McHenry County Blog

That’s what Supervisor of Assessments Robert Ross emailed me in September:

“The Department of Revenue has indicated McHenry County assessments must go down approximately 9 percent in 2012.”

Now comes my Algonquin Township assessment notice and guess what it says?

The assessment is being cut by 9.06%, as you can see.

Such an assessment cut does not mean my or your bill will decrease 9%.

In fact, as long as tax districts (think mainly schools, which take most of our property tax dollars) are beneath their statutory tax limit, the County Clerk will raise our tax rates to tax us what the tax districts request.

So, don’t be surprised if your next tax bill is higher than it was this year.

Under the heading of

“Why your tax bills went up,”

in Kevin Craver’s article on the issuance of Property Tax bills is a misstatement from the McHenry County Supervisor of Assessments.

The Northwest Herald story says Robert Ross indicated,

“The answer is a simple one – mainly because of the tax cap, and to a lesser extent the record number of people who challenged their assessments.”

That indirect quote, if accurate, is completely wrong as far as implicating the Tax Cap for tax increases.  It is true if you are one who did not appeal your real estate assessment last year.  The latter shifts the tax burden from those who receive assessment cuts to those who don’t.

Tax increases are caused by elected (and appointed) tax district officials (mainly school board members) asking for more money.

Over the first approximately fifteen years of the life of the Real Estate Tax cap law, assessments were shooting up much more than the increase in the rate of inflation.

I remember the year before the Tax Cap went into effect in the early 1990′s real estate inflation was huge.

Crystal Lake High School District 155′s Board took the entire 17% increase. In other words, the last year before the law, the largest high school district in McHenry County raised taxes 17%.

Talk about taxing to the max.

In subsequent years tax districts were not allowed to increase their tax requests by more than in the increase in the Cost of Living, even if their assessments increased by a tremendous percentage.

"Balloon levying" wrings every tax dollar possible out of property taxpayers.

There was an exception and that was for new construction.

In order to make certain they got every last dime, tax district “ballooned levied,” that is, asked for far, far more than knew they could get so they would not leave the new construction tax crumbs (really more than crumbs until real estate values collapsed) on the table.

When property inflation was higher than the cost of living’s increase, the tax rate was forced down.  That was done as the County Clerk’s Office applied the Tax Cap law.

Remember all those press releases from local school boards and municipalities about how good they had been to taxpayers because they lowered their tax rates?

Well, it was claiming credit for something the County Clerk did automatically in order to limit the total taxes that could be pulled out of taxpayers’ pockets.

If assessments went up more than inflation, the tax rate had to be adjusted downward to comply with the collection limit imposed by the Tax Cap, that is, last year’s collection, plus whatever the increase was in the Consumer Price Index, plus new growth.

The result is that most, if not all, local tax districts are beneath the tax rate they are allowed to charge under state law.

So, if assessed valued decreases, the County Clerk must raise the districts’ tax rates if they as for more money.

If they do what the majority on the McHenry County Board did

(See “Remembering the County Board Members Who Voted to Maximize Our Tax Increases,”)

the district still balloon levies in order to grab all the new construction assessed valuation.

And, if it takes a higher tax rate, that’s what taxpayers see.

The electronic sign outside of the McHenry County Treasurer's Office says, "First Installment Due."

Ross tells it as it is in this sentence in the same article:

“When you have tax levies going up and assessments down, there’s only one way the rates can go.”

And that’s what will continue to happen until tax districts start bumping up against their statutory limits.

While I have not done an analysis of which tax districts increased or decreased (some did, e.g., my Village of Lakewood, where the pre-Tax Cap, non-referendum Golf Course Bonds were paid off last year, cutting real estate taxes a big chunk) you can read what happened to various categories of tax districts in the article linked below:

Municipalities Cut Tax Take! Fire Protection Districts Cut Even More! Libraries, Sanitary Districts Flat

= = = = =
If you would like a chuckle, please read Kevin Craver’s rant about how his wife, cats and he could cover all the tax districts to which they pay taxes.

The 2010 assessed valuation has been totaled for McHenry County and it’s down almost 10%.

That’s what a comparison of raw figures from the McHenry County Supervisor of Assessments Office indicate.

McHenry County real estate taxes this year will be based on assessed value of $10,132,926,407 unless the State Department of Revenue decides that figure does not reflect one-third of a three-year average  of assessed value to market value.

$10.1 billion reflects a significant drop from last year’s total of $11,210,739,442.

Grafton, Chemung (Harvard) and Marengo Townships led the devaluation race. Grafton property decreased in value over 17%, Chemung over 13% and Marengo over 3%.

