A communication from CL Library Trustee Bill Weller about the piece posted yesterday against the $30.1 million advisory referendum put on the ballot by the Crystal Lake City Council:
A “Vote Yes” sign for the advisory referendum on building a new Crystal Lake Library is next to a sign passed out by the Library.
As a Trustee of the CL Public Library, I hope you will let me clarifythe misinformation and counter the accusations made in the anonymous handout that is associated with the Vote No yard signs. I’ll discuss them point by point.
• The author is right that this proposal is more expensive than the new building rejected by the voters 12 years ago. The escalation of costs for constructing a new library is going up about $1M a year. If we don’t build a new library now, but decide 10 years later we should have, it will cost at least $10M more. Pretty simple, actually.
• Calling it a massive increase is a matter of opinion and what each voter needs to decide for him or herself. If your home has a Fair Cash Value (this figure is on your tax bill) of $200,000, you will pay $132 more per year. The author plays with a lot of numbers in this one, but using percentages is misleading. The actual figures are these: the Library now gets 3.87% of your total tax bill and with no other increases from other taxing bodies, building a new library would raise that to 5.6%.
• The Park District does a great job, but you can’t directly compare it to the Library. The Park District serves a district and therefore has a much larger tax base. If more people are paying in, the tax rate can be lower. The Library’s service area is defined by the borders of the city of Crystal Lake. Consider also that the Park District charges additional fees for programs and events, while the Library does not.
The last 2 points are accusations made in an email sent last February to the City Council and the NW Herald. The Library Board was informed and responded directly to the accuser, pointing out the falseness of these accusations supported by legal counsel and references to the appropriate Illinois codes.
• The Board made legal purchases of the properties necessary for our proposed new building with the full knowledge, counsel, and guidance of the Library’s attorney. The method used to make those purchases was informed by past experience, designed to save tax payers’ money, and fully legal. The reasons behind the purchases, and the method used to do so, has been openly discussed in various venues. Any trustee will gladly explain if asked. As to the prices, and references to “prevailing market values,” I don’t know where the author is getting his/her numbers, but the Board, realtor, and
lawyer, who were actually involved in those negotiations, determined the prices paid were reasonable.
• There are several mistakes in this point (such as referring to the Library Director as a Trustee), but the key accusation of wrongdoing demonstrates a misunderstanding of the differences between Village and Township and City libraries. In Crystal Lake, the Library Trustees are appointed by the Mayor with the approval of the City Council (75 ILCS 5/41). As to the author’s opinion that the Trustees are insular, stale, and out-of-touch, most citizens appreciate that there are individuals willing to volunteer their time to gain experience, become knowledgable, study options, and make tough decisions.
It’s what makes Crystal Lake a great place to live.
Mr. Weller apparently doesn’t get it.
Purchasing land with taxpayers dollars without a taxpayer vote may be legal but it shouldn’t be.
And just because it’s legal does not make it ok.
Home Rule authority should be banned.
Look where it has gotten us.
High property taxes and high debt.
Government purchasing land without holding a voter referendum….that’s the face of home rule.
++++++
Repeal prevailing wage and reign in labor costs.
Read the Governor Bruce Rauner administration’s Turnaround Agenda.
The minutiae of union friendly legislation and unfunded mandates has hiked labor costs and as the author of post makes clear, there is no end in sight.
Up, up, up.
++++
Mr. Weller doesn’t bother to give the taxpayers the most basic information about the advisor referendum.
What is the estimated bond payment schedule…the annual schedule of principal, interest, and total paid by the City to the bondholders.
+++++
What is the estimated taxpayer payment schedule…the estimated property taxes on a a $200,000 house from the taxpayer to the village, for the life of the bonds.
+++++
See my other comments in other Crystal Lake Library posts for additional details that should be revealed before voting for this referendum.
Based on lack of information, vote no.
Point one:
Escalation of costs is countered by interest paid on bond borrowing, as normal inflation makes money “cheaper” in the future than today.
interest on a 20 year 3% bond is about $10 Mil so inflationary escalation of costs is a hollow argument.
But the mindset indicated by this trustee is frightening.
