Property Taxes: Who’s to Blame and How to Stop Their Growth

Across the State of Illinois, except for Cook County,  taxpayers will be receiving their property tax bills in the mail.  For most this will cause outrage over how high these taxes are.  Here are a few facts:


As you can see 5 of the top 30 counties with the highest property taxes are here in Illinois.  So who is to blame for these high taxes and how can we stop them from increasing so fast?

First, a few definitions:

Levy – The amount of tax dollars the taxing body is requesting from the county tax extension office each year. A levy is a tax.

Extension – The actual amount of tax dollars allowed, based on tax rate, that the tax extension office is allowed to tax property owners and requested in the levy. An extension is the actual levy taxed.

Assessment – The assessed value of the property and improvements (buildings). This is not a tax, but what the shared tax liability is based on.

Tax Rate – The calculated rate that will be multiplied with 1/3 of the assessed value to get the actual tax dollars it will cost each property owner.  (Cook County is 1/6)

PTELL (Tax Cap) – Property Tax Extension Limitation Law that prevents taxing bodies from increases their extended tax by the lesser of CPI (Consumer Price Index) or 5%.

Maximum Rate – The maximum allowable rate that can be extended in each fund per taxing body

First we must know who is at fault for the tax increases.

  • Is the assessor at fault?
  • Is the taxing body at fault?
  • Is it the legislature in Springfield?

Here is a simple chart to show you it’s the taxing bodies increasing their levy every year.  Detail for this chart are the bottom if you want to read further.


Tax rates fluctuate up and down in the opposite direction as the assessments. So when you hear a taxing body saying the tax rate went down, its because the assessment went up. Taxing bodies use this trick to claim they are lowering taxes when in fact they could have, and probably did, raise taxes.

Illinois has approximately 7000 taxing bodies, over 2000 more than the next closest state, Pennsylvania.  This allows property taxes of Illinois to be far above average.

Property taxes in Illinois average 2.28 percent of a home’s value, according to the Urban Institute. In New Jersey, they’re 2.32 percent, and in lowest-taxing Hawaii, they’re 0.27 percent. (The lowest among mainland states is Alabama, at 0.46 percent.)

Springfield does not control property taxes directly.  They put PTELL in place to prevent increases greater than CPI.  They have also been discussing freezing property taxes.  They cannot lower the property taxes. They have increased the homestead exemption over the years and aided senior citizens and veterans. Springfield does not control the raising or lowering of property taxes, that is the sole responsibility of the taxing bodies.

So what can citizens do to stop the ever increasing property taxes?

  1. Attend local taxing body meetings and provide input.  Budget hearings start in June running through September.  Most taxing bodies build the tax increase into their budgets. Ask them if the do.  If they do, a vote for the budget is a vote for a tax increase.
  2. Attend the levy hearings which are typically October through December.  Each taxing body is different so ask by getting involved.
  3. Run for local office yourself or recruit and help others.  These elections are held in off years so 2017 is the next set of races.  On April 7th was the last round.  Voter turn out was barely over 10% in many areas.  These elections are where you can have the greatest impact on your taxes, but few bother to get involved.

Conservatives are winning the debate on spending and fiscal responsibility.  Much of the conversation out of both Springfield and Washington is about where cuts can be made and how to stop the growth of debt.  The same must be done at the local levels. The only way to do this though is to get involved, ask questions and start holding these local officials accountable for their votes.

Please feel free to contact Illinois Conservatives for help in the questions you should ask and to share the stories you have of you local taxing body, both good and bad.

Who is Really Raising Your Property Taxes by Lennie Jarratt


History is Against Mark Kirk in 2016

KirkCapitolstairsIt’s a known fact that Sen. Mark Kirk is vulnerable in 2016.

Kirk has been generally liked by independents throughout his career, and rode a conservative wave in 2010 to claim President Barack Obama’s old seat. But, following a first term notably marred by health problems, he now will likely be matched against a formidable Democratic challenger next year in Rep. Tammy Duckworth. Factor in the fact that the conservative base isn’t wild about his voting record, and Kirk is going to have quite the uphill battle next year.

A December We Ask America poll has Kirk trailing Duckworth by less than a percentage point at 45.59 to 45, which is not a good sign for any incumbent especially considering the unlikelihood conservatives wake up tomorrow and suddenly fall in love with the freshman senator. He may even have to do battle with a GOP primary challenge before battling Duckworth.

