![]() |
Home | Search | Browse | About IPO | Staff | Links |
RECENT AMENDMENTS TO THE TRUTH IN TAXATION ACT By Earl L. Hoover, Attorney at Law Public Act 86-957, applicable to levy ordinances in 1990 and subsequent years, amends the publication, disclosure and procedural requirements of the Truth in Taxation Act, §861 et seq. of Chapter 120, Illinois Revised Statutes (the "Act"). This article sets forth the forms and procedures to be followed in complying with the Act, as amended; changes to prior law resulting from Public Act 86-957 are highlighted. Procedure: Not less than 20 days prior to the adoption of its levy ordinance, each taxing district must determine whether this year's proposed levy (not anticipated extension) exceeds last year's extension or anticipated extension (not last year's levy) by more than 105%. Whether or not the amount as so determined exceeds 105% of last year's extension, the amount should be recited in the minutes of the meeting at which the determination was made. In computing the percentage increase, those portions of this year's levy and last year's extension attributable to debt service and election costs, if any, are to be excluded. If the percent increase is greater than 105%:
Contrary to prior law, the public hearing required by the amended Act must not coincide with the hearing on the proposed budget of the taxing district. At the time the tax levy ordinances is filed with the County Clerk's office it must be accompanied by a certification by the presiding officer of the taxing district certifying compliance with or inapplicability of sections 4 through 7 of the Act. Calculations: The Act now requires that debt service and total levy calculations be made and compared to the prior year's extensions as part of the notice requirements. However, it is important to note that these calculations are not to be considered in determining whether this year's corporate and special purpose levies exceed last year's extension for these items by more than 105%. Thus, any increase or decrease in the current year's debt service levy or the total levies over last year's debt service extension or total extensions will have no effect on the calculation to determine whether the 105% standard has been exceeded for the corporate and special purpose levies. The calculations for debt service and total levy are purely informational.
Definitions: The Act now provides
definitions for certain of the terms, as
follows:
(a) "taxing district" means any
unit of local government, school
district, or community college
district, including home rule
units, authorized to levy ad
valorem taxes;
(b) "aggregate levy" means the
annual corporate levy of the taxing district and those special purpose levies which are made
annually (other than debt service
levies and levies made for the purpose of paying amounts due under
public building commission
leases);
(c) "special purpose levies"
include, but are not limited to,
levies made on an annual basis for
contributions to pension plans,
unemployment and worker's compensation, or self-insurance;
(d) "debt service" means levies
made by any taxing district pursuant to home rule authority,
statute, referendum, ordinance,
resolution, indenture, agreement,
or contract to retire the principal
or pay interest on bonds, notes,
debentures or other financial instruments which evidence indebtedness.
Please note the definition of "special purpose levies" itemizes some, but by no means all, special purpose levies which must be included in computing the aggregate levy. Forms. The following form is now required by statute for giving notice of the hearing:
As with the Act prior to amendment,
a new notice must be published if either
(1) there is an increase in the levy over
the amount stated in the original notice;
or (2) no notice was given originally and
the levy as finally adopted exceeds the
105% limit. The notice to be used for
either of these circumstances is also now
set forth in the statute:
Notice of Adopted Property
Tax Increase for . . . (commonly
known name of taxing district).
I. The corporate and special
purpose property taxes extended
for . . . (preceding year) . . .
were . . . (dollar amount of the
final aggregate levy as extended).
The adopted corporate and
special purpose property taxes to
be levied for . . . (current year)
. . . are . . . (dollar amount of
the proposed aggregate levy). This
represents a ... (percentage)
. . . increase over the previous
year.
II. The property taxes extended for debt service and public
building commission leases
for ... (preceding year . . . were
. . . (dollar amount).
The estimated property taxes to
be levied tor debt service and
public building commission leases
for . . . are . . . (dollar amount).
This represents a ... (percentage
increase or decrease) . . . over the
previous year.
III. The total property taxes to
be levied for . . . (preceding year)
. . . were . . . (dollar amount).
The estimated total property
taxes to be levied for . . . (current
year). . . are . . .(dollar
amount). This represents a ...
(percentage increase or decrease)
. . . over the previous year.
As with the Act prior to amendment, in order to obtain a tax extension more than 105% in excess of the prior year's extension, the levy ordinance must be filed with a certificate of compliance attached. The following form is suggested for the certificate: CERTIFICATE The undersigned, President of (name of public body) hereby certifies that I am the presiding officer of (name of public body), and as such presiding officer, I hereby certify that the levy ordinance, a certified copy of which is appended hereto, was adopted pursuant to, and in all respects in compliance with, the provisions of Section 4 through 7 of "The Truth in Taxation Act." Dated: _______________
___________________ Conclusion. The recent amendment to the Act has added a measure of clarity in providing the form to be used for giving notice and broadens disclosure in requiring debt service calculations. However, fundamental flaws remain. It would be a shrewd member of the public indeed who could obtain an accurate understanding of the financial position of a public body by attending the hearing or reviewing the data required in order to comply with the Act. Perhaps it is time to consolidate the Act requirements, budget and appropriation ordinance requirements, and levy ordinance into one hearing and one document. It appears unlikely that anything less will produce meaningful public financial disclosure. * * * * The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author alone; anyone undertaking the computations or completing the forms set forth in this article should consult an attorney to verify compliance with the Act.
|
|