.

D115 Passes Tax Levy

Board unanimously supports proposal during Dec. 17 meeting.

Yorkville CUSD 115 School Board of Education officials unanimously adopted a $47,018,000 tax levy Dec. 17.

The total 2011 levy was $44,254,548, 6.24 percent less than the proposed 2012 levy. Estimated property taxes in the 2012 levy are $5,389,538, according to district documents. That is a 6.91 percent increase over the $5,041,065 in property taxes in the 2011 levy.

The school district is the largest recipient of property taxes levied in Yorkville. By law, every school district is allowed to levy, or ask for, more taxes than they will collect, based on a formula utilizing the assessment of a property and the consumer price index.

Board President Dave Dockstader told Patch in 2011 that 82 percent of the district’s revenue stream comes from property taxes, with 1.9 percent coming from federal aid; 12.4 percent from the state; and 3.1 percent from other local sources.

This revenue breaks down into expenditures through eight categories. Salaries make up 44 percent of expenditures, with benefits taking another 18.6 percent. Purchased Services are 13.8 percent; supplies and materials are 8.8 percent; and capital outlay is 0.8 percent. The remaining expenditures include 12.7 percent for other projects, .4 percent for non-capitalized equipment and .5 percent for contingencies.

In 2012, the Illinois State Board of Education recog­nized Yorkville School District for its Annual Financial Report. The rating places Yorkville in the highest state recognition for financial strength, district documents show.

jean December 26, 2012 at 09:36 AM
Annual income has raised because everyone who had no job last year has a minimum wage job this year. Many people were taken off unemployment just before elections. My family income has gone down 40 percent. And our benefits decreased. Our health insurance has gone up and the deductible is insane. The state of Illinois has done so many cuts. Why cant Yorkville figure it out. We are really hurting. Just ask the food banks and churches.
Audity December 26, 2012 at 06:39 PM
Sorry, Tim, the BLS reflects that wages only increased around 2% for the 12-month period. The BEA shows disposable personal income, which could reflect a variety of different issues, but the report specifically cites wage disbursement, not wage increases. Wage disbursement has to do with the amount of money be paid out in aggregate, not necessarily increases to existing wages. http://www.bls.gov/news.release/eci.nr0.htm So, that small of a percentage seems to suggest that it is, indeed, "not happening for most people." So, if 74% of people had voted for Obama, does that mean we shouldn't necessarily acknowledge him as President if we didn't really want to? But, if people don't vote in order to express their collective political opinion, how else would you recommend they go about it? Harsh language? Always a fan of the spin! Loking forward to it.
Kevin Wagner December 26, 2012 at 07:39 PM
Spot on! There is an obvious anomaly in the November data. Perhaps it relates to Jean’s hypothesis. For example people who are otherwise employed found work due to the Christmas season. Nowhere in the cited reference is there an indication that “most” people’s income increased by 7.2% annually. Tim has a tendency to interpret data for his own amusement. He took data that compares income increases month over month and annualized that number. The .6% increase in November only indicates income was .6% more in November than in October. Based on the data presented it is not possible to draw Tim’s conclusion of a 7.2% annual increase. Read the data. Furthermore, if Tim’s logic were correct (and it is not), a .6% increase month over month would result in an annual increase of 6.8016% and the twelfth month of the cycle would be 7.4424%! Not convinced? Do the math.
Tim December 26, 2012 at 09:09 PM
We are discussing rate of growth, since that was what my comment was in response to. a .6% change in a single month, is a 7.2% yearly RATE of growth. That was the rate, for that month. There are different rates, for different months. It is included right in the footnotes of the link I provided, had you bothered to read it. Semantics aside, the majority of people are seeing an increase in wages. And like I already said, that does not mean EVERYONE, it means the majority. If you are not included in this, then you are not in the majority. Again, that doesn't change the fact that it is happening to the majority of people around you. Now, unless you make EXACTLY the amount of your school taxes every year, the rate of growth is more important than the amount. Lets say you paid $5000 in taxes to the school district, and it increased 7%, that is $350 more per year. The average income in your district is around 95K/yr, even at .6% for a single month, is $570 more per year, per income earner. Easily enough to cover the increase in taxes, with plenty left over. And that was just from a single month. Your 2% increase, even more so. If the presidential election was a non-binding referendum, your 74% voting for Obama would make sense. But it wasn't, and it doesn't. You inability to understand this aspect of how finances are calculated, probably has a direct result on your inability to afford to live in any certain area. MOST of your neighbors have no such problems.
Audity December 26, 2012 at 11:30 PM
Good try, Tim! Well done. But, I did read the footote of your page, that's how I found the one I posted. Just because there was a .6% increase in one month does not mean that it was 7.2% for the year, nor does it state that anywhere in that report. To assume so is just creative math. In addition, stated directly in the report you cite, is that it reflects Personal Disposable Income - NOT wage increases, which has nothing to do with the majority of anything, sorry. Disposable Personal Income has nothing to do with employer wage increases - that's why they are on two different government reports. Which really confuses me about whose inability to calculate finances is in question here... And, the issue is not that the referendum is binding or not, it's about the vote, the voice, the statement - essentially democracy at work. If you can wrap your head around that, maybe you can also figure out why none of this has anything to do with my ability to afford to live in a certain area - of which said ability is not in question here, nor is it an issue, and it's misguided to believe that I have any issue doing so. Nice try, though - I remain a huge fan of your ability to spin - misguided as it may be, it's still probably the most creative I have ever seen! Well done!

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »