County Board Passes Budget

[max power]

Let me put this in perspective:

If I good to Woodfield and buy a $1000 computer from the Apple Store, prior to this, the county tax was .75 percent. So, I would have payed $7.50 in county taxes. Now, it is 1.75% and I would have to pay $17.50!!!

I don't follow you. Why not just compare the total tax bill from each county? Dupage saves you like 30 bucks.

[NorthSideSox72]

There are costs associated with that stuff, the problem is its basically impossible to try and balance it all just by costs.

 

How do you charge some one for going down to the Daley Center and looking up free case information? How do you charge some one for going down and taking a look at their parents probate case?

 

Or how do you charge for all of the free internet stuff, forms, case information. What about all the property index number information you can pull up on the web from the recorder.

 

The problem is many of the services the county provides are free.

And I'd suggest that many shouldn't be free. You do have to walk a fine line - you can't per se charge for a legal right of access. But, courts have found repeatedly that nominal charges associated with the administration thereof are acceptable. Case in point - in Illinois, you have to pay to get a FOID card to own a gun, even though that is clearly a legal right.

 

[HuskyCaucasian]

Looks like a movement is afoot...

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/c...1,5509978.story

After calling on Cook County Board President Todd Stroger to personally "explain himself" for pushing through a sales tax increase, some angry Palatine Village Council members said they had an even better idea -- secede from the county.

[Steve9347]

When I still lived in Sauk Village, a mere stones throw from the border, that is where I did 90% of my shopping. Food, gas, electronics, whatever. It was just as close as almost anything else in Illinois, and even 4 years ago, the tax difference was pretty visable. However in the last few years, the gas prices have caught up to Illinois, so there isn't as big of a difference there. 3 of my neighbors while there moved to Indiana. I, however, chose to go west. At least I am out of Cook County.

West is where it's at... Lombard, Wheaton, Oak Brook, as long as it's DuPage County and not s***ty Cook!

[santo=dorf]

Looks like a movement is afoot...

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/c...1,5509978.story

...and how much tax money will they need to pay for new city officials and their fancy pants office complex?

[southsider2k5]

...and how much tax money will they need to pay for new city officials and their fancy pants office complex?

 

Probably less than what they are paying now for the bloated bureaucracy of Cook County, especially if they join another existing county.

[HuskyCaucasian]

Probably less than what they are paying now for the bloated bureaucracy of Cook County, especially if they join another existing county.

If anyone is interested in helping, I am thinking of putting together a website dedicated to the cook county secession movement.

No formal plans yet, just an idea.

[NorthSideSox72]

You know, if Peraica or Claypool had become the county board president instead of Stroger v2, we would not be in nearly as much of a mess. As a voting populace, we could just, you know... elect better officials. That might be a lot easier than breaking up the county.

 

[mr_genius]

You know, if Peraica or Claypool had become the county board president instead of Stroger v2, we would not be in nearly as much of a mess. As a voting populace, we could just, you know... elect better officials. That might be a lot easier than breaking up the county.

 

^^^

 

Taxes in Chicago are way too high, and I think there is finally a groundswell of opposition growing. But I'm sure people will just vote for whatever candidate offers the most free stuff. So we're stuck paying outrageous tax rates.

 

 

[lostfan]

Probably less than what they are paying now for the bloated bureaucracy of Cook County, especially if they join another existing county.

I'm surprised nobody is talking about this at length in this thread yet. Chicago probably has one of the most inefficient local governments I've seen anywhere in the country. There's so much nepotism and good-old-boy mess going on that it stifles the government. Howcome no other big city seems to have these budget problems all the time? If all that was streamlined, eliminated, and cleaned up (corruption) the gov't could probably still provide all those services and lower taxes a good amount. But nobody ever takes them to task so it just gets perpetually worse.

[knightni]

When you've been run primarily by Democrats for the last 50 years, higher taxes are the norm and are the modus operandi for that party.

[CanOfCorn]

When you've been run primarily by Democrats for the last 50 years, higher taxes are the norm and are the modus operandi for that party.

 

And Democrats or not...taxes RARELY go down once they've gone up.

[NorthSideSox72]

I'm surprised nobody is talking about this at length in this thread yet. Chicago probably has one of the most inefficient local governments I've seen anywhere in the country. There's so much nepotism and good-old-boy mess going on that it stifles the government. Howcome no other big city seems to have these budget problems all the time? If all that was streamlined, eliminated, and cleaned up (corruption) the gov't could probably still provide all those services and lower taxes a good amount. But nobody ever takes them to task so it just gets perpetually worse.

