District 205 Warns More Budget Cuts and Layoffs are Coming
What the Elmhurst Teachers Union refers to as "surplus" is a reserve fund equal to three months of operating expenses, according to a statement from District 205.
Photos
As Elmhurst Unit Distrit 205 declared negotiations with the Elmhurst Teachers Union at an impasse last week, the district also is warning that budget cuts and more staff layoffs are looming.
Elmhurst Unit District 205 on Friday released its Budget at a Glance, which provides an overview of the district's financial picture for fiscal year 2011-12. The booklet includes such data as expenditures by fund, enrollment projections, capital repair needs at each school, revenue sources including information on general state aid, and more.
The purpose of the booklet is to give the community a snapshot of the district's financial picture, Superintendent David Pruneau says in an introductory letter.
"We encourage all members of our community to take an active role in the education of our youth," he said. "This begins with a solid understanding of our schools and our district, including the financial management of this important resource."
The letter goes on to say that budget projections for 2012-13 "indicate a structural deficit between $600,000 and $1 million" and cuts will be necessary to balance the 2012-13 budget.
Budget at a Glance references the more than 28 full-time equivalent positions that were eliminated over the last two years, and makes a bleak prediction:
"It is projected that more layoffs will follow in 2012-13 in order to maintain a balanced budget."
The district also issued a response to last week's Teachers Union statement, claiming the budget has a $27.9 million surplus and that the district is in "great financial shape."
"District 205 must continue to cut spending since revenues are projected to remain flat while expenses continue to climb greater than the rate of inflation," the statement says. "District 205 maintains a reserve fund balance equal to 25% of its total operating budget, equivalent to one quarter (or 3 months) of revenue, in order to avoid borrowing (via Tax Anticipation Warrants) to pay its operating bills. Information on this very topic is available on page 18 of the new Budget at a Glance."
Since the district receives property tax income in June and September, the fund balance at those times will always be high. But it is depleted as it is spent down. In May 2011, for example, before the receipt of the June property tax payment, the fund balance was less than $4 million, according to the Budget at a Glance.
Budget projections will be discussed at the next School Board meeting at 7:30 p.m. Tuesday, March 20, at the administration building, 162 S. York Road. Members of the public will have an opportunity to speak for up to three minutes at the beginning of the meeting.
Scott
12:51 pm on Sunday, March 18, 2012
What is interesting to me is that the teachers, a group of supposed "intellectuals", can be so naive as to not understand that the world has changed and they must adjust their expectations. Virtually everybody in the private sector has. Why would they think they shouldn't??? I guess they're "special".
Emily.D
6:39 pm on Sunday, March 18, 2012
Ken, you don't pay teachers' pensions. Each teacher, every paycheck, has a lot of money deducted into what's called TRS (Teachers' Retirement Salary). At the end of their careers, they simply hope to get back what they put in. Also, SCOTT, you're coming off as jealous you didn't become a teacher yourself. Most teachers I know are very level-headed and all-too-aware of the economic crisis in which we live. Let's support members of our community, not bring them down. This shouldn't be a preschool-ish situation: "It's not fair!!" It's not that simple.
Ken
2:57 pm on Sunday, March 18, 2012
It's time for the taxpayers of Dist205 to stop paying the teacher's share of their pension funds (check your tax bill that's coming soon) and for them to start seeing what it is like to live like the rest of us.
Peggy Graham
6:20 pm on Sunday, March 18, 2012
I have spoken with a union teacher representative and have a different perspective than I had before. No matter how "neutral" our press might be this is politics. And like the upcoming election, each side is trying to make its agenda a point of dissension among the ranks - from the previous comments it seems this is working. I don't assume that I have all the facts yet some of the things I'm hearing are cause for concern FOR the teachers if they are accurate. Theoretically... if my boss wanted to increase the number of hours in my work day with no greater compensation I would be upset. If, in addition to this, hours I have been paid for before are going to go uncompensated in future years... I would be more upset. If I agreed to take a minimal increase because of the economic situation and then was told I'd have to guarantee to take only that same increase (even if the economy and our revenues improved) over the next three years I would be gradually getting less and less inclined to continue to listen. And, to top it off, if I have been taking classes working to improve my teaching skills, attaining a masters degree etc and was told I would no longer get a pay scale increment for that I'd be up in arms! I would rather eliminate the tenure structure that forces the retention of ineffectual teachers/staff who are skating along - we all know they exist. Please remember there are two sides to every issue and we are not getting the whole picture.
