Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: Good morning!
Posted in:
* I told subscribers about this on Monday…
When Gov. Bruce Rauner proposed preventing most property tax hikes as part of his State of the State Address in February, the agenda he released said he wanted to “freeze property taxes for two years.”
But the outline of his plans he’s given lawmakers who are meeting privately to try to craft a state budget no longer makes any reference to the two-year timetable, and a spokeswoman says the governor wants voters to decide if taxes should “ever be raised.”
“The governor’s agenda freezes property taxes and empowers voters to decide via referendum if their property taxes should ever be raised,” spokeswoman Catherine Kelly said. “Illinois has among the highest property taxes in the country and we need to get them under control by empowering voters.”
The outline says local governments wouldn’t be able to ask for more in taxes than they did in the 2015 taxing year, with some exceptions that provide for new construction or government consolidation.
The outline given to lawmakers makes clear that clamping down on property tax hikes is something that will at least be considered as they try to both make a spending plan and debate Rauner’s agenda before their May 31 deadline to make a budget.
At least somebody else in the media is finally writing about these secret meetings. We need more of this, please.
*** UPDATE *** From the governor’s office…
After Governor Rauner addressed the Chicago City Council, he was asked, “give me an example of what Chicago wants and what Illinois needs.”
The governor answered in part:
“Well in terms of what Illinois needs, I have been clear for two and a half years. We need local control, voter empowerment, pro-growth regulations and an overhaul of the government, empowering local voters and taxpayers to get more control of government costs, and that’s laid out crystal clear within our turnaround agenda. That’s what we need, and I’ve said that consistently.”
To be clear, the governor’s top priorities are listed below:
· Term limits
· Property tax freeze
· Allow local control of ability to create employee empowerment zones
· Allow local control of contracting and bargaining in schools and local governments
· Allow local control of competitive bidding on taxpayer-funded construction projects
· Pension reform
· Worker’s compensation/tort/unemployment insurance reform
· Ethics reform/end conflicts of interest in governmentThe detailed Turnaround Agenda is available at the following link: http://www2.illinois.gov/gov/Documents/CompiledPacket.pdf
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 2:35 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: Good morning!
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
If only we had let the Governor get away with taking those extra homestead exemptions, we probably would not have to deal with this pesky charade.
Comment by Juice Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 2:39 pm
That “ck”, first it’s the failures of the Tournaround Agenda, then having to back out of a debate her boss prompted, now it’s a “faith, hope, and pixie dust” property tax “foreverland”
Yikes.
To the Post,
Because something polls really swell doesn’t make it sound policy.
Numbers don’t lie, locals, and schools need money.
In government, “forever” usually equals about 7 weeks… FYI
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 2:41 pm
There are ideas so bad, you don’t even know where to begin…
Comment by Downstate GOP Faithless Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 2:44 pm
Why elect people to make decisions and then take away their ability to make the most important decisions?
Voters should trust the people they elect and toss them out when they lose that trust.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 2:48 pm
Voters also overwhelmingly voted for a millionaire’s tax. Where’s that on this agenda?
If Rauner wants to empower voters, he has to listen to their votes — even the one’s he doesn’t agree with. If you only act on the “empowerment” votes you care about — and ignore the others — that’s a kind of twisted fascism.
We said tax the millionaires. Where’s the call to action, Bruce?
Comment by Frenchie Mendoza Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 2:50 pm
Kind of a shame that the things he’d have the best chance of passing are his lowest priorities.
Comment by Arsenal Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 2:50 pm
I’m trying to understand how “local control” and “property tax caps” do not contradict each other.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 2:52 pm
Voters in Chicago want an elected school board. Is Rauner for that?
Comment by Truthteller Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 2:54 pm
Rauner is a kind of neo Marxist. He wants to see the state wither away by not funding it. So much for Praxis.
Comment by JerryG Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 2:55 pm
DJ Bruce spinning the greatest hits of the 70s. What’s next? A giant disco ball hanging from the Dome?
Prop. 13 certainly put the brakes on local and state taxes in California. That’s why California is a low tax state.
Those in the suburbs, watch your real estate values when your schools go south. Because the state ain’t going to step up with funding.
In fact, you know the pension shift is coming, right?
Comment by Wordslinger Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 2:55 pm
Per the update: he didn’t address what he thinks Chicago needs….
