Question of the day
Tuesday, May 5, 2026 - Posted by Rich Miller
* WQAD TV…
Iowa lawmakers have wrapped up the 2026 legislative session after a marathon weekend at the state Capitol, reaching a long‑awaited agreement on a plan aimed at slowing the growth of property tax rates. […]
The solution, GOP leaders say, is restraining how fast local property tax revenue can grow. Under the new plan, most city and county general levy revenue would be capped at a 2% annual growth rate, with exceptions for certain services. […]
Cities and counties, however, have warned that such caps could lead to cuts in public services, delayed infrastructure projects and reduced economic development efforts. […]
Supporters also emphasize how the cap would operate as property values rise. If valuations increase faster than the allowed revenue growth, tax rates would automatically be reduced to keep collections within the limit. […]
Republican leaders say the Iowa Department of Management estimates the plan could provide more than $4 billion in projected property tax relief over the next six years.
* The Question: Should Illinois consider a plan similar to the Iowa idea of capping city and county levies at 2 percent annual growth? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
- Pundent - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 12:02 pm:
No because the property tax burden is a result of inadequate funding at the state level. The reality is that you can’t address one without the other.
- Grandma - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 12:13 pm:
It needs to also apply to other units of government such as school districts
- Lurker - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 12:17 pm:
I voted yes as some counties just get out of control too quickly.
Also @Grandma, that’s interesting too.
- Remember the Alamo II - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 12:19 pm:
My answer is yes.
And I believe that if this was put up for a referendum, it would pass overwhelmingly.
People are tired of rising property taxes, and some of the units of government that rely on those taxes will have to figure something else out. At this point, I feel that people would value lower property taxes than the services that they are provided via that property tax revenue.
- Dupage Taxpayer - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 12:25 pm:
This looks like PTELL, which Illinois already has abd which Iowa did not, until now.
- It's always Sunny in Illinois - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 12:27 pm:
Yes
Cities and counties, however, have warned that such caps could lead to cuts in public services, delayed infrastructure projects and reduced economic development efforts. […]
Standard/expected response when Public tax funded operations are faced with possible reduced/contained spending requirements
- StarLineChicago - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 12:29 pm:
No. California under Prop 13 is a great example of how capping property tax increases can go sideways quickly for local governments. Additionally, eight of the past ten years have had annual inflation rates above 2%, which means with a 2% annual cap local governments would be taking a mandatory effective revenue cut more often than not.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 12:30 pm:
===This looks like PTELL===
Kinda, but it’s not.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 12:33 pm:
I voted No . . . unless the state has a solution to swap property taxes for some other revenue source.
- 40,000 ft - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 12:38 pm:
yes
The lack of constraints in any system leads to problems, whether the system is financial, educational, biological, etc.
I don’t feel like there are any constraints on the Illinois property tax system. There should be.
- Unionman - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 12:45 pm:
I voted yes. There is a small caveat, a large problem is that we have too many taxing bodies. A city or county might be capped but what about the road district, the school district, etc.
- Google is Your Friend - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 12:48 pm:
Yes, why not, this is just smoke and mirrors. It exempts or allows a higher cap for Des Moines public transit, emergency management, public hospitals, debt service, school funding, special and supplemental levies, and community colleges. It also actually increases property taxes on apartment buildings, caps reserve funds, and takes school infrastructure money and plows into property tax “relief.” Sounds about as good as the megaprojects relief!
https://iowacapitaldispatch.com/2026/05/03/iowa-house-senate-reach-agreement-on-property-tax-bill-as-2026-session-ends/
- Louis G Atsaves - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 12:53 pm:
I voted yes. I understand there are too many taxing districts but we have start somewhere. Consolidating and eliminating some of those tax districts is a start.
- Archpundit - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 1:02 pm:
If we could count on low inflation, I might be okay with this, but given we are going into a period of higher inflation, it could create significant problems.
