Why is the referendum necessary?

District 45 receives less state and federal funding than the average school district in Illinois. Yet our district has responded by running efficiently, keeping administrative costs low and putting money where it matters most: students, teachers and schools. In simple terms, District 45 is program-rich but financially stretched. We have worked hard to provide strong programs, services and opportunities for students, even using savings to keep them in place. But the funding available to support those programs has not kept pace with rising costs.

Didn’t the district just have a referendum in 2020? Why is the district pursuing another referendum?

The 2020 referendum was a bond referendum, which means the funding could only be used for specific projects approved by voters. Those funds were used as promised to build the new Early Childhood Center, provide full-day kindergarten and improve safety and security across our schools.

The current referendum is a limiting-rate referendum that would provide operating funds to help balance the district’s budget and rebuild its fund balance to a healthy level. District 45 has not had a limiting rate tax increase since 2000. A successful limiting-rate referendum would work alongside continued efforts to increase efficiency and remain fiscally responsible.

Why does District 45 receive a lower percentage of funding from the state and federal government than other Illinois districts?

Illinois uses a school funding formula that looks at each district’s needs and its ability to raise money locally. The state considers many factors when deciding how much funding each district receives, including student needs and local resources. Based on that formula, the state has determined that District 45 is in a stronger position than some other districts to support its schools through local funding.

However, the formula assumes the district is collecting more local revenue than it actually does. District 45’s tax rate is lower than many similar districts, which means the district does not receive the full amount of local funding the state assumes is available. As a result, District 45 receives a smaller share of state funding and has lower revenue per student and spending than many other districts.

The district continues to advocate for fair and adequate school funding through several professional organizations, including state and regional groups that work with lawmakers on school funding issues. These partnerships help District 45 stay involved in conversations about funding at the state and federal levels.

How has the money the district receives from the state and federal government changed since before COVID-19, and how does that funding compare with what it costs to operate schools today?

The district’s financial challenge is caused by two main factors: the money coming in and the cost of operating schools. District 45 receives less state and federal funding than the average school district in Illinois, and the funding the district receives has not kept up with the cost of maintaining current programs and services. At the same time, everyday costs have gone up, including insurance, transportation, staffing, special education, supplies and other operating expenses. The issue is not just that funding has changed or that costs have increased. The greater challenge is that the district’s ongoing costs of operating schools are now higher than its ongoing revenues.

How was this plan developed?

Since late summer 2025, District 45 has been listening to our community as we work to determine the best path forward for our schools and address our ongoing funding shortfall.

In the fall of 2025, more than 645 community members helped shape a plan to address these challenges. Based on that feedback, the district developed a community-driven proposal that appeared on the March 17 ballot to help address our infrastructure needs and funding challenges. While the referendum did not pass, falling short by 193 votes, the need to address the district’s funding shortfall and provide essential programs and services for students remains.

What is included in the plan?

If successful, the 26.7 cent tax rate increase referendum would provide an additional $4.4 million annually for our schools that will:

• Restore student academic programs by funding reading support, advanced academics, academic interventions and student services that meet critical student needs.
• Restore vital student programs and opportunities through fine arts, intramural sports, clubs and other activities that support a well-rounded school experience.
• Strengthen our schools’ financial future by providing more reliable yearly funding, reducing the need for deeper cuts, ensuring responsible facility maintenance, and helping our schools plan responsibly for the years ahead.
• Maintain reasonable, responsible student class sizes to ensure personalized learning and fiscal responsibility while avoiding overcrowded classrooms.

What are the benefits of this plan?

Following a successful referendum this fall, our schools will be able to support students by avoiding deeper academic cuts and restoring recent program cuts such as reading support, advanced academics, fine arts programming, and student intramurals and clubs. District 45 will strengthen its financial future while protecting home values and preserving the strong schools that contribute to the quality of life in our neighborhoods.

How will the referendum impact my taxes?

If successful, the 26.7 cent tax rate increase referendum would provide an additional $4.4 million annually for our schools. This would cost the average $350,000 property an additional $299 per year. 

Who can vote, and where can I register to vote?

• You must be a U.S. citizen who is registered to vote.
• You may vote in the general election if you will be at least 18 years of age by November 3, 2026. Or, if you are 17 years old and will turn 18 by November 3, 2026.
• A resident of your precinct at least 30 days prior to Election Day.

You may register to vote online through the Illinois State Board of Elections website.

What are the different ways to vote?

Any eligible DuPage County registered voter may vote by mail beginning 40 days prior to an election. You may request a vote-by-mail application through DuPage County.

You can vote early. In-person early voting is available starting (tentatively) Thursday, September 24, 2026, for the November 3, 2026, General Election. Learn more about times, dates and locations.

You can vote in person on Election Day, Tuesday, November 3. Find your polling place location and other voter information.

Has the district hired an outside firm to review its finances or budget? If so, how much did the review cost, what recommendations were made, and which recommendations have been implemented?

