The CEO of Chicago Public Schools says they want to an additional raise $43 million with property taxes, but it will only cost the average Joe eighteen bucks.
Mr. Huberman has to go back to math class.
In 2007 the Mayor said his $83 million tax increase would cost the owner of a $250,000 home about $60.
Now Mr. Huberman says a $43 million tax increase would cost the owner of a $262,000 home about $18.
These numbers don't add up.
To be fair, Mr. Huberman probably didn't do the math himself. I am sure he just repeated the the numbers given to him by the City of Chicago Department of Obfuscation.
Illinois State Law requires requires that the assessed value of the property in any county equal 33% of its market value.
Most counties deal with this by assessing everything at 33%.
Cook County using a sliding scale for different types of properties. This scale doesn't average out to 33%, so each year the state checks the numbers and comes up with a multiplier that brings the average up to where it is supposed to be.
This multiplier times the total assessed value of a city (its Equalized Assessed Valuation or EAV) determines the pool their levy is spread over. This multiplier times your property assessment determines what share of that levy you have to pony up.
According to the County Clerk's '07 data, the total Equalized assessed value of all the property in Chicago was $73,645,000,000. The CPS' $43,000,000 spread over that equals $.000585 per dollar of EAV. A $260,000 property has an EAV of $111,000 after assessment, equalization and homeowner exemption.
That works out to a $65 increase, not $18.
The Mayor's 2007 projection was full of bologna as well. That increase worked out to $128 not $60.
The Olympics, even if held to the $500 million liability limit, will cost the average Joe $754. For that much, you would think they would give us all free tickets.
Paul K. Dickman
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Saturday, August 8, 2009
Curb Bumpouts
These seem to be cropping up all over the city.
This is where, at intersections, the curb on the side street gets pushed out, narrowing the road bed and widening the parkway,
The Dept of Transportation comes around telling the community groups about their traffic calming effect, enhanced pedestrian safety and beautifying the corner with planters. This may all be true, but that is not why they put them there.
The real reason is a law suit.
In 2005 the city got sued in Federal court by the Council for Disability Rights for lack of compliance with ADA standards for sidewalks.
Now, this wasn’t a bad thing. The city had been doing a pretty crummy job of addressing accessibility issues. Frankly, I’ve been on logging roads that were easier to travel than Chicago’s curb ramps and a lawsuit seems to be the only way there is to get the city to do their job.
True to form, the first words out of the city’s mouth were, “We don’t need no federal intervention, your honor. We promise dat all da new ramps will pass inspection.”
The judge said, “Fine. You gotta year to prove it.”
At the end of the year, the city took the judge out to a showplace set of sidewalks on Chicago Ave and when they measured them, not a single ramp passed muster.
The city said, “Everything will be perfect from now on.”
Then, to show that they were really on the ball, the city wrote its own set of standards. These were even stricter than the fed’s. These standards must have been written by lawyers, because, by the time you add up the ramp, the landing and the corner radius, you need 15 ft wide sidewalks to ramp a typical 6 in curb.
Here in Wicker Park, most of our commercial streets have a 66 ft right of way. That doesn’t leave enough room for 15 ft sidewalks.
So the city bumps out the parkway into the side street. This not only gives them a few extra feet to play with, but it shortens the curb height because the curb meets the roadbed higher on the crown of the pavement. It also moves the corner radius over so that the ramp on the shorter sidewalk (toward the commercial street) lands parallel to the curb. Not allowing for the radius saves about two feet.
As for the lawsuit, a month later the director of the CDR sees the city pouring new sidewalks on Fullerton and has them measured.
Once again, they were wrong. The city settled the lawsuit by promising $140 million in compliant ramps over the next five years. That’s $50 million on top of the budgeted amount.
So, expect some curb bumpouts at a corner near you.
Paul K. Dickman
This is where, at intersections, the curb on the side street gets pushed out, narrowing the road bed and widening the parkway,
The Dept of Transportation comes around telling the community groups about their traffic calming effect, enhanced pedestrian safety and beautifying the corner with planters. This may all be true, but that is not why they put them there.
The real reason is a law suit.
In 2005 the city got sued in Federal court by the Council for Disability Rights for lack of compliance with ADA standards for sidewalks.
Now, this wasn’t a bad thing. The city had been doing a pretty crummy job of addressing accessibility issues. Frankly, I’ve been on logging roads that were easier to travel than Chicago’s curb ramps and a lawsuit seems to be the only way there is to get the city to do their job.
True to form, the first words out of the city’s mouth were, “We don’t need no federal intervention, your honor. We promise dat all da new ramps will pass inspection.”
The judge said, “Fine. You gotta year to prove it.”
At the end of the year, the city took the judge out to a showplace set of sidewalks on Chicago Ave and when they measured them, not a single ramp passed muster.
The city said, “Everything will be perfect from now on.”
Then, to show that they were really on the ball, the city wrote its own set of standards. These were even stricter than the fed’s. These standards must have been written by lawyers, because, by the time you add up the ramp, the landing and the corner radius, you need 15 ft wide sidewalks to ramp a typical 6 in curb.
Here in Wicker Park, most of our commercial streets have a 66 ft right of way. That doesn’t leave enough room for 15 ft sidewalks.
So the city bumps out the parkway into the side street. This not only gives them a few extra feet to play with, but it shortens the curb height because the curb meets the roadbed higher on the crown of the pavement. It also moves the corner radius over so that the ramp on the shorter sidewalk (toward the commercial street) lands parallel to the curb. Not allowing for the radius saves about two feet.
As for the lawsuit, a month later the director of the CDR sees the city pouring new sidewalks on Fullerton and has them measured.
Once again, they were wrong. The city settled the lawsuit by promising $140 million in compliant ramps over the next five years. That’s $50 million on top of the budgeted amount.
So, expect some curb bumpouts at a corner near you.
Paul K. Dickman
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