But another grim sign for Kirk has nothing to do with a primary challenge or his struggle with the conservative base. A Kirk reelection would be historically rare for Illinois. The last Republican to win reelection to either Illinois senate seat was Charles Percy in 1978, who held what is now Sen. Dick Durbin’s seat. Percy lost reelection in 1985.

The history with the seat Kirk holds is even worse. Sen. Peter Fitzgerald chose not to seek reelection in 2004, and the next Republican to win reelection was Everett Dirksen in 1968 – the only Republican in the last 100 years to win reelection to the seat. Hence why Kirk’ victory over Democrat Alexi Giannoulias in 2010 was all the more stunning.

Kirk has his share of problems heading into 2016 and is possibly the most likely incumbent Senator to lose in the country. Conservatives might not be on his side, but history definitely isn’t.


2016 and the US Senate Race in Illinois

200px-Mark_Steven_Kirk,_official_photo_portrait_color2016 is right around the corner, and it is time to start thinking about the U.S. Senate race and especially think about if we should elect Mark Kirk to a second term as the Junior Senator from Illinois.

Senator Kirk was elected with much fanfare back in November 2010. We knew that he wasn’t the most conservative Republican, but many conservatives, including myself, voted for him knowing that the Republican’s needed that seat to fight Obama’s agenda. However, since he has been elected he has repeatedly disappointed the very people that voted him into office in our backs.

Examples include:

  • Sole Republican to vote for Obama’s anti-2nd Amendment surgeon general nominee
  • Opposed lifting the ban of firearms at federally controlled water project sites
  • Voted in favor of the Schumer-Toomey-Manchin amendment which would require universal background checks which violates the 2nd Amendment
  • Voted to invoke cloture on the 2014 Farm Bill which despite the claims of reform spent over a billion dollars
  • Voted “Yes” on Senate Bill 336, “The Market Place Fairness Act”, which is colloquially known as the Internet Sales Tax Bill.

Terrible as his voting has been, none seemed more controversial than what he didn’t do: campaigning and actively supporting the Republican challenger Jim Oberweis against Democrat U.S. Senator Dick Durbin in 2014. When a Republican is afraid to publicly back and endorse your own party’s nominee for the second US Senate seat, it does question how much loyalty Senator Mark Kirk has to members of the Republican Party. After all, if he’s so confident of being an “independent” voice, perhaps it would be best for him to remove the “R” next to his name to truly exhibit to Illinoisans how independent he really is.

Illinois Prevailing Wage Costs Taxpayers

Prevailing-Wage2Illinois first passed its prevailing wage law back in 1941. It was passed to help protect employee salaries being reduced during bidding for a public project. It was also used as a mechanism to ensure that a labor dispute did not stop work on a public project. Unions once had a majority of construction employees as members. This has drastically plummeted with it down to 14% as of 2013. So it begs the question, in the year 2015 do we still need a prevailing wage law in the State of Illinois?

Has the prevailing wage laws changed over this same time period to reflect the new membership realities? The answer is no. Wages continue to be set at a union rate while 86% of the work force is not part of the union. There are many studies that show prevailing wage laws raise the cost of a project by 30-40 percent. Matt Crumb from Maclver Institute stated “As it turns out, prevailing wages can be up to 40 percent higher than competitive market wages, meaning taxpayers are hit with an extra cost burden on many government projects.” Reed the full story at Wisconsin Prevailing Wage:

Prevailing wage is a backward policy designed to ensure government contract workers are paid wage rates and receive benefits that are “prevailing” in a given industry or region. As it turns out, prevailing wages can be up to 40 percent higher than competitive market wages, meaning taxpayers are hit with an extra cost burden on many government projects.

Illinois is only one of nine states that require prevailing wage to be applied for every public project. The additional costs to county, towns, and villages are significant with this requirement. These same governmental bodies are all likely to have a reduction in state funding under Governor Rauner’s budget so eliminating the requirement of prevailing wage could be a key way for these types of governmental bodies to save money. It would also encourage governments to continue with long anticipated building projects.

Although the Governor does plan to cut back some revenue to smaller governments it appears with the elimination of prevailing wage and the institution of right to work, municipalities will be able to make up the difference.

As you can see the savings potential with the elimination of prevailing wage could help cover the cost of budget cuts for governments around Illinois.

