McHenry County Blog

This was in the Daily Herald Tuesday:

“DuPage County homeowners can expect to pay more property taxes to school districts and other local governments, even though land values continue to plummet.

“The overall value of land in DuPage decreased last year by 8 percent, to roughly $34.6 billion. At the same time, the average tax rate for the county’s 384 taxing bodies — the other half of the tax equation — increased 11.73 percent.

“As a result, property owners countywide are going to pay an average of 3.73 percent more on their tax bills this year…”

So, why does this happen?

The reason, which I have repeated pointed out, is that during the time since the Property Tax Cap took effect in the early 1990′s, real estate inflation vastly outstripped the Consumer Price Index.

Under the Tax Cap, all tax districts but Home Rule municipalities had their tax rates forced down in order to limit their tax extraction from exceeding the increase in the CPI.

That meant their tax rates were well below the maximums set by state law.

When property values started falling, the tax districts kept asking for more money.

Because they were under their maximum rates, those rates were increased enough to give them the amount they got the year before, plus whatever the Consumer Price Index (the measure of inflation used in the law) had increased.

In DuPage County’s case this past year, tax districts did what most do every year, try to squeeze every dime they can out of property owners’ pockets.

Real estate tax bills being sent out in McHenry County this year will total $783,689,437.41 this spring.

That compares with $773,325,977.50 a year ago.

That’s an increase of 1.34%, which those with good memories will recall is less than the 1.5% allowed by the state’s Property Tax Cap.

McHenry County

McHenry County government’s tax bill–just under 10% of the total tax bill –will be $78,285,064.42.  That’s compared to $76,846,500.12 last year, up 1.87%.  The County Board, you may remember, voted to take every dime possible under the Real Estate Tax Cap.

Education

The Big Daddy in the Property Tax Game is always education.

Including junior colleges, elementary and high schools, that category consumes almost two-thirds (66.4%) of our tax bills.

$520,283,124.49 this year; $511,040,206.22 last year.

That’s almost a 1.8% increase.  The Tax Cap does not cover bond payments, so my guess is that some districts back-ended bond payments to keep taxes lower in past years.

Junior Colleges

Looking at the junior colleges separately, we see that the total tax bill is $31,323,344.25 this year, while it was $30,347,809.74 last year.

That’s a 3.2% hike.

Since the junior colleges are getting so much higher a percentage the the education group as a whole, it would probably be interesting to see what the unit, grade and high school districts are getting in comparison.

Unit Districts

This year the unit districts will pull in $202,025,310.67, compared to $199,937,737.99 last year.

The difference?

A bit over 1%.

Elementary Schools

Grade school districts are charging $174,244,829.51 in 2012.  Last year’s bill was $171,086,182.51.

Doing the division yields a hike of over 1.8%.

High Schools

The last component of the educational tax bill is high schools.

$112,689,640.06 is the bill this year, compared to $109,668,475.98 this year.

Up 2.7%.

So, with the exception of the K-12 unit districts, which generally have lower tax rate limits, it appears the higher one goes in the grade level, the deeper the educators dig into our wallets:

• Unit Districts – +1%
• Grade Schools – +1.8%
• High Schools – +2.7%
• Jr. Colleges – +3.2%

McHenry County College covers most of McHenry County with the exception of District 300 School District, which is in the Elgin Community College District.  Small parts of McHenry County in the Barrington School District are in the Harper College District and a bit in the Wauconda School District goes to the College of Lake County.

Cities and Villages

Municipalities are next in the order of those pecking at our pocketbooks.

$66,644,908.46 being billed this year, compared to $66,885,115.04.

To their credit, cities and villages actually are taking less money out of our checking accounts for real estate taxes–about 4/10 of one percent–than last year!

That’s worth a headline, don’t you think?

Fire Protection Districts

Let’s look at Fire Protection Districts.

$40,598,421.16 this year, $41,448,795.39 last year.

No one looks at how Fire Protection Districts are governed or what they spend, yet, so far, this category of tax district has been parsimonious with our tax dollars.

