Jack Franks’ Agenda Item to Raise Real Estate Taxes Sees Nineteen County Board Members Vote Approval

Here's the Cut 10 logo being used in Jack Franks' campaign.  It's carries a promise that Lying Jack Franks cannot deliver.

Here’s the Cut 10 logo used in Jack Franks’ campaign. In his first chancer to do so, Franks allowed McHenry County taxes to increase. 

Discussion showing that far too many McHenry County Board members don’t understand the property tax system ended with nineteen County Board members, including many who campaigned

Taxes will be increased $80,000.against increasing real estate taxes, voting to increase next year’s tax bill.

Ironically, County Chairman and State Representative Jack Franks also campaigned on cutting property taxes by 10%.

And now, the first tax ordinance he will sign will raise county real estate taxes.

Not much, but it is a tax increase.

The vote was 19-4 with the following voting for the tax increase:

  • Michele Aavang
  • Kay Bates
  • Chris Christensen
  • Joe Gottemoller
  • John Hammerand
  • Jim Heisler
  • John Jung
  • Jim Kearns
  • Donna Kurtz
  • Mary McCann
  • Bob Nowak
  • Michael Rein
  • John Reinert
  • Mike Skala
  • Larry Smith
  • Mike Walkup
  • Tom Wilbeck
  • Chuck Wheeler
  • Paula Yensen

Those voting against the tax hike ordinance were

  • Yvonne Barnes
  • Andrew Gasser
  • Jeff Thorsen
  • Crain Wilcox

Board members couldn’t agree on whether the ordinance was a tax increase or not.

Some thought–completely incorrectly–that new construction in Algonquin Township would not be taxed at all, if the ordinance were not approved.

Craig Wilcox

Craig Wilcox

Craig Wilcox nailed that misperception:

“This is not a benefit to Algonquin Township.

“It benefits every county taxpayer.

“It [the $80,000 not taxed] would be spread across all taxpayers.”

Jeff Thorsen

Jeff Thorsen

Jeff Thorsen put it this way:

“Put it back in the taxpayers’ pockets.

“I understand, if we don’t pass it, we lose it forever.”

Yvonne Barnes

Yvonne Barnes

Yvonne Barnes pointed out,

“We have no idea how we’re giong to spend this.

“It goes against everything [the taxpayers want].”

Wilcox also attempted to attach an amendment that would abate $2,820,000 to the tax hike ordinance.

The Assistant State’s Attorney worried that its consideration would violate the Open Meetings Act.

Franks pointed out that such an abatement could be passed in the new year, that to consider it at this meeting would bring liability to county government.

Then, Joe Gottemoller moved that the idea be sent to the Finance & Audit Committee.

That motion passed.

Before it was sent to committee, Wilcox asked,

“What guarantee does this County Board have that it will pass the Finance Committee and return to the County Board vote for a vote?”

No answer was given, but Mike Skala, as Chairman of the Finance Committee, argued on November 15th that money be included in the budget that increased from $76 to $79 million.


Jack Franks’ Agenda Item to Raise Real Estate Taxes Sees Nineteen County Board Members Vote Approval — 112 Comments

  1. And everyone is surprised that a democrat, again, lied to you and will now raise your property taxes, the same thing he ran on as a “tax fighter”?

    That’s a special kinda stupid

  2. Well, it would appear that the little liar Franks has successfully beaten Hammerand and Walkup into total submission.

    I do hope the ‘farmers’ in the County are real pleased with themselves for getting Michele Aavang on the County Board.

    The deer and geese in the County support the taxpayer more than she does.

    A huge THANK YOU to Gasser, Barnes, Thorsen and Wilcox!

    We need the County Republican Party to start ‘licensing’ the use of the elephant logo and running as Republicans in primaries.

    If they did, they would have a real conundrum because Wheeler would no longer be permitted to use it.

    I do hope the others have trouble sleeping because they have just screwed the taxpayers one more time!!

  3. Isn’t the whole point of being a conservative that you grow your way out of an economic problem?

    McHenry County did just that – there was incremental tax revenue available from growth and the board, recognizing this growth, readjusted projected revenues.

    It is utterly preposterous to make an issue out of this, or hang any of the 19 board members (many Republicans) that voted for this, simply because it is rhetorically a tax increase.

    Also, did you notice Cal’s Golden Boy, Mike Walkup, voted for the measure? AZsupporter, Cautious voter, Connect the dots – y’all a bunch of fools to jump on this bandwagon.

    Cal Skinner, again, is deliberately misleading you, me and Republicans for his own, power hungry reasons.

  4. Being a conservative means you support less government – not more!!

    It is commenters such as ‘Moderate’ who are leading people astray relative to budgets and taxes.

    Message to Moderate: WE ARE BEING TAXED TOO HEAVILY!


    Try to wordsmith that comment!!

  5. This is yet another example of why we need to clamp down on taxation changes like levy increases and borrowing, even short term borrowing.

    New growth is suppose to lighten our tax load even if only a $1.00.

    If the gov needs more because of higher demand because of new growth, they should come to us and ask for more spending ability.

    The three advisory referendum all passed with over 91% on just that point.

    I’d encourage more to get on that band wagon and get all gov agencies, local to fed subject to our vote for any increase in spending and especially borrowing.

    The Fed has to pay around $230 billion a year just in interest each year, $$$$ that could be cut from our taxes or used for programs instead.

    It’s time to change the biggest flaw in taxation since this country was formed.

    The flaw is thinking Elected will be fiscally responsible for taxation and related spending, when in fact taxation and spending have been used by the Elected to buy votes to get reelected, as self serving kind of deal.

  6. McHenry County median and mean property tax rate is 3.66% of fair market value.

    Compare this to the stated national average “highest ” rate in the country(Illinois) of around 2.5%.

    Clearly there is no hope whatsoever for McHenry County homeowners, not politically connected, to obtain property tax relief from this regime.

