flag image
Lake Geneva Chiropractic

State aid drops, again — school levies rise



shadow
shadow
July 21, 2010 | 09:00 AM
Every July it seems to be the same story. The annual loss of state aid continues to plague the school districts in Lake Geneva and is the main cause for an expected rise in local property taxes again for next year.

With an estimated loss of more than $1 million in state aid combined, the Badger High School tax rate is estimated to rise 6 cents for every $1,000 of assessed value. The expected loss in state aids in the Lake Geneva Area (Joint 1) Elementary School District could lead to a raise in the tax rate by as much as 45 cents for every $1,000 of assessed value on the upcoming tax bills.

Last week, the local school boards approved their tax levy increases. The Badger levy is at $17.32 million, up 4.62 percent from 2009-10. The Elementary School District levy is up 11.41 percent, to $16.24 million. If those figures remain the same, the tax rate for Badger will be $4.07 for every $1,000 of assessed value. For the Joint No. 1 district, the rate is estimated to be $5.97 for every $1,000 of assessed value.

That means, the owner of a home assessed at $250,000 will pay $1,492 — $112 more in taxes for the elementary and middle schools, and $1,017 for the Badger district — $15 more than last year.

"The loss of state aid and what it does to the community is frustrating," Lake Geneva School Business Manager Warren Flitcroft said.

Because of relatively high property values in this area, the Lake Geneva Schools are looked at as rich districts. Tax money from all properties goes to the state to partially fund schools. There, state officials use the funding formula to decide which districts and areas receive what amounts of aid. For years, the local schools have been losing the maximum amount of state aid, which is 15 percent.

In the Badger district, 82 percent of revenues comes from local property taxes, while just 15 percent is from state aid. For Joint No. 1 district, 65 percent of the revenues are paid for through local property taxes. About 30 percent is from state aid. But, for both districts, those state aid numbers have been dropping the past few years.

What the local schools don't get in state aid, the local taxpayers must make up.

"We are again losing maximum state aid," Flitcroft said. "If we weren't losing the state aid, we would be in great shape."

In the Badger High School District, total expenditures rose $70,000 from the 2009-10 budget of $23.13 million. That is an increase of 0.3 percent. Total expenses for the Joint 1 District, which includes Central-Denison, Star Center and Eastview elementary schools and Lake Geneva Middle School, rose 2.68 percent, up to $27.52 million.

At Badger, the district budgeted nearly $10 million for instruction and $6 million for support services.

In the Joint No. 1 District, instruction costs are $13.5 million, up from $12.89 in 2009-10. Support services costs dropped slightly to $6.61 million, down from $6.65 million last year.

The budget numbers won't be finalized until October because not all information such as equalized property value and school enrollments will be available until that time. Flitcroft said the levy rate projections for 2010-11 are based on conservative estimates. He said he based the numbers on some assumptions, including an increase in equalized value in the district of 3 percent and the expected 15 percent loss of state aid.

Flitcroft said there appears to be some movement at the state level on changes to the school funding formula. However, the state legislature has been talking about adjustments for years, which have not happened. He said Lake Geneva is not the only district that continually loses its state aid. Others in the area such as Woods, Reek and Fontana elementary schools also continue to lose state aid money, which must be made up by the local tax base.

Despite the state aid decreases, Flitcroft said the districts were in solid shape regarding debt and fund balances.

The Badger High School district owes $19.7 million in debt, while Joint No. 1 owes $16.5 million.

printPrint
emailEmail
CommentFeedback
shareShare
  1. report print email
    Very frustrating
    July 21, 2010 | 05:02 PM

    Pulling money from schools and emergency services is ridiculous. Yet, we're pouring money into Haiti, Iraq and Afghanistan... oh, and let's not forget about all of the illegal aliens here soaking us dry. It's even more frustrating knowing what this country COULD be, but at the same time knowing that it's not likely to ever happen.

    Very sad.

    T
  2. report print email
    T
    July 23, 2010 | 01:32 AM

    Whatever you may think about the war, etc., spending money badly shouldn't be a reason to spend MORE money badly. I'd be willing to bet that any one of us could find ways to trim the school budget and eliminate the need to raise taxes once again. Businesses, families, and individuals are being forced to find ways to cut their spending, why can't the schools?

    Enough Already
    Lake Geneva
  3. report print email
    Enough Already
    July 23, 2010 | 06:05 AM

    My point was, we're spending tons of money on countries that hate us, and coddling all of these people who are here illegally, while schools and emergency services are being forced to do without, our roads and infrastructure leave a lot to be desired, and the list goes on. The money could be better spent.

    If you and you're family were forced to cut back to having macaroni & cheese every night for dinner, but one person in your house (who just barged in and said "I'm going to live here too now, and you're going to support me") was having steak, wouldn't that upset you just a little?

    We're pouring money into Iraq and Haiti while our own country is falling apart. How long do we do this for? How long would you pay to fix your neighbors car, while watching your own deteriorate?