Because tax districts overlap the Grafton-Algonquin Township lines, it is conceivable there ill be significant shifts of tax burden in such tax districts as Lake in the Hills, the Huntley School District and the Village of Lakewood.  Those on the Grafton Township side of the line may end up paying much less taxes to the overlapping districts than those on the Algonquin Township side of the line.
With assessed values down throughout McHenry County, one might think that tax bills will decrease.

My prediction is the same as the first year home prices started sinking.

Your tax bill will most likely increase.

McHenry County Townships.

That’s because virtually every tax district (include schools here) asked for the maximum amount they could get under the Tax Cap law.

That maximum is the amount the Consumer Price Index increased.  This year that means +2.7%, as I read this Illinois Revenue Department chart.

As long as assessed valuation was growing rapidly, tax district officials bragged about how their tax rates were less than the year before.

What complete dribble!

The way the Tax Cap (PRELL are the initials of the law’s title) works, if a district’s tax assessment base increases more than the increase in the cost of living, the tax rate must be cut so the district’s tax take will not exceed the increase in the cost of living.

Conversely, if last year’s tax rate multiplied times the new assessed value does not bring in last year’s property tax revenue, plus the increase in the CPI almost universally requested by tax district board members, the tax rate goes up.

That’s what happened last year.

It’s what I predicted over three years ago.

So, don’t think that a lower assessment figure will necessarily mean you will get a lower tax bill.

It could have meant that if tax district officials had not been greedy enough to request the maximum they could receive this year.

I have written about two districts where one board member tried to ratchet back the tax request for this year.

Grafton Township Supervisor Linda Moore made the suggestion, but lost the vote. A second vote was taken. This article has Rob LaPorta’s explanation. LaPorta notes that it will cost “11 cents per $100,000 home value.”

LaPorta is correct that township government takes relatively little of the total real estate taxes people pay.

But when every (or virtually every) tax district takes the 2.7% maximum amount allowed by state law, don’t be surprised if your tax bill is 2.7% higher than last year.

A similar request was made by John O’Neill at the levy meeting of the McHenry Grade School Board. I wrote about the unsuccessful effort in this article:

The Primal Urge of Government: Take As Much As It Can Get

A comment under that article leads me to believe that Aileen Seedorf made a similar unsuccessful suggestion to the Huntley School District 158 Board with similar results.

McHenry Township's assessment notices were published October 2nd.

Sorry for the delay in pointing out that homeowners can appeal their assessments in McHenry Township.

It looks like the deadline is the day before the election.

The sparsely populated Dunham Township, on the south edge of Harvard, also has a November 1st appeal deadline.

Other deadlines that have not already passed are listed below:

Chemung (Harvard) - November 5th

Coral (Union) – November 5th

Dorr (Woodstock) – October 29th

Marengo – November 12th

Nunda (Northern Crystal Lake & Southern McHenry, Island Lake, Prairie Grove) – November 15th

Grafton and Algonquin Township’s assessments have not been published yet.

Many people appeal their own assessments.

Other hire attorneys.

Those appealing find 5 comparable houses with recent sales that show prices less than the fair market value of their homes and ask to be assessed comparably.  Sales listings can be found here.  They can be found in any township.

Appeal forms are here.

The Supervisor of Assessments explains the appeal process here.

Appeals this year will affect next year’s real estate tax bills.

Thel lady in red on the left hand side of the second row is McHenry County Supervisor of Assessments Donna Mayberry. Mayberry is retiring this year.

Robert Ross, the Chief Deputy Supervisor of Assessments in Lake County, is scheduled to replace retiring McHenry County Supervisor of Assessments Donna Mayberry.

Robert Ross the Chief Deputy Supervisor of Assessments in Lake County is scheduled to replace retiring McHenry County Supervisor of Assessments Donna Mayberry.

Ross will be paid $100,000 a year initially.

County Administrator Peter Austin explained the interview process, which followed application solicitations sent to all Illinois counties and neighboring township assessors.

Of ten candidates who were Supervisors of Assessment or deputies , six were interviewed. Three were considered strong candidates.

The finalists were the Champaign County Supervisor of Assessments and Ross.

The interview process included a mock presentation to a group of taxpayers upset with their tax bills.

Ross will meet with township assessors next Monday.

I happened across the following letter to the Crystal Lake Herald that was published February 9, 1977, prior to the Algonquin Township primary election that pitted appointed incumbent Ed Traub against Forrest Hare’s former top assistant Bob Kunz.

I thought some might be interested in it.

You may remember the debacle (Article 1, Article 2) for the local Republican Party when Forrest Hare “lost” the 1973 caucus by four votes and no recount was allowed by the township central committee. Hare ran a write-in campaign and easily beat the establishment candidate.

