Franks Turns Shell Bill in Tax Cap Headline Bill

Shells with holes in them 2 closer up

Empty shells put to good use in the button industry..

Friday, State Rep. Jack Franks didn’t use  one of his 48 shell bills to tack on the following legislation.

He used one of House Speaker Mike Madigan’s.  Here’s how it ended up:

Provides that, beginning with the 2015 levy year, the Property Tax Extension Limitation Law [Tax Cap] applies to all taxing districts, including home rule units.

Provides that, beginning with the 2015 levy year, the extension limitation under the Property Tax Extension Limitation Law is 0% or the rate of increase approved by the voters.

Preempts home rule. Amends the State Mandates Act to require implementation without reimbursement. Effective immediately.

Here’s the 37-23-38 roll call on House Bill 695:

The roll call on Jack Franks' Tax Cap legislation.

The roll call on Jack Franks’ Tax Cap legislation.

Home Rule units (mainly cities over 25,000) are not subject to the Real Estate Tax Cap now.

Locally, voting in favor was Franks.

“Excused,” whatever that means were David McSweeney and Mike Tryon.

Voting “Present” were Steve Andersson and Barb Wheeler.

One wag has suggested this Bible verse applies:

Matthew 5:37 (New International Version (NIV))

All you need to say is simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.

Franks has until May 22nd to pass the bill in the House.

Here is the operative language:

“Extension limitation”, beginning in levy year 2015, means 0% or the rate of increase approved by the voters under Section 18-205.


Beginning with the 2015 levy year, “taxing district” has the same meaning provided in Section 1-150 and includes home rule units.

This part of the current statute would be repealed:

for the 1994 levy year, or for those taxing districts subject to this Law in accordance with Section 18-213, except for those subject to paragraph (2) of subsection (e) of Section 18-213, for the levy year in which the referendum making this Law applicable to the taxing district is held, or for those taxing districts subject to this Law in accordance with paragraph (2) of subsection (e) of Section 18-213 for the 1996 levy year,

Governor Bruce Rauner proposed a property tax freeze during his campaign.


Franks Turns Shell Bill in Tax Cap Headline Bill — 14 Comments

  1. Lots of present votes at that roll call and an absent from Madigan.

    They need to claw back hiked pension benefits which can only be done by repealing via a constitutional amendment the pension sentence added to the constitution in 1970.

    No way can the benefits be paid at a tax hike or benefit cut or fee hike or casino or whatever.

    The pensions spiraled out of control and that has been known for awhile now.

    The pensions were used for political purposes by politicians, for compensation hikes by the unions and others who get the pensions, the unions were in on the game, taxpayers left largely in the dark.

    No one should feel guilty about clawbacks because the taxpayers were deceived.

    In fact taxpayers should be outraged they were deceived.
    And if any union members were left in the dark, blame your elected union leaders, not taxpayers who are the working middle class.

    Just freezing taxes will not solve the problem.

  2. “No one should feel guilty about clawbacks because the taxpayers were deceived.”

    I think we should all feel a little guilty.

    Yes, the politicians deceive us, but that is because we like being deceived.

    I would say that the #1 fiscal problem of the US is the aging of the baby boomers. There is a mismatch between their demands for benefits, and the number of younger citizens able to support those benefits.

    Yes, the government is wasteful and complicated and hopeless, but even so, if there were enough young tax payers to support the waste, the whole mess would be pretty well covered up.

    It stands to reason that either benefits have to be cut, or taxes have to go up.

    Any volunteers for either?

    I bet no.

    So the joke is on us.

    That’s why politicians deceive us: we want to be deceived. We reelect the deceivers. If someone tells you “taxes have to go up” or “we have to cut medicare”, you will not vote for them, will you?

    Hence the deceiving, the tricks, the casinos, the deficits, etc.

  3. IMO collective bargaining would see much smaller increases with a frozen tax.

    In my experience financial strength means contract negotiators ask for more and know that binding arbitration will back them up.

    Smaller surpluses means there is less blood that can squeezed.

  4. The public sector union lobbyists, public sector union bosses, and many of the public sector union employees, other special interests, are in on the deception with the politicians.

    Public sector union employees pleading ignorance at the deception can blame their elected union officials.

    The taxpayers have been taken for a ride and manipulated with language such as a pension is a promise, when in fact, the taxpayers were never told about all the benefit hikes.

    A benefit hike is a promise?

    That’s what the pension sentence added in 1970 allowed.

    Pension benefit hikes to underfunded pensions.

    Chicago Tribune
    Pension Games

  5. Arbitration in Illinois is another game.

    How is that arbitration has allowed so many benefit hikes, salary hikes, and other perks.

    The unions find a few sucker district where benefits and salaries can be hiked, then others point to them as comparables, and the hikes continue up, up, and away.

    Clawbacks are seemingly rarely (ever?) allowed without hiking somewhere else.

    The facilities can be run into the ground with the money going to salary and benefit hikes, then have a referendum for a new building.

    Plenty of that has gone on, not everywhere, not absolute.

    The Illinois Public Labor Relations Act (IPLRA) and the Illinois Labor Relations Board (IELRB), the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Act (IELRA) and the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Board (IELRB), the collective bargaining laws, many times stacked to favor labor at taxpayer expense.

    Boards in Illinois let union members vote on collective bargaining agreements but not taxpayers.

    Taxpayers don’t have enough rights or power in Illinois.

    340 accumulated sick days to be exchanged for 2 years of service credit for instance to retire 2 years early to a 40% funded pension fund, what a joke.

    And those sick days have been hiked over time.

    Used to be 170, and before that 85.

    The number varies in the 18 pension funds in the Illinois Pension Code, have fun looking in the 1,400 pages of pension code to unravel that.

    The entire public sector compensation system is out of control in Illinois.

  6. The amendment freezes the rate.

    New growth and any increase in assessments will still allow growth in the total taxes collected.

    If this passes, EVERY property owner needs to appeal their assessments as I feel certain there are still parcels over assessed.

    Also, nothing to stop the State from imposing a positive adjustment to all assessments established by Township Assessors.

  7. Voting present or any other hiding from voting yes or no is so BO.

  8. I see Pam responded to Dan and Jack about the Consolidation nonsense.

    How come that isn’t posted here also?

  9. I think they are not freezing the tax rate, they are freezing the amount of money taxing districts may extract.

    But I think there are notable exemptions from that freeze, such as debt service on Woodstock CUSD 200 Debt Principal of $118 million and accrued unpaid interest of about another $30 million.

    So tax RATE can still rise, as property values continue to sink as a function of 4% property tax rates.

    if numerator remains constant but denominator is less, RATE continues higher.

    A property tax rate frozen at 3.88%-4.67% is still unbearable.

    That is Woodstock area tax rate.

    Not that doing something isn’t better than doing nothing.

  10. The tax cap does not deal with tax rates.

    It focuses on the total amount of money that a tax district can get, compared to what it got the year before.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.