Quote:
Originally Posted by sentinel
Okay, you can reset/lower the tax rate to a consistent one for an entire 'greater Chicago', while maintaining the individual school districts...and potentially not just for real estate taxes. Because the individual suburban school districts are already doing better than CPS, so whenever a district tries to pass a referendum (like the recent successful ones in Brookfield, Oak Park and Evanston), the tax rate can theoretically not go up nearly as much if there is already a lower baseline because they are all part of a 'greater Chicago.' In Brookfield, for example, for the past few years there has been a decent influx of younger families replacing older retirees that have moved to the Sun Belt or passed away. The schools are overcrowded, so the $20 million referendum is to build annexes for the grade school and middle school. For close family members that live there and have two small children that will be going to those schools in the next few years, it will add $260 a year to their taxes ($7,000). But if Brookfield was part of Chicago, why can't that annual real estate tax be lowered by, let's say a conservative 15% (or more), while still maintaining the separate school district (Riverside-Brookfield)?
|
What you are suggesting is unprecedented and likely unconstitutional. You're essentially suggesting that, for example, Chicago taxpayers subsidize the (wealthier) taxpayers of Oak Park without having any say in the election of the Oak Park school district board. And of course even residents on the Chicago side of Austin Boulevard would be ineligible to attend Oak Park schools.
Asides from the schools issue (which at least in Oak Park represent 2/3 of the tax bill), I doubt village residents would be willing to trade OP Police with CPD. Perhaps some of the south suburbs which are truly dire financial straits would be willing to merge with Chicago, but then why would Chicago want the burden of providing services to these poverty-stricken towns?