It demonstrates a blind spot for the plight of average citizens affected by the same inflation being described.
Look at what that $132 per year does for the person who is allowed to keep it:
If that $132 is just extra money lying around the household budget, it might be saved by the homeowners and accumulate 3% interest. In one year the $132 turns into $135, $177 in ten years.
If the household carries credit card debt at 10% interest rate, the seizure of $132 represents $342 ten years hence.
Also the trustee fails to incorporate the (negative) capitalization of property tax rates into home values.
Because CL property tax rates are already far higher than rates across America and Chicago, that $132 will also decrease the home value $132, each year going forward, relative to homes elsewhere.
A homeowner wishing to sell here and buy ‘there’ will fall further behind even conversion values annually.
The trustee describes effect of cost on forced-payers without an understanding of the true depth of the effect.
“I don’t know where the author is getting his/her numbers, but the Board, realtor, and lawyer, who were actually involved in those negotiations, determined the prices paid were reasonable.”
The only person in that group with sufficient experience and training to render such an opinion is the real estate broker.
But, the broker had a conflict of interest because the broker’s commission goes up if we over paid.
Please tell me that you amateurs got an independent appraisal.
… we all know they will and I can not afford this so I will vote no to a new library, sorry.
“As to the author’s opinion that the Trustees are insular, stale, and out-of-touch, most citizens appreciate that there are individuals willing to volunteer their time to gain experience, become knowledgable, study options, and make tough decisions.”
The entire board needs to be sacked.
Each and every one of you has betrayed the overwhelming majority of city residents, and the scary thing is that you don’t even know it.
You’ve wasted our money optimistically buying land for a project that will never be approved, and have wasted who knows how much on consultants and architects and focus groups to envision your library of the future.
Beyond the wasted money, you have been down right deceptive at every stage of this process.
Your Orwellian abuse of language is incredible.
The cheerleaders keep spouting about how this building project makes “needed” repairs.
Does everyone know how they arrived at the determination that these items are needs?
They held a focus group stacked full of their buddies and asked them whether 30 or so projects were “needs” or “wants.”
At the end of the session, they made an arbitrary cut-line and decided those dozen or so items were desperately needed.
And so they get to pretend that expanding the children’s play room is a needed repair on par with patching the potholes in the parking lot or fixing the roof.
Or how about the tax dollars you are using to overtly campaign on this issue.
You have librarians giving guided tours of the facility lamenting all the minor maintenance and repairs the existing building needs and selling a $30,100,000.00 palace to fix those ills.
Yes, nothing I’ve seen so far has crossed the line of illegality, but it’s beyond belief that you went out and got an expensive legal opinion (paid for by the citizens, natch) asking how you could get right up to the line without crossing it.
You haven’t broken the law, but you’ve nevertheless committed the same betrayals of public trust that the law was designed to prohibit.
Every single one of the trustees needs to go.
About 20% of the librarians need to be fired, too.
If they have enough down time to give walking tours advocating for spending our money, they are over staffed.
The librarians have gotten complacent and arrogant in their cushy, secure jobs, and they need to be reminded who they work for.
Rawdogger has said it well.
Trustees have a fiduciary obligation to the beneficiaries of the trust.
This is a very high standard of obligation.
And the beneficiaries are the taxpayers, NOT the library.
If the trustees wish to represent the library, they should serve on the board of the Friends of the Library or the Foundation.
But if they agree to serve on the Library Board, they agree to act in the best interests of the taxpayers.
In our democratic system of checks and balances, they are to be the check on the bureaucracy.
Instead their actions have been grossly unethical.
They have not only failed to represent the taxpayers and represented the library instead, they have purposely provided incomplete and misleading information to the taxpayers, often at taxpayer expense.
These same people would be appalled to see exactly the same actions carried out by a charity — a board acting to make the charity bigger with a fancy headquarters and excess staff and without regard to the people the charity is supposed to serve.
They would be appalled if they felt the FDA was serving the drug industry rather than the public, or the FAA the airlines rather than the public, or the Veterans Administration allowed veterans to suffer and wait for treatment while making the VA bigger.
Yet when it’s something THEY’RE doing, purposely misleading the public is the righteous thing to do.
