The Peoria Times-Observer is reporting that a bunch of North Peoria residents are “upset with the practices of the Peoria County Board of Review” and may file a lawsuit. Among those upset are realtors Michael Maloof and Brian Monge and county board member Bob Baietto.
One member of the group, who requested to be anonymous, said it appears the only way to affect change is a lawsuit.
“What it comes down to is politics,” he said. “I was incredibly naive. I thought we could win this by going through channels and giving them proof. I was wrong. We need to make noise. We need to find more people who are mad.”
The remaining members of the group agreed. A consensus was reached that efforts now need to concentrate on finding an attorney who can advise the group on what grounds they can use to sue.
Of course, the politics runs both ways. Some members of the county board attempted to resolve the situation by removing two Board of Review members: Gary Shadid and Nancy Horton. Having failed in that attempt, they’re now looking at a possible lawsuit.
But here’s my question: Have they indeed gone through all the channels, as was implied? Or have they only gone as far as the local Board of Review? According to a state publication called “The Illinois Property Tax System,” there are a couple of ways to appeal the decision of the local Board of Review:
- The decision may be appealed (in writing) to the Property Tax Appeal Board, a five-member board appointed by the governor. The Property Tax Appeal Board will determine the correct assessment based on equity and the weight of the evidence. Taxes must be paid pending the outcome of the appeal.
- The taxes can be paid under protest and the county board of review’s decision can be appealed directly to the circuit court by filing a tax objection complaint. Taxes and levies are presumed to be correct and legal, but this presumption can be rebutted. The taxpayer must provide clear and convincing evidence.
If the Board of Review’s actions are so unfair, then it should be a cinch to get them overturned on appeal. A large number of successful appeals could then be used as evidence of the local Board of Review’s alleged poor decisions and presented to the full County Board for appropriate action. On the other hand, if the decisions are upheld on appeal, then the local Board of Review will be exonerated.
Bottom line, the complainants should follow the appeals process, not resort to political and/or legal strong-arm tactics to force the Board of Review to render decisions in their favor.
padman:
If you tax based on lot value, you’d have to have a higher tax rate.
Here are two problems with structure value based property taxes:
1) It allows taxing bodies to assume value is going up and get increased revenue “without raising taxes” which I have a huge problem with it. Taxes haven’t gone up? Um, yes they have–but they went up in a more secret manner.
2) it discourages property development. Why paint my house if some assessor is just going to tax me more based on it without any depeciation on the value of the improvement? This affects rental properties more than owner occupied properties, which then becomes a regressive punishment on poorer residents who are renting.
If you taxed based on lot value, it’s not treating it all like farmland, as was stated above. It’s based on your lot, and what it could be sold for. This is a fairer way of assessing taxes per citizen. It would certainly still have higher tax bills for better neighborhoods, but people in similar neighborhoods would pay similar taxes, and take some of problems out, and be cheaper to figure out.
What we need to do is find a just system where when the economy is contracting that taxes aren’t going up on the other side and making things even worse. The governmental bodies need to take surpluses and instead of starting new programs set funds aside for the rainy day.
Then the northend, southend, and east bluff commercial and residential will probably have to pay virtually no property tax because there is very liittle market value in the land there. There probably 30% of the total properties in the City. Land in the southend and northend is probably worth $ 500 to 3,000 for improved buildable lots based on known sales. So, a lot in there will probably pay about $ 84 property tax for a $ 3000 lot value. Then all the other areas will have to pay significantly higher taxes to make up for the huge drop in revenue.
I don’t think you’re following the argument, padman.
Maybe I’m not being clear enough.
the % of FMV that is taxed now and the % of lot value would not be the same.
it is possible that tax bills would work out to something close to 100% of lot value using the lot value method, it would have to be an equitable ratio of lot value to taxes.
What I am saying is that a lot of properties will end up paying very little for taxes because their house or commercial business sits on cheap land. For instance, ADM will go from paying a lot of taxes to very little taxes because they sit on low market value land.
