Skip to main content

Ref FAQ Page

Frequently Asked Questions

A collection of questions about the proposal and the situation are below. Click on a question to reveal the answer.

Have a question that you don’t see? Use the Google Form to submit a question.

What happens if the proposal is approved by voters?

If the proposal is approved by voters, the district would be able to generate $6 million annually, giving the District the ability to create additional classroom spaces at each of our four schools while other funds will be used to staff, maintain, and support these additional classrooms in order to keep class sizes reasonable. The timeline for planning and construction would be developed quickly but could take up to two years to build the additions onto each building. Please refer to the presentation linked at the top of the webpage for more details.


What happens if the proposal is not approved by voters?

The District would need to continue evaluating ways to accommodate enrollment within its existing facilities and resources, including increasing class sizes, further repurposing instructional spaces and other operational or facility alternatives. Class sizes would continue to increase and the District would have to continue to assess next steps. Additionally, larger spaces in the schools like Library Resource Centers or dedicated specials’ classrooms may need to be transformed into general education classrooms with those programs either becoming mobile (on carts) or being eliminated.


What does a limiting rate actually mean?

In Illinois education, the "limiting rate" is the maximum property tax rate a school district can levy for funds subject to the Property Tax Extension Limitation Law (PTELL). It acts as a revenue control mechanism, capping a district's annual property tax extensions to the lesser of 5% or the rate of inflation (CPI).


Is enrollment really increasing in the school district?

Yes. This is actual enrollment growth—not simply projected growth based on future housing developments. SD113A is currently at the highest enrollment level in the District’s history, exceeding our previous historical peak. Enrollment has grown nearly 26% over the past decade, and actual enrollment has exceeded projections from previous demographic studies.

Importantly, this growth is not coming from one source. We are seeing students enter SD113A as existing homes turn over to younger families, students transfer into the District from private and parochial schools, and new families move into the community. New residential development is certainly another factor, but much of the growth we are experiencing today has occurred before we have seen the full student impact of newer developments such as Glen Eagles.

The District’s enrollment data already show record growth independent of the students those developments may ultimately generate. As a recent example, at last night's Board meeting, I reported that we have had 29 new students enroll into the District since last month's Board meeting.


Why didn’t the District plan better to anticipate this level of growth?

The District has been actively planning for growth. We commissioned independent demographic studies in 2017, 2024, and again in 2026. Each of these studies were conducted in collaboration with Lemont High School and the Village of Lemont. Actual enrollment met or exceeded even the highest projections from 2017 and 2024, and enrollment last year was more than 500 students higher than projected in the 2017 study.

The District has also taken significant, conservative and methodical steps before asking the community for additional resources. Most notably, we reopened Central School in 2022 specifically to create additional capacity and reduce class sizes. Since Central reopened, approximately 300 additional students have enrolled in SD113A. We have continued to maximize existing facilities, including converting spaces such as learning resource center and multipurpose areas into classrooms.

Our approach has been to use the space and resources we already have before making a larger investment in additional facilities. The challenge now is that continued enrollment growth has brought us to a point where those strategies alone are no longer sufficient. We have explored building a new building (the most costly option), adding modular classrooms (costly, safety/security concerns, and a temporary solution), doing nothing, or adding additions to each campus, and ultimately decided that building additions was the most reasonable and cost-effective solution.


Why is the District seeking a limiting rate increase?

The primary driver is continued enrollment growth and the need for additional classroom space while maintaining reasonable class sizes, academic programs, transportation, student support services, and safe and appropriate learning environments.

Is this request the result of financial problems or overspending?

No. The referendum is being presented to address enrollment, facility capacity, and the operational needs associated with serving a larger student population—not to address a financial crisis. 


How do SD113A school taxes compare to neighboring districts?

The financial challenges District 113A faces today are not the result of overspending. Compared with peer districts, District 113A operates with a lower tax rate, lower per-pupil spending, and lower State funding, clear evidence of long-standing fiscal discipline and careful resource management. Many peer districts have tax rates significantly higher than District 113A’s, receive substantially more State Evidence-Based Funding per student, and spend significantly more per pupil each year, underscoring the District’s sustained commitment to fiscal responsibility.