In the words of Justice Brandeis, beware
It reminds me of new-colonial imperialism which I’ve witnessed firsthand in former British colonies in Africa and Australia.
The ruling class believes it knows better than the Wogs what is good for the Wogs.
So it taxes the Wogs to pay for this ruling-class-desired ‘benefit’.
What goes unexamined is :
The benefit received by the ruling class, without any significant disruption of ruling class personal income or net worth.
Because the Wogs pay most of the nominal costs.
No consideration is wasted on Any cost-benefit analysis of what Wogs are supposedly receiving for their own (too ignorant to decide for themselves) best interests.
Complicating matters is that outside subsidy money is brought into a local closed system.
This outside input money is unsustainable but projected to be eternally available.
Trustees need to be shown a perspective which reaches their own personal threshold of pain.
Not unreasonable is to compare CL to Woodstock.
Woodstock has a 4.6% property tax rate.
It got there the way CL is going.
What will each library trustees personal household income and balance sheet look like when CL property tax rates get to 4.6%?
(It happens as a combination of higher annual nominal taxes in combination with annual declining home values).
I just received the monthly newsletter from the library.
Do you think we are stupid?
$9.1 million in “needed repairs”.
Of course a new building will never need repairs after 9 years.
LOL.
I love the picture stating that the teen room only has four chairs.
There are four kids playing a video game in surrounding a TV.
The room is empty!
The room seen in the background is also empty.
Once again, $9 million in repairs.
I’d like to see a detailed accounting of that estimate.
There’s a term for what’s going on:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture
It’s a well documented failure of government.
I would have linked to the academic articles spelling it out, but Wikipedia is more the speed of the members of the city counsel.
Susan, I agree with you but that w word is very offensive, sorry.
My library is a private, non-profit entity that has 2 paid (modestly) employees and the rest are volunteers.
The building was donated as are all the books.
It has Internet and is supported by the community.
It has a resale shop and used book store also run by volunteers.
It receives no taxpayer funds.
I know CL wants to think it is Xanadu or Malibu but if you vote this in, y’all are crazy!
If trustees provide a list of unique benefits they believe are provided, we could quantify the cost of alternative provision.
Examples of alternative cost of provision of video games and popular movie dvds have already been quantified by S. Willson posts.
Meeting rooms?
Take attendance per meeting and divide into cost of renting a conference room at local hotel.
Presumably hotel is paying property tax into the system, so include that offset.
Same goes for small meetings which may take place at local taxpaying coffee shops.
Cost of provision of research literature is variable by user.
Students are given free internet connection tablets and school libraries at taxpayer expense, so this seems a duplicate expense, to some degree.
Trustees, care to quantify your unique benefit provision?
How many students, how often, what literature unique to you?
It would be comforting to hear some specific cost-benefit analysis from trustees which justifies their current budget before hearing they NEED another $40+ million taxpayer dollars.
I think the W word is offensive too.
I believe it is the correct description of Trustees’ characterization of those on whom they inflict crushing tax burdens which destroy home equity value to boot.
I am offended by Trustees attitudes which are too lazy or isolated from personal impact and indifferent to perform cost-benefit analysis on specific harm done to median income households.
Where is the taxpayer property tax payment schedule for the library.
The taxpayers have only been given year 1.
Do not accept year 1 only.
Demand the entire property tax payment schedule.
If the government does not want to provide the property tax payment schedule for all years, vote no.
Why should property taxpayers vote yes if they don’t know the estimated total cost in property taxes for the library?
Why is the government withholding this key information from property taxpayers?
Who is dumb enough to “buy” something if they don’t know what their total cost will be.
Finally a sane voice –
Thank you Mr Weller!
I don’t see how anyone could feel that putting 9 million dollars of repairs into the current library is a good fiduciary decision.
What a waste of money!
All it does is put a Band-Aid on the problem.
It does not solve it.
For those who don’t want to see any money spent on even repairing the library you are basically saying that we should just sit by and watch this building fall apart.
There will come a time when that happens.
Is that “acting in the best interest of the taxpayers”?
In the words of T.S. Eliot
Where is this private library?