It should be noted that some municipalities have their own fire departments, e’g., Crystal Lake, so the $40 million, plus, does not comprise the whole cost of fire protection.

The FPD’s are taking over 2% less this year than they did last year.

Townships

Townships will take $25,770,362.84 this year, less than the $25,577,572.45 last year.

That’s an increase for the governmental form taking the most heat in the metropolitan media of $193,000, about a three-quarters of a one percent increase.  It should me noted that township officials are up for election next spring.

McHenry County Conservation District

The next highest taxing entity is the McHenry County Conservation District.

It will slice $19,317,898.84 out of property owners’ income this year.

Last year the total was $18,964,957.38.

The tax hike is almost 1.9%.

Library Districts

Library Districts cover a lot of the county (although Crystal Lake’s is in that city’s budget).

This year they ask you to pay $15,902,674.96.  Last year it was $15,901,974.39.

The Property Tax receipts for Library Districts will almost be constant.  Up just $700.

Park Districts

Park Districts take about as much out of the private sector as Library Districts, although municipalities like Lake in the Hill, McHenry and Woodstock do not have separate taxing districts.

$15,370,365.51 will be taxed this year compared to $15,059,395.19 last year.

The increase?

Plus 2%.  More than the Tax Cap allows, so, as with others that exceed 1.5%, it probably has to do with bond payments exempt from PTELL.

Sanitary Districts

The rest of the districts are under $1 million, so I won’t bother with them except for the Sanitary Districts, which like Fire Protection Districts, no one ever examines.  There are only two of which I am aware, the Lake in the Hills and the Island Lake (re-named the Northern Moraine) Sanitary Districts. ( I wrote about the McHenry County Health Department’s suing the latter  in a thrust for revenue, but that’s the only time I have dipped into that type of government other that attending the dedication of both of their waste treatment facilities.  The “Royal Flush” in Island Lake was a  hoot.)

= = = = =
Hoe to find your bill here.

$677,590.39 is the tax “request” from Sanitary Districts this year.  It was $667,056.58 last year.

Essentially no change for Sanitary Districts, up just $534.

= = = = =
ow to find you

Either Governor Pat Quinn

• doesn’t know what he is talking about with regard to the appeal to business that ending the state tax on natural gas or
• he’s just blowing smoke.

In 1986, in my last bureaucratic job with state government, I put together the program to buy natural gas directly.

Manufacturers, big institutions, school districts, churches, retail chains and about anybody with a brain was already doing so.

By the way, I earned by $40,000-something salary that year. The program save over $1 million.

A press release from State Rep. Mike Tryon tells us the results of a recent poll.  When I asked I was told about 100 people participated.

Interestingly, one result is exactly the opposite of the way that Tryon voted.

He reports that his constituents said 69% to 30% that they did not want “gaming expansion.”  Think video poker/slot machines that Tryon and State Senator Pam Althoff supported.

State Rep. Mike Tryon Shares Constituent Survey Results

CRYSTAL LAKE…..State Representative Mike Tryon (R-Crystal Lake) has released results of a recent constituent survey. The survey was offered to residents through an insert in a local newspaper in the fall.

“Each year I survey my stakeholders about issues that affect Illinois,” Tryon said. “The results are a great tool that helps me better represent the 64th District when I’m in Springfield.”

The results are as follows:

(not all items add up to 100% due to responses outside of listed choices)

Question #1: Do you support borrowing or additional taxes to help balance the state’s budget, pay overdue bills and fund state services?

• Support Borrowing: YES = 22% NO = 77%
• Support Additional Taxes: YES = 25% NO = 74%

Questions #2: Which would you support in order to generate more revenue to help balance the state’s budget: cutting all new spending, freezing state employees’ salaries, cutting 10% from all state agencies, pension reform, or gambling expansion in Illinois?

• Cut All New Spending Out of the Budget: YES = 31% NO =68%
• Freeze State Employees’ Salaries: YES = 77% NO = 22%
• Cut 10% From All State Agencies: YES = 76% NO = 23%
• Pension Reform: YES = 80% NO = 20%
• Gaming Expansion: YES = 30% NO = 69%  [Emphasis added.]