Illinois 18th Congressional District: A Safe GOP Seat: Don’t Expect a True New Face

By: Andrew J. Englund

As a member of the 18th Congressional District in Illinois, I felt the need to write about the resignation of Congressman Aaron Schock, effective March 31, 2015. Don’t expect a strong conservative to take the seat in the special election. I do not want to see a carpet bagger run for the 18th district seat. There are qualified conservatives in the district, however an Illinois and national establishment Republican will likely win the seat and will hold it until he chooses to retire or is forced to resign.

I voted for Aaron Schock in 2012 and 2014. I was a part of the 17th Congressional District before the 2011 redistricting and I happily voted for Bobby Schilling in 2010. I was not yet 18 for the 2008 election. I voted for Schock because I believed that his youth would be a welcoming change in Washington D.C. However, I couldn’t have been more wrong. As with so many others, he went to D.C. with the intention of changing D.C. and D.C. changed him. The corruption, money, and power in D.C. was far too appealing for Schock. Schock never faced a strong primary challenge, in the 2008 primary he received 72% of the vote and did not have a challenger in 2010, 2012, or 2014. He handily and easily won his general election campaigns: 59% in 2008, 69% in 2010, 74% in 2012, and 74% in 2014.

Illinois 18 is a safe GOP seat, according to the Cook PVI it is R+11. It has been in Republican hands since 1939. Jessie Sumner held the seat from 1939-1947. Edward Jenison held the seat from 1947-1949. Harold Velde held the sea from 1949-1957. Robert Michel held the seat from 1957-1995, serving as House Minority Leader for 14 of those years. Ray LaHood held the seat from 1995-2009 and served as Obama’s Secretary of Transportation from 2009 to 2013. For Ray LaHood’s elections he won 60% in 1994, 59% in 1996, 100% in 1998, 67% in 2000, 100% in 2002, 70% in 2004, and 67% in 2006.

The seat is safe, now is the chance for the constituents of Illinois 18 to choose a conservative. Illinois 18 has not had a consistent conservative in the seat. Aaron Schock has a 75% American Conservative Union (ACU) lifetime rating, with a 52% rating in 2013. In his freshman year (2009) he had an ACU rating of 92%, he had a promising start. Ray LaHood has a 70% ACU lifetime rating, with a 36% rating in his final year (2008).

Schock’s frivolous spending end extravagant lifestyle is common knowledge. He ignored his constituency and focused on self-promotion. He had potential, however he fell into the swamp that is Washington D.C. and was unable to rise above that swamp. I still like Schock as an individual, but I am glad that he will no longer be my congressman. In his resignation statement, he said that he had become a distraction for the district. A truer statement has never been spoken. Thank You Congressman Schock for recognizing that you were a distraction, you had to leave.

Now onto his replacement. According to the Chicago Tribune, State Senator Darin LaHood has stated that he will run for Schock’s seat. Darin LaHood is the son of Former Congressman Ray LaHood. LaHood would not be a new face for the district. Illinois 18 deserves better than to replace Schock with his predecessor’s son. Darin LaHood does have a 100% rating in the 2013 ACU State Legislative Ratings. Former state Representative and former Lt. Governor Nominee Jil Tracy is also considering a run for the seat. Tracy has a 90% ACU rating in the 2013 ratings. Tracy would be a far better choice for the district than LaHood. She remembers her constituents and works hard for them. Tracy will have to overcome the name-recognition and political machinery advantage that LaHood will have. If Tracy runs and if she wins she would be a strong conservative voice for the 18th district.

Illinois Conservatives Statement on Aaron Schock Resignation

News broke earlier today that Congressman Aaron Schock (R-IL) from the 18th district, will be stepping down from office. Stories have circulated for some time of various ethics violations, and his questionable spending of taxpayer and campaign donation money. Reports indicate that he will formally leave office on March 31st.

Here at Illinois Conservatives, we take no pride nor do we rejoice that yet another elected official is leaving public office because of civil or criminal improprieties. This, alone, is not a partisan issue: Illinois has become the laughingstock of the entire country, and even the world. “Chicago” as a term now broadly encompasses our state as a place of corruption, shadiness, and elected officials taking advantage of the office and the integrity it holds while hurting the taxpayers they were elected to represent. With Congressman Schock as the latest example, even 33 year old, youthful congressmen can be just as detrimental to recklessly spending our tax dollars as 50, 60 year olds who have served 2 decades or longer in office.

