Kane County township, local leaders fail to agree on consolidating mental health taxes
Representatives from Kane County, Aurora, Geneva and St. Charles gathered this week with the goal of creating one countywide tax to fund mental health, developmental disability and addiction treatment services. They didn't get it done.
Funding flows to Kane County mental health, developmental disability and addiction service providers from several pipelines. Most of those lines stem from seven townships that each levy a specific tax to provide such funding. Geneva and St. Charles also levy taxes for the same purpose at the municipal level.
The problem is none of those taxing bodies exist in the north end of the county. Each township and municipality also has different tax rates and tax bases. That results in some areas of the county, such as Aurora and, to a lesser extent, Batavia, subsidizing services for other parts of the county.
"There is an inequitable distribution of the tax," said William Beith, a spokesman for the county's mental health advisory committee. "About 23 percent of the Kane County jail population is on psychotropic medication. That's a huge cost. These people are in need of mental health services. They are not getting them. And the result is they are going into the criminal justice system, which costs us a lot more."
The advisory committee's idea is to do away with all the individual township taxes, create one countywide tax and give all the townships a seat at the table to decide how to spend the money.
That would create a funding stream for mental health, developmental disability and addiction service providers from the north end of the county for the first time. That means more money to provide services and an identical tax rate applied to all areas of the county.
The problem is neither the townships nor the municipalities want to surrender local control.
"Our board has passed a resolution unanimously opposing this," said Aurora Township Supervisor Bill Catching. "No one spoke to anyone at Aurora Township about this. Our board works effectively in serving residents of Aurora Township."
Batavia Township Supervisor Jim Anderson is not interested in changes that create more red tape.
"Anytime you take small boards, such as we have, and move it into a larger bureaucracy, it doesn't work well," Anderson said. "It seems like a bad idea to me."
Statements like that are confounding to Beith. The mental health portion of the township taxes already flows to a not-for-profit organization known as the INC. Board. That organization serves as the administrator of the funds, distributing the taxes collected to service providers as it deems necessary. It also takes a chunk of those tax dollars for its own administrative costs.
Most recently, those costs totaled $316,000 for the year. The INC. Board would no longer be necessary under the countywide model promoted by Beith.
St. Charles officials aren't opposed to the idea of consolidation. They just don't believe the limited details of the plan shared prove it will be a better deal for St. Charles residents.
St. Charles' local tax provides about $600,000 in annual funding for mental health, developmental disabilities and addiction services. That money funds services only for St. Charles residents.
Beith said it is unlikely the countywide model would provide that same level of funding and services for St. Charles residents. His solution is for St. Charles to keep its local tax on top of the new countywide tax.
Carolyn Waibel, who sits on the board that distributes the funds from St. Charles' tax, said it makes no sense for any taxing body to sign up for double-taxing of its residents.
"That is not a win-win for any elected official," Waibel said. "It's not a reasonable and workable solution. It also makes no sense for St. Charles to just give this county group our $600,000 when there is zero plan to show for it."
Members of the county board's public health committee expressed dismay at the inability to find a solution despite five years of work on the issue by Beith's committee.
"The hill that we're climbing is that the south end of the county can say they've been doing it, and they've been doing it well. But when is the north end going to do its share? It's not a small hill to climb," said committee member Deb Allan.