The Illinois Policy Institute focused on House Bill 278 on March 16th.
It would “would transfer an additional $300 million per year of state income tax funds to local governments, continuing to prop up local overspending that fuels high property taxes,” the article asserts.
Extra money for municipalities and county governments for which local officials would not have raised themselves.
Here’s the roll call:
Roll call on House Bill 278, a bill that would increase the transfer of income tax collections to local municipalities and county governments.
Three Republicans voted for the bill:
- Chad Hayes
- Robert Pritchard
- Steve Reick
Wonder why Reick was out in left field on that one…
I didn’t realize that the State of Illinois was so flush with cash that they could afford to do this.
Should we have payed more attention to the Reick commercial which described the “round mound” as a good guy?
Unfortunately the other choice would have been worse.
Add one more reason to the list of why people are
moving out of Illinois in record number with each passing year.
.
BTW, is the value of your home increasing or decreasing ?
Property taxes going down or up ?
I’d bet on the latter of these two questions.
When are you people going to learn that the Illinois Policy Institute is only here to take your money and hand it over to Rauner’s buddies and corporations?
The Local Government Distributive Fund is our tax dollars coming back locally to be used on services that benefit us.
It takes the burden off of the property taxpayer because it pays for items that would otherwise be charged to property owners.
It’s like school funding.
If the state actually gave the schools what it is mandated to by the state Constitution, the school funding burden borne by property owners would be reduced.
The distributive fund has already been slashed drastically and Rauner wants to cut it altogether.
If that happens then your property taxes will go up or services will be cut.
I don’t know about you but I would rather that my income tax dollar go to paying for improving roads in my village than be handed over to a business owner just because.
Go and actually read this propaganda piece.
It speculates that the the funds would be used for “perks” and “overspending”, without a single shred of proof that what they say is true.
Our portion of income taxes depends on how much money we make.
Our property taxes do not care about our ability to pay.
Where would you rather have the money that is used to run your village come from – your income taxes or your property taxes?
If you follow this garbage piece by IPI your property taxes will continue to go up.
Like most IPI pieces, this is riddled with lies.
Studies I have read show that property taxes are roughly proportional to one’s income.
One does not live in Turnberry, for instance, unless one’s income can pay for the taxes on one’s home.
I’d like to see these studies given the number of people who say that they can’t afford their homes anymore because of the taxes.
I could have sworn IPI put out a plan for a balanced budget that included completely eliminating the local government distributive fund.
Now they’re talking about giving it more money?
Make up your mind lol
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2017/01/31/conservative-policy-group-pitches-state-budget-plan-with-no-tax-hike/
“Illinois Policy Institute CEO John Tillman said it also would end state revenue sharing with larger local governments, which he claimed spend more money than they should.
“We want to end that charade. We want to create local accountability. If a local school district wants to engage in pension spiking at the end of a teacher’s career, they can do that. If they want to give administrators excessive compensation packages, they can do that. But they won’t be able to send the bill to other taxpayers anymore,” he said.”
Illinois Policy Institute
Illinois Politicians Vote to Divert $300M From State Coffers to Fuel Local Spending
March 17, 2016
by Amy Korte
“The Illinois House of Representatives voted March 7 to divert up to an additional $314 million in state tax dollars each year to local governments.
This proposal, House Bill 278, would increase state spending despite Illinois’ billions in deficit spending, billions more in unpaid bills, over $130 billion pension debt, and dismal credit rating.
The bill also props up a system that encourages local government overspending and a lack of accountability.”
http://www.illinoispolicy.org/illinois-politicians-vote-to-divert-300m-from-state-coffers-to-fuel-local-spending
+++++++++++++
Illinois Policy Institute (IPI) is against HB 278 in the 100th General Assembly, not for it.
+++++++++++++
The Local Government Distributive Fund is a portion of state tax revenues diverted to local.
The primary state tax revenue is state income taxes.
Local has cannot levy an income tax, but it obviously can levy a property tax and sales taxes, among other sources of revenues.
A major state expense is the state contribution to the 5 state pension funds (TRS, SURS, SERS, GARS, & JRS).
More money to pensions means less to public schools.
Many of the pension system were ruined by legislators hiking pension benefits and employers hiking salaries even though pensions were already underfunded.
That is especially the case for the Teachers Retirement System (TRS).
Read the TRS document, Evolution of the TRS Benefit Structure, which details legislative pension benefit hikes to TRS.
Every single one of those benefit hikes occurred while the pension system was underfunded, because TRS was never fully funded.
Instead, the pensions should have first been fully funded, then if there is money in the budget to do so, hike pension benefits.
++++++++++
The state constitution does not mandate a particular funding level for public education.
Here is the verbiage in the state constitution about public education:
“Article X
Education
A fundamental goal of the People of the State is the educational development of all persons to the limits of their capabilities.
The State shall provide for an efficient system of high quality public educational institutions and services.
Education in public schools through the secondary level shall be free.
There may be such other free education as the General Assembly provides by law.
The State has the primary responsibility for financing the system of public education.”
———
The Legislative Research Unit in the Illinois General Assembly produced a document titled, “1970 Illinois Constitution for Legislators, Fourth Edition” in 2005 that provides some context and judicial interpretations of those sentences.