Because… Rauner!
Wednesday, Jan 13, 2016 - Posted by Rich Miller
* IO…
In what may be the unveiling of a new Democratic line of attack against Governor Bruce Rauner’s Turnaround Agenda as the 2016 elections loom, State Senator Dave Koehler (D-Peoria) in a radio interview 10-days ago attacked Rauner’s property tax freeze push for, “ironically,” igniting the “biggest tax increase anywhere.”
In a January 2 interview on Peoria’s WMBD-1470, Koehler told talk-show Paul Gordon, “I just want to point this out, a real irony. The governor wanting to freeze property taxes all across the state… His desire to do that and his trying to push that through the legislation has now caused the biggest tax increase anywhere that I’ve ever seen in property taxes,” Koehler said. “Every community, every school district, they’re now going to go out passing property taxes because they want to hedge against what [inaudible].”
House Speaker Michael Madigan’s spokesman, Steve Brown, who also appeared on the program, backed Koehler’s assertion.
“They don’t want to get caught short. And so the exact opposite has happened there,” Brown said. “And the fact that a prolonged debate over the budget has probably just brought more of that on. It is an interesting phenomenon.”
I don’t disagree. We’ve already discussed this topic.
However, Sen. Koehler voted for the Senate Democrats’ property tax freeze bill which passed that chamber in August. And Brown’s boss held somewhere around a kabillion property tax freeze floor votes last year.
It ain’t just the governor. Everybody’s getting into the act.
- Formerly Known As... - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:15 pm:
Bingo.
Kohler and many Democrats are on record for multiple votes supporting what he says led to ==“biggest tax increase anywhere”== while Republicans abstained or voted against it?
Careful, Senator. You might burn yourself.
- Ducky LaMoore - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:19 pm:
===Careful, Senator. You might burn yourself.===
Your logic is backwards. If the GOPies voted for it, and the governor signed it, then nobody could pass the increases. Geez. You don’t get burned when you voted for a property tax freeze that didn’t pass and then property taxes go up.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:20 pm:
===You don’t get burned when you voted for a property tax freeze that didn’t pass and then property taxes go up===
So, by that logic, then Rauner is blameless as well.
Just sayin…
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:26 pm:
“It is an interesting phenomenon.” Steve Brown
****
Phenomenon- the result of “local control transfers” in the TurnAround Agenda; see also “non-mandated massive tax hike”
- Just Me - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:26 pm:
Rich, don’t let the truth get in the way of a good story.
- Anon221 - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:26 pm:
1:26 pm was me.
- JS Mill - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:27 pm:
= then nobody could pass the increases=
The freeze would not have impacted the December 2015 levies that were recently passed. It would impact the 2016 levies as would anything passed from here on out.
- local guy - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:28 pm:
There is only 1 slight problem with that logic. There are over 6,000 taxing districts in Illinois, and only 211 of them have the authority to raise property taxes beyond the rate of CPI. Those 211 are the home rule municipalities in the state. All other taxing districts are limited to the CPI increase, which was a whopping 0.8%. And given that a municipalities share of the tax bill is generally less than 15% of the total amount, this means that the vast majority of the taxing districts in this state, as well as the property taxes being paid, are only increasing their taxes by 0.8%. I would not consider that “the biggest tax increase anywhere that I’ve ever seen in property taxes.” Of course, we know no one in Springfield will ever let facts get in the way of an election soundbite.
- phocion - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:31 pm:
Shouldn’t Koehler and Brown direct their criticisms at local governments who use this as an excuse to jack up their property taxes? I kind of doubt the voters in these towns and school districts are going to blame Rauner. They’ll be blaming their own elected officials for hiking their property tax bills. Pretty lame criticism of Rauner from the usual suspects.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:34 pm:
The property tax freeze always confused me due in large part that the property taxes, a vast majority of them, keep local institutions such as schools afloat.
Then throw into the meddling the required Union Poison Pills…
I’d hate to have voted away my local schools a revenue lever while at the same time signaling to Labor, “I’m not with you”.