Question #3: List the top three issues that are currently important in your municipality.

(listed in the order of frequency listed on surveys)

1. Taxes/Fees
2. Economy
3. Illinois Finances
4. Public Services
5. Transportation/Roads
6. Political Issues (special interests, corruption, redistricting, term limits, partisanship, transparency)
7. Other

Question #4: Would you support medical marijuana for people diagnosed with severe illness?

• YES = 50%
• CONDITIONAL YES = 24%
• NO – 25%

A press release from Congressman Joe Walsh:

Rep. Walsh Introduces ‘Save Christmas Act’

Washington- Today, Congressman Joe Walsh (IL-8) introduced the ‘Save Christmas Act’ to permanently end the Obama Administration’s new tax on Christmas trees.

This tax was established to fund yet another unnecessary government board, the Christmas Tree Promotion Board.

This is clearly the most ridiculous in a long list of new taxes and regulations proposed by the Obama Administration.

Walsh stated:

“The sheer audacity of a tax on Christmas trees is ridiculous.

“Are we going to start taxing Halloween candy and pumpkins or turkey and apple pie?

‘Are we going to tax the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny too?

‘Are we going to tax hotdogs and hamburgers and American flags for the Fourth of July?

“Christmas has traditionally been a holiday when American families from across the country get together and just celebrate and give. And this year, when Americans are hurting and struggling to make ends meet, Christmas is more important than ever.

“This is exactly why American families are struggling.

“President Obama continues to implement unnecessary taxes to create and fund more unnecessary do-nothing government programs. If this isn’t big government, what is?”

There is widespread misunderstanding about the tax process. Today, we won’t look at the assessment part.

Instead we will examine what tax districts do to pry more money out of our pockets.

News stories talk about levies this time of year.

They are important, but not nearly as important as they are made out to be.

What tax districts almost uniformly do is levy, that is request in an ordinance, not what they expect to get, but an amount that is high enough to get the maximum amount of money allowed under the Property Tax Cap law (called PTELL by those who consider themselves in the know).

So, how does a local government figure out how to maximize its tax take from you.

Let’s use McHenry County government as an example.

The levy being proposed for next year is $78,809,995.

Last year the levy was $77,807,910.

So the levy, that is the request for money is up 1.3%.

Sounds modest, doesn’t it?

It’s even less than the increase in the CPI, which you can see in the Illinois Revenue Department table above.

The increase in the Consumer Price Index was 1.5%.

The amount the County Clerk requests the County Treasurer to collect is called the “extension.”

This requested amount takes into account the Tax Cap’s limits, which are applied to the amount collected the year before.

If deflation continues, eventually statutory tax rate limits will prevent tax districts from increasing their extension without a tax hike referendum

For McHenry County government, the extension this year was $76,847,205.11.  Almost all of it will be collected.

Do the division and you will find that the levy being considered by the County Board this year is 2.55% higher than last year’s extension.

That means county government will be able to collect the maximum amount allowed by law.

So, one can expect one’s county tax bill to increase the maximum allowed by the Tax Cap, 1.5%.

Don’t let any of the County Board members get away with telling you that they are lowering taxes.

It’s worth mentioned that if State Rep. Jack Franks’ Tax Cap amendment bill is passed, the county would receive the same amount it got (not 100% is paid, so the word “got” is a tiny bit of an exaggeration) this year.

The County Board could, of course, take the lead and cut its budgeted levy by $1,963,000–about 2.5%–and local property owners would see about the same tax bill than last year.

Someone could make a motion by substitution to the motion to approve the levy as presented to make the levy the same as last year–$76,847,205, rounding to the nearest dollar.

Let the County Board vote on that and see who votes “Yes” and who votes “No.”

Then, make the budget fit the levy.

