There’s a difference between wants and needs. That distinction matters in household budgets, and it ought to matter in public budgets, too.
We accept high property taxes as part of a bargain: We assume they’ll pay for good schools, safe neighborhoods, well-maintained streets and other essential local services. Increasingly, however, new projects are tacking even more onto the bill.
Yet even as homeowners remain outraged about high property taxes, they’re also the ones being sold on the increases.
Behold the property tax paradox.
Look at Skokie. The Skokie Park District is preparing to ask voters to approve a $53 million bond referendum to expand and improve parks. To reiterate: That’s $53 million worth of improvements. A public opinion survey commissioned for the district found majority support for the proposal, even though it would cost the owner of a $400,000 home about $137 more a year in property taxes.
Skokie is hardly alone. An analysis by the Cook County treasurer’s office found that voters approved 14 of 15 referendums in 2024 in which local taxing bodies sought permission to borrow above state limits. Between 2020 and 2023, voters approved about 80% of similar requests.
Voters in northwest suburban Mount Prospect in 2024 approved not one, but two, high-dollar referendums, worth a whopping $100 million that would add nearly $1,000 in property taxes for a home worth $400,000 in exchange for a new middle school and park facilities.
Tax bills in that neck of the woods, for homes in that price range, are already pushing $10,000 for most homeowners.
Illinois homeowners already face the nation’s highest effective residential property tax rate, according to the Tax Foundation. Yet they’re continually being told that if they want quality parks, good schools, modern infrastructure or adequate public safety, they’ll need to approve another tax increase or more borrowing (which will ultimately be repaid through future property taxes).
Every referendum asks whether one more improvement is worth paying for, but they rarely ask whether we’ve reached the point where our existing tax bill should already cover the basics. (And then some.)
More Top Picks Best Kitchen Cabinets Reachers Grabbers
Shouldn’t our current high property taxes buy the luxury of saying “no” to the next referendum? (We think so.)
More voters should be asking that question, and getting uncomfortable with the present dynamic in which their exorbitant property tax payments still aren’t enough to satisfy what we’ve come to expect from local government. Whether that’s because of pensions, inflation, union pressure, rising labor costs, state mandates or something else, the result is the same: Taxpayers who already feel tapped out are continually being asked to pay more.
If you’ve lived here long enough, you become immune to just how bad a deal it is, and how it ices so many people out of homeownership. This is just not how it is in many other parts of the Midwest, something any clear-eyed outsider can see at first glance. Our bills shock folks from the likes of Cleveland, Indianapolis, Milwaukee and other Midwest metros.
The line between essential public services and quality-of-life amenities has gradually blurred. That’s not to say communities shouldn’t invest in parks or libraries or schools, but that projects once viewed as “extras” are now treated as necessities, even as they come at great cost to taxpayers.
Somewhere along the way, the distinction between wants and needs has become less clear. In many parts of the country, homeowners who want something beyond the basics have choices. They can join a private swim club, a health club or an athletic facility and pay only if they use it. Around Chicago, it’s common for suburban governments to provide similar amenities. That means everyone helps pay for the latest aquatic center, fitness complex or recreation upgrade whether they use it or not.
Not every referendum is like that, of course, and many relate to the essentials residents expect their tax bills to cover. Before voting for another property tax hike, we suggest a question: What are we already paying for?
Why, for example, must taxpayers fork over so much money and still have to pay more for every little update and upgrade? Why are tax hikes and borrowing so often presented as the only options? What other cost-conscious, responsible ideas are not being leveraged to avoid more pain at tax time twice a year?
Every referendum plays on this impulse to want bigger, better and newer, asking the same question: “Would you pay a little more for something worthwhile?” Too often, that’s an easy sell. What’s much harder to answer is why communities with some of the highest property taxes in the country still can’t afford what residents reasonably expect those taxes to provide.
Answering that question won’t be as popular as pushing big bucks for a new playground, but failing to do so will only perpetuate the cycle that too often puts upgrades out of reach in the first place.
Every referendum is presented on its own merits, and some undoubtedly are worthy. Taxpayers don’t experience them one at a time, however, but as another add on an already staggering property tax bill. Before asking homeowners to pay a little more for the next improvement, local governments owe them a clear answer to a simple question: If we’re already paying among the highest property taxes in America, why isn’t that enough?
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email [email protected].