McHenry County Blog

Let’s put the Villages of Greenwood and Trout Valley on top, because they levy no property taxes.

While most local governments in McHenry County increased the amount they are taking from the public, a limited number asked for less money in the coming tax bills than they requested last year.

In some cases, it was just pennies.

In other words, the governments tried to get the same amount as last year, but probably through rounding managed to get a bit less.

Others made an effort to make more significant cuts.

Still others tried to get the same amount, but, again, probably because of rounding, got a tiny bit more.  They are not listed below.

The problem is that not many of those on the Honor Role get much tax money.

Property owners will be taxed $797 million this year.

Residential property owners will pay most of it–$640 million.

The bulk of local taxes go to school districts.

$499 million will go for kindergarten through 12th grade education.

There only four of them who are taking less money this year than they did last year.

Another $32 million will go to community colleges.

$93 million will be funneled to special districts, as follows:

• Fire Protection Districts – $41.1 million
• Townships – $26 million
• Conservation District – $19.6 million
• Library Districts – $16.1 million
• Park Districts – $15.6 million
• Miscellaneous Districts – $698,000
• Sanitary Districts – $672.000
• Cemetery Districts – $44,000

Almost $67 million will flow to municipalities.  Of that total, municipal Tax Increment Financing Districts will receive $2.3 million.  In reality, all of the TIF money is paid by property owners outside of the TIF districts when their local tax districts raise their levies in order to make up for the money that is diverted for cities and villages to spend as they will within those districts.

State law allowed all but non-Home Rule municipalities to increase their “tax take” by 3% this year. That was the increase in the cost of living as measured by the Consumer Price Index.

There is not limit on tax increases for Home Rule municipalities.  In McHenry County, they are Algonquin, Barrington Hills, Crystal Lake and McHenry.

Only the tax districts that actually cut taxes–even if by the smallest amount–are on the list.

The following districts will get less money in 2012 than they got in 2011:

Junior Colleges

• Rock Valley College

School Districts

• Nippersink (Richmond & Spring Grove) Grade School District
• Prairie Grove Grade School District
• Richmond-Burton High School District
• Harvard Unit School District

Cities and Villages

• Village of Algonquin
• Village of Barrington Hills
• City of Crystal Lake (excluding fire protection, net is up)
• City of Harvard
• Village of Huntley
• Village of Lake in the Hills
• Village of McCullom Lake
• City of McHenry
• Village of Prairie Grove
• City of Woodstock

Fire Protection & Rescue Squad Districts

• Crystal Lake Rural Fire Protection District
• Fox River Grove Fire Protection District
• Marengo Rescue Squad
• McHenry Fire Protection District
• Richmond Fire Protection District

Library Districts

• McHenry Library District
• Marengo Park District

Township Governments

• Algonquin Township Road & Bridge District
• Chemung Township Road & Bridge District
• Coral Township
• Dunham Township
• Hartland Township
• Hartland Township Road & Bridge District
• Hebron Township Road & Bridge District
• Marengo Township
• Nunda Township Road & Bridge District
• Seneca Township
• Seneca Township Road & Bridge District

Sanitary Districts

• Northern Moraine Water Reclamation District

= = = = =

Other articles about the real estate tax bills that will be paid in 2013:

• Most Tax Rates for McHenry County’s Upcoming Tax Bills – Up 15% in Algonquin Township Part of Lakewood
• McHenry County Multiplier Increases Assessments 1.0243 for This Year’s Tax Bills, $1 Billion Assessment Loss Sends Tax Rates Soaring
• Property Tax Rates – Comparing This Coming Year’s to Last Year’s
• McHenry County Tax District Honor Role
• The McHenry County Taxman Cometh – Tax Bills on the Internet

I asked newly-re-elected Algonquin Township Supervisor Dianne Klemm for her views on taxes

She replied,

“I will do the very best I can to keep the levy flat and not raise taxes.

“I will not make a promise I may not be able to keep since the Supervisor does not have total control over that issue.”

Finally got a copy of a mailing supporting Nunda Township Supervisor candidate Bridgett Provenzano.

This is a hit piece on opponent Lee Jennings’ tax votes. And nobody claims authorship.