    Cutbacks are necessary sometimes. But when there are ways right in front of us to avoid them, why do they get ignored?

    T
  4. report print email
    T
    July 25, 2010 | 02:17 AM

    I understand what you're saying and agree with you that in the cases you mentioned, it's a colossal waste of money. The point I was making was that just because we're dumping money down one sewer doesn't mean we shouldn't have a problem dumping money down another. Why not have our taxing bodies look for ways to save some money and let the taxpayer keep more of what they earn rather than constantly trying to find more ways to spend it?

    Enough Already
    Lake Geneva
  5. report print email
    To Enough Already
    July 25, 2010 | 06:15 AM

    A big problem in this nation is for every 2 people who want to cut spending there are 3 people who want another government program. Get rid of the government programs as they are and start over.

    Local Citizen
  6. report print email
    Clarification
    July 25, 2010 | 10:02 AM

    Are you saying getting rid of things like unemployment? Welfare? Grant programs?

    T
  7. report print email
    To T
    July 25, 2010 | 12:28 PM

    Maybe not get rid all the programs. But there are many I'll bet than could be eliminated and those you mentioned could be reviewed and changes made. You should admit that we are spending way to much on some programs that should have been eliminated years ago.

    Local Citizen
  8. report print email
    Agree on some...
    July 25, 2010 | 02:17 PM

    I still think one big, and by big I really mean HUGE, step forward would be drug testing prior to acceptance to any entitlement programs. I have a feeling welfare claims would plummet, healthcare payments (referring to state medicaid type programs) would drop significantly... and even unemployment claims. If you're not working, you're not going to buy drugs with my tax money either.

    I think there are a lot of changes like this that can be made, I'm just not sure why they're not being addressed. I'm sure there are some reasons, but I can't help but think that the benefit of this one simple implementation would be enormous.

    T
  9. report print email
    Drug testing
    July 25, 2010 | 04:57 PM

    Look at the president & look at the biggest offenders. What do these two have in common. OK! Somone is going to say I'm racist! The FACT is that the jails are full of these drug users. Look at the show COPS & who are the biggest offenders on the street corners getting busted. He will NEVER condone drug testing because we would actually get our country out of debt if the testing happens. Need I say more.

    Lexar
  10. report print email
    So both T and Lexar
    July 25, 2010 | 06:44 PM

    Let me get this straight. In order for someone who honestly needs welfare help, Unemployment and Medicaid. They would be forced to take a drug test because only Drug users need this type of help.
    Let me inform you both that:
    1... I need unemployment due to the fact my job was eliminated. I didn't quit
    2... I had a brother completely disabled due to Rheumatoid arthritis so he needed Medicaid. He was not a drug user. Next I have a twin brother suffering from Conjestive Heart Failure and he requires medicaid help because of it. He is not a drug user
    3... Welfare goes along with the first 2.
    Is that fair to have to submit to drug tests.
    How would you feel if you were required to take drug tests to buy a car, buy a house and so on.
    That is a stupid idea.

    Local Citizen
  11. report print email
    That was twisted
    July 25, 2010 | 07:01 PM

    I NEVER said that only drug users need unemployment, welfare, or medicaid. I did say that if you're a drug user, you should not be entitled to those programs.

    Let me inform you...

    1. If you need unemployment, get it.
    2. If you need medicaid, get it.
    3. If you need welfare, get it as well...

    However, if you have money for drugs, then you don't need these programs. We the taxpayers don't need to fund drug users/dealers. If it's such a stupid idea, then why do I have to pass a drug test to get a job to earn money? It really doesn't make sense to you to have to pass a drug test to get free money? That seems stupid to me...

    T
  12. report print email
    OK! T
    July 25, 2010 | 07:33 PM

    Below is your comment I was refering to. Read your first paragraph.

    Agree on some...
    July 25, 2010 | 02:17 PM

    I still think one big, and by big I really mean HUGE, step forward would be drug testing prior to acceptance to any entitlement programs. I have a feeling welfare claims would plummet, healthcare payments (referring to state medicaid type programs) would drop significantly... and even unemployment claims. If you're not working, you're not going to buy drugs with my tax money either.

    I think there are a lot of changes like this that can be made, I'm just not sure why they're not being addressed. I'm sure there are some reasons, but I can't help but think that the benefit of this one simple implementation would be enormous.

    T


    Local Citizen
  13. report print email
    Aaaaand?
    July 25, 2010 | 08:10 PM

    Nowhere in there did I say only drug users are on entitlement programs. I've used medicaid and unemplyment... and I'm not a drug user. If you're not a drug user, you wouldn't have anything to worry about under this change. Do I think that there are many people on these programs who also use drugs? Absolutely. Do I think all of them do? Not at all.

    T
  14. report print email
    Then why would a drug test
    July 25, 2010 | 08:35 PM

    be needed? Also you say that we would probably see a HUGE drop off in Welfare, Unemployment and Medacaid claims if a drug test was required. Sure sounds like you are claiming most on these programs use drugs.

