Mt. Prospect fights Springfield's 'stealth tax'

Just months after state lawmakers increased income taxes by 66 percent, Mount Prospect residents could face devastating cuts to essential services if Springfield politicians get their way. Hundreds of millions of dollars already paid by Illinois taxpayers which are legally owed to villages and cities, at this time are in jeopardy.

One legislative proposal threatens to cut Mount Prospect's state transferred revenue by $2.5 million. Any reduction in revenue, no matter the final amount, would add significant stress to the village's already barebones fiscal condition. In the past three years, the village of Mount Prospect has cut $5.5 million, including 32 personnel reductions.

This proposal amounts to a “stealth tax” on local taxpayers and our communities. Taking away this revenue, which pays for essential local programs, front-line services and critical personnel, will merely shift the state's burden onto municipal and county governments and will have a disastrous impact on local services for residents. Mount Prospect elected officials are asking our follow taxpayers to contact their local state legislators to voice their collective concern of this proposal upon the local community.

Mayor Irvana Wilks stated, “The General Assembly and Governor are prepared to break a promise that has been in place since 1970. At that time the state promised to share income tax monies collected with local governments based on local population. The General Assembly and Governor have created this budget crisis over the decades through a lack of spending control. Now these same individuals want to penalize local governments which have exercised spending control through significant budget reductions over the past several years, exactly what the state has not done.”

She further stated, “Village residents have already paid into the income tax fund and if the state decision makers do not provide this revenue to local governments there will be very few alternative options left besides reducing services further or a considerable local tax increase. Either way local residents will pay again for what they have already contributed through the state income tax.”

She also stated, “Some members of the General Assembly have been quoted as stating the Local Government Distributive Fund (LGDF) or income tax consists of municipal welfare funds. This is yet another example of a how desperate they are in Springfield; they feel they have to characterize this money in a negative light to justify their theft. The income tax money is a significant revenue source for many local governments and many local governments do not have the option of diversifying their revenue sources, does that sound like welfare?”

All residents are urged to contact their state legislators to voice their opinion on this critical local revenue impact.