I’d also hate to have voted my switch continually to take away my local schools a lever to revenue and signaled to them, “Hurry up before this is going to be for real.”.
Hard to find anyone tellin’ locals, “be cool, it’s all a show.”.
The only mixed signal here is to those choosing to have a poison pill to Labor, and those refusing to add the poison pill to Labor.
The only mixed signal…
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:35 pm:
That’s a goofy “line of attack” all the way around. I don’t get it.
- Anon221 - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:44 pm:
local guy- it depends on where you live, and how many different taxing bodies that can raise their rates are listed on your property tax bill. Have only one, maybe not much of a change. have 5-10, might feel the bite a bit more. Have more than one property, well, it starts to add up. But hey, maybe this is all part of the “master plan” to eliminate those units of government we have too many of- starve ‘em out or vote ‘em out.
- Ducky LaMoore - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:45 pm:
===So, by that logic, then Rauner is blameless as well.===
I would agree if he didn’t own the caucus and had them vote against the very thing he himself is asking for (minus anti-union poison pills).
- Lincoln Lad - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 1:50 pm:
I’m in one of the collar counties, and my 2016 property taxes went up over 10%. When I saw it, I immediately thought it was related to the expectation of a coming freeze.
- local guy - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 2:31 pm:
Anon221 - I guess I didn’t make my point clearly. Depending on where you live, there are usually at least 5 taxing districts. Most places there are about 10. But the only taxing district that can raise their property taxes more than the CPI is home rule municipalities. School districts cannot. Counties cannot. Townships cannot. Parks and Libraries cannot. So if you live in a home rule municipality (one of the 211), there is only 1 taxing district-the municipality, that makes up less than 15% of your bill, that can raise their property taxes more than CPI. For all other people who live in non-home rule municipalities, which is the majority of the state, there is no taxing district that can raise their property taxes more than the CPI (unless they go through the referendum process for a greater increase).
- Liandro - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 2:35 pm:
Lee County is tax capped, so Dixon sure as heck didn’t do this.
- A Jack - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 2:42 pm:
I am waiting for the massive income tax increase that Rauner said he was willing to sign once he gets his “reforms.” He seemed to repeat this quite often in his interviews. He really wants to put it to the middle class, first lower wages, then increase taxes.
- Norseman - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 2:49 pm:
Hypocrisy is not the sole purview of Rauner and the GOP.
- Anon221 - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 2:50 pm:
If this is a double post, I apologize.
local guy- Thanks for the clarifications. I was pointing out more that if those taxing bodies that are constrained by the CPI, raise their max this year (and next and… next?),then your overall tax bill will continue to rise, even without referendums to go past the CPI. The full on veto of the budget helped make that a reality. Locals can’t afford to wait and see. They do pass budgets, and have to plan for the next fiscal year. The withholding of motor fuel, 911 funds, etc. was a warning shot that woke up even those in support of the TurnAround. You have to wonder, in Rauner’s grand plan, if these weren’t intended unintended consequences.
- Charlie Wheeler - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 3:02 pm:
Point of Information:
Tax caps– the Property Tax Extension Limitation Law, or PTELL– are not applicable to local government taxing bodies in most counties outside Cook and the collars. While mandated by law in Cook and the collar counties, Downstate counties may impose caps by referendum; 33 of the 96 have. See http://tax.illinois.gov/LocalGovernment/PropertyTax/ptell.htm for a map of counties under the PTELL.
Charlie Wheeler
- Judgment Day - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 3:12 pm:
“There are over 6,000 taxing districts in Illinois, and only 211 of them have the authority to raise property taxes beyond the rate of CPI.”
———–
Actually, a non home rule tax district that is subject to tax cap limitations can go for referendum to increase their CPI limit above the state certified CPI rate.
In fact, that’s what the smart tax districts do - because even though it’s only a 1 year increase in their CPI, that increases their extension base going forward. And that really works better for the tax district going forward.
IMO, if there’s been an increase in the number of capped tax districts going for referendum, it’s been only a marginal increase. The capped tax districts have been doing referendums all along, so this supposed ‘flood’ of tax districts going out for increases is no real news. There was already a flood of referendums. Just more spin.