1. Other cities DO have these problems. Most of them do, in fact.

 

2. People have historically, especially in the last 2 or 3 decades, not made an issue of it because the city has done so well. Its gone through a virtual renaissance.

 

3. Also during that period, until recently, the city appeared to run much better than others. The streets are cleaner, potholes are fixed faster, things work better. Ask people who lived in Chicago but also in other cities (myself included). Its only been the last few years where people have noticed that the quality has dropped a lot, but the high taxes continue. That's when there is trouble.

 

[southsider2k5]

1. Other cities DO have these problems. Most of them do, in fact.

 

2. People have historically, especially in the last 2 or 3 decades, not made an issue of it because the city has done so well. Its gone through a virtual renaissance.

 

3. Also during that period, until recently, the city appeared to run much better than others. The streets are cleaner, potholes are fixed faster, things work better. Ask people who lived in Chicago but also in other cities (myself included). Its only been the last few years where people have noticed that the quality has dropped a lot, but the high taxes continue. That's when there is trouble.

 

If other places have these problems, why is it that Chicago is the highest taxed municipality in the country?

[YASNY]

If other places have these problems, why is it that Chicago is the highest taxed municipality in the country?

 

Because it's been run by Democrats for 50 years. No brainer.

[lostfan]

Because it's been run by Democrats for 50 years. No brainer.

It's really got more to do with corruption and inefficiency than it does with them being Democrats.

[lostfan]

1. Other cities DO have these problems. Most of them do, in fact.

 

2. People have historically, especially in the last 2 or 3 decades, not made an issue of it because the city has done so well. Its gone through a virtual renaissance.

 

3. Also during that period, until recently, the city appeared to run much better than others. The streets are cleaner, potholes are fixed faster, things work better. Ask people who lived in Chicago but also in other cities (myself included). Its only been the last few years where people have noticed that the quality has dropped a lot, but the high taxes continue. That's when there is trouble.

I didn't mean to imply that other cities don't have these kinds of problems although reading my post I could see how you'd think that's what I was saying. But like you said nobody has made an issue of it because for the most part Chicago was doing all right at least on the surface (when downstate politicians don't interfere anyway e.g. CTA "crisis" that was a self-inflicted wound from the state government). That much I can agree with.

 

For the record I know my profile says I live in Maryland but I was born and raised a Southsider.

[YASNY]

It's really got more to do with corruption and inefficiency than it does with them being Democrats.

 

Enough said.

[lostfan]

Enough said.

lol, I knew that was coming.

 

For real though it's what Chicago politics is all about, for every apparently likable one that's produced like Barack Obama you have several turds like Rod Blagojevich. It's been that way since before even my dad can remember.

[EvilMonkey]

Does Chicago really need 50 alderman? Los Angeles only has 15. I think New York has 50, but really, with that many of them, they are just parasites on the tax base, and job pools for family members.

[mr_genius]

Does Chicago really need 50 alderman? Los Angeles only has 15. I think New York has 50, but really, with that many of them, they are just parasites on the tax base, and job pools for family members.

 

50 is way too many and a big waste of money.

[NorthSideSox72]

50 is way too many and a big waste of money.

Having 50 Alderman, versus say 30, is the least of the worries of the city and the way its run. Chicago's nature is as a fractured city of neighborhoods.

 

[mr_genius]

Having 50 Alderman, versus say 30, is the least of the worries of the city and the way its run. Chicago's nature is as a fractured city of neighborhoods.

 

not really. just another thing to cut down costs. alderman have staffs, take city money to pay bribes, ect. they cost a lot. have 15 alderman.

 

done and done. save millions.

[NorthSideSox72]

not really. just another thing to cut down costs. alderman have staffs, take city money to pay bribes, ect. they cost a lot. have 15 alderman.

 

done and done. save millions.

I'd suggest you'd actually cost yourself money by doing that, not save it. The whole system in Chicago is too heavily tied to wards.

 

I think you're targeting the wrong thing. If you want to get rid of corruption, get rid of corruption. But the way the city council and funding are set up is, I think, very good at getting the right level of public input and supporting the needs of each neighborhood.

 

[mr_genius]

I'd suggest you'd actually cost yourself money by doing that, not save it. The whole system in Chicago is too heavily tied to wards.

 

I think you're targeting the wrong thing. If you want to get rid of corruption, get rid of corruption. But the way the city council and funding are set up is, I think, very good at getting the right level of public input and supporting the needs of each neighborhood.

 

na, i don't think so. they are a waste of money. don't need that many. most of them don't do jack.