- JB13 - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 1:04 pm:
Yes. And school districts should absolutely be capped too, as they are the ones overwhelmingly most responsible for our tax bills. Want more? Ask the taxpayers to approve it.
This business of budgeting to max out the levy to soak up every bit of EAV money out there every year has to end.
Just because you can constantly grab more money doesn’t mean you should.
- Big Tom - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 1:06 pm:
NO-Property tax should be assesssed at the time of purchase and then remain the same for the entire period of ownership. There is no need to raise taxes every year. Turnover and new home sales will keep taxes level with inflation. If it does not government can spend less. Tax primary residences at 4%, all other property at 6%.
- JS Mill - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 1:08 pm:
Voted No. For reasons that are probably obvious to many here. Iowa funds schools primarily at the state level (they also have a statewide 1% sales tax for school facilities), so the impact on schools with a 2% cap is not going to affect them.
= will have to figure something else out.=
Sure. The state would need to follow that with legislation to cap the cost of fuel, nat gas and electric, property and health insurance, and salaries at 2% or less as well. Those are our cost drivers and regardless of inflation they have been increasing at 2 to 3 times (diesel being the exception, but not lately) the rate of inflation. Health insurance increases for this year are running around 20% according to our broker.
Cap all of those and I am all in. Not holding my breath for any legislative forethought or bravery though.
- DuPage Saint - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 1:09 pm:
I voted no. Money is needed for many things and you cannot just micromanage. The only reform that will work and will never happen is consolidation of schools eliminating all these governmental bodies like townships and boards especially in densely populated areas combine small counties and finally make state be responsible for most of educational expenses and cap school district spending
- Steve M - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 1:09 pm:
No, a locked in 2% cap is too inflexible. Something like PTELL for schools that indexes to inflation would work for me though. Home Rule units have an awful lot of free reign at the moment, although they are not the majority of the tax bill. Illinois can only resolve its property tax issue by reworking school funding
- Oldtimer - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 1:15 pm:
Would’ve voted No had I still been working but am now retired and seeing 5%-7% annual increases in my property tax bill. Additionally, the County I live in has twice raised the sales tax in the last three years.
- Anyone Remember - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 1:29 pm:
No. For the reasons stated by others more eloquently than I could.
===Turnover and new home sales will keep taxes level with inflation.===
That’s working so well in Rochester right now …
- Annonin' - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 1:30 pm:
Sure. Then the darlings could be home schooled
q when school year shortened
- Michael - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 1:34 pm:
no. Any cap must be on expenditures. Otherwise we end up with “we capped property taxes, but our sales tax doubled”
- Huh? - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 1:55 pm:
No. A 2% limit will mean that the taxing bodies will lose money to inflation.
The idea of merging taxing bodies with the hope of reducing property taxes is a fools dream. The expenditures of the absorbed taxing unit will be picked up by the larger body. The funding for those expenditures must come from somewhere, therefore the hoped for tax reduction will be moved to another government agency.
- Think Again - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 2:01 pm:
=we capped property taxes, but our sales tax doubled=
Not very likely - and if local property taxes were to see a reduced rate of increase - homeowners would have more money in their pockets to actually spend in the community - the collected sales tax would go up.
- JS Mill - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 2:01 pm:
= Just because you can constantly grab more money doesn’t mean you should.=
Tell that to BlueCross, ComEd et al.
All those that want to run public ed and service into the ground will howl when the fire truck doesn’t show up or police car and when schools run 5 hours a day or less and the kids are on the street running around and standing on their lawn.
- 40,000 ft - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 2:05 pm:
Big Tom at 1:06pm has an interesting idea to contemplate.
I’ve noticed that the idea of taxing unrealized gains, while ignoring unrealized losses, is being applied as an argument against FMV which are the basis of prop tax calculations (fair market value).
No other financial agreement, that I can think of, gives that kind of power to a counter party.
