecting more normalcy than they’ve had these past few COVID-19 years, but budget cuts and a declining financial situation have created new challenges for the district.

In response to the budget cuts, the district has decided to place another iteration of its referendum on the November ballot.

Those who voted in the June election may recall seeing a district referendum to increase the limiting tax rate by 0.506%. That referendum lost with only 40% of voters saying “yes” to the increase.

Because the district’s financial situation is so poor, the board subsequently approved a new referendum for the November ballot. It will ask voters for a limiting tax rate increase of 0.4%. Superintendent Andrew Wise said this represents a 20% reduction in the request – something he hopes is enough of a compromise for the community.

“The community said ‘no,’ so to ask for the same amount or even a similar amount, I don’t think that’s the right thing to do,” Wise said. “A lesser ask means things will take longer to implement, but if this does pass, we can at least get back on track. I hope the community will partner with us and get this turned around.”

This time around, the district is taking some new approaches in hopes of seeing a successful referendum. One of these approaches, Wise said, is the formation of a Community Engagement Committee. Wise said the committee should be made up of a diverse group of people, including those who voted for and against the referendum, those with and without children in district schools and those who did not vote in the June election.

The district received 25 applications from residents interested in being part of the committee, and Wise said the board will choose 20 participants. The board’s application for the committee – which asks whether an individual supported the June referendum, their age bracket and whether they have children in the district, among other things – was developed based on similar forms used by surrounding districts, Wise said. Because the board is seeking an engaged and involved committee, Wise said they also will consider applicants’ availability and commitment level.

“We want to get people who can be part of the dialogue,” Wise said. “The community has not seen the type of information that was provided to them [for the June referendum] and this is about communication and transparency, so we will continue to communicate and be transparent.”

Additionally, the board will have experts present at many of its upcoming board meetings in an effort to help inform the public and build trust in the district’s proposal, Wise said. Auditors, financial advisers, architects and attorneys are among some of the experts Wise said will be presenting at the meetings.

Auditors, for example, will attend a meeting to discuss the district’s finances from recent years and explain the spending down of balances. Some presentations, Wise said, will mirror similar ones offered prior to the June vote, but others will be presenting for the first time.

“I give Superintendent Wise credit for trying to reach voters. … Bringing in experts could be a good way to address this and facilitate more critical discussion,” said Chester Szerlag, who previously voted against the referendum. “With this particular economic climate, the timing is very bad, and it’s a little disappointing [the district] didn’t slow down here.”

If a referendum passes, Wise said, the community will know exactly where every dollar is going, and if dollars are spent in a way the community disagrees with, then the community can speak up and be heard. He said he believes the district has been completely transparent with the community, answering every question, presenting its plan, putting in board policies and doing things the same way every other district in Illinois has to do them.

One question many voters initially had regarding the referendum was why the district was seeking a limiting tax rate increase referendum rather than a bond referendum. A bond referendum, Wise said, is typically needed when a district is planning a larger project, such as building construction. Bond issues are borrowed in large sums, and the district pays those sums back with interest, creating additional debt for the initial borrow.

This contrasts with a limiting rate increase, which does not create additional debt for the district and can be spent in all areas of need. Wise said the reason a limiting rate is necessary is because of the way funding for public districts works in Illinois. Because districts are tax capped, they lost the ability to fix things without having to go to a referendum every single time.

“I don’t think anybody wants the schools to fail,” Szerlag said. “So, yeah, I think there are problems with where the revenue stream is more dependent on residents, and I don’t know if that can change. I would sign up to go to war on that but nobody’s doing that.”