We could get off onto a big rabbit trail regarding corporate property taxes or the value of the land ADM sits on and the like, but I”m going to not go there right now.
The thrust of this post is about fair assessment processes that are not overly burdensome to taxpayers, and a fair appeals process that has checks and balances. I do favor land value taxation because I think that is the most just method, but I don’t think we’ll see that anytime soon. There are lots of inequities built into the system that can be fixed without that kind of overhaul, though, and some kind of accountability for valuation problems should be built in, whether it be as drastic as having to buy houses for assessed FMV or not.
I’m probably going to bow out of the discussion at this point, though and give anyone who wants it the last word, because I’ll head back to the office tomorrow and have other things on my mind. I’ve appreciated the friendly discourse here, and glad for the discussion even. We’re not all going to agree on a fair way to tax citizens, but my own opinion is smaller government, fewer ways of taxing, fewer nickel and dime taxes (like those on your phone bill or the garbage tax on the water bill), and more freedom will bring about better changes for society most quickly. Not all of you will agree with that, certainly, but I’m glad that in this city we can still have something of a friendly disagreement over issues like that.
At least here on CJ’s blog that is. 🙂
Erik: I agree with Diane — what are you talking about?
I have tried the ‘private or off-line” email discussion method with you. Sometimes it works and sometimes it does not. Please recall that several months ago, I contacted you by email in a private manner. I offered suggestions about your ‘accusing and marginalizing’ public comments regarding kcdad which you had posted on CJ’s site. I shared that I would be out of town, I would have not Internet access for a few days and that the communication was meant to be private not public.
Voila — I return and find out that you have publically shared that I had chastised you for your comments. That was stupifying.
I subsequently contacted you to seek to understand why you choose that course of action? No response from you.
Your post is generalized. If I am incorrect, then please, by all means correct my inaccuracies and if your comments are factual …. then I will be glad to apologize and correct my inaccuracies.
My comments are based on what is being presented in the press unless the media is reporting inaccurate information too.
And, I have had conversations with you in which I have approved of past Peoria County financial transactions. Now, in the present and future, I am not in agreement with Peoria County regarding the proposed museum expenditures as well as the proposed Bel-Wood expenditures. I feel that both projects are not appropriate uses of taxpayer monies. Although there will be at least two different funding sources for these respective projects — more debt for Peoria County taxpayers is not a good situation in any economic climate.
During the museum issue, Peoria County debt was around $19M, debt would more than triple with the passage of the public facility sales tax referendum for the museum. Now Peoria County is proposing to add the same amount for the Bel-Wood project. That is concerning to this taxpayer.
I agree with James … smaller government is needed. Let’s let government stick to basic services and stay out of the private sector — that includes museums and nursing homes.
Thank you for the dialogue.
Erik, I think you are the enemy and your words seem to indicate it …
“you’re both wrong, AND, you both know you can call me to discuss.” BECAUSE YOU, ERIK, ARE RIGHT… ALWAYS
“i believe you to have been complimentary.” IT IS NOT ABOUT YOU (COMPLIMENTS OR INSULTS)
“i welcome your calls” EVEN FROM US PETTY LOWER CLASSES??? HOW NOBLE.
“i am not the enemy, nor are the hard working people ” INTERESTING. NEITHER YOU NOR THOSE HARD WORKING PEOPLE… you aren’t one of “them” apparently.
“we’re people trying to find our best way forward” HA HA. We are lost, just trying to find our way… FOLLOW US!
I rather like that Erik and other public officials (like Merle, Steve and Jim) not only read these blogs but openly engage in discussing the issues at hand. I imagine Erik wishes he hadn’t written that last post – partially for the sentiment he expressed, partially because he could have probably stated it better – but mostly because he allowed his frustrations to show through. Too bad he doesn’t apparently have that luxury like the rest of us. (might explain why Jim hasn’t posted lately, too) Karrie, this is not directed at your last post – though I find it interesting that you offered suggestions about Erik’s discourse with kcdad. I give credit to Erik for trying. It’s probably good practice, I mean, if you can have a discussion with kcdad without losing your temper, it’s got to help in dealing with less agitated people.