This is a sad day for Illinoisans, and although we surely aren’t new to being let down by our elected officials, this hurts many that (naively) believed that sending young faces to D.C. would suddenly shake up the old business in our nation’s capital. We could say the people of the 18th congressional district deserve better, but then they knew that already. It was hard to find a candidate with the strength, both mentally and financially, to primary an incumbent who is backed by powerful interests in and outside the district. Citizens were left with little to do, either run up a candidate who will offer nothing more than “symbolic opposition”, hold their nose and continue voting for Schock, or just not vote at all and lose more hope in that they will have responsible elected officials in office.

We can imagine today’s announcement was rather bittersweet for those in the 18th district, that although they will no longer have Aaron Schock as their congressman and that they may now have a representative who will better serve them, losing a representative in such a way is both embarrassing and tragic. However, we hope with such an event like this occurring allows those in the 18th a new opportunity, that whomever is chosen to replace Schock’s seat, that the voters hold their representative’s feet to the fire. And if the replacement chosen is no better than Schock in representing the district, the likelihood of rallying behind an opposition candidate is better.

The Future of Illinois Depends on Us


Do you feel as I do–that in addition to the entire state, the IL GOP is broken?  It seems there is no leadership, no vision, no strategy, and no will to change the status quo that is bankrupting the State of Illinois.  We must take back our party, and we can do just that.  It isn’t complicated–the steps are simple–but ALL OF US MUST PARTICIPATE.

In the State of Illinois, the Precinct Committeeman (woman) should be thought of as the most powerful elected position.  Our state is divided into 102 counties and 6,407 precincts.  In all counties, except Cook County, voters elect precinct committeemen.  The actual number of elected precinct committeemen is abysmally low.  Some county GOP Chairs appoint a healthy number of precinct committeemen, but there is little power in being appointed.  With the combination of those elected plus those appointed, barely 50% of the precincts have representation by a committeemen.   Given the power that is held in the position of precinct committeeman, we conservatives need to step up to the plate and take back our party by filling with conservatives as many as possible of these 6,407 precincts.

The power of the Elected Precinct Committeeman is this:  it is the only vote that counts when electing each county’s GOP chairman (woman).  Just consider what might happen, if in each of the 101 counties outside of Cook, we conservatives make sure to get elected as a precinct committeeman and can get at least two others in our county elected.  It would be a simple matter to begin outnumbering the “old guard” precinct committeemen and vote in county GOP leaders with vision, strategy, and respect for the party platform and principles.

The first step is to  get elected as a Republican Precinct Committeeman in your county.  The process of getting on the ballot and ultimately elected is extremely simple.  Most of the information is available online at your County Clerk’s website.  There are few simple forms to complete and the most important is the Nominating Petition.  You will need to get 10 (12 for safety) signatures of Republican voters in your precinct.  Turn in your paperwork by the deadline, and you will be on the March Primary Election ballot.

After the March Primary Election, you have become an elected Precinct Committeeman.  In April, Illinois State Law requires that county political parties hold a “convention” (meeting).  This is where you will vote in (or out) your County GOP leaders.  At this same meeting, another very important vote takes place–one in which, again, only elected precinct committeeman take part.  This is the vote on your State Central Committee representative.

The state central committee representatives choose the ILGOP chairman.  The state central committee representatives are elected by congressional district.  We have 18 congressional districts in Illinois  Did you know that many state central committee representatives are also your state legislators?  These two most important votes take place at that one April meeting.  Electing new county leaders and new state central committeemen can change the face of the ILGOP.  In fact, in April of 2014, we did make big changes in LaSalle and McHenry counties as well as significant turnover on the State Central Committee.  It can and is being done.

Now you know the power you hold as a precinct committeeman.  Throughout the year–election cycle to election cycle–the precinct committeeman has the key role of communicating with voters in their precinct.  Knocking on doors and talking with people is the most effective means of getting out the vote, growing our party, and finding conservative candidates to run for office.  The Democrats are quite good at this–they call it “community organizing.”  We conservatives have a bit to learn about getting out into the community, but that is the only way we will succeed.  You will be amazed at the positive reception and level of appreciation you garner at each door on which you knock.