- thisjustinagain - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 2:09 pm:
Illinois has to start somewhere with property tax REFORM, not just “relief”. Time to cap taxes on property, and lower property taxes to 1% of AV for homestead (owner-occupied) properties. Also need to increase the homestead deduction, handicapped deduction. Illinois taxing bodies have to learn there’s no endless pile of taxpayer money, and get smarter about what they spend money on, and how much they have to spend.
- Mister Ed - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 2:11 pm:
No because they should tax the rich and raise corporate taxes. Citizens pay way too much in property taxes and we don’t get the tax breaks corporations do or the wealthy. They need a different revenue stream besides taking homeowners to the cleaners every year.
- Reality Check - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 2:18 pm:
Sure, right after voters re-elect Bruce Rauner.
- btowntruth from forgottonia - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 2:20 pm:
Yes.
I absolutely feel that my county in Forgottonia needs annual property tax increases capped.
- Duck Duck Goose - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 2:24 pm:
How is this different from PTELL?
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 2:25 pm:
===How is this different from PTELL? ===
2 percent, and when inflation kicks in it goes down, not up.
- Phineas - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 2:34 pm:
No, not until sales tax base broadened and income tax made more progressive (larger exemption, higher rate)
- Benjamin - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 2:58 pm:
No. California tried this decades ago and it has not, to put it mildly, been a public policy success.
- Bigtwich - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 3:24 pm:
No, The average inflation rate over the last decade has been roughly 3.2%.
- No Releation - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 3:33 pm:
I live in the county, not the city and the county/township share of my taxes are 28% so the impact of a law like Iowa on me would be minimal. Also not adjusting the cap for inflation is asking for problems down the road. Instead of looking at the taxes piece meal they should do a package that ties them all together.
- @misterjayem - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 3:34 pm:
No.
An overly-rigid, simple solution to a very complex problem.
Plus and the many downsides enumerated in comments above.
– MrJM
- No Relation - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 3:34 pm:
That was a No note, above.
- Aaron B - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 3:41 pm:
I voted no because it doesn’t seem like a good idea to cap the increase below the rate that far below inflation. IIRC PTELL is already tied to the lower of CPI or 5%.
If they wanted to help homeowners then don’t let assessors continually increase residential assessments while leaving non-residential assessments the same. My township has averaged almost 11% residential assessment increases for each of the last 6 years while non-residential has stayed flat.
- Flapdoodle - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 3:56 pm:
No. This is a simplistic approach to a complex issue. By omitting other property taxing entities (school districts, park districts, etc.) it is a partial, fragmented answer that will accelerate deterioration of public infrastructure. Fees and charges will increase as cities and counties try to replace lost property tax revenue.
A systemic problem cannot be solved by partial, non-systemic approaches that are less answers than indicators of a lack of political will.
- Give us Barabbas - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 3:57 pm:
Simple solutions are generally neither. Still true.
- twowaystreet - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 4:01 pm:
Wouldn’t the pain to local government be larger in Illinois, where we have almost 2.5x the number of school districts?
- Pot calling kettle - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 4:30 pm:
No. The money has to come from somewhere. This is lazy legislation. The real work is balancing a budget - revenue from available sources in necessary and appropriate amounts and expenditures on needed and desired services. That “desired” services is the place folks should look when they want lower taxes - I like to ask people “Which government services that you want are you willing to give up?” (Otherwise, the cuts most folks offer up are the services they do not use.)
This is simply part of the right-wing “starve the beast” approach to budgeting, and it doesn’t work. Show me what you would cut first.
I’ve been very hard pressed to find anyone willing to give up government services. They simply don’t want to pay for them.
- curtis - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 4:39 pm:
I voted no. The main issue is the money to run government needs to come from somewhere. If not, we will just need to cut services. Simple.
- Casper the Ghost Bus - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 7:44 pm:
Turns out there are worse things more munis than flat funding for LGDF.
- Excitable Boy - Tuesday, May 5, 26 @ 8:03 pm:
No unless more comprehensive reforms accompany the cap. Progressive income tax, service tax, and a look at township government would be at the top of my list.