While I don’t follow the PD budget process, I guess I should so I would have seen this coming:
From an Art Jaros comment at DGreport:
Mark, Our levy meeting was televised on Channel 6 and, during our discussion, we specifically referred to our Mayor’s comment posted elsewhere here at dgreport.com to the effect that this is no time to be raising taxes. The five person Park Board was unanimous in voting to reduce the Park District’s own share of the combined levy from its 2007 level so that the total combined SEASPAR/Park District levy total would be frozen at the government level, and, thereby meaning that existing (pre-2008) District taxpayers would actually experience a tax decrease (since some of the frozen amount of tax dollars would now be shifted onto new property coming on line into the District’s tax base).
So that’s two taxing bodies that get it, that seem to be in tune with taxpayers concerns for the coming year. The PD board is holding off on some items, as well as biting the bullet on a 7% SEASPAR budget increase.
SEASPAR’s budget is a component of the Park District budget, and it is spread over several different taxing bodies. Those taxing bodies don’t seem to have the ability to provide input and direction for levy amounts, and are presented a “take it or leave it” final product that they don’t really have any control over. The DGPD representative was the sole vote against the SEASPAR budget. Similarly, the Library budget is a component of the village budget, and it has increased at or near the maximum allowable rate year after year.
That leaves the two school districts. 99 is looking for a 6.6% increase, and 58 pretty much the same % increase as 99.
All of these boards are elected or appointed tax paying residents of the districts. How can half of them act one way and trim expenses, gird to weather the economic storm, and the other half act the opposite, and put in for the maximum increase?