Nell, you are framing the problem without inclusion of quantifiable damage done to all citizens being taxed, and without any supporting evidence that provision of services cannot or are not already provided better and cheaper elsewhere.
That is at best useful idiocy, at worst a deliberate attempt to advance narrow self-serving agenda.
Arguing about a library is very much a moot point.
It does NOT matter what you vote here (even were it possible that we get that far).
You are going to get it anyway when the city has their way. A referendum does nothing in this instance.
Look up the word folks.
You are being hornswaggled.
Libraries have been rendered useless by years of new world order communist planning.
Trying to “save” this vapid institution while we are being nuked by Russia because they are leery of our stolen elections is totally useless.
Your priorities are going to change radically overnight.
Cal, it’s Taneyhills Community Library.
Rawdogger preempted me …..
This is just another outrage
To attempt a different tack from the clear headed brilliant continued input of Mark, Susan, Steve and others….
At this point the supporters of the new library seem to have abandoned the breathless panic of building a new library by the Post Office with no plan for the sale or public repurposing of the current library.
Their new argument is the current library building has slipped so far beyond repair it is untenable as a viable structure and needs abandonment/destruction.
Okay.
Let’s explore their current argument and its indications.
There are public and private buildings all over our young nation which, with proper construction and maintenance, are well over a century or more old.
The argument the trustees seem to be making is government has failed in their tenancy of our library building.
They failed to inspect the building, its addition, its improvements and its repairs to the point the building, from its foundations, is crumbling.
They failed to maintain the building with the tax money afforded them to do so to the point where the building, from its foundations, is crumbling.
The government has failed to put in place proper protections for the inventory of the stated use building, from its inception, to allow this inventory to survive inhabiting this building.
When children of any age are given a toy they desperately wanted and they fail to properly care for this toy to the point of its destruction or inviability responsible parents do not replace the toy.
Responsible parents use it as a teaching moment for the children.
So… Library Trustees, Public Building Inspectors and Crystal Lake Government who want a new library because of your PUBLICLY ADMITTED failure to care for the current library properly to ensure its long term survival and viability:
No.
You may not have a new library to build incorrectly, inspect improperly and fail to maintain at minimum standards to allow its survival.
When you show the Crystal Lake Taxpayer you can care for what you are given properly there can be another conversation.
Your allowance is now taken, the building is ours and we will take it from your irresponsible hands and you all need to sit in the corner to think about what you have done.
We appreciate your honesty in telling us you’ve all failed to care for our building.
You get points for honesty.
We will not be giving you any more responsibility until you can show some aptitude for taking care of what you’ve currently been given responsibly.
Thank You Priest.
Perhaps a more relevant question to pose to taxpayers on the November ballot should be:
They should then provide taxpayers with an estimated savings on their real estate tax bill that a $200,000 home would realize by eliminating this assessment.
I can almost hear the collective howl from the library trustees but I wonder if they are afraid of the outcome of this question?
There are many soft arguments that city officials like to throw around to support the need for a library such as,
I think I recently read that the under-45 demographic (households with children) is leaving the area, even though we have a library and good schools.
Is an expensive library project with questionable future relevance going to change this demographic trend?
I don’t know but I think a young family who wants public library services and good schools (and can’t afford the real estate taxes here) would simply live in a community that offers these amenities AND has lower taxes.
There are plenty of places that fit this description to choose from, and they are not in McHenry County/Crystal Lake.
I would also like to know how many people who live outside of the City of Crystal Lake pay the “fee” to be members of the library?
For those who have learned to live without the library, has it stunted their psyche and ruined their lives?
If they have learned to live without a library, is it because it’s not cost effective to pay $200-$300-$400+ dollars a year for their yearly needs for books and movies?
I read in the library newsletter that the library had to turn away children at a holiday event.
(Heart-tug tactic.)
If library type services were privatized, perhaps local entrepreneurs would start a children’s book club with children’s services, books, and movies (similar to a health club) and charge an affordable membership fee?
A business such as this would pay real-estate taxes and employ people who do not need a public pension.
Meeting space?
There are SO many creative, cost effective ways to address this in Crystal Lake that no one has pursued or considered.
