Below the total tax requests from Fire Protection Districts in McHenry County for last year are compared to the ones which will be reflected in the real estate tax bills about to arrive in people’s mailboxes:
The Barrington Countryside Fire Protection District shows the biggest decrease. In all likelihood, this is because it is located in four counties and some adjustment has been made that benefited its McHenry County residents. Wauconda FPD, which also overlaps into another county showed a slight decrease in extraction of real estate taxes from McHenry County property owners.
Fox River Grove’s went down 4%, even though its tax rate will be increasing. The result will be $49,000 less being paid by residents.
The McHenry Township FPD will increase its tax take the most–5%, which amounts to $325,000.
The following will see over 2% increases:
- Algonquin-Lake in the Hills +2.35%
- Hebron-Alden-Greenwood +2.05
- Nunda Rural +2.03%
- Spring Grove +2.08%
- Woodstock +2.21%
The Property Tax Cap allowed a 1.5% increase this year. Districts getting more than that included taxes on newly-constructed property.
= = = = =
Find a comparison of this year’s and last year’s municipal tax takes (Crystal Lake has the highest increase) here.
A township government tax comparison is here.
Schools, junior colleges, McHenry County and the Conservation District are here.
There is a fundamental problem with a society which allows veterans to receive third class healthcare, takes away their right to own a gun because he / she VISITED a head doctor, does not guarantee them a job upon discharge and allows them to live on the streets while Firemen and Police get a guaranteed income and practically free healthcare after twenty years on the job!!
When most firemen and police do retires they get another job doing whatever and collect their pension also!!
What a country!
I would like to know why McHenry needs the biggest raise.
I think our high school teachers also had a big raise.
Stores lie vacant in McHenry.
Maybe the town should live within its means.
Illinois municipal taxes are typically kept artificially low to avoid fully funding pensions.
An exception is the IMRF pension fund.
It has a provision making it more difficult to underfund, even though it too is underfunded.
But the contribution levels and thus taxes have increased substantially for IMRF, and there’s juicy perks in that fund that have been exploited.
Following are fire district pension funding levels from Illinois Department of Insurance data, with the number of active and retired employees.
Those districts not listed are likely in the IMRF pension fund or hooked up with another district.
There are a lot of major problems inherent with underfunded pensions.
For example, the return on investment target is designed for full funding.
If there’s not 100% funding, then even if the investment return is met, it was met on an amount less than full funding, so the return is less than if 100% funded….it’s hard to catch up.
One of the challenging parts in salary negotiations for Illinois public sector workers is whether to fully fund pensions or provide more generous salary increases.
Usually salary increases win because there’s a sentence added to the Illinois State Constitution in 1970 stating pensions can’t be diminished or impaired (that sentence was added in 1970).
There was no sentence stating pensions could not be increased of improved.
So pensions were increased or improved by state legislators and Governors from 1971 – thru today.
Isn’t that great.
Pension benefit could be and were increased and improved through state legislation, but once improved, could not be diminished or impaired.
That happened pretty much every year from 1971 – 2014.
That and collective bargaining and contractual pay raises is pretty much why we are in a pension crisis.
Anyone tells you different, tell them to start their figuring in 1971, not 1985 or 1995.
Benefits were hiked, causing contributions to be hiked.
Salaries were hiked, causing contributions to be hiked.
If taxes climb too high or services fall too low, can enough residents be convinced to stay to fund these pensions, especially if the pensions are more lucrative than residents own retirement program?