Unfortunately, a large part of the problem we have with the ILGOP is that many current precinct committeemen simply do not do their job.  They are long-time party stalwarts who have come to accept the status quo.  Together, we conservatives can bring our party back to  its platform and the principles that we know work.  Candidates that will stand by the platform and principles can  win elections.

Are you in?  The cost is minimal–a little time to get signatures, fill out forms and then attend that all important meeting in April.  Of course, there is a lot more that you may choose to do once elected, for example, getting out into your precinct, talking with your neighbors, and finding good conservatives to run for election to the school board, city council, county board, etc.  If you’re already a Republican Precinct Committeeman, “thank you.”  If you are not, let’s get you elected.  Then, each of us needs to commit to delivering at least two more precinct committeeman who will also be on the March Primary Election ballot.

For more information about the importance of the precinct committeeman and what you can do, visit Precinct Army or  Don’t hesitate to contact me at CPASherry AT aol DOT com with any questions.

We all know that the ILGOP will not change by itself.  The change must come from each of us–let’s ALL commit to take back our party.

The Most Important Issue of the 2016 Presidential Election: The Supremes.

By: Andrew J. Englund

"Supreme Court US 2010" by Steve Petteway, Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States - Roberts Court (2010-) - The Oyez Project. Licensed under Public Domain via Wikimedia Commons.

Supreme Court US 2010” by Steve Petteway, Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States – Roberts Court (2010-) – The Oyez Project. Licensed under Public Domain via Wikimedia Commons.

Barack Obama has about 680 days left of his term.  And there are about 600 days left until Election Day 2016.  I believe that the most important issue for this election cycle will not be ISIS, various social issues, or even the Federal Debt which now tops $18 Trillion.  I believe that the most important issue will be what type of justices the candidate will appoint to the Supreme Court.  The president controls policy for four to eight years; however his Supreme Court appointments can sit on the court for twenty to thirty years, if not longer, leaving a far greater impact than any policy proposal.  Which is why John Adams appointed John Marshall to be Chief Justice of the Court in 1801.  John Marshall served as Chief Justice until 1835, his appointment was an obvious attempt by John Adams to disrupt the policies of Thomas Jefferson.  Even though John Adams was only President for four years (1797-1801), his Chief Justice controlled the court for thirty-four years.  This is why the Supreme Court is such an important presidential campaign issue.

The current Supreme Court has four loose constructionists, four strict constructionists, and one textualist (Scalia).  Here is the current make-up of the court: Chief Justice John Roberts, 60, appointed by George W. Bush in 2005; Justice Antonin Scalia, 78, appointed by Ronald Reagan in 1986; Justice Anthony Kennedy, 78, appointed by Ronald Reagan in 1988; Justice Clarence Thomas, 66, appointed by George H.W. Bush in 1991; Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, 81, appointed by Bill Clinton in 1993; Justice Stephen Breyer, 76, appointed by Bill Clinton in 1994; Justice Sam Alito, 64, appointed by George W. Bush in 2006; Justice Sonia Sotomayor, 60, appointed by Barack Obama in 2009; and Justice Elena Kagan, 54, appointed by Barack Obama in 2010.

It is unlikely that Obama will have another Supreme Court nominee before his term concludes.  Justice Ginsberg has far too much respect for the Court to resign before Obama’s term concludes just so that her seat can be filled by a younger liberal justice, as has been suggested by a few blogs.  It is very likely that the next president will be able to appoint two or three justices.  If the swap is a liberal for a liberal, then the dynamic of the court will remain unchanged as is evident with the two most recent nominees.  However, if the swap is a conservative for a liberal or vice-versa then the dynamic of the court can change for the next twenty years.

Not only do we need to ensure that a conservative is elected President, but the GOP must remain in control of the Senate so that the nominees have a greater chance of being confirmed.  We do not want any of the textualist or strict constructionist nominees to be “Borked” by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

I do not know who will be the Republican nominee for president, nor do I have a horse in the race.  I am suggesting that in order to really have an impact on the culture in Washington DC that we need to ask our candidates what types of justices they will nominate.  We need to pressure them to pick textualists or strict constitutionalists.

tramadol for sale

The Choice: Pat Quinn or Bruce Rauner

There are 3 candidates on the ballot for Governor; Pat Quinn, Bruce Rauner and Chad Grimm.  Many people are still undecided even with only a few days left until the election.  It is for this reason that Illinois Conservatives has decided to weigh in on the election to help in that decision process.