Many peer districts have tax rates up to 45% higher than District 113A’s, receive substantially more State Evidence-Based Funding per student, and spend at  least 30% more per pupil each year,  underscoring the District’s sustained  commitment to fiscal responsibility.

Tax Rate Comparison 

Tax Rate Comparison Chart

113A 1.968
Downers Grove GSD 58 2.237
Hinsdale CCSD 181 2.465
Center Cass SD 66 2.610
CCSD 180 2.704
Palos 128 2.851
Maercker SD 60 2.921
Cass SD 63 2.930
Will County SD 92 2.939
Palos CCSD 118 3.037
Homer CCSD 33C 3.653
North Palos SD 117 3.925
Woodridge SD 68 3.949
CCSD 146 4.580
Lisle CUSD 202 4.862

How does SD113A's spending compare to neighboring districts?

The financial challenges District 113A faces today are not the result of overspending. Compared with peer districts, District 113A operates with a lower tax rate, lower per-pupil spending, and lower State funding, clear evidence of longstanding fiscal discipline and careful resource management. Many peer districts have tax rates significantly higher than District 113A’s, receive substantially more State Evidence-Based Funding per student, and spend significantly more per pupil each year, underscoring the District’s sustained commitment to fiscal responsibility.

Instructional Spending comparison

Instructional Per Pupil Spending Comparison 

113A $8,054
Homer 33C $8,879
Cass SD 63 $9,459
Maercker SD 60 $9,916
Palos 118 $9,961
Center Cass 66 $10,078
Palos 128 $10,279
North Palos 117 $10,375
Darien SD 61 $10,601
Gower SD 62 $10,936
DG 58 $11,096
Woodridge SD 68 $11,733
State $11,785
Will County SD 92 $12,486
Hinsdale 181 $14,066
Lisle SD 202 $14,788
Burr Ridge 180 $15,050

 

Operational Spending comparison

Operational Per Pupil Spending Comparison 

113A $13,537
Homer 33C $15,499
Palos 128 $15,681
Palos 118 $15,867
Center Cass 66 $15,919
North Palos 117 $16,486
Darien SD 61 $16,845
Cass SD 63 $17,278
Maercker SD 60 $17,999
Woodridge SD 68 $18,416
Gower SD 62 $19,070
DG 58 $19,593
State $20,129
Hinsdale 181 $22,402
Will County SD 92 $22,670
Lisle SD 202 $25,138
Burr Ridge CCSD 180 $28,233

What will this cost me?

District 113A is placing a limiting rate referendum on the November 2026 ballot. If approved, the limiting rate increase would generate an estimated $6,000,000 annually. Use the online tax calculator to calculate your home’s tax impact.

Tax Impact table


What would the additional revenue support?

If approved by voters, the 36-cent limiting rate increase is estimated to generate approximately $6 million annually. It would allow the District to create additional classroom space at all four schools and provide the staffing, maintenance, and operational resources necessary to support those classrooms.


Why are there so many administrators in District 113A? Couldn’t the District cut administrative costs instead?

District 113A actually operates with one of the leanest administrative structures in the area. The District has one of the highest number of students per administrator among comparable local districts, meaning fewer administrators are supporting more students.

District 113A is a nearly $40 million organization serving more than 2,700 students across four schools, yet many major district functions—including finance, human resources, teaching and learning, technology, transportation, and buildings and grounds—are each led by just one administrator. 

The District also does not employ several administrative positions commonly found in comparable districts, such as dedicated directors for communications, multilingual education, early childhood, or assessment.

Reducing this already-lean administrative structure would not address the underlying issue driving the referendum: continued enrollment growth and the need for additional classroom space and staffing to serve more students.

A bar chart comparing the number of students per administrator in D113A (177) versus the state average (136).