Just a thought: When I talked to the operations folks on the inside of getting property taxes ready a number of years ago, they gave me a rule of thumb they used on the effects of PTELL on units of local government:
Years 1-2: Budget Necessities vrs. Budget Frills: No change
Years 3-4: Budget Necessities vrs. Budget Frills: Frills start getting cut.
Years 5+: Budget Necessities vrs. Budget Frills: Frills eliminated; it’s Budget Necessities vrs. Budget Necessities.
Lots of referendums. Every year.
- yinn - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 3:15 pm:
Local guy, there are probably a couple dozen exceptions to PTELL that non-home rule units of government can use to to avoid caps.
- Judgment Day - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 3:46 pm:
Actually, the entire IL property tax administration process is going to have to be dramatically changed, and for reasons not obvious to most people.
Technology change.
And it’s going to need to be a drastic STRUCTURAL redesign of the entire system, starting with the laws governing property taxes (35 ILCS 200/) Property Tax Code.).
Here’s the executive summary of the issue:
What folks outside of the property taxation field miss is that real estate taxes are actually administered/calculated down to the political township level, not just at the County level.
Over the years, we’ve (the legislature) made all sorts of little tiny technical changes (think of these changes as ‘filters’) where we imposed all sorts of ‘checks’ using prior year(s) data in making current year calculations.
Well, the way we made those changes work on a computer level was as follows:
1) Load those fancy calculations (incorporating both current year data -and- prior year(s) data) onto a workstation’s local hard drive (think C: drive) over the network.
2) Run your processing on that workstation.
3) Write the results from that workstation doing the processing back across the network to the fileserver(s).
4) Success. All is good with the world and you are good to go forward.
Well, all these Smartphones and tables - guess what most don’t have? A local hard disk drive.
As long as you have desktops and notebooks with local hard drives, you are still ok. But that’s not the end of it.
Now for inquiry only processing, it’s not really an issue, But for maintenance/processing, it’s a BIG ISSUE.
And there’s an even bigger issue: For a lot of these Counties, they are running Windows legacy client-server applications for property taxes, plus other applications.
In virtually all cases that I know of, that means they are having to run Windows client software on those local devices/workstations for doing maintenance/processing work.
Good luck running that client software in the future. Because more than likely, you will be required to do the applications work on Android, iOS, or Windows 8 or higher. Guess what, so far it’s not happening. The new mobile OS’s do not support the legacy Windows client software.
Means you are stuck using Windows 7. Today, no problem - Down the road - BIG PROBLEM.
All that existing Windows legacy client-server applications software is going to have to be re-written to take into account these new mobile operations systems (OS’s). Not fun work.
You got some time (4-5 years), but better get started.
Technology changes bite.
- Lynn S. - Wednesday, Jan 13, 16 @ 11:00 pm:
Local guy–
Your statement is only true in those areas covered by a tax cap (PTELL). I live in Champaign County, which has PTELL,but there are a few school districts that straddle Champaign and another county. Districts like Champaign Unit 4 and Urbana 116 are covered by PTELL and limited in what they can do with their levies; Mahomet-Seymour and Monticello are not capped and may raise their rates by greater amounts than CPI. Whether it would be smart for them to do that is another story..
- local guy - Thursday, Jan 14, 16 @ 9:37 am:
I do appreciate everyone correcting me. I thought the PTELL caps applied across the state. Just out of curiosity, does anyone know if the more rural counties that are not capped by PTELL have an issue with high property taxes? I wouldn’t think so, but I do not have any knowledge in that area.
- Lynn S. - Thursday, Jan 14, 16 @ 6:23 pm:
The issue for most rural counties is that farmland values are declining, because the commodities supercycle is ending, and prices for corn, soybeans, wheat, oil, and other basics have declined (some by as much as 70%). EVEN IF the county and its taxing bodies hold the line on expenses and go with the same levy amount as the prior year, the levy amount is being spread over a smaller base, leading to rising tax bills for all residents.