The Urbana Park District will again attempt to raise property taxes enough to pay for an outdoor pool:
And while board Vice President Nancy Delcomyn said she's sad to see the district's only outdoor pool closed, she wants to start planning its replacement as soon as possible. She urged community members to sign up to be involved in the process.
The park district will be able to afford it if voters approve a 15-cent tax increase per $100 of assessed valuation in April. The tax increase would mean the owner of a $150,000 house would pay about $68 more in taxes. The increase isn't just because of the pool, said Vicki Mayes, the park district's executive director. The park district needs it to catch up on its maintenance, prevent problems from happening and to match grants that will help improve its programs and parks.
The board unanimously approved putting the question on the ballot.
Walker said he believes it's time, and that the park district's finances need to be addressed.
"We're ready to put that question to the public," Walker said.
Last year, the park district asked for an increase of 25 cents per $100 assessed valuation; that was defeated by 64 votes. As part of that proposal, the park board wanted to take on a $5 million renovation of Crystal Lake Pool.
I thought the 25-cent increase was an insanely large request, and even so, it almost passed. They're trying again in April, when they hope turnout will be more friendly to a tax increase.
Keeping taxes down is a never-ending battle. It reminds me of the fight against terrorism in that we have to win every single time, but they only need to win once.
Note that I'm not calling tax-increasers terrorists, just suggesting the nature of the struggle against them is similar to that against terrorists.
"Note that I'm not calling tax-increasers terrorists, just suggesting the nature of the struggle against them is similar to that against terrorists."
Boggle.
Maybe we have a new phenomenon--tax terrorists or tax and spend terrorists :)
So if I understand the article correctly, the tax increase will support the *planning* of a new pool, not the building of one. Correct?
And once again, the News-Gazette has failed to put this tax increase request in terms that most people would like to see: what is the percentage increase of the request? The request is for a 21% increase in their tax rate.
I wrote about this at length last November, but in general, how many of you got a 21% raise this year? What about the current economy does the park district not understand? Further, it seems they keep changing their priorities every time they discuss the increase. Last November 15th they said they needed 15 cents to avoid program cuts and staff reductions. Now they say they need 15 cents to plan for the new pool. It seems to me that they need 15 cents, and what they need it for changes based on what they think might sound convincing to people.
I will be voting no.
The park district board says it will have to implement severe program cuts, 20 to 25 percent cuts, without the tax increase. They feel the public should have a right to say at the ballot box if they want those cuts or not. The tax increase would not pay for a new pool, only planning for a new pool. A new pool would likely require another tax increase down the road.
You can object to the tax increase and try to make convincing arguments against it, but inferring that the PD is making stuff up to get more money seems a bit irresponsible.
Last year they asked for 25 cents to save the pool. They didn't get it. The pool is closing. You can expect a lot of lower-income kids roaming the streets looking for something to do all summer, but at least the average taxpayer saved a Benjamin. What will happen to Crystal Lake Pool? I expect nothing. It is on the wrong side of town so it will be an eye sore for years to come.
Now the PD is asking for 15 cents before they have to close more stuff and make more cuts. They'd also like to stay committed to the mission of providing an public outdoor pool for the people of Urbana. It would be nice if they would be willing to place the new pool on the north side of town, but I wouldn't count on it.
Vote no. Fight them on the tax increase. Do your best to get your neighbors to vote no so we won't have to pay an extra $70 a year. Go for it!
But stop impeaching the integrity of the Board. And know that you are not only saving yourself money on your taxes, you are also making it harder for the city to provide services to everyone in this town. I love Crystal Lake Pool, my wife and I took our daughter there regularly. It was an Urbana institution - a rite of passage for many Urbana youth. Now it is gone because 70 people decided $100 is more important than a pool for everyone to share.
Fair enough. But just be sure you know what you are fighting for, and against.
They should also let all of the park ground just go back to natural prairie,
it always sounds so clear when you say it, D. Boon. People are just being selfish when they vote against tax increases, for important public services like swimming pools. I got it now.
Was there ever a promise that the pool would stay open if the tax increase passed? Seems to me the increase was going to go for other things.
"Now it is gone because 70 people decided $100 is more important than a pool for everyone to share."
No, the tax increase didn't pass because 38,428 people didn't want the increase, not 70.
I'm not saying they're making stuff up. I'm concluding, from reading their comments in the paper then and now, that they're changing what they say the 21% tax increase covers. They have every right to do that and I have every right to criticize it.
I'm sure another $70/year is fine for you. It's not fine for everybody. Perhaps if it was the only extra $70 this year that would be fine. But many bills have gone up and this won't even be the only tax increase on the ballot in April.
Maybe MTD can get some federal money for the pool if the locate their daycare park and ride tram terminal next to the pool.
Government spending is simply a collective agreement that buying a certain good or service is in the common good. Its appropriate to put such to a referendum. If the folks all agree to pitch in a build a pool, there is nothing inherently evil about that. Some people believe its worth it to have a higher quality of life. Or that providing outdoor physical exercise opportunities helps all of us by keeping youth from mischief, reducing obesity, feeling a sense of community, etc.