School districts are required by law to complete an annual audit to help ensure they are operating responsibly and following required financial practices. The audit costs about $27,000 each year and is included in the district’s regular budget. Any recommendations from the audit can vary from year to year and are reviewed publicly when the audit is presented to the Board of Education each December.

In addition, the district’s assistant superintendent for finance/CSBO, who joined District 45 in July 2025 with 13 years of school finance experience, has reviewed current and past budgets and actual spending to provide a fresh perspective on the district’s finances.

When did the current Board members and superintendent begin serving, and when did the District begin formal efforts to rebalance the budget?

The current Board of Education was in place after the April 2025 election. Superintendent Dr. Brian Graber began serving in spring 2024. The district’s work to address its ongoing budget challenges became more public and organized in fall 2025. This included community engagement, financial planning, and discussions about possible budget reductions and referendum options. The budget approved in September 2025 was based on the information available at that time. Later projections showed the district could not continue using its fund balance, or savings, to cover ongoing yearly deficits.

Why did the district’s financial outlook appear to change after the September 2025 budget presentation, and what new information or analysis led to the current deficit-reduction plan?

This was not a case where the district suddenly discovered a financial problem. For several years, the district used reserves, or savings, to help protect students, staff and programs while costs rose faster than ongoing revenue.

After the September 2025 budget process, updated financial information gave the district a clearer long-term picture. Updated fund balances, actual insurance renewal rates, enrollment and staffing assumptions, and multiyear projections showed the district could not continue using savings to cover ongoing deficits without taking more significant action. As a result, the district shifted from managing a short-term budget gap to addressing a structural operating deficit. This means the district’s ongoing costs are higher than its ongoing revenues.

Why was there not a formal Board vote on the proposed budget reductions or referendum-related recommendations?

A formal vote is required when the Board of Education takes official action, such as adopting a budget, approving a contract, approving personnel action, placing a referendum question on the ballot or making another legally binding decision. In this case, the Board discussion was for planning and direction, not final action. Board members were giving district administration guidance on how to continue planning and which items should continue to be developed.

What budget reductions or cost-saving measures has the district already implemented in prior years?

Reducing administrator positions was the first step the district took to lower costs while keeping cuts as far away from classrooms as possible. The district eliminated several administrative-level positions, including assistant director of buildings and grounds, instructional media facilitator, instructional technology facilitator, bilingual literacy leader, curriculum coordinator and director of learning.

Together, these reductions save about $700,000 each year. The district also decided not to fill a proposed student services coordinator position before the 2023-24 school year, likely saving about $100,000 more annually.

No employees were laid off or fired as part of these administrative reductions. Instead, when people left the district or moved into other roles, those positions were left unfilled. Some responsibilities were shifted to schools or shared among remaining administrators. As a result, District 45 operates with a smaller administrative staff than other similarly sized districts.

The district also extended the Chromebook replacement cycle by one year, stopped sending Chromebooks home with all students every day, reviewed technology tools for possible savings and made targeted staffing reductions through attrition going into the 2025-26 school year.

These steps have helped, but they are not enough to close the budget deficit. Revenue growth has not kept up with expenses, and the district has reached a point where it needs either additional revenue to support increasing needs or more significant reductions.

What financial solutions and budget reductions are currently being considered?

The district is considering several ways to address its financial challenges. This includes possible budget reductions, changes to how some operations are managed and options to bring in additional revenue. Areas under review include larger class sizes through reduced certified staffing, reductions to some nonclassroom positions, reductions or elimination of certain clubs and extracurricular stipends, increased school fees, more facility rental revenue, reduced or delayed maintenance, and savings from technology or system changes. The district also may consider additional options in the future, such as redistricting, school closure options, transportation changes and other operational reductions.

What other reductions were considered before staff and program cuts were proposed?

The district reviewed many possible ways to reduce costs before and while considering staff and program reductions. These included increasing school fees, bringing in more facility rental revenue, delaying maintenance, reducing technology staff or systems, changing transportation services, adjusting custodial staffing or cleaning schedules, reducing building office staff, reducing administrative or support positions, changing lunch coverage, redistricting, considering school closure options and using multigrade sections where needed. Not every option is currently recommended. Some could create concerns related to school operations, student safety, instruction, contracts or fairness across schools. However, these options were part of the district’s broader financial review.

Has the district looked at options such as freezing salaries, reducing salaries or making other changes to employee compensation to help control costs?

Yes. The district has looked at employee compensation as part of its overall financial planning. This includes reviewing options related to salaries and staffing costs. However, broad salary freezes or pay reductions are not simple short-term solutions. Many employee salaries are set through union agreements, individual contracts, state law and approved salary schedules. Because of this, the district must address compensation carefully and legally through steps such as contract negotiations, staffing decisions, retirements and resignations, position restructuring and future contract planning. The district will continue to review compensation and staffing costs as part of its financial planning, but it cannot simply reduce most employee salaries on its own as a short-term budget solution.

Why are the proposed budget reductions more than the minimum amount needed to address the projected deficit?