    So if you can’t reduce the levy (numerator), the only relief lies in increasing EAV (denominator).

    The only way to increase EAV denominator in a real estate area charging 3.66% property tax rate is to

    1.get untaxed property (TIF districts) onto the tax rolls,

    2. Pressure County assessor Ross to RE-evaluate the many underassessed properties paying well below “fair share”.

  7. What was done here was to tax new growth.

    The AL assessor was tardy in getting the new growth figures into us and missed the deadline by 3 days last November.

    We had voted already to take the new growth for the rest of the county.

    Had we not taken it here, the people who built new properties in the past year in AL township would have gotten a free ride that the rest of the county didn’t get and the AL assessor would have been rewarded for being late with the figures.

    If you don’t tax new growth, those properties are not taxed properly for the first year as the taxes are always one year behind. That’s why when you buy a new house, you have to pay one year’s taxes at closing.

    It is not a tax increase to take new growth.

  8. “Had we not taken it here, the people who built new properties in the past year in AL township would have gotten a free ride that the rest of the county didn’t get and the AL assessor would have been rewarded for being late with the figures.”

    Do other trustees believe this?

  9. Mike Walkup SAVES THE DAY with a RATIONAL explanation of what happened.

  10. If you want to lower taxes, forgoing taking the new growth is not the way to go about it.

    There are other things you can do.

    Running for school board is probably the most effective.

    Kudos to those people who filed petitions.

    We even had a County Board Member (not Trustees) who did that and will have to give up her County Board seat and salary to take a position which pays nothing and has no health insurance (which she needs) if she is successful.

    People here who didn’t do that for whatever reason can at least help out with those campaigns in their areas.

    Everyone who doesn’t do that should hold their peace.

    Talk is cheap.

    Actions speak for themselves.

  11. The new growth was already paying property taxes on empty lots, most lots already paying more than if farm land.

    Most new growth also had to pay some types of developer donations to some of the taxing districts, schools as an example.

    Developer donations are to offset the lag in the future higher real estate taxation.

    As I said before prove you need more, prove it by new letter or some other form than just talking about it in board meetings.

  12. Impact fees, and transition fees, for a new development in Woodstock D200 School District was granted a waiver of about $650,000 of such fees by Woodstock City and D200, thanks to Woodstock Mayor Sager.

    Also, Mayor Sager took the time to lobby D200 who might NOT have waived these fees (vote was 5-2) had not the Mayor spoken at school board meeting to lobby for CalAtlantic Homes and the owners of the Woodstock Properties LLC and Amcore Trust which own the several hundred acres of property on which homes will be built.

    This occurred in late 2016, while property tax rates in Woodstock remain 4.6% of total home fair market value.

  13. Elected ‘officials’ like Mike Walkup and ‘dumb’ voters are a real challenge!

    The County BOARD does NOT set the TAX RATE!

    The County Clerk sets the TAX RATE!

    The County Board LEVIES A DOLLAR AMOUNT!


    New growth taxes are always collected!

    The RATE at which new growth and current assessed value is taxed is based on the LEVY AMOUNT!!

    The rate applied to new growth AND current EAV is based on the LEVY AMOUNT!

    BTW, Walkup’s statement: “Had we not taken it here, the people who built new properties in the past year in AL township would have gotten a free ride that the rest of the county didn’t get and the AL assessor would have been rewarded for being late with the figures. ” is so far off the mark he should resign!!

    NOBODY gets a free ride!

    Government bodies levy a dollar amount and the Clerk establishes the rate based on current EAV and new growth!!

    Anyone who tells you they increase the levy to capture new growth is in fact LYING!!

    Levy amounts are increased for one reason: SPEND MORE MONEY!!!!

  14. The total amount of taxes went up with the vote taken last night.

    It is simply wrong to assert that the Algonquin Township Assessor did not put the new growth on the tax rolls.

    If the County Board acted like the College Board, tax rates would have gone down.

    The MCC Board does not take new growth, thus the same amount of taxes is spread among more assessed valuation, lessening the tax burden.

    We can argue whether taking new growth is a good idea, but we can’t argue that it does not bring in more money, therefore, raising total taxes.

  15. So, you would ask for a flat levy and to not levy taxes on new growth?

    You can’t pick and choose – that’s unfair.

    Everyone contributes to the tax burden.

    You can mince words about their assessed rate – for example, Seniors or those in TIFF districts pay less – but assessing 0% tax levy makes no fiscal sense.

    Regardless of the timeliness of the Tax assessor, Cal, what a deliberate misuse of your soap box to push an illogical narrative against Franks, which inadvertently catches your flock in the cross fire.

  16. Not taking new growth is probably the worst possible way to reduce taxes.

    If you want to reduce taxes, you should reduce the levy.

    If the County Board were to reduce the county levy by 10%, it would amount to a reduction of about $50 per year for the average property owner in McHenry County.

    That’s it.

    To do that, following having already reduced the BUDGET (not the levy) by 10% over the past four years, will require a case by case evaluation of the services that will be impacted.

    To give one example, we are now looking at buying a old energy inefficient building on the edge of the campus, tearing it down, and building a new building on the site for a cost of Ten Million Dollars.

    Just to buy the building will cost several times what the new growth we just took will bring in and then we have to pay to tear it down.

    The purpose of this is to house the Health Department, and open up more space for I.T. and the State’s Attorney in existing buildings.

    One of the reasons is that Annex B, an old cinderblock building which needs a new roof, needs to come down and use that space for courthouse parking while we are doing the repaving project for the courthouse complex.

    Annex B currently houses something called the WIC Program, for “Women, Infants, and Children.” The WIC program is funded by the federal government (at least so far), but we have to provide the space.

    Also in that building is a Tuberculosis screening unit, which needs new equipment. We are required to provide TB screening because the General Assembly has never changed a 100 year old law to reflect current conditions. We are not required to do similar things for other diseases.

