top of page
.png)
Clear View: Sharing the Pride and Purpose of Teutopolis Schools
The Question Before Voters
On November 3, 2026, voters in Teutopolis CUSD #50 will decide whether to authorize the District to issue up to $15 million in School Building Bonds for improvements to Teutopolis Grade School.
The proposed work addresses identified needs involving school safety and security, instructional spaces, restrooms, ADA accessibility, elevators, floors and interior walls, water and sewer infrastructure, and related improvements to the Grade School building and site.
Clear View provides information about the proposal, the facility planning that led to it, financial considerations, the Grade School lease, community input, and the source documents used by the Board in its decision-making.
Ballot Question
Proposed Improvements
Voters will decide whether the Board of Education should be authorized to issue up to $15 million in School Building Bonds to make the Grade School improvements identified in the ballot proposition.The decision to place the question on the ballot was made by the Board in August 2026. The decision whether to grant that borrowing authority belongs to the voters of the District.
If a majority of voters voting on the proposition approve it, the District would receive authority to issue the bonds. The project would then move into additional architectural and engineering design, financing, bidding, Board review, and eventually construction.Approval of the proposition would not eliminate those later steps.
If the proposition is not approved, the District would not receive the requested authority to issue the proposed $15 million in School Building Bonds.The Grade School would continue operating, and the District would continue maintaining the facility. The identified building and infrastructure needs would also remain. The Board would then have to determine how those needs should be prioritized and addressed over time using available resources, individual projects, alternative funding mechanisms, or future planning.An unsuccessful referendum would therefore determine the availability of the proposed financing mechanism. It would not, by itself, eliminate the facility needs identified through the District’s professional assessments.
It contains the District's oldest school structure, dating to 1954, with identified infrastructure, accessibility and functional needs.
Safety/security, instructional spaces, restrooms, elevators/ADA accessibility, floors/walls, water/sewer and related building/site work.
No. Conceptual plans, renderings and estimates establish scope. Approval would be followed by additional architectural/engineering work, bidding and Board action.
View more relevant questions such as Cost & Taxes and Grade School Lease in our FAQ as well as additional resources in our Document Library.
Cost & Taxes
Explore the sections below to learn more. To view all frequently asked questions, view our FAQ page here.
The District currently has two outstanding General Obligation School Bond issues from 2019. As of the August 2026 Stifel analysis, approximately $4.815 million in principal remains outstanding on those obligations. The existing bonds are scheduled to be repaid through 2033.The District’s 2025 Equalized Assessed Value, or EAV, was approximately $237.6 million. For purposes of calculating statutory debt capacity, the applicable 2025 EAV including TIF and Enterprise Zone property is approximately $255.7 million.Under Illinois statutory debt limits for unit school districts, the District’s total debt limit at approximately $35.29 million. After subtracting the District’s existing $4.815 million of outstanding debt, approximately $30.47 million in statutory debt capacity remains.Debt capacity represents the legal maximum the District may borrow.
District reserves support several purposes, including maintaining cash flow, responding to unexpected expenses, supporting District operations, and funding capital improvements.The Board has used District reserves to address facility needs when the size of the project and the District’s financial position made that approach practical, including recent High School and security projects.A Grade School renovation approaching $15 million is substantially larger than those individual projects. Paying for a project of that size entirely from existing reserves would eliminate resources available for District operations, emergencies, and other capital needs.
Stifel’s August 2026 analysis provides estimated homeowner tax impacts for both a 15-year and a 20-year repayment structure.Under the 15-year option, the estimated annual property-tax impact is approximately $84 for a home with a $100,000 fair market value, $186 for a $200,000 home, and $389 for a $400,000 home.Under the 20-year option, the estimated annual property-tax impact is approximately $51 for a home with a $100,000 fair market value, $114 for a $200,000 home, and $239 for a $400,000 home.These illustrations include a $6,000 homestead exemption. They are estimates rather than guaranteed future tax bills.
For its borrowing analysis, Stifel used the District’s actual 2025 EAV of approximately $237.6 million and then assumed 2% annual EAV growth in future years for illustrative purposes. Stifel specifically notes that future EAV growth is an assumption used for analysis and is not guaranteed, but admittedly is lower than the historical average. The model also uses illustrative interest-rate assumptions and assumes costs of issuance equal to 2% of the borrowing amount. Stifel states that the interest rates are provided for illustrative purposes and are not a commitment to underwrite bonds at those rates.Actual tax impact would ultimately depend on the final bond repayment structure, interest rates when bonds are issued, future changes in the District’s EAV, the taxable value and exemptions applicable to an individual property, and the timing and structure of the final bond issuance.
For the 2025 levy year, the District’s existing Bond and Interest tax rate is approximately 0.331.Under Stifel’s illustrative $15 million borrowing analysis, the combined Bond and Interest tax rate would be approximately 0.636 under the 15-year repayment option or 0.519 under the 20-year repayment option.Those rates are modeled using the assumptions contained in the August 2026 Debt Book and should be viewed as estimates rather than guaranteed future rates.
The two structures involve a trade-off between annual tax impact and the total cost of borrowing.A 15-year repayment period would result in a higher estimated annual property-tax impact but would repay the bonds sooner. A 20-year repayment period would lower the estimated annual property-tax impact but would extend repayment over five additional years and result in greater total debt-service costs.Stifel’s analysis estimates total debt service on the new bonds at approximately $23.09 million under the 15-year structure and approximately $27.02 million under the 20-year structure, before considering the District’s existing debt service.
