More Mass Transit Thoughts from Overtaxed Suburbia
Some have suggested that I have merely re-fighting a battle I lost in 1974.
Whatever the reason, mass transit thoughts keep rising to the surface of my consciousness.
Today I offer three ideas, one political and two substantive.
The political thought is
Governor Rod Blagojevich has handed the General Assembly a strategy to raise sales taxes over his veto in which those casting the crucial final votes can escape political punishment at the polls.The first substantive suggestion is
The deadline for passage as far as the Chicago Transit Authority is concerned is now November 4th.
Know what day November 5th is?
It’s the filing deadline for state representative and state senator.
If the General Assembly can stall that long, marginal members may be convinced to vote for the bill knowing that the odds of an outraged potential challenger getting 500 (state rep.) or 1,000 (state senate) signatures within a day are slim.
And they can vote to override the Governor's veto after the end of filing.
a logical way to finance whatever deficit the CTA has.The second substantive suggestion is
A property tax.Before you beat me about the head with aluminum bats, consider that that the value of property in Chicago is largely dependent on its access to mass transit. Certainly, that is a major reason, if not the primary reason, that property value in and near the Loop is so high.
Likewise, real estate in poorly served parts of the city is less valuable.
So, those who receive the most value from mass transit would pay the most; those receiving the least value, the least.
I am certain the fact that more Metra trains stop at Crystal Lake than anywhere else in McHenry County makes local property values higher than they would be otherwise.Now, my preference would be the unrefined approach of 19th Century economist Henry George, that is, a tax on only the land. (This approach has the result of encouraging maximum development of land, since the tax on a particular parcel would be the same whether an empty lot or a high rise. Think of all the problems that could be avoided with such a tax system in Chicago or anywhere else.)
One final thought.Residential property taxes in Chicago are about the lowest in all of Illinois.
My information comes from the Illinois Department of Revenue’s Property Tax Statistics. It has information on “effective tax rates” that show Chicago about as low as one can go in Illinois.An “effective tax rate” is defined as one’s tax bill divided by what one could sell one’s house for.Chicago homeowners paid 1.1% of the value of their homes in real estate taxes for the 2000 tax year payable in 2001. That ranks 521st lowest out of 533 Illinois communities for which the effective tax rate was calculated.
Figure out your own by getting the value of your home from Zillow.com. Divide the number there by your annual real estate tax bill.
Not a big surprise, but the Illinois Revenue Department stopped calculating effective tax rates about the time Democrat Rod Blagojevich took office. There is a couple of year lag time, so the most recent and, sorrowfully, the last comparisons of relative property tax burdens throughout Illinois is for the 2000 tax year.
I found Chicago’s effective tax rate for residential property on page 46 of that year’s Illinois Property Tax Statistics. (You’ll have to scroll down to Table 10. You can find what the effective tax rate is for your town, if it is large enough. This is a double-sided table, so it's a bit tricky.)
So, don't tell me Chicago property taxes are too high unless you can produce an up-to-date effective tax rate for the city.
Most of Crystal Lake (the Algonquin Township part) the effective tax rate is 2.05%--ranking 203rd. The Village of Algonquin in McHenry County and Algonquin Township was 1.89%, ranking 286. McHenry was ranked 251 at 1.96% in McHenry Township.
allowing legalized jitney cabs to take up the slack.
I think I had a bill drafted to allow jitneys passing a safety inspection and proper insurance for a group of conservative legislators whom I was helping in the late 1980's or early 1990's. The idea is still a good one.
Not just where the Chicago Transit Authority finds it uneconomical to run buses, but anywhere in Chicago.
I know that the “powers that be” would favor this no more than they would a property tax to finance the CTA, but it also makes all kinds of sense.
Look at the price of taxi medallions.
Clearly there is room in the market for more cab-like transportation.
Of course, bailing out the CTA is not about logic or even transpiration.It is about patronage and forcing suburbanites to subsidize downtown office buildings.
And you can read more of some of that here.
Always more on the weekend on McHenry County Blog.
12 comments:
I actually agree.
The city only contributes $3 million to the CTA (same amount since 1982). The lowest of any major city by a factor of 50.
Time for them to put up.
The city residents contributes much more than $3 million through sales taxes, but yes, the city budget should dedicate more as well.
You've got it backwards about the suburbs subsidizing the city. The collar counties are subsidized by Cook County.
I agree on the property tax, but only if suburbanites start paying for highways and gas subsidies in the same manner. It's unfair to expect transit to compete on equal footing with driving if transit riders have to pay heavy user fees while the government throws socialist subsidies at drivers.
Wow, to think that I agree with Cal on most of this post -- and I'm a city homeowner (who thinks our property tax system is even more convoluted than California's). However, I'd prefer to see if there are ways for city and suburbs to work together to advance the entire region's interests, instead of narrow parochialism.
Cal, I put this on another post but thought I'd post it here too since it's your latest. I'd still like to know how you reached the $200 a year figure for McHenry County households.
According to the census, McHenry County retail sales per capita in 2002 was $9,451. Persons per household was 2.89 in 2000. So, a 0.5 percent increase in the sales tax would be $136.57 per household, which is far away from your $200 figure. Do McHenry County residents do that much out of county shopping?
Please respond.
Here's the URL for the article that contains the reasoning:
http://www.mchenrycountyblog.com/2007/08/over-200-annual-sales-tax-hike-facing.html
A lot of shopping is done out of county in the new shopping center just south of the McHenry Couinty line in Kane County, but that was not the way I got there.
I think the Census numbers are more valid.
You need to look at:
1. The CTA Board which is a political joke.
2. The patronage jobs.
3. The contracts.
4. The inflated and expensive pension system.
5. The lack of qualified or experienced people from Ron Huberman to Mike Wojcik on down.
6. The lack of a strategic plan.
7. A real analysis of the Federal Report.
I agree with Miliken. If the system was honest, well run and not a black hole of money with no visible results, some extra money might be easier. But to give them more money for more of the same is just foolish.
Thanks Cal,
We agree about patronage, mismanagement and the need for accountability in mass transit. The CTA may be the most egregious example, but Metra and Pace share some serious management issues as well.
As for your McHenry County sales tax analysis, you said: "If only the 89,403 households paid the tax, it would amount to $231 a family. But, since businesses pay some sales tax, the figure per household will actually be less"
What's missing from your simplistic analysis is that visitors to McHenry pay the same sales tax rate too. Doesn't that fact diminish the $231 per family burden? Yes, if only McHenry families paid McHenry sales taxes, it might cost them $0.63 per day to fund transit. But since others will pay it too, maybe McHenry families pay only $0.40 per day, or even less? So it is very possible that your argument is purposely exaggerating the tax angle.
Why would you want to do that?
How can you give more money to CTA until you get rid of the village idiot MIKE WOJCICK???
I feel certain that more McHenry County residents show out of county than the reverse.
As I mentioned in an earlier post, when a local tax district wants more than a $100 from out pockets we have big referendum fights.
Off plan property investment can be a full time job, and the more properties that you invest in, the less time you have available. Off plan property investors may utilize a property manager to help them manage and oversee their investment. A property manager is someone who takes care of most of the maintenance and the day to day problems, giving the owner of the property freedom from the small and mundane tasks that come with real estate investments. Property managers are used for income investment property, or property that provides a cash inflow to the owner.
Post a Comment