The bottom line is this:
When our Illinois leaders finally get around to actually passing a budget, the state income tax, or some other tax is going to increase.
Health insurance costs are increasing.
The state is evaluating new ways to fund public schools and it could mean less money for McHenry County schools (and higher real estate taxes.)
Everything is increasing and McHenry County has not bounced back like other parts of Illinois and other parts of the country.
Our wages are stagnant and growth in Crystal Lake is non-existent/decreasing.
If Crystal Lake residents vote “no” for the Library plan in November, I hope City officials listen and perhaps consider whether “maintaining” a building at the cost of $9 million is prudent.
The fact that property has already been purchased is a bad sign.
They call it carpet-bagging back in the day with tax payers $$.
Its time to remove the council since they don’t get it
“its Not Theirs to spend!!!? not now not ever!
it belongs to the people!
and they will decide who should get it, not you!
its not your personal bank account.
get it?
My house is older than the Library.
It is far from needing to be entirely replaced.
You people should learn how to take care of things, especially with the money I already give you.
Maybe there’s a How-to book about it in there.
Don’t you love the threat he makes with if we vote this down it’ll cost 10 million more next time?
Didn’t somebody once mention that CL library has more full time and part time employees that any other library in the area?
Why is that I wonder?
Are they planning to hire a bunch more employees if they get a new building?
Why did they buy those houses on the corner without knowing yet if they will get approved for it?
Possibly they already know the answer and this referendem is just a smoke screen?
And where is the break down of the $9 million dollar repairs.
The complete itemized listing, in addition to the high level estimates.
That should be posted on the referendum website.
Another lack of transparency.
Labor would be at state mandated prevailing wage.
I just would like to know how I can get my hands on some of the “Vote No to the new Library”?????
Yard Signs***
“And where is the break down of the $9 million dollar repairs.”
They’re not repairs.
They’re improvements that the Trustees are deceptively calling “needed” “repairs.”
They’re neither.
The estimates for the improvements / repairs are not posted on any website.
The library and city is not being transparent.
Who benefits from a lack of transparency?
The CL library in 2116:
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/b9/16/50/b91650df376decd76036dc4bdf473ee3.jpg
The land purchased for the new building is now off the tax rolls for ever.
Is that lose of tax money being properly accounted for?
What about the lose of income to the other taxing districts?
Coffey, in another post, made the same point about factoring in lost property tax revenue when comparing new vs remodeled library.
In other words, the opportunity cost.
Once again, the Library Board and City is hoarding information and not posting it on the website.
Another lack of transparency.
++++++
The City does not videotape board meetings thus does not indefinitely archive videotaped board meetings on its website.
All the taxpayer money going to the City of Crystal Lake and the Crystal Lake School Districts, but they don’t bother to videotape the meetings so you can watch the tapes on YouTube to learn how they are spending your hard earned money.
Because they are making shady back door deals like they did with the trash collectors, like they did with the power company, like they did with the fluoride in our water, like they did with installing all those filthy wi-fi water meters that make people sick. The city if going down the soft kill route.
Some where I read that the 30 mill was not all for the building, but for new stuff for inside the new building.
What’s wrong with the stuff they have now in use?
Maybe using the serviceable old stuff and cutting the borrowed $$$$ down to say 15 mill would make it easier to consider.
Chevy’s get you to where you’re heading just almost like the Caddy.
The number of the bond issue amount is calibrated to be the max borrowing allowable under the law, as a function of percentage of current EAV
There is an email address on the signs.
The Crystal Lake Library advisory referendum website is called Focus.
One section of the Focus website is called, “Focus on the Future.”
Focus on the Future includes a calculator in which one can calculate their property tax hike for the library.
But it’s only for year 1.
Would the taxpayers pay hiked property taxes for only 1 year if the bonds are issued?
No.
So what is the property tax cost for future years?
http://focus.clpl.org
The blue sign in the picture in the blog post reads:
Vote Yes
For Our
Library
Crystal Lake
YesLibrary.com
+++++++++++++++
http://YesLibrary.com
(no www)
+++++++++++++++
That website doesn’t answer the question about tapxayer payments after year 1 either.