Comment by Vote Quimby! Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 2:58 pm
As a retired guy, I would much rather pay income tax on my 401K and pension benefits than pay ever higher taxes on the home I bought and paid off decades ago. I can’t think of anything more regressive than a property tax. So by all means freeze them or get rid of them, and come up with a form of taxation that actually is driven by actual economic activity.
Comment by Skirmisher Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 2:59 pm
Well… I’m sure we’ll all think fondly of your ‘agenda’ there Bruce. Especially after a veto-proofed house and senate pass a budget. Here’s an idea… maybe you should, you know, govern. Like most governors at the very least make an attempt to….
Comment by Ducky LaMoore Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:00 pm
I want to empower voters by constitutionally restricting who they can vote for.
I want to empower local governments by placing greater limits of control that they have on their own budgets.
I want to empower workers by giving their corporate overlords a better shot at lowering pay and reducing benefits.
And I want to end conflicts of interest for state employees by outsourcing more and more functions of state government.
Oh, and state workers are paid too much, but we’re going to put more money in their pockets. Got it!
Comment by Juice Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:00 pm
“We said tax the millionaires. Where’s the call to action, Bruce?” - That would require a constitutional amendment in the state. If changing the state constitution is what you are asking for, then would you support striking the words “impair of diminish” under the pension clause?
Comment by Lkwd Resd Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:05 pm
Wordslinger, we pay taxes in both CA and IL, and I can tell you CA is not a low tax state!
And if we had a state higher income tax, property taxes wouldn’t be the vehicle for so much funding on the local level.
Comment by Archiesmom Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:07 pm
Baron von Carharrt wants to end conflicts of interest in government. Ha. I’ll believe that when GRTC invests state pension funds without a commission.
Comment by Jorge Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:08 pm
Being a working class “voter” myself I hate to say this but giving voters the power to suspend increasing taxes of any kind “forever” is irresponsible. That’s like asking the fox to guard the chicken house as many voters will oppose any tax increase for any reason, regardless if occasionally they might be necessary. At some point there need to be a few adults in the room to make tough decisions. This would be what Madison once referred to as the tyranny of the majority.
Comment by The Dude Abides Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:09 pm
—
… then would you support striking the words “impair of diminish” under the pension clause?
—
No, because one doesn’t have to do with the other. I’m fine with taxing the millionaires, and I’m fine with state employees current and retired receiving the benefits they’ve been promised.
Both are fair to me, and one change doesn’t require the other to be effective.
Voters weren’t asked about a change in the pension clause. Voters *were asked* and *did* approve a millionaire’s tax.
Comment by Frenchie Mendoza Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:11 pm
Rauner, as usual, makes some sweeping statements and proposals that may fly in the face of good policy and government.
However, I am not dismissing this altogether. My assessed valuation and property taxes have not decreased in years. Even though housing has taken a tremendous beating since 2008 the valuations have remained level. What goes on here. Try to question it at any county government level and you get double talk.
Furthermore, it is my understanding that school districts can raise taxes without voter approval for building projects under the safety issues. (If I am wrong on this, please correct me).
So if you want a new building just let the old, but perfectly good, buildings deteriorate and you have the excuse you needed.
There is something very wrong going on out there in property tax land and would hope the Governor’s office might address some of these issues.
Comment by Federalist Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:12 pm
Yeah man, Prop. 13 worked out soooo well in California.
Comment by GraduatedCollegeStudent Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:12 pm
Prop 13 was a reaction to tax increases that were destroying many homeowners. The liberal, spendthrift government could have cared less about the people actually paying the taxes- they had their own agenda.
So real citizens took it on themselves to shake things up- and they did.
The problem with Prop 13 was that it froze taxes as long as one lived in their home. That could mean many decades.
A rational approach would have been to limit it to the CPI. Instead, two extremes collided with results that were not positive.
I lived in California from 1973-1977 and I saw the beginnings of this uproar.
Comment by Federalist Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:20 pm
Speaking of voter empowerment, what’s the latest on the millionaire’s tax that voters so overwhelmingly supported in the last election? I know it was non-binding, but wasn’t it supported by something like 80% of the voters? Where’s the voter empowerment here?
Comment by forwhatitsworth Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:27 pm
Federalist: you didn’t really mean to say that those who agreed with you were the “real citizens” and the others were not, did you? That’s below you.
