To the editor:
Best of Chicago voting is live now. Vote for your favorites »
In addition, the article incorrectly presents statistics, generalizes facts, and does not challenge some key misconceptions, thereby creating an inaccurate picture of the property tax system. For example, the article says that the tax rate stays roughly the same year after year. Between 1996 and 2004, the aggregate tax rate for the city of Chicago has actually dropped from 9.45 to 6.28 percent, a 34 percent decline. It also says the legislation “gave no protection to commercial property owners, many of whose taxes rose considerably.” This is an overgeneralization, given that according to the Cook County assessor’s office many commercial properties have seen limited valuation growth since 2000. As the Civic Federation confirmed, the 7 percent cap only increased taxes slightly for commercial taxpayers (by 2.4 percent), where otherwise they would have seen a 2 percent decrease.
Finally, the article says that large apartment buildings are considered commercial property. In fact, large apartment buildings are considered Class 3 under the Cook County classification system, and Mayor Daley was recently instrumental in lowering the assessment for that class.
Blank misrepresents the Civic Federation report, which did not find that the 7 percent cap increased commercial property taxes only slightly. Instead the report found that the “total tax amount owed by all other classes of property combined [emphasis added] increased by 2.4 percent, but would have otherwise decreased by 2.0 percent in 2003.” These classifications include vacant properties, not-for-profit properties, and multifamily residential properties as well as industrial and commercial properties. (You can find the federation’s report at www.civicfed.org.) As commercial property owners throughout the city will tell you, many were hit hard during the last assessment, with tax increases reaching as high as 100 percent in some north-side neighborhoods.