When I was a baby budget examiner in the U.S. Bureau of the Budget, one of my hardest lessons involved making the Small Business Administration Budget fit the bottom line dictated by Sam Lawrence, the Section Chief.

He was a bright guy who, upon considering hiring me off the Management Intern list, asked by to-be Senior Budget Examiner Roger Adkins, if he could work with a Goldwater Republican. No matter that my mother and I had supported Scranton in 1964. It was my father who supported AU H20. (That was his bumper sticker.) Roger said he could work with anyone.

The SBA budget didn’t have a lot of lines. I tried to figure out what was needed in each of them and for at least two times I exceeded the bottom line laid out by Mr. Lawrence.

The third time he said, “You don’t understand. I don’t care what those numbers are, but they must add up to this bottom line.”

All of a sudden I got it.

And so can the Finance Committee, if the County Board dictates a lower bottom line.

= = = = =

I have noted previously, that the two County Board Democrats have voted against raising the salaries of McHenry County officials.  If they added a second financial issue to their bag of arrows, they would be able to make the case that local Republicans are the “big spenders.”

That, of course, would fight with the Democrats’ state and national images, but it might make for an interesting campaign.

A press release from Grafton Township Supervisor Linda Moore:

Residents of Grafton Township now have the ability to show the members of the township board how they would cast their vote regarding the township tax levies for the Township and Road District. By visiting the township website, www.graftontownshipsupervisor.us residents can vote on whether they want to see the board increase the levies, decrease the levies, or levy for a zero change in the levy.

“As the Township Supervisor, I will use this poll to determine how I will vote when this matter comes before the board. I hope the rest of the board will also consider the public’s response when they determine their vote sometime in December. The question that is being posed is as follows:

If you were on the Grafton Township Board, how would you vote regarding the Levy? (A Levy is the use of government authority to impose or collect a tax.)

1. I would increase the levy.
2. I would decrease the levy.
3. I would make no change to the levy.

The website has had more than 15,000 hits to date. It includes township financial information, press releases, upcoming township events, meeting video and audio recordings, food pantry hours, financial assistance information and downloadable forms, a sign-up form to receive emails from the township, etc. Please visit here and vote on the

• increase or
• decrease

of township taxes.

The lobbying arm of Illinois Township Officials is urging local members to call their legislators to ask them to oppose two bills.

One takes money from a state subsidy that should have been phased out decades ago. It looks like an income tax to business. Actually, it is an income tax, but it was levied when the hated Personal Property Tax was lifted from business in order to replace the lost local tax.

I wish I had been in office so I could have tried to keep the total amount replaced from increasing. It should have been a tax whose negative impact on business would have decreased over time as the rate needed to raise the lost local tax revenue would have gone down.

In any event, the Township Officials of Illinois object to diverting part of that replacement tax to pay the salaries of Regional Superintendents of Schools.

The lobbying group also opposes Jack Franks’ bill to prevent increasing local governments’ tax take when property values and, hence, real estate assessments are going down.

Here is the email of lobbyist Bryan E. Smith, Executive Director of TOI:

• House Bill 3828 was introduced and would divert money from the Corporate Personal Property Replacement Tax Fund to pay the salaries and benefits of Regional School Superintendents. TOI is OPPOSED to a diversion like this that would take money away from local governments, including townships and road districts. Late yesterday the bill was called in the House Revenue and Finance Committee and was passed out on a strictly party-line vote despite the opposition of virtually all local government groups. WE NEED YOUR HELP NOW! We need to have everyone call their State Representative(s) NOW and ask them to vote NO on House Bill 3828 when it is called for a vote in the House. It is time the State stop diverting money that is designated for local governments.
• Another bill we have been closely following is House Bill 3793. This bill amends the Property Tax Extension Limitation Law (PTELL) to prevent a taxing district (Townships and Road Districts included) from capturing the CPI increase for its extension limitation if the district’s total EAV is less than the previous levy year. TOI OPPOSES this bill because it would reduce available property tax revenues for Townships and Road Districts. PTELL (Tax Caps) already limits (in those counties that have tax caps) the ability of Townships/Road Districts to capture all available growth during good economic times. It would be very unfair to also prevent a township/road district from capturing minimal cost-of-living increases that are available.