Comment by walker Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:27 pm
Im surprised he didn’t say Chicago needs the Cubs to win the world series, just think about all that tax money St. Louis has generated from all their extensive playoff runs!
Go cards!
Comment by BlameBruceRauner Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:27 pm
@Federalist
“Forever” is even longer than that. Why is Brucie’s idea a good one again?
Comment by GraduatedCollegeStudent Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:27 pm
I lived in CA from 1994-2004 and still pay income tax there. The marginal rate for most of my income there will be 9.3 percent this year. I wish I were paying more here.
Comment by Archiesmom Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:28 pm
“just let the old, but perfectly good, buildings deteriorate and you have the excuse you needed.” There’s also the concept of “Throwing Good Money After Bad” to keep in mind. With things like asbestos, mold, lead, pests, ADA, HVAC, new technology, etc. to think about, you’re better off to bite the bullet and build a new building rather than trying to limp along with the old one.
Comment by Skeptic Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:30 pm
@federalist:
“liberal, spendthirft” almost spit out my drink laughing so hard.
Thank the Good Lord Jesus our Thirfty Right Wing Conservative government started 2 wars recently, with no way to pay for them. Right?
Comment by Jack Stephens Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:32 pm
Ok, so all of the eight are part of the Turnaround Agenda. Most are not achievable under any legal scenario in time to impact fiscal 2016 budget. How does that work within a negotiating strategy this month? Is Rauner simply not interested in a negotiated budget solution? Serious question. Not snark.
Comment by walker Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:33 pm
thanks for reminding me about that Millionaire’s Tax we all voted for…I hear a similar tax has really worked really well in Minnesota.
isn’t it time to pass that Gov Bruce?
Comment by Belle Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:35 pm
In Michigan, voters turned down an increase in the sales tax. Originally it was to just fund road repairs, but other improvements got tacked on. Everyone there agrees the roads are deplorable but they can’t agree on how to pay……
Comment by Bogey Golfer Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:43 pm
We have elections for a reason. We are a republic not a democracy.
Comment by facts are stubborn things Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:50 pm
Is it the governor’s plan to bankrupt cities and towns in Illinois by reducing their share of sales tax revenue and freezing property taxes? And to what end? The people of Illinois need to wake up quickly and stop this nonsense before it is too late.
Comment by Enviro Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:50 pm
—
Is Rauner simply not interested in a negotiated budget solution?
—
I’m assuming he’ll let the government crash and burn — and then put the blame on the D’s for any damage. He’s said before that he’s happy to shut down the government to rewrite the contracts. I assume this meant state employees — but it could very well mean the state itself.
One thing Rauner does is say what he means to do — and then goes ahead does it. That’s not a compliment, either. Unless mysteries are revealed in these closed door, star chamber meetings — there’s no reason to believe that Rauner is willing to compromise — on anything.
Comment by Frenchie Mendoza Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:51 pm
“Is Rauner simply not interested in a negotiated budget solution?”
Nope.
There’s no time for “governing” when Rauner is so busy with his ⁕⁕⁕⁕around Agenda.
– MrJM
Comment by MrJM Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:51 pm
With all that local control, we could get rid of Springfield altogether. Maybe that’s what he meant by “shakin’ it up.”
Comment by Streator Curmudgeon Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:53 pm
“There’s no time for “governing” when Rauner is so busy with his ⁕⁕⁕⁕around Agenda.” I’m not sure why, but that made “Doing the Hokey-Pokey” come to mind.
Comment by Skeptic Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 4:00 pm
Eliminate property taxes? He really doesn’t understand the tax structure in Illinois, does he. Property taxes are unpopular-true. But in our area, the city taxes subsidize the township roads; the farm taxes subsidize the schools. Each receives revenues from other separate, sources, such as MFT and sales taxes. Like it or not the general overall taxing structure generally works, unless messed with by legislatures, either state or local- I reference pension underfunding and “tax caps” as examples.
The problem has been that the various tax revenues have not kept pace with inflation, because they weren’t raised as needed.
Now, Brucey wants to come along and cut everything, expenses AND revenues, to solve the problems-wonder what color the sky is in his world???
Comment by downstate commissioner Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 4:09 pm
Hey Federalist:
“A rational approach would have been to limit it to CPI” - you realize that is what we have now under the Tax Cap for property taxes in Illinois….