A press release from Grafton Township Supervisor Linda Moore:

Grafton Trustees Tax to the Max

At the January meeting of the Grafton Township Board, Supervisor Linda Moore proposed keeping taxes constant, but Trustees LaPorta, Murphy and Zirk refused to second the motion to discuss the Resolution to authorize the Supervisor to amend the Levy to last year’s extension.

Trustee Zirk however launched into discussion alluding to a risk that would be great if the township were not to collect the maximum tax dollars possible.

When asked to identify the risk, none could be explained.

In order for a local government to collect about the same as last year, its levy must be pretty close to the amount collected last year. That figure is called the “extension.”

Because there is some growth, a tax district could actually raise its levy a (the county assessor says about one-quarter of one percent for the county as a whole) tiny bit without raising bills on last year’s taxpayers.

Last year the extension for the combination of the Grafton Town Fund and the General Assistance Fund was $1,070,637.00.

The levy passed in December 2012 for this coming year was $1,102,142.00.

Because nothing was done, Grafton Township taxpayers will have to come up with an extra $31,505.00 in taxes.

As I understand the process, there is a short window of opportunity after the County Clerk’s Office decides what the tax rate will be and how much taxes will be extracted from taxpayers’ pockets. In that perhaps less than a week’s time frame, a district may make a last minute change.

The maximum that a tax district can increase its tax bill this year under the tax cap is 3%. By making the levy 4% higher than last year’s tax collections, the township trustees have decided to extract as much property taxes out of your pocket as is allowed by law.

”For the last three years, I have voted to keep next year’s real estate tax collections equal to the year before.” said Supervisor Moore.

Supervisor Linda Moore posted a separate agenda. This agenda gave Trustees Zirk, LaPorta, McMahon and Murphy another opportunity to adopt last year’s taxes to match the amount received last year.

Grafton Township taxpayers could actually have seen a small tax cut if Trustee Zirk would have favored this resolution. Zirk is the only trustee who is running for re-election.

An email from Algonquin Township Clerk Marc Munaretto, who is running against incumbent Supervisor Dianne Klemm for that office:

“Here is some information about the Township’s financial stewardship under Supervisor Klemm that might be interesting to your readers.

“Did you know that, despite the fact that the Township has enough cash in reserve to pay for almost a full year of Township expenses, Supervisor Klemm continues to increase the levy? [This was received before last night's meeting.]

“Moreover, she has increased the levy in each of the last 4 years by $123,000.

“And, budgeted town fund expenses rose by $300,000 last year over the previous year.

“I know that the Supervisor’s plan now, in response to the NW Herald article last week, is to rebate the increase in the levy that was adopted last November.

“As an acclaimed ‘tax fighter’ I imagine this kind of financial stewardship must give you pause.

“I know that it is upsetting to our electorate when their elected officials don’t get it.

“Our taxpayers are fed up with rising property taxes and declining property values.

“I think Algonquin Township can be a better financial steward under my leadership if I am elected Supervisor.”

A press release from Linda Moore:

Grafton Township Clerk Harriet Ford Fails to Include Supervisor’s Agenda Item to Propose Tax Cutting Resolution

At the December meeting of the Grafton Township Board, Supervisor Linda Moore proposed keeping taxes constant, but Trustees LaPorta, Murphy and Zirk voted in the maximum taxes without a public hearing.

In order for a local government to collect about the same as last year, its levy must be pretty close to the amount collected last year. That figure is called the “extension.”

Because there is some growth, a tax district could actually raise its levy a (the county assessor says about one-quarter of one percent for the county as a whole) tiny bit without raising bills on last year’s taxpayers.

Last year the extension for the combination of the Grafton Town Fund and the General Assistance Fund was $1,070,637.

The levy passed in December for this coming year was $1,102,142.00.

So, unless something is done quickly, Grafton Township taxpayers will have to come up with an extra $31,505 more.

Now, the Grafton Township Board of Trustees has been denied a second chance as a result of the Clerk Harriet Ford.

Supervisor Linda Moore requested the following item on Thursday’s agenda posted by the Clerk:

Resolution to authorize the Supervisor to amend the Levy to last year’s extension.

