Endorsement: Villa Park referendum

Mention "home rule" and someone invariably will howl, "higher taxes."

That's not an unfounded complaint, in that many home-rule governments have used their home-rule authority to increase taxes beyond the provision of the state tax cap. But the village of Villa Park insists its Feb. 5 referendum asking voters to give back the home-rule powers they took away almost three decades ago does have prominent safeguards against using the authority as a tax windfall.

First of all, village officials say they would invoke the greater lawmaking abilities that come with home rule to impose tougher laws regulating bad landlords. Specifically, the village wants to enact a crime-free housing program that allows it to license landlords and -- most significantly -- revoke their right to rent if their units are not up to code. That's significant in Villa Park, officials say, because some apartment complexes have fallen into disrepair, and buildings have been individually sold, creating a surfeit of landlords.

Further, the village has passed an ordinance stating that it will continue to levy taxes as if it were still a non-home-rule town bound by the tax cap. It states: "It shall be the policy of the village to levy property taxes in the same amount and to the same extent as if the village had remained a non-home rule unit and was subject to the maximum aggregate levy increase permitted by statute."

The village also has bound itself to hold public hearings should it decide to levy any new tax. And if 10 percent of residents petition against it, a binding referendum will be held on the proposed tax. Critics point out such a no-tax ordinance can be overturned by future village boards, and we wish it did not put the onus on residents to petition against a new tax. But the village deserves the tools to fight some serious problems. We encourage a "yes" vote.