  • What happens if the proposal is approved by voters?

    If the proposal is approved by voters, the district would be able to generate $6 million annually, giving the District the ability to create additional classroom spaces at each of our four schools while other funds will be used to staff, maintain, and support these additional classrooms in order to keep class sizes reasonable. The timeline for planning and construction would be developed quickly but could take up to two years to build the additions onto each building. Please refer to the presentation linked at the top of the webpage for more details.


    What happens if the proposal is not approved by voters?

    The District would need to continue evaluating ways to accommodate enrollment within its existing facilities and resources, including increasing class sizes, further repurposing instructional spaces and other operational or facility alternatives. Class sizes would continue to increase and the District would have to continue to assess next steps. Additionally, larger spaces in the schools like Library Resource Centers or dedicated specials’ classrooms may need to be transformed into general education classrooms with those programs either becoming mobile (on carts) or being eliminated.


    What does a limiting rate actually mean?

    In Illinois education, the "limiting rate" is the maximum property tax rate a school district can levy for funds subject to the Property Tax Extension Limitation Law (PTELL). It acts as a revenue control mechanism, capping a district's annual property tax extensions to the lesser of 5% or the rate of inflation (CPI).


    Is enrollment really increasing in the school district?

    Yes. This is actual enrollment growth—not simply projected growth based on future housing developments. SD113A is currently at the highest enrollment level in the District’s history, exceeding our previous historical peak. Enrollment has grown nearly 26% over the past decade, and actual enrollment has exceeded projections from previous demographic studies.

    Importantly, this growth is not coming from one source. We are seeing students enter SD113A as existing homes turn over to younger families, students transfer into the District from private and parochial schools, and new families move into the community. New residential development is certainly another factor, but much of the growth we are experiencing today has occurred before we have seen the full student impact of newer developments such as Glen Eagles.

    The District’s enrollment data already show record growth independent of the students those developments may ultimately generate. As a recent example, at last night's Board meeting, I reported that we have had 29 new students enroll into the District since last month's Board meeting.


    Why didn’t the District plan better to anticipate this level of growth?

    The District has been actively planning for growth. We commissioned independent demographic studies in 2017, 2024, and again in 2026. Each of these studies were conducted in collaboration with Lemont High School and the Village of Lemont. Actual enrollment met or exceeded even the highest projections from 2017 and 2024, and enrollment last year was more than 500 students higher than projected in the 2017 study.

    The District has also taken significant, conservative and methodical steps before asking the community for additional resources. Most notably, we reopened Central School in 2022 specifically to create additional capacity and reduce class sizes. Since Central reopened, approximately 300 additional students have enrolled in SD113A. We have continued to maximize existing facilities, including converting spaces such as learning resource center and multipurpose areas into classrooms.

    Our approach has been to use the space and resources we already have before making a larger investment in additional facilities. The challenge now is that continued enrollment growth has brought us to a point where those strategies alone are no longer sufficient. We have explored building a new building (the most costly option), adding modular classrooms (costly, safety/security concerns, and a temporary solution), doing nothing, or adding additions to each campus, and ultimately decided that building additions was the most reasonable and cost-effective solution.


    Why is the District seeking a limiting rate increase?

    The primary driver is continued enrollment growth and the need for additional classroom space while maintaining reasonable class sizes, academic programs, transportation, student support services, and safe and appropriate learning environments.

  • Is this request the result of financial problems or overspending?

    No. The referendum is being presented to address enrollment, facility capacity, and the operational needs associated with serving a larger student population—not to address a financial crisis. 


    How do SD113A school taxes compare to neighboring districts?

    The financial challenges District 113A faces today are not the result of overspending. Compared with peer districts, District 113A operates with a lower tax rate, lower per-pupil spending, and lower State funding, clear evidence of long-standing fiscal discipline and careful resource management. Many peer districts have tax rates significantly higher than District 113A’s, receive substantially more State Evidence-Based Funding per student, and spend significantly more per pupil each year, underscoring the District’s sustained commitment to fiscal responsibility.