I hope that Urbana gets their pool. Maybe folks could spend less on cigarettes, magnetic yellow ribbons for the back of their car and french fries and more on the common good. But it will no doubt fail again.
The problem is that it's not just the park district asking for more money. All of the cities automatically get more when our assessments go up every year, and there's no reason to think this year will be any different since the assessments are based on the last three years, not just the year of assessment. Then we have the MTD who just grabbed more without having to ask the public for more. Then we have the townships who may or may not be asking for more. Then we have the school districts who are asking for more via the sales tax. Then we have....you get the picture. By the time you've added all of these up, you're talking much more than $70. I'm curious--it it's O.K. to support the tax, why isn't it O.K. for those who are against it to put forth those views? Or is that just one of those politically correct rules we just haven't heard yet? And why do we have to figure out how to live within our budgets, but it's some kind of social crime to ask the government to do the same?
We all want quality schools conducted in buildings that are safe and efficient with all the infrastructure to support 21st Century technology. We all want to drive on safe streets in good repair without axle busting potholes, freshly plowed in the winter with salt spread to melt the ice. We want first class recreation opportunities available to all of our citizens without economic barriers to their use. In short we want government to do those things for us that we are unable to accomplish as individuals.
God forbid that that government from which we ask so much should ever ask us to pay for it!
3 Score + 10
Keith Hays
Mr, Hayes: you mean like the 11 million for a parking garage in downtown Champaign, in a now admited very fragile business environment downtown?
All of you pro tax folks could just pony up and make a nice contribution for a pool. It's always those that have plenty of cash, telling those without cash that they need to fund. Local government needs a wake up call on living on a budget.
"Mr, Hayes: you mean like the 11 million for a parking garage in downtown Champaign, in a now admited very fragile business environment downtown?"
I think this is an excellent point, and I have personally been very much against the business handouts that have taken place over the last ten years in downtown Champaign, especially considering the horrible economics and development theories they are based around (ie: make a "Creative Class" mecca and they will come).
I think it is possible to differentiate between tax policies. Some, like more money for the park and school districts, appear to benefit a wide number and variety of people. They have benefits far beyond simply having a pool, or more teachers, or new computers in schools. They are long-term investments that reduce crime rates, increase property values, and generally improve the quality of life in an area. Plus, they are directed at the younger generation - helping our young people to become better citizens, stay out of trouble, and have productive lives. These are very wise and very important investments.
Other tax policies are very suspect. Cutting deals with developers who plop up crappy housing in farm fields benefits almost no one except the developers. Giving tax breaks to downtown developers to put up money making buildings that may (or may not) increase tax revenues at a higher rate than the dollars spent by the city to maintain the infrastructure vital to those buildings does not seem like wise policy to me. Again, the benefits to the greater community are very limited when compared to a good pool or excellent schools.
It doesn't make sense to always take stands against tax increases or even tax breaks without thinking the proposals through. Sholem pool is an excellent example of a community resource that is just invaluable to the quality of life in C/U. It is a great pool that is geared toward families and is usually full of happy swimmers from Memorial Day to Labor Day. It helps keep kids out of trouble, promotes well-being, gives parents a fun and healthy place to take their kids, and even employs dozens of young people in the summer time. It is great bang for the buck.
Urbana just lost its comparable venture, and that is too bad. If there were legitimate concerns about the way the PD spends its money, then I think that would be a legitimate reason to vote against increased funding, or at least demand reform. Ditto for the school districts. But I haven't heard detailed explanations of where the PD or the USD116 are wasting money. It seems the people of Urbana just aren't interested in spending a little more for these community investments.
Personally, I think that is sad.
WOW...a little more? These property taxes are phenomenal. My escrowed property tax bills per month are fast approaching my morgage payment....
What difference does it make whether the park district is wasting money or not?The point is that people simply don't have the ability to pay more right now, regardless of whether it's a good idea or not. We as a society had better wake up to the fact that resources are limited, and we're at a point where we're going to have to make tough choices--right now a pool is a luxury, no matter how many people it benefits.
I live in Urbana in one of the old homes in the State Street area that does not have air conditioning. The pool made our summers bearable. I find the closing--without the promise of a new outdoor pool, terribly sad.
You live in a house without air-conditioning?
What is wrong with you?
It is downright un-American!
You aren't contributing your fair share to the community carbon footprint!
Now you expect the taxpayers to cool you off!
That is downright selfish!
3 Score + 10
Keith Hays
I know, what kind of selfish bastard would be against paying more taxes for a pool to cool off the people who live on state street? Civilizations should be judged by how much pools are subsidized. Some guys are so selfish, trying to save for their children's college, or keeping up with their mortgage payments in the face of tough economic times. I mean come on, what are people supposed to do in the summer? Go to a free government cooling center? What fun is that? Pools are a great investment for the future. I would hate to live in a city where the black kids don't have some place to go swim, if you know what I mean. (I'm not racist, I'm an enlightened liberal.)
Yes higher taxes will mean that more people will become dependent on government services, but that's fine, because their money will have been used wisely as investments for the future and good government programs. So instead of saving for your own child's college, or paying your own mortgage, just give your money to the government, which will use it efficiently to provide subsidized college loans and mortgage assistance.