Comment by archimedes Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 4:24 pm
I didn’t get past “local control” and #1 on the list, “term limits.”
Because we all know if you want to locally reelect your spokesperson, because you think he / she is doing a good job, prohibiting the local voters from doing that, from reaching their own decision about the merits of said official, is the best example of empowering the local citizenry. “Oh, you’d like to keep so-and-so? Sorry.”
Sheesh.
Comment by ZC Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 4:31 pm
The reason people think term limits are needed is because we don’t have competitive districts. If we had redistricting reform then the goal of term limits would be met.
And while the Governor is also reforming local governments, he should bring term limits and/or redistricting reform to local governments as well. Nobody need look any further then Chicago’s 2nd ward to realize that gerry wandering is just as prevalent at the local level as it is at the State-level.
Comment by Just Me Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 4:34 pm
Is this the “Put Your Hands on Top of Your Head and Turnaround” Agenda?
Comment by Nick Naylor Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 4:34 pm
PTELL- tax caps- actually can have the opposite effect the governor claims to be looking for (I believe he is pandering to the no tax religion people). By forcing a cap districts that can lower their levy do not because they have to go to referendum to get the funding back if they need it and that takes years in most cases. This is common in some suburban and even some down state districts. They are running surplus budgets but don’t dare lower taxes.
If passed we will raise our rates to the max next year to protect our district financially. The state is not reliable, they make cuts during the year and have been skipping MCAT payments for more than 5 years now. The state is responsible for 20% of our funding. Unfortunately that is enough to make an impact even after years of reductions. Any more reductions in funding we mean the loss of programs that our community beieves important and increased class sizes and more time on a bus (one reduced route would put our kids on a bus for over an hour on average).
Consolidation? If we consolidated with the smallest neighboring district the new district would cover over 500 square miles. For some people, a school could be more than 20 miles away. Ever travel rural roads in the winter? Not that great.
At the end of the day no one likes taxes. Heck, our country was founded based on a tax protest even though the American colonies had the lowest level of taxation in the British Empire. The bottom line is that a bunch of mega millionaires and billionaires (Koch Brothers and Americans for Prosperity (for the wealthy)) don’t want to pay taxes.
Comment by JS Mill Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 4:35 pm
he clearly does not understand how public finance works….
Comment by I wish to remain anonymous Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 4:37 pm
= = Heck, our country was founded based on a tax protest even though the American colonies had the lowest level of taxation in the British Empire. = =
Actually, I believe the Boston Tea Party was to protest the East India Company being given a monopoly on the sale of tea (mercantilism) accomplished by providing the East India Company a subsidy that allowed the sale of tea in Boston at below market prices (market dumping).
Taxation was only a small part of the protest.
Comment by Bill White Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 4:44 pm
@Bill White- I was definitely not referencing the Boston Tea party. That is a common misconception.
Comment by JS Mill Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 4:51 pm
@JS Mill - Fair enough
Comment by Bill White Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 4:55 pm
No property taxes would kill the public schools which appears to be his intent.
Comment by Mama Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 4:55 pm
I love how everyone seems to think that Rauner is “clueless”, “doesn’t understand public finance”, is “out of his league”, “stupid”, “obviously didn’t think things through”, etc. This is a brilliant man who was educated in finance at Harvard, and is a self-made billionaire investor/financier. I can promise you he knows exactly what he’s doing, he calculated the costs and did the math long before he ever officially started running for office. This is a guy who has mastered the art of preparation and being thorough his entire life. Just because his messaging may seem to indicate otherwise, or if his methods seem unconventional to failed bureaucrats (and there are countless in this state), doesn’t mean he’s clueless or his plans have no merit.
Comment by econ prof Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 5:50 pm
- econ prof -
Today,
MJM - 1
Rauner -0
You’re welcome.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 5:52 pm
Econ Prof, as someone who likes to pretend to be a professor of economics, does that proposed FY16 budget look balanced to you.
Comment by Wordslinger Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 6:00 pm
One of the pitfalls of PTELL is that taxing bodies more or less HAVE to levy the maximum amount (pegged to CPI or 5%, whichever is less), or they leave that money on the table and face a downward compounding effect in subsequent years.
If local property taxes are high in Illinois, it’s precisely because the GSA is underfunded and broken. Starving school districts into bankruptcy so they can shirk their obligations to employees and creditors is irresponsible governance.
