Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Morning Shorts
Next Post: “If I was lucky, I had a resume”
Posted in:
* This secession idea may make some people feel better, but it’s pie in the sky…
Officials in Palatine will work in the coming weeks to see what can be done to alleviate the major sales tax disparity that will soon plague the suburb.
After news last week that the village wanted to secede from Cook County, elected officials in Palatine said on Monday they want to look at options that could help keep economic development in the town viable. Secession from Cook County is still among the options. […]
One is to form a new county with surrounding towns. To start that, a petition would need to be signed by 51 percent of electors. Then, a county-wide referendum would take place.
Another choice is to merge with an adjoining county, like Lake County. To do that, 51 percent of electors would also need to agree. After that, a referendum of Cook and Lake county residents would be needed for the change.
They can grumble all they want, but are communities like Palatine willing to pay Cook County for any existing roads within their new or merged county? What about forest preserve land? Will they be able to reimburse Cook for treatment given to locals at the public hospital?
It might be a whole lot cheaper to find a way to reimburse some businesses for part of the county sales tax increase, or somehow alleviate the hike. Secession and creation of a new county requires Cook County’s agreement. Switching to Lake County would require the agreement of both Cook and Lake.
It’s not gonna happen. This proposal may help Palatine locals feel better, but it does literally nothing to solve what local officials say is a real problem.
* Meanwhile, in the city…
Chicago home sellers getting lower prices if they can unload their properties at all in the stone cold housing market have a new headache: the 40 percent increase in the real estate transfer tax tied to the CTA bail-out.
The City Council’s Finance Committee voted today to shift the increase from buyer to seller, taking $900 out of the pocket of the seller of a $300,000 home even as home prices continue to plunge.
The current tax — $7.50 per $1,000 of sale price — will continue to be paid by the buyer. The $3 increase per $1,000, which takes effect April 1, will shift to the seller.
Ald. Pat O’Connor (40th), sponsor of the ordinance, said he wanted to evenly divide the entire $10.50 city tax between buyer and seller, “But state law will not allow that to happen.” So, he opted for “the next fairest thing.”
There are no good alternatives here, since the tax hike has already been passed. Either the council can roll back the increase and find the transit subsidy money elsewhere, or they can spread the pain, which is what seems to be happening. That seems to be fair, and might help alleviate a small hurdle to buying a house.
* And speaking of tax hikes…
Cub fans who stand to benefit from new skyboxes, washrooms, concessions — and a new or rebuilt upper deck — at a renovated Wrigley Field could be asked to help pay for it.
Sources say the Tribune Co. is exploring the possibility of imposing a ticket tax — in the range of 25 to 50 cents — to help finance a top-to-bottom overhaul of the 94-year-old shrine of Major League Baseball. […]
“The Tribune will contribute because a restored ballpark would allow the team to make more revenue. But the people coming into the ballpark are another group that benefits. They’re going to a ballpark that’s a nicer place. A ticket tax is one of the sources of funding we may go to.” [said a source.]
If they want to raise prices, that’s fine with me, but in the current environment why would anyone in the Cub organization call a price hike a “tax”?
This is just another example of how Sam Zell’s Tribune is as horrible at PR as his team is at baseball.
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Mar 11, 08 @ 8:19 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Morning Shorts
Next Post: “If I was lucky, I had a resume”
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
What about the money that Palatine has provided with Cook County. It is easy to say who will maintain the roads and forest preserve. But they are talking like Palatine has contributed nothing in the past and adre starting from 0.
Comment by Wumpus Tuesday, Mar 11, 08 @ 8:32 am
You will remember from a prior thread that taxpayer in the seceding area, that all existing bond isued by Cook, the Forest Preserve District, Water Reclamation, etc, will still appear on the enw tax bills. Money spent out of current revenue of the entitty has already been collecred from Palatine taxpayers and used. There is no other obligation.
The new entity will have to levy a tax to pay for County road maintenance either by their own employees or even under contract with Cook. If they join Lake, that County will levy their tax against the new property as well for road maintenance. And so on.
Different topic under this thread. Under the magician theory of City spending, will the additional transfer tax disappear into the maw, or will taxpayers be able to tell that it was used for CTA? I thought not.
BTW, the collars with their new 0.50% tax in the same bill need not be used for ‘transit”. And it likely will not.
Comment by Truthful James Tuesday, Mar 11, 08 @ 8:48 am
So drop out of Cook County first, keep all the tax monies for themselves and then consider going to Lake County at a later date. I seriously doubt whatever services Cook County is providing is anything close to the value of the money being sent downtown by Palatine. Something needs to change and if even remotely makes the powers that be nervous, then good.
Comment by Mike Tuesday, Mar 11, 08 @ 8:50 am
Ticket tax? sounds like some one is floating an idea for the State to use as a new owner of the bldg more thne a private entity. AFter all they can set whatever price they choose for admission. Although I preer to think of it as a ticket fine or ticket penalty.
Technically a tax is a defined term, and it may be illegal or deceptive for them to call a price increase a tax.
Comment by Ghost Tuesday, Mar 11, 08 @ 9:37 am
for the same reason why utilities and airlines call certain surcharges “fees” and make them sound all governmental. Confuse the buyer into thinking that this is a tax levied by the government, when its really just a price hike.
Cost-recovery fees charged by utility companies aren’t taxes, they are surcharges that go straight to the bottom line.
It’s a deceptive practice, but certain businesses get away with it all the time. Next time you’re looking at a utility bill, read the fine print, you’ll be surprised what add-on’s are actually taxes and what add-on’s are just additional charges that the business wants you to think are taxes.
Comment by jerry 101 Tuesday, Mar 11, 08 @ 9:59 am
oh, and if Palatine seceeds from Cook County, the County better sock it to them in terms of the costs.
Comment by jerry 101 Tuesday, Mar 11, 08 @ 10:00 am
It’s funny how every couple of years, you hear talk of some disgruntled community wanting to break off from wastful and corrupt Cook County government…the reason communities remain in Cook is not that it’s better that way…it’s because it is so hard to leave. Like any dysfunctional relationship. There have been “Lincoln County” proposals in the past, but these days it might be a better sell to call it
“Obama County”
Comment by M.V. Tuesday, Mar 11, 08 @ 2:39 pm
The buyer and seller can work out the deal any way they want. Today, it’s a buyers market, so they have all the leverage. In the longer sellers market we just experienced, sellers could dictate terms.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Mar 11, 08 @ 3:22 pm
The fact of the matter is that Buyer pays for every fee. The Buyer and seller come to the closing table. Each is aware of the fees. The seller accepts, knowing all the costs. But it is the Buyer’s money that enables fee payments to be made.
Comment by Truthful James Tuesday, Mar 11, 08 @ 3:36 pm