They are not revealing the cost to property taxpayers after year 1 to repay the bonds.
a portion of The Library Act:
ARTICLE 3. TAXATION
(75 ILCS 5/3-1) (from Ch. 81, par. 3-1)
Sec. 3-1. In any city of 500,000 or fewer inhabitants, the corporate authorities shall levy a tax for library purposes of not to exceed .15% of the value of all the taxable property in the city, as equalized or assessed by the Department of Revenue. If the annual public library tax rate of an established library was increased above .12% up to .20% prior to 1972 as provided in this Act, the corporate authorities shall then levy up to an additional .03% above the increased rate approved at the election. If, however, the corporate authorities desire to increase the tax rate but not in excess of .60% of value for such purposes, the corporate authorities may, by ordinance, stating the tax rate desired, direct that a proposition be submitted to the voters of the city at any regular election. The proposition shall be in substantially the form prescribed in Section 3-3. If a majority of the votes cast upon the proposition are in favor thereof, the corporate authorities may thereafter levy annually a tax for library purposes at the authorized increased rate. Any tax levied pursuant to Section 3-9 shall be disregarded in applying the provisions of this Section.
The corporate authorities may also levy an additional tax of .02% of the value of all the taxable property in the city, as equalized or assessed by the Department of Revenue, for the purchase of sites and buildings, for the construction and equipment of buildings, for the rental of buildings required for library purposes, and for maintenance, repairs and alterations of library buildings and equipment. In any year in which the corporate authorities propose to levy such additional .02% tax, the corporate authorities shall adopt a resolution determining to levy such tax. Within 15 days after the adoption of the resolution, it shall be published at least once in one or more newspapers published in the city, or if no newspaper is published therein, then in one or more newspapers with a general circulation within the city. In a city in which no newspaper is published, publication may instead be made by posting a notice in three prominent places within the city. The publication or posting of the resolution shall include a notice of (1) the specific number of voters required to sign a petition requesting that the question of the adoption of the resolution be submitted to the electors of the city; (2) the time in which the petition must be filed; and (3) the date of the prospective referendum. The city clerk shall provide a petition form to any individual requesting one. If no petition is filed with the corporate authorities within 30 days after publication or posting of the resolution, or if all petitions so filed are determined to be invalid or insufficient the city shall then be authorized to levy the tax. However, if within the 30 day period, a petition is filed with the corporate authorities, signed by electors of the city equal in number to 10% or more of the total number of registered voters in the city, asking that the question of levying such a .02% tax be submitted to the electors of the city, the question shall be submitted at an election. Notice of this referendum shall be given as provided by the general election laws of the state, and the referendum shall be held in all respects in accordance with those laws. The proposition shall be in substantially the following form: “Shall the corporate authorities of (name of city) be authorized to levy an additional tax of ….% for the construction of buildings, provision of sites, etc., as determined by resolution dated (insert date)?”. If a majority of votes cast upon the proposition are in favor thereof, the corporate authorities may levy the additional tax.
(Source: P.A. 91-357, eff. 7-29-99.)
unincorporated area taxation /backdoor referendum provision of Library Act:
(75 ILCS 5/3-4) (from Ch. 81, par. 3-4)
Sec. 3-4. When the electors of an incorporated town, village or township have voted to establish and maintain a public library as provided in Section 2-2, the corporate authorities of such incorporated town, village or township shall levy an annual tax for the establishment and maintenance of such library, not exceeding .15% of the value as equalized or assessed by the Department of Revenue. If the petition and ballots so specify in the original establishment as set forth in Section 2-2 of this Act, the corporate authorities may levy a tax in excess of .15%, not to exceed the rate specified in such establishment petition and ballot, but in any event not to exceed .60% of the value as equalized and assessed by the Department of Revenue. If the annual public library tax rate of an established library was increased above .12% up to .20% prior to 1972 as provided in this Act, the corporate authorities shall then levy up to an additional .03% above the increased rate approved at the referendum. Such tax rate may be increased to not to exceed .60% of the value, as equalized or assessed by the Department of Revenue, or the excess tax shall no longer be levied, if the electors of such incorporated town, village or township shall so determine by referendum at any regular election. Such referendum shall be petitioned for in the manner as the referendum for the establishment and maintenance of the library. Any tax levied pursuant to Section 3-9 shall be disregarded in applying the provisions of this Section.