Comment by Tournaround Agenda Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 6:02 pm
@econ prof, agree that he does fully realize what the repercussions are if his agenda is enacted. The fact that he understands what he is doing however, doesn’t make it right though. He’s no fool but he’s not interested in shared sacrifice either. Those like himself who are wealthy are not being asked to sacrifice at all in any of his proposals. Rauner is being financed by the wealthy and he is looking out for their interest. His insistence that his turnaround agenda be implemented before he’ll consider increasing revenues is a non starter, that’s not going anywhere. At some point he’ll need to learn how to be a Governor. Governing like a CEO won’t work because unlike the business world, in politics he has to deal with this thing called separation of powers.
Comment by The Dude Abides Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 6:03 pm
The Chicago City Council threw shade on Rauner today. They passed a resolution of their own opposing Rauner’s anti-union policies. Rahm Emanuel called on Rauner to not be a hypocrite on fiscal responsibility, since Chicago pays “dual-taxation” for its own teacher pensions and downstate teacher pensions.
And who should be talkin’ about secedin’? Just sayin’.
I’m kidding about secession. I don’t like that idea at all. In fact, I invite all Illinoisans to celebrate the Obama library coming to Chicago. The official announcement will be next week. This is a win not for just Chicago, but for the whole state.
Comment by Grandson of Man Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 6:13 pm
Rauner can’t lead the charge on revenue and Democrats cannot pass revenue over his veto. Rauner is also willing to spend millions in 2018 political races. Opposing property tax freezes when you have an opponent outspending you 3-1 will make many legislators concerned about this plank of the turnaround agenda. In addition, He needs to grab local revenue to help make the fy 2016 budget work without revenue and then flush the problem downstream to local government. It seems like Rauner’s long term strategy is to pull off Detroit style cuts to public employee pay and benefits without having to go through the hassle and expense of municipal bankruptcy. Many of his large donors seems to have bought into this plan - at least in the short term. I agree with other commenters about the plutocrats absence of shared sacrifice. That said, how does a rank and file legislator counter an onslaught of Rauner money after they have opposed a property tax freeze?
Comment by Daytona 500 Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 6:29 pm
=Chicago pays “dual-taxation” for its own teacher pensions and downstate teacher pensions.=
Rahm can say that but that does not make it true.
CPS actually benefits disproportionately from the collar counties and downstate when it comes to overall funding. And, during the Daley years, Chicago failed to contribute to CPS pensions ans the system went from more than 100% funding to underfunded.
Comment by JS Mill Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 6:55 pm
@TDA In addition to the points which you made, The Governor when once elected must realize that he is governor of all the people, not just a very influential few.
Comment by Old Sarge Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 7:11 pm
>> This is a brilliant man who was educated in finance at Harvard, and is a self-made billionaire investor/financier. I can promise you he knows exactly what he’s doing, he calculated the costs and did the math long before he ever officially started running for office. This is a guy who has mastered the art of preparation and being thorough his entire life.
If the 2007-08 financial crisis taught us anything, it’s to be thoroughly suspicious of sentiments like the above …
Comment by ZC Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 7:40 pm
Econ Prof, that’s one big fat sloppy kiss on the governor’s, um, resume.
You seem to know him well. Tell me, in all that preparin’, long-rangin’, thoroughnatin’, calculatin’, financin’, and messagin’ he picked up while matriculatin’ at Harvard, how was he on cipherin’?
As in, countin’ to 60 and 30?
Comment by Wordslinger Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 8:02 pm
@ Oswego
“Because something polls really swell doesn’t make it sound policy..”
So I assume you’re opposed to a minimum wage hike and the tax on millionaires as well.
Comment by 1776 Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 8:24 pm
- 1776 -
Use the search key…
As a political tool to drive turnout, they were “fine” to be on the ballot.
Rauner’s minimum wage proposal is bad policy, and a surtax on Millionaires, how about taxing corporations at a rate that doesn’t zero out, and not Mom and Pop shops that make the family business magically in that millionaire tax bracket.
K?
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 8:29 pm
@graduated/college student
Forever” is even longer than that. Why is Brucie’s idea a good one again
Read what I said and not how you want to convolute it.
Comment by Federalist Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 9:07 pm
Econ prof. Thanks for the laugh. I needed that.
