Looks as If Woodstock City Council Wants Another Tax

Dring through Woodstock this week, I saw a lot of “No Tenant Tax” signs.

‘No Tenant Tax”

It wss not too long ago that the Woodstock City Council hiked the sales tax and imposed a plastic bag tax.

Can anyone provide details.


Looks as If Woodstock City Council Wants Another Tax — 22 Comments

  1. I have herd from several cashers at stores in Woodstock that one of the council members that pushed for the bag tax won’t even take a bag at the store.

    And that they do not bring their own in either.

    Hypocrites to no end.

  2. People in McHenry County that are somewhat equal distant between Woodstock and Crystal Lake can choose Crystal Lake to shop to avoid the bag tax. Crystal Lake will be the winner in added revenue for the stores and sales tax for the city. An added benefit is that traffic moves smoother in Crystal Lake vs Woodstock.

    Just amazing that Woodstock is so dumb in this age of heightened awareness about germs. By their bag tax measure, Woodstock is indirectly encouraging people to bring in their own germ infested bags and put these on the counters of stores. If you see somebody bringing in a bag or bags to a Woodstock store, do you know where that bag(s) been? Touching dirt, germs, dried up dog poop, whatever, child’s throw up, etc.

  3. The ‘Tenant Tax’ is denied prominently on Woodstock City website.

    Technically it is not a tax on tenants.

    It is technically the imposition of costly mandates and vaguely defined new requirements for landlords, which will in essence ‘Tax Tenants’ as raising the rent is the only way to pass along the new costs.

  4. Weren’t they trying to do this a few years ago?

    iirc they were trying to tax landlords and the “no tenant tax” started because people said the owner would just pass the cost on to them.

    Not sure what ever happened with that but it sounds like they scrapped it and are bringing it back now.

    I heard they brought the bag tax back.

    The premise was they were suspending the bag tax because of COVID.

    Then when the numbers went down and things were looking up, they brought it back, and now things are goofed up again but they are collecting the money anyway.

  5. “How is it hypocritical to not take a bag?”

    It’s only hypocritical, when you vote to tax the bags, I will assume the village needs the money, so paying for a bag would be the duty of a lawmaker who supports such laws.

  6. The tenant tax refers to Woodstock’s proposed performance-based property improvement program.

    The gist of the program is they’ll force the biggest slumlords to make considerable improvements to their properties.

    The practical effect is that landlords will raise their rents, passing the costs on to tenants and eliminating the most affordable units.

    This is gentrification by governmental fiat rather than through the market.

    And gentrification is what most Woodstock progressives actually want.

    They don’t want to help poor people in their community because poor people are icky, maintain crummy lawns, and have several inoperable cars in the driveway.

    The Woodstock progressives want the gay pride farmers market progressive utopia but don’t want to do the hard work of bringing the neediest along for the ride.

    This vision of Woodstock has been in motion for a while now.

    Anybody notice that all the alkie bums who used to use the Square as their private sunbathing grounds are missing?

    Where did they go?

    Did Woodstock lift them out of homelessness, or did Woodstock merely run them out of town?

  7. **It’s only hypocritical, when you vote to tax the bags, I will assume the village needs the money, so paying for a bag would be the duty of a lawmaker who supports such laws.**

    Typically, the general premise of a bag tax is to reduce plastic bag consumption.

    I don’t think it is hypocritical, at all, to choose to not use a bag.

  8. Thank you, Batman (and Susan). I forgot all those details.

    Your commentary on Woodstock is spot-on.

  9. Woodstock is AWFUL!

    It’s like they’re dedicated to making their residents live with less and less each year!


  10. Wasn’t one of the prominent Woodstock Gestapo people finishing their previously unfinished basement without a permit years ago?

    It was learned that the house had an extra bedroom and more living square footage upon selling than when he bought it and no where in the system was a permit to do the work.

    They need to start fining and taxing these people upon listing their homes for sale.

    By screwing the city out of upgraded work places the burden on the people who abide by the law and get the permits on time.

    Then the new owner gets their taxes raised big time during the next quad.

  11. The grocery stores once had brown paper bags, which were recyclable.

    They switched to cheaper plastic bags in the mid 1980s (before my time).

  12. A Woodstock councillor plastic bag tax advocate who won’t use or buy a cloth bag IS indeed a hypocrite.

    Reimagining the word “hypocrite” won’t work! πŸ€”πŸ””

  13. Hey Batman – Sixth paragraph, I don’t want that either.

    As for where’d the homeless go – McHenry took them thankfully.

  14. There are a lot of homos in Woodstock.

    Prim hires many of them.

    Tadelman gushes over them.

    Buehler is afraid of his own shadow.

  15. How about a tax on degenerates….. should net quite a lot.

    Sager said he’s moving to Key West, where he can wear his little vest of naked teens.

    When I told him in that’s in the hated state of Florida, he scrunched up his little calf face and said “Oh”

  16. Cal, I found this response from city councilwoman Wendy Piersall defending what they are trying to do.

    Thought you might find it interesting so I copy and pasted it below with a link.


    “Absolutely NO new fees or taxes are being proposed. The signs that you are seeing were printed in opposition to a very different ordinance that was considered in 2017.

    “At that time Woodstock was considering a Landlord Registration Program that would have charged property owners $15 per unit to participate.

    “Woodstock is considering a considerably less intrusive ordinance soon, one that is crafted specifically to not affect any landlord in the city who is already following current laws.

    “We are still in the process of developing the ordinance, but the general goal is to ensure that landlords with *repeated code and legal violations* are more effectively held accountable.

    “Again, absolutely NO fees or taxes are being proposed. (I’m on the Woodstock City Council)(edited)”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *