Jack Franks Proposes Drawing Down Valley Hi Surplus

A press release from McHenry County Board Chairman Jack Franks:

McHenry County Board advances $100 Per Household Rebate From $40 Million Valley Hi Surplus

Valley Hi Nursing Home fund’s cash on hand from FY 2006 through FY 2016 (projected). Over $41 million currently.

WOODSTOCK, Ill. – McHenry County homeowners will each get $100 refunded to them from the massive surplus that Valley Hi Nursing Home has accumulated, under a resolution proposed by County Board Chairman Jack Franks.

Franks, D-Marengo, said the surplus, which at the end of the 2017 fiscal year stood at almost $40.1 million, was a result of years of overtaxation, and that homeowners are entitled to a rebate.

“A responsible government should have a rainy-day fund, but the reserve that Valley Hi has accumulated is enough to fund several years of operations.

“That’s obscene, especially given how brutally overtaxed the homeowners of McHenry County are.

“I promised when I ran for this office that I would rebate a healthy amount of this back to the taxpayers without jeopardizing Valley Hi’s operations, and that’s exactly what my resolution does,” Franks said.

If the resolution is approved by the County Board, every homeowner who qualified for the homestead exemption on their 2018 tax bills, and who paid their taxes on time, would receive a $100 check on or before the end of next February.

About 88,000 properties potentially qualify, which would result in a rebate of about $8.8 million, which Franks said would in no way put Valley Hi in any financial peril.

“The generous and caring people of McHenry County approved a referendum, and opened their wallets, to build and run a home for the county’s indigent seniors to live out the rest of their days in comfort and dignity.

“It was never the will of the taxpayers to endow Valley Hi with a $40 million nest egg.

“The County Board this year significantly reduced county government’s tax levy, and is in good shape to reduce it further for 2019’s tax bills.

“Rebating some of this surplus back to taxpayers fits in perfectly with our mission to provide whatever tax relief we can,” Franks said.

The resolution passed the Public Health and Community Services Committee on Thursday, and is scheduled to go before the County Board for a vote at is Oct. 16 meeting.

Valley Hi’s revenue comes from Medicaid and Medicare reimbursements, the property tax levy, and from some private-pay customers.

“A $40 million surplus for Valley Hi is indefensible. Period,” committee member John Reinert, R-Crystal Lake, said.

“Giving some of that back to the taxpayers without hurting Valley Hi’s financial stability is the right thing to do.

“The County Board for years has debated what to do about this surplus, and I’m pleased that a plan that provides some tax relief is moving forward.”

“We always should be looking for ways to keep more of what taxpayers earn in their own pockets,” said committee member Chris Christensen, R-Cary.

“Valley Hi has a $40 million surplus in part because past County Boards didn’t keep an eye on the financials. This is a step in the right direction to right a wrong without hurting Valley Hi’s mission. I wholeheartedly support this measure.”

= = = =
It should be noted that the Valley Hi surplus was developed by taxing all taxpayers, not just homeowners. And, among homeowners, those with more valuable properties paid significantly more than those with lower valued properties.


Jack Franks Proposes Drawing Down Valley Hi Surplus — 11 Comments

  1. Just a typical Franks’ publicity stunt.

    How about getting the county out of the nursing home business for Mchenry County politicos and their family members!

    How about that!

  2. Rebating homeowners is ONE MORE publicity stunt by Jack.

    He will keep spending down the reserves to the point where Valley Hi has insufficient operating funds then he’ll sell to the highest bidder.

  3. It makes sense to refund/rebate the excessive amounts collected to create this surplus. That said, why is

    1) limited to ONLY those with a homestead exemption,

    2) ONLY those who have paid their 2018 tax bill in a timely fashion (Note: I assume since they project the checks will be out by February 2019 that he refers to the 2017 taxes PAYABLE in 2018)? If you paid taxes that contributed to this surplus, shouldn’t you receive the rebate? Something about equal protection under the law or some such?

    3) Lastly and perhaps of equal importance, why are you mailing out checks? At a bare minimum that’s going to cost > $1.00 per rebate. Why not just deduct the “rebate/refund” from the 2018 tax bill payable in 2019?

    With regard to the last item, does anyone want to bet that those checks if they allow Franks to have his way will be accompanied by a personalized note from Jack to ensure that everyone who receives one knows that Jack is working hard to. . . promote Jack Franks!

    TheTerminator and the guy with no clothes know Jack only too well.

    Hopefully he won’t be passing out any of those billboard sized checks that sometimes never cleared.

  4. Imagine the misfortune of those who recently sold their home but paid for Valley Hi over many years.

    Certainly not an equitable and meaningful approach

    I don’t want a $100 campaign token from the board or Frank, I want reform and solid financial stewardship.

  5. So let me get this straight. Franks and the board decide to do something good for taxpayers and you all still find reason to complain and bash Franks.


  6. How is $100 to everyone who claims a homestead exemption fair?

    Those who live in say Marengo, Harvard or Wonder Lake pay less to the county than say those who live in Turnberry.

    Simple math for expedited passage so the politicians can have good publicity/talking points during campaigns.

  7. Thanks again Jack, first a reduction in my tax bill, and now a rebate.

  8. Real estate taxes are determined by the “ad valorem” method of determining the valuation of real estate.

    A person with a $400,000 piece or real estate pays more than a person with a $100,000 parcel.

    We all know that.

    But it follows that it would not be equitable to redistribute the wealth by parceling out refunds based upon an arbitrary idea that everyone gets a equal share.

    I wouldn’t spend too much time on this unlawful process.

    Surely, a lawsuit would be filed to enjoin “redistribution”.

  9. The fact that the surplus was for the greatest part accumulated as an ‘ad valorem’ tax, and that a resolution is about to be debated that would refund part of this surplus in equal shares to some (not all) who paid, is just another scheme for wealth redistribution.

    No surprise that such a scheme is proposed by the same Democrat that served as a delegate for Hillary Clinton.

    The only question remaining is how many clueless RINOs will hop on board this ‘bus to nowhere’.

  10. Let me get this straight.

    Franks uses purloined taxpayer money … to buy votes from the taxpayers who were fleeced!

    Years ago, I had a rental residence in Johnsburg.

    I saw Jack Franks yard signs up all over the place.

    But it couldn’t have been the renters who put them up!

    The house was vacant then, and being rehabbed.

    I knew then that Franks was a dirty piker who ‘cut corners’ to self promote his socialist scheme.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.