    Then there are a handful of nurses doing public health related work and giving inoculations that are housed in that building.

    None of these things really need to be done on campus.

    TB screening could be done at local hospitals which already have the equipment and we could reimburse them.

    The WIC program funding could be discontinued by the new Federal Administration.

    The inoculations could also be done at hospitals and the county could be billed.

    The I.T. department could be located literally anywhere this side of the Moon.

    The States Attorney does not have an immediate need for more space.

    They have a huge room now which is used to store paper files because they have not converted everything to electronic formats.

    Not doing this would save us TEN MILLION DOLLARS.

    That’s the kind of thing we should be focused on.

  17. By buying extra property the gov ageny just took more tax dollars out of the system.

    The other taxing bodies then will get less and start screaming for a levy increase.

    We’re over taxed now, find a better solution, form a better plan.

  18. I literally cannot believe how incredibly stupid this whole narrative is.

    This demonstrates the power hungry nature of Cal Skinner and how he is literally willing to risk everything in his continued pursuit of ruining Jack Franks.

    He doesn’t care about party loyalty, he doesn’t care about truth, he doesn’t care about facts.

    This is a warning to the McHenry County Central Committee – Cal is willing to throw your most recent nominee for Chairman to the dogs.

    Is he really your standard bearer?

  19. Finally we agree on something Nob.

    We already own a ton of land North of Ware Road next to the current Admin. building.

    We can develop that at any time.

    We are losing population currently in the county and there are no indications that this will be changing in the immediate future.

    If it does change it will do so gradually rather than all at once so we have ample time to adjust.

    Whereas it made sense at one time to try to acquire the various different buildings to the South of the Courthouse along Russell Court and Seminary Street, that is no longer the case as we have unlimited expansion capabilities to the North with nothing but farms all the way to Hebron.

    Rather than try to repurpose buildings that were not built for our needs, or tear them down and build something else on that site, we have raw land to work with that is equally suitable that we already own.

    The tear down cost alone for just one of those buildings exceeds the new growth that we just captured.

    Making sound decisions like that is where we can save a few bucks for the taxpayers.

    Meanwhile, look to the schools.

  20. Lawyers will be the death of us all.

    You should all hang your heads in shame for being so stupid as to let Franks roll you over.

    I am completely literally sickened by the actions of this board in the past two days.

  21. McHenry County has a median and mean property tax rate of 3.66% of fair market value.

    Contrast this with the supposed highest property tax rate in America (2.5%).

    Property tax rate is fully capitalized into property t]value, so each year McHenry County homes lose over 2% of value relative to homes all over America.

    People may argue that other States charge more for a license plate.
    Do you buy a license plate every year?
    Does a license plate cost the price of a home?

    If you spend five minutes researching the vague general defenses of our 3.66% (in Woodstock it is 4.66%) property tax rates relative to other States, and their different income tax rates and sales tax rates, and realizing that few people net the values of their home each year, and that few people spend the values of their home on sale-tax-eligible purchases, you will see the fallacy in the logic of these defenses.

    I am getting the realization that it is about time to give up–let the ministers take over this territory and split it up amongst themselves.

  22. No comments from gas bag gasser Cal?

    Gasser the gas bag from frox river grove is nothing more than a disruptor with no ideas.

    He hates everyone and he was the ring leader behind getting Republicans to vote for Jack Franks and defeat GOOD Republicans in the primary this year.

    Never forget that gas bag gasser is not on your side.

  23. Here’s a rough draft of an oversimplified summary followed by who does what that may not be technically correct and definitely does not include all the steps because that’s too confusing for a summary.

    If EAV increases due to new growth (a new house, etc.), there is no requirement for the property taxing district to hike its levy request for more taxpayer dollars.

    A reason new growth is considered separately is that it might result in hiking taxing district costs.

    A high level abbreviated overview of the property tax determination process:

    The property taxing districts send their levy request to the County Clerk.

    The County Assessor sends the assessed value of each parcel and total assessed value for each taxing district to the County Clerk.

    The County Clerk determines the Tax Rate that matches property taxing district levy request to property taxing district EAV, then applies that tax rate to parcels resulting in Extensions.

    Feel free to make any corrections, clarifications, or suggestions.

  24. Between the audio of the meeting and some of these comments, I’m finding it difficult to find a factually correct statement.

    They’re either flat out wrong or exactly backwards.

    First: No taxpayer was going to get a “free ride”.

    All new construction comes onto to the tax rolls and pays the appropriate tax.

    Its just that the county didn’t jack up their original levy extension request sufficiently to capture this missing new growth.

    Second: New growth comes onto the tax rolls on a pro rata basis based on the occupancy date of that project.

    So, if a new Starbucks gets built and opens on July 1st 2016, Starbucks will pay in 2017 a tax bill that is prorated for the first 6 months under its old assessed value plus 6 months based on the stepped-up basis of the new completed building.

    And 2018’s tax bill will then reflect a full year at the new, stepped-up assessed value.

    Third: By definition, a permanent reduction of an operating levy requires one to NOT levy for new growth.

    It means that you’ve requested an overall levy extension amount that is less than the previous extension and new growth and CPI have nothing to do with that decision.

    Fourth: If the county has an overall goal of cutting taxes 10% (is that off of last year’s $76.3 mil levy or this year’s $79+ mil levy?), then that goal REQUIRES you to abandon the concept of always taking new growth.

    They are mutually exclusive.

    Fifth: Our board at D-26, went through extensive machinations over the last 6 months to actually deliver a tax cut to our community.

    It appears that the substantial tax increase approved by the county board has essentially wiped out all of the tax savings that would have otherwise been recognized by our families and seniors.

    I’m going to make sure that I bring that message to our community.

  25. The amount to be taxed could not have been voted upon unless new County Chairman and State Representative Jack Franks had not put it on the Agenda.

  26. You need to pick your battles Cindy. This wasn’t it.

    There will be others.

    Again, why are property taxes so high in Illinois?

    (1) General Assembly. In order to try to balance their own budget while giving out handouts to friends and supporters, the state has dumped more tax burdens onto local governments. They hoped that would be covered by continued growth but when the growth stopped, the state tanked. Other states have different tax mixes where more taxes are collected statewide from various sources.

    (2) Schools. Local school boards have caved in time and time again to teacher and administrator salary demands. Teachers go on strike right before the schools are to open. Parents freak out because they have to continue their kids in day care or have them at home longer and flood the meetings singing the praises of their kid’s particular teachers. School Board caves in. Then there is football. Taxes go up.

    Property taxes are much more noticeable than other taxes because you have to pay them in large chunks. They are also unfair to those who are retired or have lost their jobs but still have to pay taxes on the homes they can’t sell. You don’t notice the taxes you pay at the gas pump or in the grocery store nearly as much.

    If the state would step up to it’s obligations to fund education, and school boards would be more frugal, maybe seniors could be given more breaks on property taxes as they no longer have kids in the schools. The senior exemption currently doesn’t amount to much.

    Did you file for School Board Cindy?

  27. Mike?

    Everything I see this board do tells me that NOT A ONE of those votes for can even comprehnd when they have BEEN LIED TO! Some things never change.

    This board is STILL the dumbest bunch of hicks I have ever read about.

    They are ignorant of what they are supposed to do in every situation that comes fbefore them.

    They are totally incapable of understanding how they just helped the new agenda steam roll the poor people that live in this county!

    Like usan, I have no hope.

    They didn’t even get past the first meeting and they caved completely!

    I am pysically ill and in bed becauee of this kind of stress that complete morons have put is in jeopardy once again!

    (That is something with your sensitivites that you should completely understand!)

  28. Oh, and Mike, I was unable to run for anything ten years ago when Cal exhorted me to do just that.

    I am too feeble to do much of anything.

    The last time I was strong enough to actualy leave my house, I voted!

    Looks like that was a waste of my precious waning energy.

  29. The little liar was in Springfield how many years?

    During his tenure, the following definition of “New property” ruled.

    “New property” means

    (i) the assessed value, after final board of review or board of appeals action, of new improvements or additions to existing improvements on any parcel of real property that increase the assessed value of that real property during the levy year multiplied by the equalization factor issued by the Department under Section 17-30 and

    (ii) the assessed value, after final board of review or board of appeals action, of real property not exempt from real estate taxation, which real property was exempt from real estate taxation for any portion of the immediately preceding levy year, multiplied by the equalization factor issued by the Department under Section 17-30.”

    Talk about a cop out!!

    “You need to pick your battles Cindy. This wasn’t it. ”

    My interpretation of that comment is “let’s screw the taxpayers”!

    Walkup has no time for you!

    And he thinks he can be elected as a Supervisor?

    A relatively unknown in his District got more votes than he did!!

  30. Cindy, keep posting and fighting the good fight.

    I always look for your posts first.

    May not always agree but always make me think.

    For way too long, politicians in McHenry County were not called out.

    Cool to see it now.

  31. You should listen to the meeting online for yourself instead of taking anybody ‘s word for it on here.

    It’s absurd to pin this on Franks or Walkup or anybody as a premeditated tax increase.

    They were fixing an error made on the part of the county essentially underestimating new growth.

  32. >Can’t agree if it’s a tax increase or not

    To me that shows a high level of incompetence.

  33. The county’s justification for the tax increase was new growth.

    The county was not required to levy a tax increase for the new growth.

    The county wanted more money, so they hiked their levy.

  34. If there’s vocabulary or procedural errors in those two comments feel free to clarify or correct.

    But that’s the general idea.

  35. Here’s another way to look at it.

    As a result of this, will the county receive more money from taxpayers?


    That’s a tax increase.

  36. As a result of this “Pick Your Battles” idiom, I will no longer be able to afford food.

    What happens to people that don’t eat, Mike?

    How do you lawyers sleep at night knowing the damage you have done?

  37. It passed 19-4.

    You argue it’s a tax increase.

    So I imagine you think they’re either incompetent, or they’re just wrong.

  38. Let’s see…

    Good old Jack serving in the legislature fighting for taxes the last 18 years hasn’t taught anyone anything?

  39. This was a tax increase.

    I actually stayed until the end and the County Assessor admitted the extra $80,000 would not only come from Algonquin Township BUT the entire county.

    Fact: Algonquin Township Assessments arrived at the county November 18th

    Fact: The total of new growth was about $80,000

    Fact: The $80,000 will not solely come from Algonquin Township

    Fact: McHenry County will be assessed an additional $80,000 from Hebron to Marengo, from Spring Grove to Woodstock all because of Algonquin Township.

    This was a tax raise folks.

    Go back and listen to the tape.

  40. Mike Walkup is a democrat, again he lied to you and this shows how he will continue to raise your property taxes, this is what democrats do.

    This is same thing Walkup is running for as Supervisor even though he lost chairman position he is now running in Nunda saying he is going to save taxpayers money.

    Liar Liar pants on fire

  41. The more I look at this the more I realize this is not a Republican or Democrat thing.

    This is a political class versus “the rest of us” kind of thing.

    I do not know what “the establishment” thinks of Barnes, Thorsen, or Wilcox but last week at a function I attended many Republicans were ripping Gasser.

    Gasser is not well liked be many elected politicians which is why I chose to support Gasser.

  42. Gasser does not even pay taxes he lives in his mothers basement and collects a disability compensation from the government.

    He has no skin in the game and is nothing more than an obstructionist and very political.

    Look at his affiliation McSweeney the weeny and Walsh the load mouth this county can do whole lot better than Walkup and Gasser.

  43. Dan, you are so right.

    There is no such thing as Repub/Demo.

    There are only people.

    And people can be evil or cruel or ignorant as the day is long.

    Take your pick.

  44. I would point out that the tax hiking resolution was put on the agenda by Chairman Jack Franks.

  45. Cal,

    You can say it all you want that doesn’t make it true.

    I’m starting to see a pattern here as others are I’m pretty sure.

    Let us talk about your inadequacies like your support for walkup in the last election which he thankfully lost.

    Now only to once again voted to raise our taxes.

  46. All the members of the County Board had the agenda packet and they debated this issue.

    They voted 19-4 for this.

    If this is a tax hike, many people are to blame.

  47. How can anyone take the posters here who do nothing but attack people seriously?

    I have read this blog for awhile now and never really thought twice of Mr. Gasser until about two months ago.

    After reading some of the comments by a very upset person I actually went to Mr. Gasser’s website and facebook page to see what was so bad about this man.

    From all the research I have done Mr. Gasser consistently votes against property tax increases.

    Has any other county board member, or local elected official, held a property tax forum?

    If Mr. Gasser is such a “bad Republican” how could the Illinois Republican Party make him the Republican Electoral College nominee for his district?

    Why do people contest Mr. Gasser’s military service?

    He had a 20 year career in the US Navy and Air Force – what is the crime?

    Andrew Gasser said he would not take a pension or healthcare and then he didn’t, yet some criticize him for it?

    Out of ALL of our 24 county board members Andrew Gasser is the only one who communicates directly with people on meaningful issues.

    Andrew Gasser seems to be the only local politician willing to talk about issues that others refuse to talk about.

    What is so wrong with what Mr. Gasser is doing?

    All anyone sees from these people are personal, hate filled rants.

    There has to be more to this.

    We would all be better off with more people like Mr. Gasser in local offices.

    He represents us well on the County Board.

    Olivia Rodriguez

  48. McHenry County Blog

    County Board Discussing 721 Pages at Tuesday [December 20, 2016] Committee of the Whole Meeting

    – article dated December 18, 2016 [Sunday]



    December 19, 2016 – County Board Committee of the Whole Meeting 11AM

    December 20, 2016 – County Board Regular Meeting 7PM

    – The County Board Regular Meeting occurred less than 48 hours after the Committee of the Whole Meeting.

    – The Board Packet was dated updated December 16, 2016 3:35PM updated (no further version control / update history listed)

  49. Well said Oliva Rodriguez. I concur.

    Andrew Gasser is everything positive and hard working, communicative, honest, tax fighting and government limiting.

    He’s the real deal.

    Those that protest too much?

    Those are the ones who have something/everything to lose when they are exposed by Andrew Gasser.

    They do nothing but take from the taxpayer and are running scared that their empire(s) may crumble when exposed.

    I would vote for Gasser every chance I get.

  50. Oliva and Cecile?

    You may not have noticed, but those attacking Andrew are the trolls.

  51. So, Gasser Your so called tax fighter is still living off of tax payer dollars but that’s alright?

    I call BS Here!

    Cal is one in the same, Living off of Taxpayer dollars as well.

  52. Campaign pitch:

    Cut Property Taxes 10% Now.

    Once elected:

    Raised property taxes $80,000 which was calculated from $6,965,052 new growth.

  53. Since the County Board Chair does not vote, it is agreed with the decision to raise property taxes $80,000.

  54. stand?

    What do your comments net you?

    Just curious, what you think you are accomplishing.

  55. Need to point out that Franks did not vote.

    All the republicans did. If Franks did not bring the vote forward, Cal would accuse him of not letting them vote. This is a democracy they should vote.

    It’s not Franks’ job to protect the board from themselves.

    It’s his job to allow them to vote in a democracy.

    Sounds like Cal is against allowing people to vote.

    Would he prefer Franks not allow votes on items that passed the committees because that is what he is suggesting

  56. How low of an IQ is required to believe the statement, “…sounds like Cal is against allowing people to vote.” and how many of those people are there in McHenry County.

  57. Wow!

    Did Mark seriously just post something original?!


    Skinner is continuing his quest to try and ruin the career of Jack Franks.

    He doesn’t care who he hurts or the fact that Republicans voted in committees to pass this measure.

  58. Jack Franks broken campaign promises:

    1998 Broken Campaign Promise #1 – Will limit himself to 3 terms in office as a State Representative. He was a State Representative for 9 terms (18 years).

    2014 Broken Campaign Promise #2 – Will not run for County Board Chair. He ran for County Board Chair and was elected County Board Chair.

    2016 Broken Campaign Promise #3 – Will deliver his plan to cut property taxes 10% on his first day in office. His first day in office was December 5, 2016.

  59. Repetition begets repetition.

    A majority republican board passed this measure from committee and the board overwhelmingly approved the measure.

    Sure, the chairman sets the agenda, but he doesn’t vote.

    It would be better if Cal wanted to have his cake and eat it too, instead, Cal Skinner continues to attack anyone that gets in his way of trying to ruin the career of Jack Franks.

    Cal doesn’t care if he attacks the GOP or even his golden boy, Mike Walkup, if that means he can try smear Franks.

    Cal holds no allegiances and THIS is who the majority of GOP leadership look to as the megaphone for their messaging.

    He is a snake.

  60. The Jack Franks Cheerleader whose goal is to discredit Cal Skinner and the blog to promote the career of Jack Franks for what purpose.

  61. Mike Walkup writes: What was done here was to tax new growth.

    The AL assessor was tardy in getting the new growth figures into us and missed the deadline by 3 days last November.

    We had voted already to take the new growth for the rest of the county.

    Had we not taken it here, the people who built new properties in the past year in AL township would have gotten a free ride that the rest of the county didn’t get and the AL assessor would have been rewarded for being late with the figures.

    If you don’t tax new growth, those properties are not taxed properly for the first year as the taxes are always one year behind.

    That’s why when you buy a new house, you have to pay one year’s taxes at closing.

