The fe
ar mongering is beginning once again in Woodford County.
Next Tuesday, the Woodford County Board will vote on whether or not to allow the State of Illinois' Property Tax Extension Limitation Law (PTELL) to be put on the November '08 ballot for voters to give a thumbs up or thumbs down. PTELL essentially limits the growth of property tax extensions to 5% per year or the rate of inflation, whichever is less - UNLESS THE INCREASE IS TAKEN TO VOTERS for approval in a referendum. This "cap" does not pertain to new construction growth.
Already, two objections to EVEN ALLOWING THE "FOLKS" TO VOTE on this issue have been raised by those terrified of a PTELL initiative (taxing authorities). Both are red herrings:
1. Taxes will actually GO UP, because taxing districts will "load up" on the front end, and . . .
2. PTELL will force one local taxing district (read School District) to live by the rules of another area's voters not those in the district.
Both arguments are specious not to say ridiculous.
First of all, taxes may indeed go up initially in a PTELL county if a taxing district chooses to "front load" on its extensions before the law can go into effect. Not only is this onerous, it is a tactic designed not only as a threat to voters in advance of a vote, but if implemented after a successful vote, a deliberate, albeit legal, attempt to circumvent the will of the voters. If a taxing district chooses this route they will indeed have a revenue bump in the initial years, but history shows that this initial bump will pale in comparison to the spending restraint statistically accrued over time in those counties under PTELL versus those not. It will also destroy the taxing authorities perceived credibility, accountability, and transparency to the voters - hardly worth the effort just to be able to say, "we'll show them".
Second, with regard to the "unfairness" of one district having to live with the same rules as another in the County (the PTELL opponents gripe that areas with larger populations have a disproportionate influence) - couldn't the same thing be said about ANY county law? Why should one district live under the zoning laws of another? Why should one school district have the same truancy laws as another? What about "local control" of a school district? Let's face it - "local control" is largely an illusion anyway. What about NCLB? What about federal and state mandates? What about unions?
Local control? Well, let's demonstrate that by asking the local voter for the money rather than confiscating it.
Clearly, the "unfairness to local districts" argument a silly one. Even if it were true that the voting on PTELL were somehow skewed because it is one man, one vote (hunh?), it simply IS NOT TRUE that a taxing district can't raise any amount of money that they wish under PTELL. No one but that district's own voters can determine what their budgets will be. The district, simply, must ASK THE VOTERS rather than just TAKING THE MONEY. No other area is in charge of a district's levy or extension under PTELL. If it's more than the rate of inflation or 5% the district simply needs to ask the voters for that increase. WHAT"S WRONG WITH THAT?
Finally, and most egregiously, you will hear Woodford County Board members that are opposed to PTELL maintain that "this is why we, and the local taxing authorities' Boards are elected - to 'make the hard decisions'. We don't need PTELL to help us keep taxes low. The voters already have accountability - at election time!"
Well, that is fine and good. Unfortunately, taxes are assessed every year costing homeowners thousands of dollars. Officials aren't elected every year. Try and get an explanation in plain english for a rise in equalized assessed valuations from one of your board members at any level. This isn't asking for money - this is taking it.
Can you even attend all of those board meetings? We sure can't. There are hundreds of taxing authorities in Woodford County.
Just look at the past record and decide for yourself if you want to give permission for increased taxes or if you want to continue to cede that permission to various local boards.
ar mongering is beginning once again in Woodford County.Next Tuesday, the Woodford County Board will vote on whether or not to allow the State of Illinois' Property Tax Extension Limitation Law (PTELL) to be put on the November '08 ballot for voters to give a thumbs up or thumbs down. PTELL essentially limits the growth of property tax extensions to 5% per year or the rate of inflation, whichever is less - UNLESS THE INCREASE IS TAKEN TO VOTERS for approval in a referendum. This "cap" does not pertain to new construction growth.
Already, two objections to EVEN ALLOWING THE "FOLKS" TO VOTE on this issue have been raised by those terrified of a PTELL initiative (taxing authorities). Both are red herrings:
1. Taxes will actually GO UP, because taxing districts will "load up" on the front end, and . . .
2. PTELL will force one local taxing district (read School District) to live by the rules of another area's voters not those in the district.
Both arguments are specious not to say ridiculous.
First of all, taxes may indeed go up initially in a PTELL county if a taxing district chooses to "front load" on its extensions before the law can go into effect. Not only is this onerous, it is a tactic designed not only as a threat to voters in advance of a vote, but if implemented after a successful vote, a deliberate, albeit legal, attempt to circumvent the will of the voters. If a taxing district chooses this route they will indeed have a revenue bump in the initial years, but history shows that this initial bump will pale in comparison to the spending restraint statistically accrued over time in those counties under PTELL versus those not. It will also destroy the taxing authorities perceived credibility, accountability, and transparency to the voters - hardly worth the effort just to be able to say, "we'll show them".
Second, with regard to the "unfairness" of one district having to live with the same rules as another in the County (the PTELL opponents gripe that areas with larger populations have a disproportionate influence) - couldn't the same thing be said about ANY county law? Why should one district live under the zoning laws of another? Why should one school district have the same truancy laws as another? What about "local control" of a school district? Let's face it - "local control" is largely an illusion anyway. What about NCLB? What about federal and state mandates? What about unions?
Local control? Well, let's demonstrate that by asking the local voter for the money rather than confiscating it.
Clearly, the "unfairness to local districts" argument a silly one. Even if it were true that the voting on PTELL were somehow skewed because it is one man, one vote (hunh?), it simply IS NOT TRUE that a taxing district can't raise any amount of money that they wish under PTELL. No one but that district's own voters can determine what their budgets will be. The district, simply, must ASK THE VOTERS rather than just TAKING THE MONEY. No other area is in charge of a district's levy or extension under PTELL. If it's more than the rate of inflation or 5% the district simply needs to ask the voters for that increase. WHAT"S WRONG WITH THAT?
Finally, and most egregiously, you will hear Woodford County Board members that are opposed to PTELL maintain that "this is why we, and the local taxing authorities' Boards are elected - to 'make the hard decisions'. We don't need PTELL to help us keep taxes low. The voters already have accountability - at election time!"
Well, that is fine and good. Unfortunately, taxes are assessed every year costing homeowners thousands of dollars. Officials aren't elected every year. Try and get an explanation in plain english for a rise in equalized assessed valuations from one of your board members at any level. This isn't asking for money - this is taking it.
Can you even attend all of those board meetings? We sure can't. There are hundreds of taxing authorities in Woodford County.
Just look at the past record and decide for yourself if you want to give permission for increased taxes or if you want to continue to cede that permission to various local boards.
No comments:
Post a Comment