As Chicago voters prepare to elect their first-ever school board president on Tuesday, the district’s ongoing funding challenges have emerged as a central issue among the three candidates vying for the position. The Chicago Board of Education passed a $10.11 billion budget months ago that included an anticipated $150 million in additional state funding—an amount tied to demands made to lawmakers in Springfield but with no guarantee the funds will materialize.
The Chicago Teachers Union (CTU), a powerful force in local education politics, has long opposed classroom cuts and school closures, and its endorsed candidate, Hilario Dominguez, insists state legislators can provide the necessary financial support. A former teacher and CTU political organizer, Dominguez points to his connections in Springfield as his main asset in securing this funding. “The money is there,” he said during a September debate, emphasizing that the school board president’s role is to press for state assistance rather than anticipate refusal.
However, opponents Jessica Biggs and Victor Henderson criticize the board’s reliance on uncertain state aid. Biggs, a current board member backed by labor unions and philanthropist Michael Sacks, voted against a budget amendment demanding $150 million in additional state support, arguing that the district must take responsibility for managing existing resources. She draws on her experience as a South Side principal during a similar funding shortfall in 2017, when promised state money failed to arrive and the district faced cuts and increased borrowing.
Henderson, a lawyer positioning himself as an outsider, calls for a forensic audit before any financial reforms or tax increases. He proposes a more transactional approach to funding discussions with Springfield and rejects the idea of raising property taxes without clear evidence that the district manages funds responsibly. “You have two folks who have raised taxes, or say they’re gonna raise taxes, and me saying that the taxes should not be raised one single iota unless and until CPS shows that that money’s being used properly,” Henderson stated in a recent debate.
The state government’s stance remains cautious. Governor JB Pritzker acknowledged that while supplemental funding discussions have not been ongoing, the legislature has already passed a budget for the current fiscal year, limiting new appropriations. He emphasized that any additional aid must consider statewide needs rather than focusing solely on one district.
All candidates agree that Illinois should eventually provide full funding for schools, but differ sharply on timing, strategy, and conditions tied to that support. Dominguez advocates leveraging unexpected state revenues and potential new taxes on the wealthy, as well as extracting funds from legal settlements like the recent Meta settlement, though officials have indicated restrictions on using those monies. Biggs has proposed a five-year financial recovery plan aimed at eliminating borrowing and establishing stronger fiscal reserves, while Henderson stresses transparency and accountability as prerequisites for further funding.
Beyond state aid, the district confronts declining enrollment and rising costs, complicating efforts to balance the budget. School closings remain a politically sensitive topic: Dominguez opposes any closures, citing research warning of increased violence, whereas Biggs and Henderson remain open to them but stress the importance of community engagement.
The candidates also differ on property taxes, a key revenue source that Chicago Public Schools has maximized for over a decade. Both Dominguez and Biggs support maintaining the levy as needed, though with hopes of eventual relief through other sources. Henderson opposes any tax increases until financial inefficiencies are thoroughly investigated.
As Chicago voters head to the polls, the debate over how best to stabilize the district’s finances highlights a broader struggle over the role of local and state government in funding public education.