    It is not a tax increase to take new growth.

    Mike, you are such a lying liar, and it’s time that someone called you out on it.

    This is a tax increase.

    You voted for a tax increase.

    What we’re talking about is the Resolution Authorizing an Amendment to the 2016-2017 County Tax Levy (which I’ll refer to as the “Resolution” as shorthand from here forward), that was item 13.48 on the 12/20/16 board meeting agenda.

    The Resolution increases the total amount that McHenry County will collect countywide as property taxes by $80,000.

    The Resolution was artfully couched in terms of being “for the purpose of collecting property taxes on the additional new property growth reported by [Algonquin Township].”

    But that just isn’t true.

    Whoever drafted that Resolution very clearly had one of the Board Members looking for cover from the voters chirping in his or her ear about how best to obfuscate the issue.

    That person should be fired for taking part in deceiving the voters.

    The County Board has absolutely nothing to do with whether individual properties are taxed.

    The taxation of individual properties is handled through the Township Assessor’s offices and the County Board of Review.

    The Township Assessor assesses properties (at least once every four years, and every property gets reassessed in a quadrennial year which 2016 (for taxes payable in 2017) is).

    If property owners disagree with their assessment, they can appeal to the County Board of Review, the Property Tax Appeal Board, and on occasion, to the courts.

    Then the properties are equalized en masse, so that there’s some equity between the counties (i.e. so that Boone County can’t artificially deflate its assessments in comparison to its neighbors).

    Once the assessment/appeal/equalization process is finished, calculating the pro rata share of property taxes paid by any individual property is a simple mathematical calculation. Someone at the county (treasurer?) adds up the equalized assessed valuation of all the properties in any given taxing district and uses that number to divide the taxing district’s levy (i.e. levy divided by total valuation equals tax burden per dollar of assessment).

    That number is the multiplier that appears on your tax bill.

    I presume that the Algonquin Township assessor assessed this new growth (because that’s his office’s job), and these properties will be on the tax rolls.

    Even if they’re not, your vote won’t change that.

    The long and the short of it is that the Resolution had absolutely nothing to do with taxing these new properties specifically.

    The Resolution was about increasing the total county tax levy because new property on the rolls meant that you could.

    The Resolution plain and simple was about jacking up the County’s tax bill by $80,000.

    Moreover, you did it not because you needed the money to fund government but simply because you could.

    If you needed the money, it would have been earmarked for a specific purpose, rather than “Non-Dept. Capital Projects–Fd Bal. Enhancement,” whatever the heck that is.

    You proclaim to be the smartest guy in the room (and anyone who has ever spoken to you for more than five minutes can back that up).

    You know the difference between the levy, the tax assessment rolls, and the multiplier.

    You attempting to confuse the two issues is slimy.

    You’re better than that, Mike.

    You voted for a tax hike.

    Don’t lie after the fact and pretend like you didn’t.

  62. Perhaps you have forgotten that Chairman and State Rep. Jack Franks cancelled all committee meetings after he was sworn in on Janaury 5th.

    No Finance Committee meeting was held to approve this resolution.

    If you think there was, please tell readers when that meeting was held.

    That means Franks decided on his own to place the resolution on the agenda.

    Frankly, I am surprised that Franks would put forward a tax hike after campaigning to cut our property taxes 10%.

  63. Refusing to take new growth, particularly where you already took it and this is just a glitch where one township didn’t get it’s figures in before the deadline so they now have to be added before the end of the calendar year, is not the way to cut taxes.

    That’s why 19 people, including the fiscal conservatives, voted for it.

    You cut taxes by cutting expenditures.

    Then you can reduce the overall levy.

    We are going to be spending this year taking a close look at all of the expense items, making reasoned decisions on what sort of functions the county should be performing and how much it should cost to perform each one, and then seeing if the levy can be reduced at the end of the year.

    Knee jerk reactions will not get us to where we need to be.

    Everyone should take a deep breath and watch what we do over the next several months.

    And get out there an help those conservative school board candidates.

    Every dollar they save has 7 times the impact of what is done by the county.

    Have a Merry Christmas everyone!

  64. Of course Franks did not vote.

    He has no vote on the County Board.

    However, he is the one who sets the agenda.

    County Chairman and State Representative Jack Franks put the tax hike on the agenda without reference to the Finance or any other committee.

    Had he not done so, our taxes next year would be $80,000 less.

  65. And, did I thank you for my pension recently?

    If not, thank you.

  66. You remind me of my “responsible Republican” days.

    Then, in 1973, State Rep. Don Totten (who managed Ronald Reagan’s Illinois campaigns) told me something that changed my worldview with regard to government–at least local governments, which have no presses to print money.

    He told me government will spend every dime it gets.

    In retrospect it sounds silly that I thought that was a revelation.

    The only way to cut government, Totten argued, was to limit its income.

    That is what local officials do who cut taxes (or cut the levy by $3 million, as you advocated and succeeded in convincing your colleagues to do in 2015).

    Raising the levy by $80,000 does not cut taxes.

    It increases them.

  67. “You cut taxes by cutting expenditures.”

    What expenditures will be funded by the additional $80k, Mike?

    Looks to me from Publius’s point that the money is just going into an unearmarked fund just in case you want to spend it down the road.

    What faith can we have that you’ll cut expenditures someday when you’re willing to tax for no specific purpose at all?

  68. Cut the bullshit Cal.
    All you are doing is sitting on your haunches, chuckling because you can – with $80k as meager evidence – pedantically point to a tax increase that was on the agenda set by Chairman Jack Franks. This isn’t about saving money and you know it. This has, and always will be, about your quest to ruin Jack Franks.

    You can limit levies, but everyone should pay their fair share. Period. End of Story. That’s what this measure was. It’s why Walkup voted for it.

  69. Is the $80,000 billed to all parcels or just those that experienced new growth.

  70. “Is the $80,000 billed to all parcels or just those that experienced new growth.”

    The county’s ability to increase its levy is capped by law at the rate of inflation unless new property is added to the tax rolls (what happened here), a taxing district annexes additional property, a TIF expires, or the voters approve a tax hike by referendum.

    Stripping away all of the intentional obfuscation, what the County Board did was increase their county-wide levy because the new properties that were added to the tax rolls allowed them to.

    They “taxed to the max,” which is the slogan for this practice used by angry taxpayers.

    All taxpayers in the county will have their tax bill increase proportionately.

  71. “That’s why 19 people, including the fiscal conservatives, voted for it.”

    If the “fiscal conservatives” on the Board support increasing taxes just because they can, they’re not fiscal conservatives by any reasonable definition of the term.

  72. Moderate I respectfully disagree with you.

    I will make a dangerous assumption and say that you did not listen to the meeting but instead were attending the meeting.

    Bob Ross, our county assessor, specifically said in the meeting that the $80,000 dollars being added to our levy (a tax increase) would not come from only the Township of Algonquin.

    We have no idea why the Township of Algonquin was delayed but the bottom line is that every property owner (and renter) will have to eat their share of the additional $80,000 in property taxes.

    There is no “fair share” argument with “collecting new growth”.

    If anything, by the Township of Algonquin not filing by the deadline was a stealth TAX CUT that we all should have embraced.

    After spending a some time in DC and some time in Illinois I have come to the personal conclusion that one man’s “fiscal conservative” is another man’s “reckless spender”.

    We are what we vote.

    Finally – you seem to be a smart individual I think you can make a point without cussing.

    I think we are all better than that – no need to get “dirty”.

    Call me anytime (850)866-0155.

    Andrew Gasser
    County Board, District 1

  73. All you MMC Bd members put up or shut up!

    why don’t you all put the multiplier where it should be with the REST of the Country!!!!

    that way you will all be forced to spend within your budgets!

    you get only what you get!

    No More raises!

    including the multiplier when its set, I’m sick of being the highest screwed state in the UNION!

    and getting NOTHING FOR IT !

    but pickpocketed !

    you all ran on lowering costs now do it!

    we should not be reading anything about increases!

    of any kind!

    Don’t kid yourself do you not think we don’t know i.e. Algonquin property taxes will be going up due to Businesses such as the WCC who bought a huge building there goes your tax bill then as they continue to do renovations more tax dollars are going to come out of your pockets to pay for them! enough is enough!

    stop expecting US to pay for these people to so call worship!

    you want to be free pay for it the freedom on your own stop depending on us the already strapped tax payer!

    do any of you sit and problem solve or just follow the sheep!!!

  74. Actually, the County Board has not “taxed to the max” in about four years.

    Every local government is allowed to increase its tax take by the percentage by which the Consumer Price Index increased the year before.

    For this coming year, that is 7/10 of one percent. (Next year it will be something under 2%.)

    The County Board was able to increase its levy by 4% ($3 million) because of a clause in the Tax Cap legislation that allows a government to eliminate a levy for one year and re-instate it the next year.

    So, for one year, McHenry County taxpayers saved $3 million.

    And I thank Mike Walkup for leading the fight for that tax cut.

  75. I have more reason to dislike Franks than probably anyone in the county.

    However, this was not his doing and I am not going to try to blame him for it.

    There will be plenty of other more legitimate opportunities to blame Jack Franks.

    Don’t worry about that.

    Happy New Year!

  76. Andrew, after getting such positive results with the three referendums, what happen to moving forward on legislation/binding referendum/whatever it takes to get that concept working for the tax payers?

    I’d say we just saw more justification for allowing us to vote on taxes/levies.

    Most elected officials can not be trusted to do as they say, the County Board vote just proved that again.

    You’re side tracking from the most important of missions, lowering our real estate taxes.

    They will not do it, WE HAVE TO.

  77. All of this financial stuff is a little over my head.

    But I believe this issue of the $80k had to be known prior to this last election.

    If so, why wasn’t it laid out for the electorate prior to the election?

  78. If Jack Franks had not put the tax hike resolution on the agenda of Tuesday’s County Board meeting, it could not have been voted upon and passed.

  79. I don’t understand why it’s a big surprise.

    Aren’t the elected officials supposed to know what’s going on.

    This issue has aggravated a lot of people.

    If someone messed up, why weren’t they held accountable?

  80. The $80,000 increase to the General Fund Property Tax Levy results in the General Fund Property Tax Levy increasing from $44,351,303 to $44,431,303.


    The McHenry County property taxing district sends the General Fund Property Tax Levy Request to the County Clerk, along with property tax levy requests for other McHenry County property taxing district funds.

    To oversimplify, the County Clerk performs a calculation:

    Levy Request / EAV = Tax Rate for the McHenry County property taxing district.

    That Tax Rate is applied to each parcel.

    Thus, each parcel pays a portion of the $80,000.


    Feel free to make any technical or procedural corrections.

    Just trying to list a high level overview of the process; not attempting to capture every step that occurs.

  81. Mark,

    You get it.

    I get it.

    Is it possible that the Board Members don’t get it.

    I’ve operated under the assumption that Walkup knew what he was doing, but maybe he genuinely is pleading his ignorance.

    What resources can we make available for the County Board to ensure that they understand the legislation they’re passing?

    We typically rely upon the bureaucrats, but they have a conflict of interest–additional tax dollars available are additional tax dollars that can be spent on bureaucrats’ salaries, making them have to do less work for the same pay, and creating job perks for them.

    I’d like to see a tax leader like Gasser, Serwatka, or Skilicorn put on a seminar for the boards of taxing districts to help them understand exactly what they’re doing before they pass legislation increasing taxes. That way there can be no excuse when we want to pillory tax-and-spend RINOs.