No. The Debt Book is a planning tool intended to help the Board and community understand possible borrowing structures and estimated financial impacts.Stifel notes that the financing terms are subject to further discussion and negotiation, that it does not guarantee the availability of the illustrated financing structures, and that the information is based on conditions and information available at the time the analysis was prepared.If voters authorize the bonds, final financing terms would be established later based on market conditions and subsequent Board action.
Grade School Lease
Explore the sections below to learn more. To view all frequently asked questions, view our FAQ page here.
The District currently has two outstanding General Obligation School Bond issues from 2019. As of the August 2026 Stifel analysis, approximately $4.815 million in principal remains outstanding on those obligations. The existing bonds are scheduled to be repaid through 2033.The District’s 2025 Equalized Assessed Value, or EAV, was approximately $237.6 million. For purposes of calculating statutory debt capacity, the applicable 2025 EAV including TIF and Enterprise Zone property is approximately $255.7 million.Under Illinois statutory debt limits for unit school districts, the District’s total debt limit at approximately $35.29 million. After subtracting the District’s existing $4.815 million of outstanding debt, approximately $30.47 million in statutory debt capacity remains.Debt capacity represents the legal maximum the District may borrow.
District reserves support several purposes, including maintaining cash flow, responding to unexpected expenses, supporting District operations, and funding capital improvements.The Board has used District reserves to address facility needs when the size of the project and the District’s financial position made that approach practical, including recent High School and security projects.A Grade School renovation approaching $15 million is substantially larger than those individual projects. Paying for a project of that size entirely from existing reserves would eliminate resources available for District operations, emergencies, and other capital needs.
Stifel’s August 2026 analysis provides estimated homeowner tax impacts for both a 15-year and a 20-year repayment structure.Under the 15-year option, the estimated annual property-tax impact is approximately $84 for a home with a $100,000 fair market value, $186 for a $200,000 home, and $389 for a $400,000 home.Under the 20-year option, the estimated annual property-tax impact is approximately $51 for a home with a $100,000 fair market value, $114 for a $200,000 home, and $239 for a $400,000 home.These illustrations include a $6,000 homestead exemption. They are estimates rather than guaranteed future tax bills.
For its borrowing analysis, Stifel used the District’s actual 2025 EAV of approximately $237.6 million and then assumed 2% annual EAV growth in future years for illustrative purposes. Stifel specifically notes that future EAV growth is an assumption used for analysis and is not guaranteed, but admittedly is lower than the historical average. The model also uses illustrative interest-rate assumptions and assumes costs of issuance equal to 2% of the borrowing amount. Stifel states that the interest rates are provided for illustrative purposes and are not a commitment to underwrite bonds at those rates.Actual tax impact would ultimately depend on the final bond repayment structure, interest rates when bonds are issued, future changes in the District’s EAV, the taxable value and exemptions applicable to an individual property, and the timing and structure of the final bond issuance.
For the 2025 levy year, the District’s existing Bond and Interest tax rate is approximately 0.331.Under Stifel’s illustrative $15 million borrowing analysis, the combined Bond and Interest tax rate would be approximately 0.636 under the 15-year repayment option or 0.519 under the 20-year repayment option.Those rates are modeled using the assumptions contained in the August 2026 Debt Book and should be viewed as estimates rather than guaranteed future rates.
The two structures involve a trade-off between annual tax impact and the total cost of borrowing.A 15-year repayment period would result in a higher estimated annual property-tax impact but would repay the bonds sooner. A 20-year repayment period would lower the estimated annual property-tax impact but would extend repayment over five additional years and result in greater total debt-service costs.Stifel’s analysis estimates total debt service on the new bonds at approximately $23.09 million under the 15-year structure and approximately $27.02 million under the 20-year structure, before considering the District’s existing debt service.
No. The Debt Book is a planning tool intended to help the Board and community understand possible borrowing structures and estimated financial impacts.Stifel notes that the financing terms are subject to further discussion and negotiation, that it does not guarantee the availability of the illustrated financing structures, and that the information is based on conditions and information available at the time the analysis was prepared.If voters authorize the bonds, final financing terms would be established later based on market conditions and subsequent Board action.
The planning process has focused on whether the existing facility can continue to serve the District if major deficiencies and functional limitations are addressed.Renovation allows the District to retain a substantial amount of existing educational space while updating aging infrastructure, accessibility, security, instructional areas, and other building components. Building an entirely new Grade School would represent a different project, site question, scope, and financial commitment.The proposition being presented to voters is specifically for improvements to the existing Teutopolis Grade School.
No. The Grade School property is owned by St. Francis Parish and is leased to Teutopolis CUSD #50. The District has operated the school under a long-term lease arrangement for many years.
This has been one of the issues considered during the planning process. The existing lease provides the District with the use of a substantial school facility for an annual lease cost that is comparatively modest when considered against the cost of acquiring land and constructing an entirely new school.The current arrangement also allows qualifying capital improvements made by the District to offset lease payments. Because the proposed renovation would represent a much larger public investment, the District has discussed a longer-term lease arrangement with the property owner as part of its planning.
A significant renovation would be accompanied by an extended lease agreement intended to provide the District with long-term use of the facility consistent with the size of the proposed investment.The District and property owner have discussed the framework for a potential lease extension should a renovation move forward. Any final lease arrangement associated with the project would be reviewed and approved through the appropriate public Board process.
bottom of page