The Unit 5 and District 87 school boards formally promised Wednesday to reduce property taxes for at least five years if voters approve a new 1% school sales tax that’s on the April 1 ballot.
The school boards passed twin resolutions, one day before early voting begins on Thursday. If approved by voters, the sales tax in McLean County would increase by 1% for eligible items such as retail purchases, prepared food and gasoline. A $10 meal at a restaurant would cost an extra 10 cents. The one-cent sales tax would not apply to groceries, prescription drugs or services like getting a haircut. The money can be used for facility upgrades, school security, mental health resources and energy efficiency projects.
Here's a recap of each school board meeting.
Unit 5
Unit 5 pledged to put no less than 33% — at least $6 million of the $18 million in new estimated revenue from the sales tax — toward offsetting property taxes. That would save around $150 in property taxes annually for the owner of a $225,000 home. The pledge guarantees continuance of the plan for the next five years, should the referendum pass.
“It's not just property owners shopping and being assessed that additional sales tax. It could be non-property owners already within the community, or those traveling within, and so it is that aspect that we're trying to recognize in being able to alleviate some of the tax burden for our property owners,” said Stan Gozur, school board member.
Kristin Weikle, Unit 5 superintendent, was asked by several who attended a recent tax referendum informational event about the possibility of the district using some of the revenue for this purpose. Some expressed worry that the district may not deliver on those plans.
“The resolution is just a way to formalize what we've said, to show the community that we are committed to that, should it pass,” said Weikle.
The district has more than $50 million in repairs on the horizon, which Unit 5 chief financial officer Marty Hickman said the district “really needs to move forward” with — with or without the tax referendum passing.
The board also conducted a public hearing during Wednesday’s meeting to discuss the district selling $15.5 million in school fire prevention and safety bonds, or borrowing.
“The bond money would be used to fund health and life-safety projects in our buildings,” said Hickman. “Many of the projects that we've talked several times over the last few months … the $15 million bonds that we're considering this evening is a start on some of that work.”
Hickman added the public hearing was the first step in the process toward the goal of issuing the bonds, with a resolution and hearing to follow over the next few months.
“There's only so many contractors out there, and only so many projects that we can do at any given time,” said Hickman. “So, we're trying to borrow just enough that will really satisfy the needs of those projects over that time span 12 to 18 months, and then likely we'll be back again at that time for more bonds.”
District 87
Meanwhile, District 87’s board also pledged to use money from the sales tax to reduce the property tax burden.
Superintendent David Mouser estimated the tax would bring in about $6 million for the district, and a third of that would be returned in property tax relief. That could mean about $220 less in taxes for the owner of a $250,000 home.
Because the sales tax would apply to many but not all items, Mouser said he thinks of it as a tax on discretionary purchases.
“It’s important to know that what’s not taxed here are things like groceries and medications and things that are more essential,” Mouser said. “So, I like to think of this tax as more on luxury items, and things that we go out and do.”
That’s not to say no essential purchases would be taxed. Concerns had previously been raised because gasoline is not exempt.
Mouser argued the tax would let McLean County benefit from visitors spending time and money in the community. Their tax dollars would help fund schools, too, Mouser said, as McLean County residents do when they visit the many nearby counties who already have similar sales taxes.
Mouser urged voters to become informed while hoping the promise of lower property tax will be a factor in the outcome on April 1.
“There needs to be property tax abatement. I feel like property taxes have been so high, we’ve been so reliant on them as schools for so long, that really, this is an option that needed to be put in front of the voters,” Mouser said.
The tax will be on the ballot in the municipal election on April 1.