  82. We need some government, how much will be debated till the end of the earth.

    As tax payers we must take away some of the power/decision making away from our elected officials, spending, setting tax rates, and borrowing.

    These three issues were problems that were never addressed properly when the country was formed and Constitution was written.

    They should have been, but the partisan nonsense started already way back then with over spending and borrowing to buy votes.

    Spending must always match actual revenue available at the time, ie what we are willing to give in the form of taxation.

    Borrowing should only be allowed with voter approval.

    Individual Income tax rates and Property tax rates should not be roller coasters of ever changing rates, that just leads to insecurity for the tax payer not knowing what is coming next from the elected to buy votes.

    That is called: As the wind blows nonsense.

    I would propose we force our elected by Petition, which is allowed in the constitution, to enact a Balanced Budget Amendment that has the income tax rate and/or property tax rate control tied to it.

    The Congress, State, and Local government agencies will only be allowed to adjust the income or property tax rates after a 2/3 approval vote within its legal boundary.

    Our choice, the citizens of the country, state, county, and local government, with a strong majority vote behind changes, not the Pacs controlling the over the top partisan as the wind blows hacks.

    Government agencies that use Property taxes should have no levy power or equalizer or ability to raise taxes because of inflation, whatever the home value, up or down, the rate we voted on determines what is paid in taxes.

    Not enough as most elected seem to keep saying, then come to us with your yearly or two year budget recommendations and let us vote 2/3 for any change from the year before.

    No more passing on our debt to future generations should be allowed.

    We borrow almost 40% for the Fed Gov now that must stop ASAP.

    We can budget a pay back of our various government debts, it’s time we correct our mistakes as lazy sleeping citizens and move on as a country with fiscally responsible government.

    I listening for other suggestions, got one?

  83. Is the amount McHenry County underestimated for Algonquin Township new growth, $6,965,052, assessed value or equalized assessed value?

    $80,000 (additional county levy) / $6,965,052 (McHenry County’s underestimation of Algonquin township new growth) = .01148591568.

  84. Mark, to me it looks like EAV.

    Your number is very close to the County’s current limiting rate (0.01078148).

    I’m not sure what the new tax rate will be for next year given the roughly $3 million increase in the extension and the signicant increases in overall EAV due to growth and the application of an Equalization Factor of 6-8% accross most of the county.

  85. So $6,965,052 appears to be equalized assessed value (EAV) not aessed value.

    The $6,965,052 would not change, if the McHenry County taxing district levied $80,000, or did not levy $80,000?

  86. Mike certainly doesn’t get it.

    We don’t want plenty of other things to blame on him.

    We want this crap STOPPED!

  87. Can you be more specific, Cindy?

    By crap, you mean people paying their fare share?

  88. Fair is the word I think you want to use.

    And it is still spoken like the true socialist you insist on being.

  89. The Algonquin Township new growth parcels are paying their fair share / proportional share for the $6,965,052 EAV new growth attributed to their parcels, as a result of the Algonquin Township assessor hiking the assessments of the new growth parcels.

    That action results in the new growth parcels paying an increased proportional share of the McHenry County property taxing district levy / extension.


    The $80,000 hiked levy is paid for by all parcels in the McHenry County property taxing district, not only by the new growth parcels.



  90. If parcels in the entire property taxing district receive a special levy for new growth parcels, the parcels in the property taxing district, which are not the new growth parcels, are paying hiked taxes.

    As well as the the new growth parcels.

    Every parcel receives a tax hike for new growth, when new growth is levied.

    Which seems counter intuitive.

    Why should a non new growth parcel receive a tax hike specifically because of improvements to a new growth parcel.

  91. In which case levying every parcel for new growth is a more accurate description than levying for new growth.

  92. What would impress me is if the county board “ate” this 80k between them and paid it out of their salaries this year.

    That would be a nice Christmas gesture.

  93. It’s a cold day in hell when Mike Walkup and I agree on something, but he’s dead right: if you refuse to tax new construction then you are giving new residents a FREE RIDE at the expense of existing residents; it does NOT “lower taxes” in any way.

    You want to let your new McMansion neighbors get off scott-free from shouldering their fair share of property taxes?

    Then you’re either Bruce Rauner or you’re a special kind of stupid, or both…

  94. The new property in Algonquin Township will be taxed, Mr. Williams, whether or not the county increased its levy $80,000.

    That is what happens when new construction is put on the tax rolls, as was done in Algonquin Township.

    No newly-built property there would have gotten a “Free Ride,” as you seem to believe.

    Had the additional $80,000 not been levied by the County Board after Jack Franks put the resolution on the agenda, all taxpayers in the county would have paid a little less real estate tax next spring than will happen now with the $80,000 tax hike.

  95. Cal: Your math works in that alternate universe where increasing population puts zero additional demands on public services and resources.

    In the real world, the math works in the opposite direction.

    Which means that the new residents are indeed getting a “free ride” on the services that existing residents have already paid for…

  96. Cal: HOWEVER, it does appear to me that Skala wants to “fake” additional New Construction in order to raise County Tax Revenue?

    His statement claiming that the Townships “benefit” from unreported New Construction tells you that he’s a liar and that he knows it.

    And Skala clearly wants to cut the voter out of the property tax equation by replacing elected Township Tax Assessors (who are directly accountable to the taxpayer at the ballot box) with Skala’s own fellow APPOINTED political crony, the County Supervisor of Tax Assessments.

    In other words, Skala wants to switch to the same corrupt tax system they have in Cook County, BUT he wants to make his County Tax Assessor UNELECTED, which even Cook County isn’t corrupt enough to try to get away with…

  97. What is Mike Skala’s explanation for the “missing” New Construction that he’s “found?”

    Does he have the parcel numbers for these properties?

    Which Township Assessor is at fault here?

    Did the County Supervisor of Assessments “discover” the “missing” New Construction, or did Mike Skala find it himself?

    So many questions…no answers yet?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.