    Many peer districts have tax rates up to 45% higher than District 113A’s, receive substantially more State Evidence-Based Funding per student, and spend at  least 30% more per pupil each year,  underscoring the District’s sustained  commitment to fiscal responsibility.

    Tax Rate Comparison 

    Tax Rate Comparison Chart

    113A 1.968
    Downers Grove GSD 58 2.237
    Hinsdale CCSD 181 2.465
    Center Cass SD 66 2.610
    CCSD 180 2.704
    Palos 128 2.851
    Maercker SD 60 2.921
    Cass SD 63 2.930
    Will County SD 92 2.939
    Palos CCSD 118 3.037
    Homer CCSD 33C 3.653
    North Palos SD 117 3.925
    Woodridge SD 68 3.949
    CCSD 146 4.580
    Lisle CUSD 202 4.862

    How does SD113A's spending compare to neighboring districts?

    The financial challenges District 113A faces today are not the result of overspending. Compared with peer districts, District 113A operates with a lower tax rate, lower per-pupil spending, and lower State funding, clear evidence of longstanding fiscal discipline and careful resource management. Many peer districts have tax rates significantly higher than District 113A’s, receive substantially more State Evidence-Based Funding per student, and spend significantly more per pupil each year, underscoring the District’s sustained commitment to fiscal responsibility.

    Instructional Spending comparison

    Instructional Per Pupil Spending Comparison 

    113A $8,054
    Homer 33C $8,879
    Cass SD 63 $9,459
    Maercker SD 60 $9,916
    Palos 118 $9,961
    Center Cass 66 $10,078
    Palos 128 $10,279
    North Palos 117 $10,375
    Darien SD 61 $10,601
    Gower SD 62 $10,936
    DG 58 $11,096
    Woodridge SD 68 $11,733
    State $11,785
    Will County SD 92 $12,486
    Hinsdale 181 $14,066
    Lisle SD 202 $14,788
    Burr Ridge 180 $15,050

     

    Operational Spending comparison

    Operational Per Pupil Spending Comparison 

    113A $13,537
    Homer 33C $15,499
    Palos 128 $15,681
    Palos 118 $15,867
    Center Cass 66 $15,919
    North Palos 117 $16,486
    Darien SD 61 $16,845
    Cass SD 63 $17,278
    Maercker SD 60 $17,999
    Woodridge SD 68 $18,416
    Gower SD 62 $19,070
    DG 58 $19,593
    State $20,129
    Hinsdale 181 $22,402
    Will County SD 92 $22,670
    Lisle SD 202 $25,138
    Burr Ridge CCSD 180 $28,233

    What will this cost me?

    District 113A is placing a limiting rate referendum on the November 2026 ballot. If approved, the limiting rate increase would generate an estimated $6,000,000 annually. Use the online tax calculator to calculate your home’s tax impact.

    Tax Impact table


    What would the additional revenue support?

    If approved by voters, the 36-cent limiting rate increase is estimated to generate approximately $6 million annually. It would allow the District to create additional classroom space at all four schools and provide the staffing, maintenance, and operational resources necessary to support those classrooms.


    Why are there so many administrators in District 113A? Couldn’t the District cut administrative costs instead?

    District 113A actually operates with one of the leanest administrative structures in the area. The District has one of the highest number of students per administrator among comparable local districts, meaning fewer administrators are supporting more students.

    District 113A is a nearly $40 million organization serving more than 2,700 students across four schools, yet many major district functions—including finance, human resources, teaching and learning, technology, transportation, and buildings and grounds—are each led by just one administrator. 

    The District also does not employ several administrative positions commonly found in comparable districts, such as dedicated directors for communications, multilingual education, early childhood, or assessment.

    Reducing this already-lean administrative structure would not address the underlying issue driving the referendum: continued enrollment growth and the need for additional classroom space and staffing to serve more students.

    A bar chart comparing the number of students per administrator in D113A (177) versus the state average (136).