Homeowners can breathe a sigh of relief.
After years of out-of-control property tax increases, Wisconsin will finally have a permanent property tax freeze.
Last year, property taxes took a $9.4 billion bite out of homeowners’ wallets. According to the non-partisan Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance, the average Wisconsinite spent 4.5 percent of their income on property taxes alone.
In an historic vote, the Joint Committee on Finance on May 12 approved a permanent property tax freeze.
Wisconsin has a $3.6 billion budget deficit. When your family budget is short, you sit down at the kitchen table and find a way to do more with less. In these tough times, government, too, must find a way to do more with less.
Throughout the budget deliberations, I have committed to not raising taxes. However, we simply cannot pass the buck onto local homeowners. That’s why, in addition to no state tax increases, we need to ensure that local property taxes remain frozen as well.
Under the proposal approved by the committee, tax levies would be frozen for two years. After that, tax levies could increase by only 1.5 percent per year. A set levy limit will give taxpayers the certainty they need as they set their family budgets.
We have created levy limits, but we have also given more control to municipal governments to manage their own budgets. That way local officials can preserve vital core services while controlling costs.
By reducing state mandates and giving local units of government more flexibility in their operations, government can do more with less.
We are giving certainty to both local government officials and to the property taxpayers.
Wisconsin’s taxpayers need relief. For far too long, we’ve spent beyond our means. Wisconsin will finally have a budget that recognizes the taxpayers’ ability to pay and puts us on a sustainable financial path.
Sen. Alberta Darling represents the 8th Senate District, which includes Fox Point, Shorewood, Whitefish Bay and Menomonee Falls.
By keeping the property tax percentage high, safety services are able to update their technology to keep us safe. Schools are able to keep their buildings, equipment, and technology updated to promote a well-rounded education. Etc., Etc. I just don't get it, why is all of this bad?
...and I don't have a smartphone or drive a Lexus.
further alberta you are an advocate of economic growth. i maintain the costs of growth are far greater than the benefits (read ezra mishan's "growth & technology the price we pay".further since the poor have such a small % of the gnp to begin with growth does not really benefit them. growth really only benefits the rich.
http://taxfoundation.org/research/show/22320.html Milwaukee County currently ranks as the 35th worst county (out of 2922) in the nation for property taxes as a % of income. http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/27281.html Local Counties that rank higher... Lake, IL - 17th Kane, IL - 28th Kendall, IL - 29th McHenry, IL - 31st Then Milwaukee and several Illinois/Wisconsin Counties Note that the next closest Midwestern County that is not Illinois/Wisconsin based is in Michigan, ranked 115th Also note that Illinois has lower income taxes than Wisconsin even after their 67% tax increase they just passed. For those who think taxes and regulations have no impact on business climate, take a look at this interesting tool. It shows migration data...state by state. Between 2000 and 2008, Wisconsin has seen a loss of 27,000 tax returns (that includes a gain of 19,000 from Illinois). South Carolina, one of our favorite whipping boys, gained 98,000 over that time period. http://interactive.taxfoundation.org/migration/ We need to get our tax and regulatory climate in line to compete within our own country. Losing people who make money to other states will only make our situation much worse. One can argue about much of what Walker and Alberta have done, but the state has been neglected the last 10 years.
It's not so much that one will 'lose their home' as much as they will have to leave Shorewood because they can no longer afford to pay their property taxes. The median household income in Shorewood is around $58,000.
I moved to WFB knowing my property taxes were going to be high. But I moved here knowing that I'll receive great services (especially schools for our daughter) in a great community, with great parks within walking distance, next to the lake, and minutes from downtown. If you do minimal research before moving into a community, you learn about that community's property taxes and what you get for that money. I know you to be an intelligent person so I'm assuming you did research before you bought a home in Shorewood.
My point is that we need to look for other answers besides 'raise property taxes'. If property tax increases continue, people looking for homes are going to avoid moving into Shorewood, and people who are already living in Shorewood are going to start to look for other communities to move to.