Comment by Jorge Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 9:08 pm
@Archiesmon,
I lived in CA from 1994-2004 and still pay income tax there. The marginal rate for most of my income there will be 9.3 percent this year. I wish I were paying more here.
No one is stopping you from paying more. Justtsend the state whatever you want to.
By the way how much do you pay in state income taxes and property taxes in Illinois? If you want to get moralistic, back it up.
Comment by Federalist Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 9:12 pm
@Archimedes,
“A rational approach would have been to limit it to CPI” - you realize that is what we have now under the Tax Cap for property taxes in Illinois….
In case you did not read I was specifically dealing with California. Don’t understand why certain people do not read in context of what is written.
However, it still does not deal with the issue of home price decreases and assessed valuations remaining the same!
Comment by Federalist Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 9:16 pm
@ Jack Stephens,
Obviously the truth hurts but that is exactly what California has been on for years and Brown continues it ever more. The answer is alwasy to tax more and use income resentment as much as possilbe in the process.
As to your irre3lvant 2 wars comment, why did you bring this up. Best you could think of at the time. If so try to stay on focus about this issue.
As to the last 2 Wars (Bush) you mentioned, I was against them from the beginning just as I was opposed to Vietnam War. And I was opposed to our war in Afghanistan which Obama full supported in his 2008 campaign.
@federalist:
“liberal, spendthirft” almost spit out my drink laughing so hard.
Thank the Good Lord Jesus our Thirfty Right Wing Conservative government started 2 wars recently, with no way to pay for them. Right?
Comment by Federalist Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 9:22 pm
Sorry I could not to you all earlier but even late it sure was fun.
Comment by Federalist Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 9:23 pm
“Ethics reform/ end conflicts of interests in government”
So Bruce, you’re gonna fire your wife and her 100 K secretary?
Comment by Property of IDOC Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 9:35 pm
It doesn’t matter what makes economic sense, ethical sense, or legal sense… All that matters is what he and his millionaire cheerleaders want. He will shut down the government & bankrupt municipalities. He really doesn’t care. His only concern is his “agenda “, the betterment of our State is not part of it. Too bad they closed Zeller, he probably would have been more comfortable having his” command center” in his room there.
Comment by Property of IDOC Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 9:58 pm
This is only him paving the way for local governments to declare bankruptcy. When considering whether every option has been exhausted before doing so this is another box checked “yes”. And the wording is strategic in that uninformed voters will vote willingly against their own best interests to further agendas of those who oppose them.
Comment by truthurts Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 10:03 pm
Property values are based on a three year moving average. That way they cannot peak and trough from one bad year. It is a dizzying process but in the end it makes sense and if you want to reduce your property taxes - buy a less valuable home.
Comment by Nothin's easy Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 10:41 pm
Many parents move into expensive houses or condos they can barely afford in the hopes that their children will benefit from better schools in more affluent areas. It’s not greed, or the desire to show off. Illinois politicians of both parties have failed to ensure that all or even the majority of schools in Illinois are of how quality-pick your reasons-and as usual the middle class pays disproportionately to their actual income and wealth, and low-income families can’t play at all.
Another reason why we need a new political party and new politicians. These folks of the current Illinois political class have utterly failed. How long will the millenials and younger folks moving into positions of power put up with this crew of political failures.
And how long will they make the middle class pay for everything while pretending the wealthy-I’m talking about the really wealthy-aren’t there from the perspective of proportion of wealth paid.
Comment by Cassandra Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 6:43 am
Ridiculous!!!
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 7:13 am
taxes don’t go up on their own, it is elected bodies that vote to raise them. That elected body is voted on by the people of that municipality. Sometimes in a republic the elected officials may go against the majority of people. The constitution is where you limit the power of the elected government.
Comment by facts are stubborn things Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 7:31 am
@federalist:
Not sure what California has to do,with the topic but I digress.
Back to the topic.
“tax more and use income resentment as much as possible in the process”
Bruce is driven’ around the state talkin’ about “Shared Sacrifice”. Since he has millions more reasons to “share” then he can share more!
Comment by Jack Stephens Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 7:51 am
“CPS actually benefits disproportionately from the collar counties and downstate when it comes to overall funding.”
This is also not true–CPS had about 20% of the k-12 student population in IL, and–over the last 4 years, at least–about 20% of the “ISBE” state money + TRS funding.
Comment by Chris Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 10:26 am