Ken
6:33 pm on Sunday, March 18, 2012
Here is the problem in a nutshell.
Teachers and their union donate millions of dollars and campaign time to politicians who promise them huge pensions and salaries that in the long run cannot be sustained by the taxpayers. When everything implodes because of the poor economy the teachers blame everyone but themselves and want the struggling taxpayer to bail them out.
Sorry but I paid my taxes----time for the teachers to go cry on someone else's shoulder.
nana
6:35 pm on Sunday, March 18, 2012
@Ken-our district does not pay the teacher's share of their pension; unless I'm misunderstanding what you meant. That is not one of the benefits. I am a little concerned over the statement that there is this huge surplus-if this were true,why the need for 3 million in cuts? But still, the teachers are offering to not take any raises unless the economy improves. That seems reasonable to me.
Ken
8:07 pm on Sunday, March 18, 2012
My understanding is that in Dist 205 (and many others in this state) the taxpayers pay the teacher's contribution to their pension funds. It's on our property tax bill.
TCB
9:51 pm on Sunday, March 18, 2012
Tha stated claim of an existing Surplus of $27 Mil is a LIE. It is simply a cash flow of $3 Mil at the low, and $52 at the high. It is a misleading and disingenuous claim. The Union knows it is not true.
There are no leftover funds, after all expenses are paid. They know this, but just don't want to advocate Tax increases on a burdened market. Better to mislead.
I think they made a HUGE public relations error on this claim. It is the crux of their argument and being debunked quickly.
Karen Chadra
8:09 am on Monday, March 19, 2012
@Ken - We pay into the pension system in Illinois through our state income tax. The talk in Springfield is to shift payment obligations from the state to the local districts, which will shift the burden from the income tax payer to the property tax payer. The teachers also pay 9 percent into their own pensions.
York
6:56 pm on Sunday, March 18, 2012
There are many jobs where responsiblities have incrreased, with no extra pay. Extra hours have been required with no extra pay. People do not take vacations because they have more work than before. People have not had a raise in years. Teachers are not the only people in this situation. Yes, you can be upset. Yes you can stay and work there or you can move to another job, it is the same choice we all have.
nana
8:24 pm on Sunday, March 18, 2012
@Ken-I think you are mistaken. My understanding after reading a Daily Herald story from a while ago is this: you and I pay into Social Security. We pay 6%, the employer pays 6%. The state of Illinois decided they didn't want to pay that much and made up their own system called TRS (for teachers,anyway). Teachers pay 9% of their salary to TRS, the state is supposed to pay 3%. This was supposed to save taxpayers money. The teachers have their 9% taken out of their check every pay period. The problem is, the state hasn't been paying their share and now owes the system. Not only that, they have been raiding the system with the intention to pay it back eventually. Now that they owe the system a boat load of money they are crying poor and trying to make it seem that teachers are bankrupting the system. But District 205 does not pay anything to the teachers pensions directly. You and I, of course, do pay in our taxes to the state. I'm not sure what you mean otherwise.
Dan
9:40 pm on Sunday, March 18, 2012
What I never understand is why the teachers and their unions aren't leading the charge to take the retirement plans out of the hands of the politicians and set up 401 style plans that are self directed. It always leads me to believe once again there are two sides to this story and although we end up with the bill we never get a clear idea of what is going on.
Ken
8:59 am on Monday, March 19, 2012
Take a look at your next property tax bill (if you're a home owner). You'll see part of your bill going to teacher's pensions in our district as well as for COD teachers and others.
