Home

General Information

About Us


CVC Audit Information Download


Contact Us


Display Advertising


Ad Sizes and Samples


Classified Advertising

Communities

Communities Served


Community Resources

-$- Online Store -$-

Digital Online Subscription


Order A Classified Ad Online


Place Assumed Name Notice


Cook County Legals Printed Here


Kane County Name Change - $85


Place Obituary Notice


Download Sample Paper

Submission of News

Engagement Submittal


Birth Announcements


News & Photos


Sports Scores

Lifestyle Features and Videos

Food and Lifestyle


Lifestyle Videos


Seasonal Widget


Crossword and Sudoku Puzzles


Mug Shot Mania News

Online News and Commentary

The Examiner U-46 News Feed


Cheap Seats 2024 By Rich Trzupek


Cheap Seats 2023 By Rich Trzupek


Cheap Seats 2022 By Rich Trzupek


Guest Seat By Harold Pease, Ph.D.


Cheap Seats 2021 By Rich Trzupek


Cheap Seats 2020


Cheap Seats 2019


Cheap Seats 2018


Cheap Seats 2017


Cheap Seats 2016


Cheap Seats 2015 B


Cheap Seats 2015


Cheap Seats 2014


Cheap Seats 2013


Cheap Seats 2012


Cheap Seats 2011


Cheap Seats 2010


Ramey DUI Video


Representative Randy Ramey pleads guilty to DUI


Bartlett Volunteer Fire Department Street Dance


The Truth about Global Warming


Examiner Editorials and Cheap Seats from the past

Forms and Newsstand Locations

Newsstand Locations


Carriers needed


Legal Newspaper

The Examiner U-46 News Feed

Dist. U-46 tax levy hike subject to upcoming vote


By Seth Hancock
  School District U-46 is seeking a 2.2 percent increase from $335 million to $342.4 million in its property tax levy, the largest allowed under the law, as a resolution and determination of tax levy was presented to the Board of Education at its Monday, Oct. 18 meeting.
  The items will be voted on at the upcoming Nov. 1 meeting. The tax levy comes after the board approved a $61 million increase in spending in this year’s budget while enrollment is expected to drop for the seventh straight year.
  The levy is determined by the Consumer Price Index, which is 1.4 percent, and Equalized Assessed Valuation (EAV), according the Dale Burnidge, director of public works. The EAV is projected to rise from $5.4 billion to $5.6 billion, but the district is proposing a $5.7 billion EAV as a defensive levy.
  The levy includes a 2.5 percent increase, $292.8 million to $300.2 million, for the corporate and special purpose levy but the district expects $297.9 million. The debt service levy is expected to slightly drop from $42.28 million to $42.23 million.
  The determination stated the defensive levy is in order to take as much from the taxpayers as it “is entitled.”
  The district plans to again do an abatement, $9.6 million according to Burnidge, which the administration has admitted effectively kicks the can down the road for future taxpayers.
  Board member Dawn Martin asked about increasing the abatement  
  “Given what the last 18 months has been, it’s hard to look forward and look our community members in the eye and tell them, ‘Yes, your taxes are going up this year,’” Martin said.
  Burnidge claimed about the abatement: “That was really an accumulation of three different years where the board did choose to not increase the taxes for that year. And we have been carrying that forward for each year since 2015, the first year that we’ve done the abatement.”
  Through all board documents available on the website, dating back to 2009, the board has approved the maximum levy allowed annually.
  Board member John Devereux said the district gave “benefits” and the annual levy increase is “offset to all the services that we’re offering free of charge.” However, those “free” services were all paid by taxpayers including meals, school supplies and waiving of registration fees.
  Martin noted those were federal tax dollars and “it’s not quite the same thing,” but board member Kate Thommes said: “It’s still less money out of our families’ pockets. I for one really appreciated the not have to pay the registration fees for this year.”
  “I just want to make sure that we’re looking at the feasibility of it,” Martin said. Noting not every property taxpayer has kids, she added: “I just want to make sure we’re taking the entire community into account.”




©2024 Examiner Publications, Inc.

Website Powered by Web Construction Set