Let’s take a look at the candidates:

Pat Quinn

Quinn has been Governor now for 6 years, taking over the now jailed Rod Blagojevich. Below of some of the reasons Pat Quinn must not be re-elected.

  • Under multiple corruption probes
  • Real unemployment rate of 18.1%
  • Food stamp growth outpacing job growth 2 – 1
  • Raised personal income taxes by 67% and corporate taxes by 30%
  • Wants to make the temporary tax increase permanent
  • Wants to implement a progressive income tax
  • His fiscal policies have brought Illinois the lowest credit rating in the nation
  • Second highest property taxes in the nation, #1 in the Midwest
  • Highest percentage of people wanting to leave the state – 50%
  • Highest pension debt
  • Ranked 48 in taking care of the disabled
  • Lowest private sector job growth in Midwest
  • Lost 49,000 manufacturing jobs

Chad Grimm

Grimm has run for office twice before and lost.  He currently manages a gym in Peoria. Some of his positions are as follows:

  • Eliminate the Minimum Wage Completely
  • Legalize Heroin and Marijuana
  • Abolish Public Schools
  • Allowing Adults to Bring Assault Rifles into Schools
  • Has allied himself with anti-Rauner Quinn supporters
  • Has stated his goal is not to win but to get 5% of the vote


Grimm lacks a thorough knowledge of current Illinois policies.  An example was stating in an interview with WTAX the current tax rate is 7% when it is actually 5%.


Bruce Rauner

Rauner is a businessman who is a self-made multi-millionaire.  One of his investment jobs was handling millions of dollars from state run retirement systems. His acumen here produced more than double the average return.  He has released overviews of how he will govern with finances, educational priorities, and ethics.

Pat Quinn is an abject failure.  Chad Grimm has sold out any principles to Quinn’s Democrat allies and has no intention of running to win.  Neither Quinn nor Grimm can be trusted by conservatives with their progressive ties and allegiances.

That leaves only one choice for Illinois conservative voters, Bruce Rauner.  While we certainly do not agree on all of Rauner’s social issues, he is no doubt more closely aligned to conservative values than to the progressive policies and the appointments Quinn will make.

On fiscal issues, Rauner’s business expertise is greatly needed. Quinn’s policies have driven far too many business out of Illinois and we need a business minded governor that knows how to attract business and jobs to Illinois.  It is time Illinois focused on growing the private sector instead of growing government.

Illinois has a spending problem, not a revenue problem and we need someone who knows how to get spending and revenue in alignment. It is for these reasons that Illinois Conservatives recommends that conservatives vote for Bruce Rauner on Nov. 4.



For as long as anyone can remember Illinois has had more taxing bodies than any other state. Illinois has a total of 6,963 (Illinois Policy) taxing bodies with over 1,400 of them being township governments. 84 of the 101 counties in Illinois operate using the township form of government. 61% of Illinois citizens are currently being taxed by City, County, and Township. That is the highest percentage in the entire country.

Townships are given specific powers under the Illinois Constitution (60ILCS 1/85-13). Below I have listed the responsibilities that townships have currently and who I believe could take them over if township governments were eliminated.


(A) Public safety (including law enforcement, fire protection and building code enforcement)

– Counties, Villages, and Cities can and in most cases already have taken over law enforcement and code enforcement. Fire Protection for the most part have their own boards and are taxing bodies.


(B) Environmental protection (including sewage disposal, sanitation and pollution abatement)

– Counties, Villages, Cities, and the State of Illinois can pick up the slack in this department. Most County and City governments already have environmental protection standards. The State of Illinois already has high protection standards.

(C) Public transportation (including transit systems, paratransit systems and streets and roads)

– County, City, and State Governments already offer Public Transportation. Transportation Systems are also expanding to rural areas thanks to Federal and State tax dollars funding the systems. Roads and Streets under the care of townships can be moved to county control.


(D) Health

-County and City. Counties and bigger Cities already have Health Departments.

(E) Recreation

-Recreation property can be gifted to non-profit agencies or to County and City Governments.

(F) Libraries

-Some Libraries are already their own taxing bodies. The ones that are not could be taken over by cities or villages.

(G) Social services for the poor and aged

-Local, State, and Federal Governments.



If you don’t agree with get rid of them all together, how about merging some of them together?