Recently in Taxes Category

In a close 5-4 vote Monday night, the Naperville City Council agreed to raise the property tax rate from 0.7167 percent to 0.7367 percent.

The city has in the past approved a property tax rate increase and then lowered it when assessments are released, and officials claim the same thing will happen this time. The city plans to collect more than $50.6 million in property taxes next year and only approved the higher rate in case assessments fall, to ensure city services are funded.

This is necessary because a property tax levy must be approved well in advance of the budget year's beginning.

Councilwoman Judy Brodhead said the assessment was much more important to a person's tax payment than the tax rate, but Councilman Bob Fieseler objected to a tax that is impossible for a struggling property owner to avoid, unlike a sales tax.

Still, for owners hoping a drop in property values would mean a drop in taxes, it would seem the city is planning for a way around that contingency.

What do you think? Is this just business as usual or do you object?

http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/napervillesun/news/1847791,Naperville-OKs-tax-rate-hike_na102609.article

By Chris Magee
There's a childish game called "chicken." where two people ride straight at one another, in a car, a bike, whatever, to see who flinches and gets out of the way first. Designed as a test of courage and bravado, it is really just a good way to get hurt.

Illinois politicians are playing chicken right now with the budget. The problems are real - there's a $7 billion deficit. Governor Pat Quinn wants to raise taxes to plug this gap, and Republican and many Democratic legislators are refusing, so Quinn is threatening to take away funding from just about every social welfare program in the state to make up the difference.

Quinn knows if he targets the popular programs, the ones most people think we need, he is likely to get some action on his proposals. You're not going to find too many people in favor of eliminating drug treatment programs and battered women shelters.

Of course, the legislators can't allow themselves to be blackmailed, so they're playing hardball. They're not going to give in to threats and pass a tax increase they don't believe in.

Caught in the middle are these social services - shelters, treatment programs, food pantries, just about every fashionable cause you can think of - and they don't care who wins the game of chicken. They just want to have the money to keep doing their jobs.

In the last few weeks The Sun has received letters from seemingly every agency within 25 miles that will be affected by these cuts. Many have run in print already and many more are scheduled for publication in coming days. Each of these letters explains the valuable work these groups do and details all the cuts that will have to be made July 1 if the legislators don't find that money.

No one wants to take away funding from these agencies, but it could very well happen despite everyone's well wishing. In this game of chicken, if no one flinches, the two sides will collide in the middle and it will all come crashing down.

Unemployment in Illinois is over 10 percent now. Some estimates say state budget cuts could result in 200,000 additional job losses in our state. Is this the way to get out of the recession? Laying off employees, putting the junkies on the street, leaving those who have lost their jobs without anywhere to turn for help?

Yes, the Republicans have a point. The state needs to try to make other cuts before taking the easy way out of a tax increase. But there isn't $7 billion worth of fat in the budget. New revenue will need to be found.

No one wants to pay more taxes, especially in an economic downturn. But sometimes something is too important not to fund. Should the governor and legislators who got us into this mess by spending money like drunken sailors be held accountable? Absolutely. But groups that had nothing to do with the problem shouldn't be the ones to pay for the mistakes.

Chicken is a stupid game. It's time for our leaders to grow up and make some adult decisions before it's too late. As I write this, there are seven days until time runs out. The time for grandstanding and scoring political points is long gone. Now is the time to get serious and solve these problems.

The City Council has decided to do nothing for now about the controversial Special Events and Cultural Amenities Fund and its revenue source--some $3 million in taxes on food and beverages sold in the city.

The city gives this money to charitable organizations, groups that do things like put on festivals or put up art works around town.

This concept of benevolent generosity is not unique to Naperville. In happier times, the city of Joliet used to give a share of its revenues from casino gambling to schools and nonprofit organizations.

Not any more. Casino revenues are way down, thanks to the indoor smoking ban and the overall sluggish economy. This year, Joliet pulled the plug on handouts.

In theory, the $3 million that Naperville gives away to do-good organizations is $3 million more that you, your neighbor and the guy down the street and the gal across town have to pay out of your own pockets to fund those essential services like police and fire protection.

Now, Naperville's a generous town, and time and time again the community responds when the call goes out for help. The thing is, it's one thing to voluntarily open your hearts and wallets and lend a hand. It's another when the city taxes you and forces you to give money to charity.

What say you? Is it time to abolish the Special Events and Cultural Amenities Fund, and return those food and beverage tax revenues into the general fund to offset the budget deficit and reduce the number of layoffs of public safety and other personnel?

