By: Ted Dabrowski and John Klingner
In a state where property taxes keep going up and up and up – and where they are already the highest in the country – Effingham voters just said enough is enough. They just successfully blocked a $57 million tax hike, but they had to rally like crazy to get the win.
Their school district, which wanted to raise those millions to build a new school and upgrade others, tried to borrow the money without a voter referendum. School officials at the district, whose student population is down by nearly 20% since 2010, were trying to take advantage of a new law signed by Gov. Pritzker and passed by Democratic supermajorities last year that gives school districts the power to borrow money without a voter referendum under certain conditions.
That law flips the regular operation of government on its head. It puts the burden on taxpayers to stop an already planned borrowing, rather than making governments get permission to borrow in the first place.
The only way Effingham voters could force a referendum – called a back-door referendum – was if they hustled in a 30-day period to get enough signed petitions to force a vote on the borrowing. And hustle they did.
Residents like Shannon McClurg, Lisa Tegeler and Nancy Mills – and many others – educated residents on the issue and collected far more signatures than were necessary to force a referendum. So much so that the district admitted total defeat and canceled the referendum by rescinding the bond offerings entirely.
Effingham voters proved that Illinoisans can successfully fight back against a system that sees them as little more than a piggy bank.
**************************
Effingham’s success is a lesson of what needs to happen statewide – unity and participation among everyday residents – if we want to see property taxes cut, greater economic growth in our cities and villages, and more overall prosperity.
Another big lesson: we need to work hard to repeal the laws that strip voters of their voice. It shouldn’t be this way.
Read more from Wirepoints:
- Taxpayer success in Effingham – Wirepoints with Chicago’s Morning Answer
- New Illinois law makes it tougher for voters to block school district borrowings/tax hikes. Effingham good example.
- Sen. Durbin throws Illinois students under the bus, including kids from his own East St. Louis
- Illinois’ disastrous demographics: Fewer youth, a drop in working-age residents and a jump in elderly
- End the menace of ‘superspeeders’ on Chicago area expressways
- Gov. Pritzker: 2% support in potential presidential candidate poll
Audio and summary 
If this bill passes, say goodbye to local control over all Illinois parks and expect to see open drug and alcohol use, needles, no sanitation and fire hazards, but no ordinary park users.
A rare win for the taxpayer and an aptly named town!
Great article! Teamwork, communication and dedication are a powerful force! I’m confident the vigilance will spread.
Hurray for the citizens of Effingham. This is a great example of a wonderful small town with a lot of great people with a ton of common sense who won’t put up with the fools who run the state.
If the school district needs the money they will just come and ask for it again and again until they eventually get it. I wonder how long they would need to wait to try this same tactic again? Could they announce they want to borrow $58 million at the next board meeting and just say this is a new announcement that is different from the prior attempt? Wouldn’t this force the opposition to start all over and collect signatures again? Seems like an easy way to wear down the opposition or sneak it in when voters are busy on vacation… Read more »
That was the 5th time voters have killed a similar proposal since 2014.
The price of liberty is eternal vigilance. Unless people with common sense run for local boards, the boards will be run by cheerleaders who think that more money for schools, parks, etc., is always a good idea. We need watchdogs, not cheerleaders.
Great news! Nice to hear the Tax payer was able to take control and have their voices heard and followed. Congrats to Effingham on this win! Stay vigilant. I am sure you know, the District already has a plan to try again next year and are likely contracting with referendum consultants to make sure the timing is too short for the petitions to be signed and gathered, the title of the referendum will be changed to make it sound like something completely different, they perhaps will even let the existing building fall into more and more disrepair to show the… Read more »
That is great news for the taxpayer this year but look out they will be back next year with another tax increase. They will keep trying and all they have to win is once, whereas the taxpayer has always win. They game is fixed so sooner or later the taxman wins.
I paid over $28,000 in real estate taxes on land in a school district I don’t live in . There have been numerous school referendums through the years. I don’t get to vote on those ballot measures. Real estate taxes on farmland are and always have been tax without representation.
Kevin, can you please shoot me an email if interested. I’d like to hear more. ted@wirepoints.org
“Real estate taxes on farmland are and always have been tax without representation.” Not true for actual farmers who live on the land they farm. But yes, it might be true for rentiers who profit from the labor of working farmers. Ag land already gets huge tax breaks, compared to the percentage of value that homeowners and nonfarm businesses pay.
Right. That’s like someone that owns rental properties in Illinois but lives out of state complaining about taxation without representation. Your business doesn’t get to vote.
That’s surely because the value of IL farmland as an income producer really is embarrassingly low in percentage terms as compared to its likely price appreciation when sold. It’s a bad investment if one focuses on the yearly income it generates for the landlord, but historically farmland’s advantage is its appreciation over time. Over several decades the landlord’s total income approximates one-third of the overall net income while appreciation represents the remaining two-thirds. Hence, the expression from many decades ago is that farm owners are income poor but die rich, something the heirs can appreciate at least.