Almost 6% Appeal Assessments in McHenry County

The table above shows the seventeen townships in McHenry County, the number of appeals for this tax year (2011 assessments, taxes to be collected in 2012), the total number of real estate parcels, plus the percentage of appeals from each township.  Algonquin Township is highlighted only because its appeals are still in process.

So, what do the numbers tell us?

For starters, the most tax unrest seems to be in the Woodstock area.  Both Dorr and Greenwood Township have lots of Woodstock residents.

9.75% of the real estate parcels in Dorr were appealed, while 7.65% in Greenwood were subject to appeals.

Grafton Township’s high 8.7% appeal rate is sandwiched in between Dorr’s and Greenwood’s numbers.

The other townships above the county average of 5.67% were Nunda (6.89%) and Richmond (6.39%).

Least activity was seen in Hebron ( 1.24%), Chemung (1.65%) and Alden( 2.3%) Townships.  All are on the Wisconsin border.

This map shows which townships are where in McHenry County.

Three townships had somewhere between 3% and 4% of their property owners appeal.  They are

  • Hartland – 3.2%
  • Marengo – 3.26%
  • Algonquin at – 3.9%

In the 4% to 6% range are the following:

  • Riley – 3.85%
  • Coral – 4.08%
  • Seneca – 4.39%
  • McHenry – 4.73%
  • Burton – 5.33%

Of the four largest townships–Algonquin, Grafton, McHenry and Nunda–only two are above average.


Almost 6% Appeal Assessments in McHenry County — 6 Comments

  1. I suprised more people don’t appeal. RE taxes are way out of line and in my opinion are driven by the thirst for taxing bodies to spend. The slogan should be “More is never ever enough”.

  2. We had legislation passed in Springfield in 2011 to STUDY government body elimination / consolidation.

    Why have Messrs. Franks, Tryon, Gaffney or Senator Althoff not introduced legislation to permit Township Assessor use of current year sales statistics instead of a rolling three year?

    Most appeals are successful because we, the taxpayer, fund a Review Board which uses current sales statistics in place of a rolling three year average.

    The following is posted on the STATE Property Tax Appeal Board web site: “The State’s current budget constraints will only allow our agency to provide support for the ASI site when accessed from a PC using the Windows XP Operating System and the Internet Explorer web browser version 6 or higher. We will try to offer support on additional platforms when additional funding becomes available.”

    But don’t worry, our Legislators in Springfield just created a Tax Tribunal (more tax dollar spending) which you can appeal to starting in 2013!

  3. Yeah those morons change the rules as they go too…at least during my last appeal.

    I appealed and they clearly violated one of the terms of the appeal form and used a foreclosure (which was insanely high for some reason) and they stated that they will allow them this year so they are using it.

    If I had known this I would have based it off of all “good” foreclosures and won easily.

    That really pissed me off and I let them know about it.

    I finally left after they could not explain the phantom math they were using to make their point…as a person that loves math the statement “it just works out that way” does not compute….morons!

    My New Year’s vent! 🙂

  4. The directions clearly stated that they would allow foreclosures and short sales this year, as a percentage of total sales of comparables. The problem was still not enough sales, period, to use as comparables.

    As my business, I have helped many homeowners successfully appeal the past few years.

    This year was by far the most difficult.

    We were forced to use appraisals instead of comparable sales.

    This increased the cost significantly to provide my service to homeowners.

  5. Unfortunately, even though many homeowners will win their appeals and get their assessments lowered, their tax bills will still be higher next year.

    Most taxing bodies are increasing their levies.

    The only way to lower taxes is to require full transparency of all taxing bodies.

    Their ‘checkbooks’ should be posted online.

    t’s our job to attend their meetings and push for lower spending, and get rid of corruption.

  6. LaurieJ, I am speaking about last year.

    They stated that they allowed it last year because it was going to change this year.

    If it would have benefited myself then the rules would have been enforced to a tee.

    I was pointing to a specific sentence in the “rules” and they kept saying that it was going to change so it was allowable. Morons!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.