Below was one of my father’s contributions to Bob Kunz’ campaign. He was running against appointed incumbent Ed Traub, appointed when Forrest Hare resigned to go into private enterprise.

Editor:

Noting Ed Traub’s letter to the editor in Friday’s paper, it appears desirable to really set the record straight.

If Traub does not have a bad memory or if he did not reduce the taxes on those 200 or so properties last year, then he should promptly bring suit against somebody for forging his name on records which are at the courthouse.

It was reported to me that abatements (tax reductions) were signed by a person named Traub, purporting to be the Algonquin Township Assessor; and the handwritten information on the forms corresponded to the signed name.

In addition Supervisor of Assessment Hogge confirmed to the reporter that the abatements were made by Traub. Hogge would have no reason to such a thing to harm a friend.

Traub actually confirmed in his letter that the 11 per cent multiplier was not added to his home, just as I had stated.

Traub is wrong when he says “the 1975 assessment on which you paid taxes some months ago were…the work of Hare.” Only the initial base was provided by Hare; the extra 11 per cent was added by the courthouse, the group from which Traub is an alumnus.

Regarding homes that were not on the assessing rolls, Traub should be aware that most (and maybe all) of that fault lies with the Supervisor of Assessments who is currently on the pan for not having passed occupancy permits along to the township assessors.

Traub’s acquaintanceship with Algonquin Township assessments if he isn’t aware of the uprising in the late 1950′s when some 800 to 1000 attended a mass meeting in Cary to demand legal assessments.

Attorney Tom Henley started his local practice on that project. The people got but a bare bone tossed to them, just sufficient to calm them down. Some of us think the battle is worth continuing until preferential taxation ceases and we are all treated fairly.

Traub misreads my intent, but is entitled to his opinion. It is not my desire to “Control and manipulate assessments.” Quite the contrary is the case. I want to see such practice cease…throughout McHenry County. And, especially, I don’t want it Algonquin Township. That’s why I so strongly favor the election of Bob Kunz.

Sincerely,

Cal Skinner, Sr.

Kunz won that primary election and is running unopposed for re-election as Algonquin Township on February 24th.

= = = = =
My father could certainly write better than I.

I happened across the following letter to the Crystal Lake Herald that was published February 9, 1977, prior to the Algonquin Township primary election that pitted appointed incumbent Ed Traub against Forrest Hare’s former top assistant Bob Kunz.

I thought some might be interested in it.

You may remember the debacle (Article 1, Article 2) for the local Republican Party when Forrest Hare “lost” the 1973 caucus by four votes and no recount was allowed by the township central committee. Hare ran a write-in campaign and easily beat the establishment candidate.

Below was one of my father’s contributions to Bob Kunz’ campaign. He was running against appointed incumbent Ed Traub, appointed when Forrest Hare resigned to go into private enterprise.

Editor:

Noting Ed Traub’s letter to the editor in Friday’s paper, it appears desirable to really set the record straight.

If Traub does not have a bad memory or if he did not reduce the taxes on those 200 or so properties last year, then he should promptly bring suit against somebody for forging his name on records which are at the courthouse.

It was reported to me that abatements (tax reductions) were signed by a person named Traub, purporting to be the Algonquin Township Assessor; and the handwritten information on the forms corresponded to the signed name.

In addition Supervisor of Assessment Hogge confirmed to the reporter that the abatements were made by Traub. Hogge would have no reason to such a thing to harm a friend.

Traub actually confirmed in his letter that the 11 per cent multiplier was not added to his home, just as I had stated.

Traub is wrong when he says “the 1975 assessment on which you paid taxes some months ago were…the work of Hare.” Only the initial base was provided by Hare; the extra 11 per cent was added by the courthouse, the group from which Traub is an alumnus.

Regarding homes that were not on the assessing rolls, Traub should be aware that most (and maybe all) of that fault lies with the Supervisor of Assessments who is currently on the pan for not having passed occupancy permits along to the township assessors.

Traub’s acquaintanceship with Algonquin Township assessments if he isn’t aware of the uprising in the late 1950′s when some 800 to 1000 attended a mass meeting in Cary to demand legal assessments.

Attorney Tom Henley started his local practice on that project. The people got but a bare bone tossed to them, just sufficient to calm them down. Some of us think the battle is worth continuing until preferential taxation ceases and we are all treated fairly.

Traub misreads my intent, but is entitled to his opinion. It is not my desire to “Control and manipulate assessments.” Quite the contrary is the case. I want to see such practice cease…throughout McHenry County. And, especially, I don’t want it Algonquin Township. That’s why I so strongly favor the election of Bob Kunz.

Sincerely,

Cal Skinner, Sr.