Almost $10K more a year than WCTC! Oh.. and while we are $3.6B (-0.6B) in the hole, MATC fast tracked their contract to screw tax payers... http://www.jsonline.com/news/education/116581388.html 10 to 1... you'll hear MATC scream when the budget comes out, raise tuition and blame others. Typical of an organization with poor leadership. It has been far too easy for a governmental body to overspend & commit to excessive compensation packages. Conserving money and staying on top of finances is a yearly effort and it only takes 1 bad group of leaders to screw us for decades. Just look at Milwaukee County... how much of our current and future tax base will be used to pay off the unnecessary pension benefits. Why in the WORLD would any leader of an organization give lavish pensions when you are looking at DECREASING your workforce! But because of ass clowns like those who ran Milwaukee County into the ground, we are stuck paying bills that provide no service improvements.
@D.D. - The $7k figure came straight from @Joe about property taxes. Why are you directing your comment to me? And you're right about the "ass clowns" in Milwaukee County. I think their supervisor showed extremely poor leadership, lack of economic knowledge, and general lack of care for the people of Milwaukee County. I'd love to know the name of the supervisor that allowed all of this to continue; the same guy that made decisions for the Mental Health Complex that directly lead to patients getting raped. Could you imagine how much turmoil that would cause if that guy became Governor? Wish I could remember his name????
http://www.revenue.wi.gov/pubs/slf/tvc09.pdf My final word on this is that even though the taxes might be frozen, I will still have to pay more as the costs will be transferred to me in another way. For example, my alley will not be plowed and I will have to pay for snow removal to a private contractor. Not a fee or a tax, but a very real cost just the same.
The ranking of Wisconsin as the 4th highest tax burden state was based on 2009 fiscal year data. This is from the Tax Foundations latest data. See table 3 in the link below: http://taxfoundation.org/files/ff2011.pdf This report was released Feb 28, 2011. Beth... Wisconsin was ranked #40... WORST business tax climate. Ranking #1 is actuall best. Illinois is 23.. .which is better! If you are going to come at me, read the damn document! You just undercut your position and I thank you!!!!!
As far as where businesses are adding Jobs, take a look at population movement based on the Migration link I provided. Since 1993, low tax state you listed: Nevada gain of 296,276 Montana gain of 15,000 Wyoming gain of 14,561 Utah gain of 16,441 South Dakota gain of 7,568 High tax states you listed NY loss of 962,000 CT loss of 117,000 California loss of 723,000 NJ loss of 280,000 So it proves my point! People and businesses are leaving high tax/cost states. I think you make a valid point regarding Illinois. Illinois is actual somewhat smart in how it handles taxes. It has very high sales taxes, hotel taxes, rental car, etc. That shifts much of the burden on individuals outside the state. So when we visit Chicago, we pay the 10-11% sales tax + extra taxes on hotels/cars. That is part of our tax burden. When others visit Wisconsin, they pay our 5% sales tax... so the burden is not equal.
http://www.linkup.com/trends/job-growth-by-state/march-2011.html Look at it closely, there is alot of new growth, but most of it is replacing lost jobs. In fact, there are not many jobs being created anywhere and it doesn't appear to make any difference whatsoever as to what the tax consequence is. Just saying we're open for business and continuing to cut revenue while destroying the quality of life is not working for Wisconsin.
Has anyone in government considered the benefits of consolidating communities? Although I was born and raised in WI, I went to college at Arizona State University. Az has 15 counties, versus 72 in Wisconsin. Why do we need so many? Has anyone done a cost-benefit analysis on Shorewood and Whitefish Bay combining services, or Cedarburg and Grafton? (Not to single those communities out, I'm only using them as examples). Just curious.
My 6-year old has always been an extremely happy and outgoing little boy. He always loved school, ever since starting 3-year old preschool. However, since starting public school in Cedarburg he has become increasingly depressed and does not look forward to going to school. He has had a lot of problems with bullying and was even stabbed in the arm with a pencil by another boy recently. This happened right outside his classroom. Where is the supervision? A 6-year old shouldn't be scared to go to school. The teaching methods are uninspired and old-fashioned. Not everything about the school is bad, they have a new principal who I think is trying to make improvements. I'm just not willing to wait around and see what happens. I could write a lot more, but I'm running out of characters.
http://www.usdebtclock.org/ now compare to the reduction in spending http://www.usdebtclock.org/state-debt-clocks/state-of-wisconsin-debt-clock.html
Key word is average, most of the state does not live in a house above 300K, it is also based off of property, not income.