The corporate authorities may also levy an additional tax of .02% of the value of all the taxable property in the incorporated town, village or township, as equalized or assessed by the Department of Revenue, for the purchase of sites and buildings, for the construction and equipment of buildings, for the rental of buildings required for library purposes, and for maintenance, repairs and alterations of library buildings and equipment. In any year in which the corporate authorities propose to levy such additional .02% tax, the corporate authorities shall adopt a resolution determining to levy such tax. Within 15 days after the adoption of the resolution, it shall be published at least once in one or more newspapers published in the incorporated town, village or township, or if no newspaper is published therein, then in one or more newspapers with a general circulation therein. In an incorporated town, village or township in which no newspaper is published, publication may instead be made by posting a notice in three prominent places. The publication or posting of the resolution shall include a notice of (1) the specific number of voters required to sign a petition requesting that the question of the adoption of the resolution be submitted to the electors of the incorporated town, village or township; (2) the time in which the petition must be filed; and (3) the date of the prospective referendum. The clerk of the incorporated town, village or township, shall provide a petition form to any individual requesting one. If no petition is filed with the corporate authorities within 30 days after publication or posting of the resolution, the incorporated town, village or township shall then be authorized to levy the tax. However, if within the 30 day period, a petition is filed with the corporate authorities, signed by electors of the incorporated town, village or township equal in number to 10% or more of the total number of registered voters in the incorporated town, village or township, asking that the question of levying such a .02% tax be submitted to the electors thereof, the question shall be submitted at a special or general election. Notice of this election shall be given as provided by the general election laws of this state in force at the time of the election, and the election shall be held in all respects in accordance with those laws. The ballot on which the proposition is submitted shall be in substantially the following form: “Shall the corporate authorities of (name of incorporated town, village or township) be authorized to levy an additional tax of …% for the construction of buildings, provision of sites, etc., as determined by resolution dated (insert date)?”. If a majority of votes cast upon the proposition are in favor thereof, the corporate authorities may levy the additional tax.
(Source: P.A. 91-357, eff. 7-29-99.)
Am I the only one who finds it disgraceful that we are in a fight for our lives against our elected officials, and we have to check the classified section of several newspapers DAILY in self defense?
No Susan.
You aren’t alone. Not by a long shot.
Sometimes, being the leader you are, you can feel alone.
Please let me assure you many stand with you in kindred spirit and more locally stand with you specifically.
Keep up your amazing efforts.
They are needed, desired, solicited and appreciated.
I have an advanced degree, lived in the library district for more than 50 years, have been to the Library twice since grade school.
I think the need is outrageously overstated.
My family will vote no.
I don’t think you people are getting it yet.
It doesn’t matter HOW you vote.
You are going to get this anyway.
Kind of like Trump is running 85% to 95% ahead of Hitlery yet you are going to get her, too.
Unless you start screaming and taking down the establishment jerks that are fomenting this junk, you are going to have to literally fight in the streets.
It’s only a handful of communist aholes but they are running everything the way they see fit.
Voting is not going to stop them.
Bond referendums in general (Park District, School District, Fire Protection District, City / Village / Town), etc. rarely present the taxpayers with adequate information to make an informed decision.
Missing information often includes:
– Estimated property tax hike for each year until bond is retired (paid in full).
For example, Crystal Lake is only providing the first year property tax hike.
—————-
– Estimated bond debt service schedule for each year until bond is retired, including principal, interest, and total payments.
For example, Crystal Lake is only providing the principal of $30.1 million.
+++++++++++++
– Breakdown of the estimated project costs, in summary and detail levels.
Whatever estimates Crystal Lake has received should be posted on the website, including all the detail in spreadsheets.
++++++++++++
– Presentations from the financial advisor to the taxing district should be posted on the website.
For instance, the Powerpoint presentations that PMA (financial advisor) presented to Crystal Lake during board meetings should be posted on the website.
+++++++++++
That is a good start.