Naturally, tax dollars finance the Township Officials of Illinois.

Don’t you wish you could get tax dollars to finance your lobbying of the state legislature?

A Jack Franks’ bill that would prevent most local governments from getting more money in year two than they did in year one if real estate assessments are declining flew out of the House Revenue Committee 6-1 Tuesday.

There is a caveat in the legislation.

Voters could approve a higher percentage increase by referendum.

This is bill that will be fought tooth and nail by all non-Home Rule units.

Home Rule units are those municipalities with over 25,000 people, plus those, like Barrington Hills, where local voters have approved the Home Rule status by referendum. Cook County is also a Home Rule unit.

Home Rule units have no taxing limits.

All the other tax district, schools, parks, counties, small villages and cities, townships, etc., would have their tax take capped under this proposal

The bill has been placed on “Short Debate,” which means only two people may speak on each side of the issue.

You can safely assume that more will want to talk.

Proponents to make points for the taxpaying public and those who view their role as primarily protecting the self-interest of schools and other tax districts to defend them.

My guess is that the bill will not clear both houses of the Illinois General Assembly.

And, if it does, who knows what this on-again, off-again progressive government will do. He owes an awful lot to public employee–including teachers’–unions and less money from taxpayers potentially means less money for them.

When I saw that “Election Workshop” item on the agenda of the special meeting of the McHenry County Board for Tuesday, I called and asked the President’s Office what was up.

The woman I talked to did not know.

I figured it couldn’t be about board elections, since they were this past spring.

That left referendums.

That means tax hikes.

Thursday, a Northwest Herald article by Brett Rowland verified my premonition.

It is too bad that the MCC Board was unwilling to be more forthright.

The reaction shown in the comments below the article show that the College has a real image problem.

Certainly, the history of opaqueness will be an issue in any tax hike effort.

This is a board that won’t even tape record its meetings so someone could hear what went on, if he or she could or did not attend a meeting.

Let alone live stream the meetings.

The content of comments made by members of the public is not reported in the minutes.

“Transparency” is not part of this government’s philosophy.

This is a board that hid the baseball stadium details that would have put taxpayers on the hook for over $20 million in bonds…plus interest.

This is a board that kept us in the dark while conspiring to allow the tallest broadcast aerial in the State of Illinois.

And new President Vicky Smith made it quite clear that her selection had more than a little to do with raising taxes.

Two summers ago there was a series of “community” meetings put together by the same tax hike consultant that ran the success tax hike campaigns in Woodstock Unit District 200 and Carpentersville District 300.

Read about those meetings and other aspects of MCC’s tax hike preparation efforts in the links below:

• McHenry County’s Power Elite and Meteors
• McHenry County’s Power Elite as Seen by McHenry County College
• MCC’s View of the Power Elite, as Laid Out in it Communications Plan
  
  What Does It Take to Have Democracy?
• McHenry County College Power Elite Nominees
• MCC Power Elite Add-Ons
• McHenry County College Inviting Public
• McHenry County College MAP “Engages” 60 Community Members
• 2010 Referendum Predicted For MCC, District 300 & District 200 Tax Hike Firm to be Hired by McHenry County College
• MCC MAP Meeting Light on Community Participation
• McHenry County College Citizen Engagement Process Attracts 31
• Northwest Herald Reporter Discerns Real Reason for McHenry County College’s $137,750 Hiring of Tax Hike Firm
• MCC MAP Meeting – Part 2 – Building Up Balances
• MCC MAP Meeting – Part 3 – Enrollment Increase & Who Pays What
• Northwest Herald Reveals More Than Ever Before about School St. Louis Tax Hike Firm Unicom-ARC
• MCC MAP Citizen Engagement Process Ends with Maybe 14 Non-Employee Citizens at Last Session

My timing was off on the date of the referendum. The rest should prove instructive to those interested in how a tax district goes about raising taxes.