As I understand the process, there is a short window of opportunity after the County Clerk’s Office decides what the tax rate will be and how much taxes will be extracted from taxpayers’ pockets.

In that perhaps less than a week’s time frame, a district may make a last minute change.

For these reasons, Supervisor Linda Moore has posted a separate agenda. This agenda will give Trustees Zirk, LaPorta, McMahon and Murphy another opportunity to adopt last year’s taxes to match the amount received last year.

If a resolution authorizes the Township Supervisor Moore to lower the levy to last year’s extension (pretty much the amount collected), Grafton Township taxpayers could actually have seen a small tax cut because the amount to be collected would be shared by not only the taxpayers of last year, but the new taxpayers of this year.

The meeting will start at 7:30 pm at the Huntley Park District.

It is my understanding every tax district could make such last minute changes.

= = = = =

The story about what Dianne Klemm is doing can be found here.

After the November meeting of the Algonquin Township Board, McHenry County Blog ran a story pointing out that Bob Miller’s Road District had proposed keeping taxes constant, but that the levy for the Town Fund, while constant, actually would result in a tax hike.

The reason was that last year’s levy was high enough to allow for more money to be collected.  Last year, the County Clerk’s Office did not allow the entire levy to be collected…probably because it was higher than the Property Tax Cap allowed.

That left room for more taxes this year, even the levy was the same as last year’s.

In order for a local government to collect about the same as last year, its levy must be pretty close to the amount collected last year.  That figure is called the “extension.”

Because there is some growth (think of the commercial remodeling and construction on Route 14 in Crystal Lake), a tax district could actually raise its levy a tiny bit (the county assessor says about one-quarter of one percent for the county as a whole) without raising bills on last year’s taxpayers.

Last year the extension for the combination of the Algonquin Town Fund and the General Assistance Fund was $1.812,281.

The levy passed in November for this coming year was $1,861,000.

So, unless something is done quickly, Algonquin Township taxpayers will have to come up with an extra $51,281 more.

Not a lot, but a tax increase allowed under the Real Estate Tax Cap rules, which allows up to a 3% jump in property tax revenue for next year’s bill.

Now, the Algonquin Township Board of Trustees is being given a second chance.

Supervisor Dianne Klemm has put the following item on Wednesday’s agenda under New Business:

Resolution to authorize the Supervisor to amend the Levy to last year’s extension.

As I understand the process, there is a short window of opportunity after the County Clerk’s Office decides what the tax rate will be and how much taxes will be extracted from taxpayers’ pockets.

In that perhaps less than a week’s time frame, a district may make a last minute change.

If a resolution authorizes the Townships Chief Executive Officer, Supervisor Klemm, to do lower the levy to last year’s extension (pretty much the amount collected), Algonquin Township taxpayers could actually see a small tax cut because the amount to be collected would be shared by not only the taxpayers of last year, but the new taxpayers of this year.

The meeting will start at 7 at the Township Hall on Route 14.  The entrance to the meeting room, in the northeast corner of the building on the lower level , is from the back parking lot.

= = = = =
It is my understanding every tax district could make such last minute changes.

Grafton Township Supervisor Linda Moore’s weekly newsletter:

Weekly Newsletter from Supervisor Moore

SUBJECT LINE: Tax Rate Increase, Property Tax Quiz, Christmas Giveaway Successful, Christmas Crafts at
Bingo Tuesday

Dear Resident,

Merry Christmas! I am enjoying all of the Christmas lights as I meet with residents during the campaign
season. The township office is welcoming less visitors now that the deadline to file appeals has passed.

Try a quiz to see how much you know about your property taxes. The board met last week and returned to court again. The Christmas spirit is alive at the supervisor’s office.

TAX RATE INCREASE AT BOARD MEETING

Thursday night the board held its regular meeting. They passed an increase (4 to 1, Supervisor Moore voted no) in the tax levy for both the town (4%) and road district (4.99%).  [Under the Tax Cap, tax districts are allowed to increase the amount they take from taxpayers by 3%--the increase in the Consumer Price Index last year--plus new growth.  Both levies mentioned guarantee the Grafton Township tax districts will maximize their tax takes.]