Jon; The challenge in public discourse is that it takes time ….. lots of time …. and usually the plan does not include time …. usually rushing to approve one single use project after another with little thought about the connectivity of our city and of course no vision statement.
I was just trying to be helpful and then I felt I was broadsided.
As for kcdad … well, I enjoy kcdad’s posts — not that I always agree with the actual posts — makes me think alot and I appreciate the time taken to put forth many views. Thanks kcdad! 🙂
CJ …. did you hear — I think that it was on NPR this morning …. that the American Association of Pediatricians have issued a statement —- that urban sprawl is one of the major reasons for childhood obesity. That legislators should pay attention to these findings when planning cities! 🙂
Karrie,
Evidently, those responsible for designing the ‘new’ Regional Museum did so with the problem of obese children [and adults] in mind. It is actually quite clever. They figure that the further one must walk to see ANYTHING of significance, the more apt someone is to burn off a few calories…
You could walk ALL DAY and not see a single exhibit or artifact that adequately explains some aspect of Peoria’s past! Instead of donning your Reeboks to ‘walk the mall,’ you could take several leisurely strolls around the museum! Brilliant!
Diane: I think that you might be onto something here — your comment about mentoring — not really sure.
A project manager for the museum ….
$50 / hour (It is currently estimated that during the pre-construction phase, the hours would not exceed 10 hours/week) ….. —- let’s hope those estimates hold
(annual salary $50/hour x 40 hours/week x 52 weeks/ year = $104,000).
…. and would increase during the construction phase. It is anticpated that the rate will be revisited in 2010.”
Would it be important to get an architect as the owner’s representative?
No contract to review at present.
Hummm — wonder what that means? I will email Erik and return and report.
I would think $50/hour would be quite reasonable. (Most of you probably find any amount unreasonable because you are against the museum.) I would assume Mr. Johnson would be a contract employee, so that he is responsible for his own FICA. The alternative might be to have Mr. Urich himself be the project manager. What do you think his hourly rate is when you figure in salary, pension, health care, etc.
I was against the museum (as configured) and voted no on the referendum. But if it is going to be built, it should have the proper stewardship at the County level.
Sud:
Not against museums. Just went to the Abraham Lincoln museum in Springfield — Fabulously done. Still losing money.
I remain against this museum as configured and voted no just as you did. I understand about the very narrow majority of 410 votes having voted for this project.
Nevertheless, prudence should always be exercised.
Last Friday, Peoria County was looking at ways to decrease expenditures, including Patrick Urich being willing to give up his recent $10,000 salary increase. Other negotiations to come.
There has been no news of the private museum funding gap being closed. Two days after the election, Caterpillar disseminated an email that stated that CAT would not be providing any cash funding to the project this year, going to forward in some configuration (whatever that means) with the project and so on.
Redevelopment agreement expried 31 May 2009 for the museum and 30 June 2009 it will expire for CAT.
Still going forward to get the parking garage started and the rest of the details will be worked out later — I guess.
Still a project of folly. I am reminded of the housing mortgage crisis — still living beyond our means as a city, park district, school district and now the county seems to be joining suit.
The county engaged in a strategic planning session last Friday. Revenues are lower across the board. That is good news. Nevertheless, the world is in crisis if you haven’t noticed. The County has to come up with some great measures to not deplete the $18M reserve in the General Fund — if no action is taken then that money would be gone by mid 2011-ish. (Checked my facts with Erik — thanks Erik! 🙂 )
If that were to happen — then Peoria County will have come full circle — that is in a similar position to about —- I think —- about 10-12 years ago —- when there was little to no reserve. Merle or Erik would be able to verify that.
Just troubling. Still on the wrong path. Still living beyond our means. Still placing our ladder against the wrong wall.