Arlington Heights: Tell Legislators No Diverting Village Monies to Springfield’s Debt

Springfield legislators have been tackling big issues this session, from approving driver’s licenses for undocumented immigrants, and bills relating to gay marriage, gambling and gun control.

There is one piece of legislation, however, that would impact the financial stability of local governments, opponents say.

Senate Bill 0492 moved forward Tuesday out of executive committee with an amendment. It will likely be voted on by the end of this session, on May 31.

The state of Illinois collects tax dollars for the Corporate Personal Property Replacement Tax (CPPRT) then repays cities, towns and villages that money. Last year, the state began diverting a portion of those monies to pay for its own obligations, according to the Illinois General Assembly’s website.

SB 0492 would make those diversions permanent and expand the areas the monies can be used for, the website states. It would mean a loss of $12 to $15 million to local governments statewide, according to the Illinois Municipal League.

Arlington Heights is urging residents to call state senators and representatives to vote no when the bill comes up for a vote. A letter on the village’s website explains the bill and its effect on Arlington Heights.

“They are taking money due to our municipality for our own bills to pay for Springfield’s bills,” Trustee Joseph Farwell said during an Arlington Heights village board meeting Monday. “It (the bill) shifts Springfield’s bill on our budget.”

“We need your voice to join ours,” Farwell said, speaking directly to taxpayers.

Farwell represents the village on the Northwest Munciple Conference, which has alerted its membership of the bill.

“What the bill is doing is allowing for the state to continue diverting from the Corporate Personal Property Replacement Tax to fun other areas of state government that is typically not funded out of local taxes,” NWMC Policy Director Larry Bury said Tuesday.

The amendment that was approved through the executive committee appears to expand the diversions, detailing what the state can spend the money on, Bury said.

“We are concerned they will start looking at other funds,” Bury said. “We are very much concerned the state could begin diverting from the Local Government Tax Fund (sales tax) that goes to local municipalities.”

Anytime the state divers revenues from cities, towns or villages, it effectively becomes a tax increase, he said. Local governments then have to make dramatic cuts or increase taxes on residents and businesses, he said.