Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: SB 328: Separating Lies From Truth
Next Post: SB 328 Puts Illinois’s Economy At Risk
Posted in:
* The Tribune’s Alice Yin…
At Q&A, Mayor Brandon Johnson calls for “a more enriched conversation around how local control over progressive revenue streams can meet the demands of this moment.” He says in follow-up he means giving the city power to pass taxes that would normally go thru state legislature pic.twitter.com/bnVCOZ3bCw
— Alice Yin (@byaliceyin) July 8, 2025
posted by Isabel Miller
Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 11:22 am
Previous Post: SB 328: Separating Lies From Truth
Next Post: SB 328 Puts Illinois’s Economy At Risk
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Yes, the current options available to local governments are too regressive and broad based. Sales and property taxes are really only options. Cities should be permitted to enact progressive property taxation, income taxes, etc. Residents have direct say in these policies via their local elected officials. Progressive property taxation should be permitted.
Comment by curtis Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 11:26 am
If you’re going to allow home rule units to pass taxes in general, then yes you should allow them to pass progressive taxes.
Comment by Homebody Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 11:27 am
Yes, I’m always in favor of more democracy.
Comment by Excitable Boy Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 11:33 am
Oh yes-Can you see the campaign adds- Hi - I am JB Pritzker-the governor who signed the legislation allowing folks like Brandon Johnson to raise your taxes so he can spend even more on his social programs- vote for me to be your next president
Comment by Sue Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 11:46 am
==Residents have direct say in these policies via their local elected officials.==
Referendums are the direct say we need more often, and home rule kills referendum requirements.
Illinois needs to reform home rule to curb current abuses. Until then, count me as a “no” for granting HR units additional taxation powers.
Comment by yinn Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 11:55 am
Makes sense. If I was a legislator in Woodstock or Collinsville, why would I care if people in Edgewater or Lincoln Park paid a tax that didn’t impact my district.
Comment by levivotedforjudy Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 11:55 am
Bold vision considering the only progressive taxation idea presented legally during his tenure already failed (Bring CHicago Home).
But you can only squeeze Chad and Trixie so much.
Comment by City Zen Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 12:05 pm
If we had consistently competent and responsible government then I would support the idea. We don’t have that so I am a “no”.
Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 12:12 pm
No, Illinois already has substantial home rule powers.
This is not a serious comment by the Mayor. Even if he had such authority, he’d just try to make the Governor do it anyway.
Comment by Three Dimensional Checkers Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 12:15 pm
I was always under the impression that the Local Distributive Government Fund (the percentage of State Income Tax that is distributed directly to municipalities) was created when the income tax was formed, as a compromise so that local municipalities could not pass their own income tax. The State collects it and passes it back to the municipalities. In theory, this avoids folks from playing games with their residence address, and puts all of the cities on a level playing field. However the State has reduced that amount and kept it for themselves, and when the tax rate increased, there was no corresponding increase in payout to the LGDF. It may be time to eliminate the LGDF and reduce the State tax rate, and then allow the cities to pass their own tax.
Comment by slippery slope Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 12:29 pm
No. To echo the comment above, if specific proposals were done by referendum vote like Bring Chicago Home, that would be fine.
But I’ve watched too many awful fiscal policy votes at Chicago City Hall to let the body anywhere near progressive tax creation authority too.
Comment by ChicagoBars Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 12:30 pm
Sure. Everyone likes to compare us to our surrounding states. Indiana counties have their own local income tax rates. I’m sure you people that cheer for Illinois to be like other states should be perfectly find with local governments setting their own taxes.
Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 12:56 pm
For home rule towns under a million people? Yes.
/s
Comment by Socially DIstant Watcher Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 12:56 pm
No, progressive taxation is banned in the Illinois constition … as of now.
Comment by Steve Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 1:04 pm
Sure. If Chicago decides they don’t like whatever tax scheme Brandon cooks up to give money to the CTU, they can vote him and their alderman out.
Comment by Perrid Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 1:06 pm
Yes, for several reasons. Republicans enacted severe federal cuts. Trump is fighting Democratic cities. The state won’t enact a progressive income tax, and downstate overwhelmingly supports massive handouts to the wealthiest. The city already taxes. Chicago is limited by things beyond its control. Just like the federal and state government, if the voters don’t like the policies, they can vote out their alderpeople and mayor.
Comment by Grandson of Man Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 1:19 pm
I have huge respect for @chicagobars- but the business community spent enormous amounts of money dishonestly framing Bring Chicago Home. In a perfect world this is a problem solved by a state graduating income tax- but this is in no way a perfect world. So yes, Home-rule municipalities need better tools to solve their financial problems.
Comment by West Sider Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 1:25 pm
Thanks for the kind words West Sider…but Governor Pritzker also spent enormous amounts of money trying (and failing) to pass a statewide progressive income tax.
Yes, Citadel guy spent heavily too but the Pritzker political operation is skilled and couldn’t sell it. I think Chicago & Illinois voters have tax fatigue and deep distrust the new money would be spent wisely, and it doesn’t take a huge war chest to activate those citizen concerns.
Comment by ChicagoBars Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 2:10 pm
Yes, how else to pay for expensive consultant jargon like “a more enriched conversation”? /s
Comment by mrp Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 2:18 pm
If you’re going to get anyone to vote to give locals more taxing authority, it’s going to have to be tied to caps, freezes and reductions in current revenue raisers, specifically, property taxes.
And if the state gives locals new authority to raise revenue, locals should be ready to see a reduction in LGDF. I think locals imagine the state will continue to carry their water by continuing to funnel money that would otherwise be GRF to locals via things like LGDF. I think if locals want the authority they should accept that the state won’t be enabling a double-dip.
Comment by Who else Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 2:26 pm
No. Certainly not with the people we have in office currently.
Comment by Tim Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 2:31 pm
- the Pritzker political operation is skilled and couldn’t sell it. -
I agree in general but that campaign was a disaster from the get go. They let the opposition get way ahead of them and made the whole thing way too confusing for voters.
Comment by Excitable Boy Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 2:39 pm
If municiaplities can enact progressive revenue streams without going through the state authority, then the same should be true for declaring bankruptcy.
Comment by City Zen Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 2:50 pm
=== the Pritzker political operation is skilled and couldn’t sell it===
The Fair Tax received 71 percent of the Chicago vote
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 2:57 pm
Generally, yes, I support home rule districts being able to tax very broadly.
Having watched the MBJ administration fail so hard, Chicago is a very strong argument against.
Comment by Odysseus Tuesday, Jul 8, 25 @ 3:24 pm