Although I pointed out that residents cannot afford to pay more taxes and that the road district has a surplus equivalent to almost one year’s revenue, the motion carried.

Last week the trustees filed a new motion with the courts asking Judge Caldwell to approve a down payment of $10,000 for the services of a forensic auditor. The trustees have not cited any fraud, nor does a forensic audit guarantee fraud investigation. They have not approved payment on an independent audit completed two years ago.

ASSESSOR REQUESTS

Assessor Ottley is asking for 12 new windows in his office, he would also like to purchase a new copier, to contract with a new phone company and to pay $300 per month to join an MLS Service for commercial property. He does not know yet how many appeals have been filed, but he is sure that it was less than the 2000, approximately, that were filed last year. He will post the figures on his website soon.

QUIZ YOURSELF REGARDING TAX LEVIES

The levies passed by local government, which include townships, are used in the calculation of your tax rate. Here’s the formula:

LEVY(*1) / Total Equalized Assessed Value(*2) = Tax Rate

*1 – A Levy is determined by Bonded Indebtedness, Local School Boards, and Local Governments.

*2 – The Total Equalized Assessed Value is determined by the Assessor.

QUIZ

1. The largest share of property tax goes to _______________.
2. Give two examples of “special property valuations” or “preferential assessments.”
3. The _________ property owner pays the largest share of the property tax.
4. List two strengths of the property tax.
5. List two weaknesses of the property tax.

Look at the end of this letter for the answers. (Source – Illinois Property Institute)

CHRISTMAS DINNER GIVE-AWAY

Yesterday, the Huntley Lions Club and Grafton Township General Assistance Supervisor Linda Moore worked together to give away Christmas Dinners and presents donated by the Sun City Woodchucks and other private donors. The gifts were greatly appreciated. One of the recipients, with a large family of young children, asked for help with fuel to return home. The generosity of the Lions Club members was immediate, without hesitation and heart-warming. Everyone worked in rainy weather without complaint.

Highway Commissioner Jack Freund and Huntley Village Trustee Nick Hanson were on hand to pitch in. Thank you for giving families a Christmas Dinner and presents that they may not have been able to afford to celebrate otherwise. If you know of someone who is in a financial emergency, direct them to their local township office for possible help or for referral to help. We always welcome donations at the township office food pantry. Remember, if you know of someone who needs a coat, but can’t afford to buy one, we have plenty of warm coats available at the township for all ages.

TOWNSHIP BINGO THIS WEEK

On Tuesday, December 18th, at 11am join us for Christmas Crafts, a free lunch sponsored by Congressman Randy Hultgren, and bingo games. All ages are welcome. We will meet at the Huntley American Legion. This is the last event of 2012. January 15th is the next bingo. Please join us for some fun and have lunch on Congressman Randy Hultgren.

FLAG LOWERED

We have lowered the township flag to half-staff in memory of the recent victims of the Connecticut school shooting of 26 people ages 6 to 56. I extend my sincerest sympathies to their families.

Sincerely,

Linda Moore, Grafton Township Supervisor

QUIZ ANSWERS

1.  Education
2.  Farmland, Model homes, Coal, Solar Energy System, Historic residences, subdivisions, open space, subdivision commons, and oil.
3.  Residential
4.  Difficult to evade, Stable Revenue, value can be estimated, locally administered, historically a rising value.
5.  Taxes unrealized gains, inequitable assessments, lump sum payments are inconvenient, regressive, high burden on certain taxpayers relative to income, viewed as unfair.

The following email has arrived from McHenry Elementary District School Board member John O’Neill:

At the McHenry School District #15 Board of Education meeting held Tuesday, November 13th at Landmark School in McHenry we voted on publishing the “Notice of Proposed Property Tax Increase” in the Northwest Herald.

his will satisfy the Truth in Taxation requirement for the district to propose an increase in its tax levy. Imagine my surprise when I read it and at first glance I was drawn to the words,

“This represents a 52.96% increase over the previous year.“

My blood pressure shot right up there but then my heart nearly stopped when I saw the bottom showing the notice was submitted by…

John O’Neill, Secretary
Board of Education
McHenry School District #15

…part of the duty of secretary is that notices of meetings, agendas, etc go out in the name of the secretary.