The district should not reduce spending by only the exact amount of the projected deficit because financial projections are estimates, and unexpected costs can come up during the school year. Changes in enrollment, required staffing adjustments, special education needs, transportation costs, health insurance costs, emergency building repairs and other unplanned expenses can quickly use up a small savings cushion. The proposed reductions are meant to give the district enough financial flexibility to avoid quickly falling back into deficit spending and to support a multiyear plan to rebuild the district’s fund balance, or savings.

Did the district look at combining choral, musical or other performing arts programs instead of eliminating them?

Yes. The district looked at whether some choral, musical or other performing arts programs could be combined instead of eliminated. However, combining programs does not always lead to meaningful savings. In some cases, the district would still need to manage costs and challenges related to transportation, supervision, scheduling, staffing and making sure students could reasonably take part. Those factors could reduce or even eliminate the savings. For that reason, consolidation was reviewed, but it was not a simple replacement for the reductions being considered.

Could some extracurricular activities continue if they were partly or fully paid for through participant fees or parent contributions?

We are grateful to the families who have offered to help pay for these programs. Their support shows how much our community values extracurricular activities and the opportunities they provide for students. However, as a public school district, relying on parent funding creates legal, staffing and fairness concerns. It also makes it difficult to ensure that all students have the same opportunity to participate, regardless of a family’s ability to pay. The most responsible and sustainable way to restore all extracurricular programs for every student is through a successful referendum in November.

Why are some stipends recommended to continue in next year’s budget?

Some stipend reductions were delayed because they are connected to larger operational issues, not because they are off the table. For example, instrumental music and interscholastic athletics affect daytime staffing, student schedules, supervision, and commitments to other schools or conferences. Delaying those reductions gives the district time to plan responsibly, communicate with partner schools and avoid disruptions in the middle of a school year or activity season. These stipends can still be reviewed as part of future budget planning.

Why does the district have full-time substitute teachers, and how are they used in schools across the district?

Full-time building substitutes help make sure classrooms are covered when daily substitutes are not available. This helps avoid uncovered classrooms and keeps the school day more consistent for students. When they are not covering a classroom, full-time substitutes may help with supervision, small-group support, student needs, building operations or other immediate needs assigned by the principal. The district will continue to review these positions to make sure they are cost-effective. However, eliminating them could move coverage problems to administrators, specialists, interventionists or other staff, which could create more disruptions to student learning and actually increase costs.

Has the district looked at delaying or reducing the purchase of new curriculum materials as part of its budget planning?

Yes. The district has talked about limiting future curriculum purchases whenever possible. When the district replaced outdated materials, it chose high-quality resources that are expected to be useful for many years. The district also relies on teachers’ expertise to adapt and strengthen existing materials when appropriate. This helps extend the life of current resources and avoid unnecessary large-scale purchases. At the same time, curriculum materials are important to student learning, so some continued investment will always be needed. In some cases, state requirements also may require the district to purchase new or updated materials for certain subjects.

What technology subscriptions, software platforms, or digital services were reviewed for possible reduction or elimination?

The district reviews technology subscriptions and digital tools each year to determine their instructional value, usage, possible overlap, student data privacy, legal compliance, safety and long-term cost. Recent reviews have included both classroom tools and operational systems. Some tools already have been discontinued, allowed to expire, reduced, delayed or replaced when there was overlap or limited instructional value.

Has the District considered reducing or eliminating Chromebook use in the early elementary grades, and what financial savings or instructional impacts would result?

We share families’ concerns about screen time, especially for younger students. The district is reviewing early learning research and looking at ways to thoughtfully reduce Chromebook use in the primary grades. Any changes would happen gradually so students’ learning is not disrupted and teachers have time to adjust. Some current curriculum materials include online components, and state testing begins online in third grade, so students still need some basic technology skills. The goal is to find the right balance. Having access to a device does not mean students are using screens all day. The district is committed to supporting teachers and making sure technology is used only when it has a clear purpose for learning.

Why did the district build the Early Childhood Education Center, and why weren’t preschool classrooms placed in existing elementary schools?

Before the Early Childhood Center was built, preschool classes were housed in elementary schools. At that time, kindergarten was half-day. As the district moved toward full-day kindergarten, there was not enough classroom space in the elementary schools to house both preschool and full-day kindergarten across the district. The Early Childhood Center helped address that space issue by bringing preschool programming together in one location, while allowing elementary schools to support full-day kindergarten and other grade-level needs.

What will happen if the referendum fails?

If the referendum does not pass, the reductions made this school year would remain in place, and the Board of Education would need to consider additional cuts for the 2027-28 school year to close the district’s funding gap. These additional reductions could include 15 to 20 more certified staff positions, including teachers and staff who support students and schools outside the classroom. They could also include further reductions to extracurricular activities, such as interscholastic athletics and instrumental music; additional program reductions or eliminations; and possible redistricting or school closures.

If the referendum passes, will there be any changes beyond the status quo?

Yes. If the referendum passes, the district would continue to take a fiscally responsible approach while also looking for ways to improve services and opportunities for students. The district leadership team and Board of Education will continue to identify efficiencies, carefully manage resources and pursue improvements that support students, regardless of the referendum outcome.