    Local Citizen
  15. report print email
    Let's try this again...
    July 26, 2010 | 06:38 AM

    Okay, again, I am not saying that everyone on these programs is on drugs. However, on a nationwide scale, I'm sure there are a lot. The drug test would be required for numerous reasons: 1. drug users would not be allowed into these programs (after all, they are breaking the law). 2. Taxpayers money would not be going to people who are choosing to not work. If they can't pass a drug test for unemployment, they can't pass one for employment either. So in essence, they're making a choice to not work. 3. Again, if we have to be drug tested to work, give me one good reason why people shouldn't be drug tested to get into these programs? 4. Maybe it would help to reduce drug use... if I were a drug user, and had a family to feed, I surely would not be doing drugs knowing that I would be denied benefits like this if I needed them.

    These programs are designed to keep food on the table, a roof over your head, and healthcare available if needed. If people can't even stop doing drugs during the time when they need these programs, why give the money and benefits to go do more drugs? Can you give me any good reasons NOT to do this? The only thing you've mentioned so far were your two brothers, but neither of them do drugs, so why would it be an issue?

    T
  16. report print email
    Hey Local Citizen
    July 26, 2010 | 07:14 AM

    You must be really a dumb ass not to understand what T is saying. You admitted to smoking the dope before so you would not be eligible for help. You sure spend alot of time on here instead of pounding the pavement looking for work, or are you (removed).

    Uranus
  17. report print email
    Local Citizen re Drug Test
    July 26, 2010 | 09:01 AM

    First explain to your relitives the entire reasoning behind what was said then ask them how they would feel.
    I am on disability & if I was required to take a random drug test to stay eligable I would do it in a heart beat just because of reasons stated.

    Lexar
  18. report print email
    And you call me a loser.
    July 26, 2010 | 09:17 AM

    T has used government assistance, Local C is also and Lexar is disabled and taking assistance. Do any of you low life's pay your own way in this life? I would be ashamed to admit the handouts. Before you rag on me look at your own miserable existence.

    Still Uranus and paying my way.
  19. report print email
    Loser?
    July 26, 2010 | 09:45 AM

    Yes you are.

    I am far from a loser Uranus. The one time in my life when I collected unemployment was when my employer suddenly closed it's doors. I had a new job shortly after, and have not relied on any assistance of any kind since then. Calling someone a loser for using one of these programs is like calling someone a loser for filing a claim for insurance... stuff happens sometimes, it's a fact of life. We pay for these things in the event we need to use them. These programs are there for a reason. I more than pay my own way through life, and donate quite a bit as well. So before you go shooting your mouth off, maybe take a moment to get the facts. Otherwise it makes you look like a bigger idiot than you already make yourself out to be.

    T
  20. report print email
    T
    July 26, 2010 | 09:52 AM

    I only used what you provided, unemployment and medicaid assistance.

    UpUranus
  21. report print email
    So?
    July 26, 2010 | 10:03 AM

    I pay into these programs out of each check I get, so how exactly does it make me a loser for using them one time? If my life's ambition was to stay on them for no good reason, I could understand being called a loser. But I guess we all can't be steller members of our community such as you. You seem to setting such a great example of how to be a good person so far..... (yeah, that was sarcasm in case you missed it)

    T
  22. report print email
    T
    July 26, 2010 | 10:11 AM

    I am so sorry I doubted you. You are a fine upstanding member of the community and provide wonderfully for your family. Again I am sorry for doubting you.

    Humbled Uranus
  23. report print email
    Property Taxes
    August 05, 2010 | 08:15 PM

    Well, I could never understand how such a small community could afford such Big , nice expenseive Schools when I moved here for retirement and I still don't see how it can be justified..

    Building our Commerical Business Base is vital.. And why not tax the Seasonal -Non Resident Homeowners to give the Wi. Resident home owners a break?
    Down in Illinois? Home owners get a tax Break vs Rental units and Seniors also get several Hundred Dollars off their taxes as well..

    And to say having Seniors pay the same , since it supports property values sure hasn't held water in the past several Yrs that I can see..

    While my Property valule dropped over 25%, but Not my Property Taxes!

    Am paying the same Taxes per $100k value as I did living in Lake County Illinois, and even more, since as a retiree/senior I got $400 Credit.. Same goes for Cook County, Ill. But paying $1,600 per a $100k vallue place is just too much!

    Provide a Decent education , just so they can Leave and live elsewhere? There are very few Decent paying Jobs her, let alone Good one's..to keep them here..

    It's nice to have all the BIG CITY luxuries and conviences, but living in a Rural Area with such a smaller tax base to pay for them, just doesn't work..

    2 retired neighbors have sold and moved back to Illinois

    Retired of course
    Lake Geneva of course
Community Bank
Site Search

Pick up The Lake Geneva Regional News at these convenient locations
Community Bank
Lake Geneva Chiropractic
Saturday
05 - 18 - 13
06:43
Search the Net