My bill last year included taxes for the following:
COD pension fund
Dist 205 pension fund
Elmhurst park dist, pension fund
City of Elmhurst pension fund
Addison township road pension fund
Addison township pension fund
County of Du Page pension fund
County health dept pension fund
Forest preserve pension fund
My pension (like 99% of taxpayers) $0.00. Yes, I get social security and if I wait till I'm 67 years old I'll get a whopping $1700 a month or $20,400 a year. A far cry from what teachers and government workers will receive.
York
8:50 pm on Sunday, March 18, 2012
That is so wrong to take and use their pension money
nana
9:46 pm on Sunday, March 18, 2012
@ Dan-do you feel the same way about your Social Security? I wonder if TRS could survive without the state's input. They haven't been putting in anyway. The teachers are putting in 9% of their income right now. The state wants them to put in more-I've heard up to 13%. What is TRS became self sufficient with that 13%?
rbm
7:55 am on Monday, March 19, 2012
The small amount of extra hours teachers are being asked to work are for the benefit of your children, Elmhurst!
Stewart Levine
5:12 am on Thursday, March 22, 2012
because no one wants to pay for these entitlements anymore, id rather take my 10,000 dollar property tax bill and cut it into 1/3rd of that and spend the other money taking my kids to disney world. these public workers need to realize that their job is dependent on my donation of tax payer money, so they work for me. i dont even think they do a marvelous job of educating our kids either, id rather opt out all together and home school. It's not just the schools though, i see all these city workers driving around uselessly in their city vehicles @ 4.50 a gallon gasoline prices, how quickly do you think that fuel bill ads up? I would like to see someone build a website and streamline our property taxes to show in real-time what they actually go for so we as tax payers can cut the fat so to speak and bring our city government back to reality. I would like to see kids do more apprenticeships and trades too, not everyone wants to shell out 50 grand for college these days when kids arent getting hired out of school and unemployment is higher.
Bob R
9:14 am on Saturday, June 2, 2012
Hey, I'm very confused so somebody out there please educate me about who really pays for teacher's pensions. The regional media says that, outside of Chicago, the State pays for teacher's pensions. However, we all now know that the State has been stealing from this "fund" for years. Some of the above comments indicated that the teachers pay 9% of their salary into the pension fund. However, my property tax bill shows that I pay into the School District 205 Pension Fund. Somebody please clarify for me how the pensions are actually funded.....Help!
concerned citizen
10:02 am on Saturday, June 2, 2012
This is how I understand it. The state essentially wants to make up for their neglect by passing it back to the local taxpayer. Shame on them, especially Madigan.
Currently active teachers (around 9% taken out of their paychecks), school districts (the % they get from property taxes) and state government (This is where the state messed up and didn't put their part in for the last 30 years or so.) split the cost of what is owed this year to retired TRS members, as well as the cost of benefits for future retirees. These contributions are supplemented by TRS investment income. .... In the City of Chicago, a larger share of the annual cost of teacher pensions each year is funded by a property tax levy in the city – about 18.6 percent, compared to 2.3 percent in the rest of the state (I believe that is what is on your tax bill). Most of this can be found on the TRS of Illinois website.
MIKE
2:47 pm on Tuesday, June 12, 2012
How about if the Patch runs an ariticle on this subject to clear up some "fuzzy" areas that some of us are less than educated about regarding teacher pensions.
MIKE
2:51 pm on Tuesday, June 12, 2012
Karen - How about the patch providing an article or explanation on State of IL teacher/educator pensions, so some of us can be brought up to speed regarding the funding of teacher pensions? Karen is right, ALL IL taxpayers pay into the State's education pensions for teachers, that's why Gov. Quinn and the idiots in Springfield went along with Quinn and raised the 2% IL individual taxes to bail out the pension funds. Quinn is NEVER going to get elected again and the teachers will be back looking for more to waste. Oh, well help us Karen.