Kunz won that primary election and is running unopposed for re-election as Algonquin Township on February 24th.

= = = = =
My father could certainly write better than I.

Every year there is a meeting of township assessors led by county supervisors of assessment.

It’s a meeting where new laws are explained, information compiled by county assessment employees is distributed and questions are answered.

As far as twelve township assessors were concerned, the highlight might have been the handing out of forms to apply for an annual $3,000 bonus from the state for meeting certain performance standards.

But taxpayers would have probably focused on Supervisor of Assessments Dpnna Mayberry’s comments on trends in local assessed value.

She pointed out that foreclosures were “still coming in at a record rate—800 more than the year before.”

The county assessment level for 2008 is 33.54%, according to preliminary calculations. A second edit removing all sales that are not arms length transactions might change that figure.

“Just because the market took a dive doesn’t mean people are overassessed,” she continued.

She did say that some areas in new subdivisions may be overassessed.

Since the township multipliers are based on three-year averages, Mayberry thinks,

“we would probably be looking at small negative (multipliers) next year.”

Instead of seeing a, say, 1.03% increase from the county level, it might be a .98% figure multiplied times this year’s assessed valuation.

As I have pointed out several times before, the amount that tax districts can collect is limited in total by the increase in the Consumer Price Index, plus assessments of new construction.

Tax rates are below their statutory maximums for all tax districts, I would guess, because property values have gone up so much more than the CPI since the tax cap was imposed by state law.

Whenever assessed valuation increases more than the cost of living, a taxing district’s tax rate is decreased by the county clerk to keep the district from getting more than the increase allowed by the tax cap.

That’s complicated, but it means, even if your assessment a year from now goes down, don’t expect your tax bill to go down.

My guess is that there will be all sorts of homeowners who don’t understand this and they will be “mad as hell.”

I figure the only way for a tax district’s tax bill to go down is if the tax district spends less money.

Anyone think any tax district will do that?

Every year there is a meeting of township assessors led by county supervisors of assessment.

It’s a meeting where new laws are explained, information compiled by county assessment employees is distributed and questions are answered.

As far as twelve township assessors were concerned, the highlight might have been the handing out of forms to apply for an annual $3,000 bonus from the state for meeting certain performance standards.

But taxpayers would have probably focused on Supervisor of Assessments Dpnna Mayberry’s comments on trends in local assessed value.

She pointed out that foreclosures were “still coming in at a record rate—800 more than the year before.”

The county assessment level for 2008 is 33.54%, according to preliminary calculations. A second edit removing all sales that are not arms length transactions might change that figure.

“Just because the market took a dive doesn’t mean people are overassessed,” she continued.

She did say that some areas in new subdivisions may be overassessed.

Since the township multipliers are based on three-year averages, Mayberry thinks,

“we would probably be looking at small negative (multipliers) next year.”

Instead of seeing a, say, 1.03% increase from the county level, it might be a .98% figure multiplied times this year’s assessed valuation.

As I have pointed out several times before, the amount that tax districts can collect is limited in total by the increase in the Consumer Price Index, plus assessments of new construction.

Tax rates are below their statutory maximums for all tax districts, I would guess, because property values have gone up so much more than the CPI since the tax cap was imposed by state law.

Whenever assessed valuation increases more than the cost of living, a taxing district’s tax rate is decreased by the county clerk to keep the district from getting more than the increase allowed by the tax cap.

That’s complicated, but it means, even if your assessment a year from now goes down, don’t expect your tax bill to go down.

My guess is that there will be all sorts of homeowners who don’t understand this and they will be “mad as hell.”

I figure the only way for a tax district’s tax bill to go down is if the tax district spends less money.

Anyone think any tax district will do that?

With real estate assessment notices being mailed out in some of the smaller townships and assessments increasing, it occurs that some might find reading these articles of interest:

September 26, 2008 – Daily Herald Editorial Misses the Boat on Effect of Lower Assessments on Tax Bills

April 25, 2008 – Can’t Stand the Suspense?

April 24, 2008 – Home Prices Down – Don’t Expect Assessments to Fall…

January 01, 2008 – Wonder Why Real Estate Assessments Do Not Go Down?

December 04, 2007 – McHenry County Assessments Up About 5%

After you receives a reassessment notice, you have 30 days to appeal. Look for the map you see below, which you can find here on the Supervisor of Assessments’ web page. Click on your township and your deadline can be found. I’ve copied the map below, but I do not know if the connections will work.

Click the map for Filing Deadlines & Assessor Information

Here are the deadlines announced as of yesterday:

• Alden – October 27th
• Hebron – October 30th
• Richmond – October 23rd
• Hartland – October 17th
• Seneca – October 17th