At the meeting we discussed the tax levy at great length and the district’s Finance Committee Chairman and Business Manager both gave an overview of the Tax Cap Law or PTELL which really makes it difficult for taxing bodies to create their budget without enacting a tax increase.

One of the difficulties is that if there has been any new construction in the previous year, without taxing to the maximum the district will forever lose the ability to receive taxes from the new construction.

When Our illustrious State Rep. Jack Franks was pushing for a fundamental change in the governance of McHenry County with his County Executive referendum one of his talking points was that McHenry County sought the maximum tax for each of the past 21 years.

District #15′s tax levy is the type of “maximum tax” he was referring to.

Taxing districts overwhelmingly tax to the max under the so-called “Tax Cap” law in order to share the tax burden with all properties in a district, not just those which were built in previous years.

While Franks railed against the County for levying the maximum amount, there was a deafening silence from him regarding other taxing bodies such as

• School Districts
• Municipalities
• Library Districts and
• Fire Protection Districts

which regularly tax to the max.

This is typical of the Liberal Left when they give you the “truth” but not the whole truth.

After all the dust settles, McHenry School District #15 is seeking an increase in the neighborhood of 3.24% along with a bond repayment of 1.22% for a total increase of 4.46%.

This does not mean that a homeowner’s property tax bill will necessarily increase by 4.46% due to the convoluted nature of property tax calculations; not to mention the fact that a homeowner may win a property tax appeal and have their taxes lowered – in some cases.

The attached notice is, in fact an invitation to the Public Hearing which will be held at 7:00 pm on Tuesday, November 11, 2012 at McHenry Middle School, 2120 W. Lincoln Road, in McHenry. I hope to see many taxpayers there.

This is the season that taxpayers should be attending municipal meetings.

It’s when village trustees, city councilmen and aldermen decide how much to raise your taxes next year.

I almost added “if any” to the above sentence, but raising taxes is the nature of the beast called tax district.

“Feed me! Feed me!” one can almost hear the various types of school districts howling.

Just like in the “Little Shop of Horrors.”

Last Tuesday night I attended the Lakewood Village Board meeting.

After the group seeking a public-private partnership to build a new Village Hall left disappointed after Village Board members wanted more assurance that the estimated $3 million to be borrowed (out of about a $4 million total cost), the Board moved onto the tax levy.

Village President Erin Smith laid out three options:

1. “Captur[ing] the tax we are able to tax (that is, taking as much as possible)
2. “a ‘we never get that money back option’
3. “the Woodstock option–defer [the final decision] until we have more information option”

The third option would allow for an abatement of some or all of the tax increase on current taxpayers.

The Property Tax Cap, which Board members referred to by the initials of the statute’s name, PTELL, allows every tax district to pry 3% more out of taxpayers’ collective pockets next spring than this year.

In addition, tax districts are allowed to “capture” new growth.

That is estimated to be 26/100 of 1%.

One can certainly make an argument that tax revenue from newly-built or re-modeled properties, such as those along Route 14 in Crystal Lake, should contribute tax revenues.

If the amount requested next year were the same as this year, the new assessed valuation would actually bring about a tax cut for existing taxpayers.

But the nature of government is to grow, so that rarely happens.

In any event, to get maximum taxes from the new growth, a tax district must basically guess what it will be.  The actual number is not known until after all the assessment appeals have been complete.

Recommended to the Lakewood Board was the third option.

Pass what is called a “balloon” levy now which asks for the 3% increase in the Consumer Price Index, plus the County’s estimate of “new growth” and, then, when the final assessment appeal numbers are in, take another look to see if the Board wants to cut back the amount it is requesting.

Trustee Carl Davis argued, “Go for the maximum PTELL will allow.”

He pointed out that property taxes are not the only source of revenue the Village has, but it is “the only source deductible from Federal income taxes.”

Davis pointed out that vehicle stickers are not deductible and suggested eliminating that $65,000 revenue source instead of cutting property taxes.

Needless to say, I made a pitch from the taxpayers’ point of view.

The Board voted 6-0 to levy the maximum amount of taxes allowed by law with the understanding its members would re-visit the issue once the final assessment numbers are known.