Naperville City Council member Grant Wehrli proposed a bold suggestion Tuesday night, when the council unanimously approved a new 1.5 percent tax on downtown businesses in order to pay for new parking decks.

Wehrli thinks Naperville should stop imposing a 1 percent citywide food and beverage tax, and levy a half percent instead.

This tax has been in place since 2004 and for the last few years its revenues have been doled out to various cultural and community groups, to the tune of about $2.7 million per year.

What do you think of Wehrli's idea? Other council members seemed cool to the suggestion. He says given this tough economic climate, every little bit helps. Do you agree, that taxpayer dollars paying for the arts is a luxury we can't afford these days? Or are the cultural programs too important to neglect, whatever the cost?

Sunday's Sun features the results of a Sun study about Naperville's highest-paid public servants. We used the Freedom of Information Act to ask the city, school districts and park districts for lists of their highest-paid workers, then combined the findings into one list.

In a moment, you'll be able to share your observations. First, here's a couple of thoughts from us:

Why are administrators in Indian Prairie School District 204 paid so much more than their counterparts in Naperville School District 203?

The highest-paid public servants work in schools, not the city. Why is that?

The park district's highest salaries don't even register in the top 20 citywide.

The findings reported in The Sun are simply base salaries. You gotta figure another, what, 20 percent in costs borne by taxpayers for health insurance and other benefits, then add whatever retirement contribution taxpayers are making, not to mention auto allowances, etc.

Now, your turn. What do you think of the salaries paid to public servants in Naperville? What would you change, if you could?

A two-part series beginning in Sunday's Sun explores pensions for public-sector employees. Part I delves into city pensions: how pensions for police officers, firefighters, public works employees and others are funded. A typical 30-year veteran of a municipality these days can expect to collect about $72,000 a year for the rest of his life. And often that person will be in his 50s when he retires.

Part II explains how the burden for funding teacher pensions falls mainly on the state. Still, the income and sales taxes you pay are expected to pay for these comfortable retirement plans.

These days, it's hard to find comparable benefits packages in the private sector, where 401(k) and similar programs designed to help individuals supplement expected Social Security incomes are the norm. Employers often make a modest match, but nothing like the 9 or 10 percent matches that municipalities and school districts kick in.

Given the state's financial situation, it's clear that pension reform is needed. Match amounts are determined by state law. Yet lawmakers seem to lack the political will to even consider reform, what with the clout wielded by unions.

How do we fix this problem? How do we even start? Or, do you even agree that there is a problem? Maybe you think the current pension systems are fair and sustainable, that it will always be the responsibility of taxpayers to fund these programs. It seems unlikely that any proposal to reduce pensions would ever pass--it would be political suicide for any politician to support that.

OK, then, here's a thought: If state law forces local taxpayers to pay for these generous $6,000-a-month retirement plans, what about getting the state or federal government to increase income taxes on those who collect public-sector pensions? Then the recipients at least would have to kick back enough until a fair balance is reached.

What other thoughts or ideas about public-sector pensions do you want to share?

Naperville Township trustees did something unusual Tuesday night. They voted to drastically cut salaries for elected officials. The town supervisor's pay, for example, is being slashed in half to $45,000 from $89,000. The town clerk's salary is being cut to $32,000 from $40,000.

These cuts bring Naperville in line with the compensation afforded other township officials in DuPage County.

However, the cuts did not come without a fight. One trustee, Fred Spitzzeri, verbally attacked another, Gary Vician. Spitzzeri called Vician a hypocrite, since Vician voted for pay raises four years ago. Vician said the plan four years ago was to justify the raises because staff cuts were planned, but those savings were never fully realized, Paige Winfiled reports in The Sun.

What do you make of all this? Does the township board deserve praise for acting responsibly and reducing salaries? Or should it be qualified praise, since the board was correcting irresponsible past actions that inflated salaries in the first place? Or should the board be outright criticized for not doing enough to cut costs?

Boy, some could say there's a leadership vacuum in Naperville. We've been without a city manager since December and the city council seems in no hurry to fill the position. We currently don't have a fire chief. Our Park District executive director is on leave for reasons unknown. And now the schools superintendent is stepping down.

What do think is a better way to fill these positions: to promote from within, or to look outside the city for the best candidate? The trend nowadays is to conduct national searches. But that doesn't always produce the best selection, and it isn't always the best situation for taxpayers. Consider those school superintendents, park directors and city managers who can get fully vested in a very generous pension plan in one state, then a few years later accept a job in another state and before long become eligible to collect another full pension. What a country!

Tell us what you think. Is it better to do a national search, or to promote from within?