Wealthy white homeowners vote more on property tax hike proposals in Cook County, study finds
Some suburban voters are facing key decisions about hiking property taxes in the April 1 election, but if the past is precedent, 'the few will decide for the many' again, according to a report from Cook County Treasurer Maria Pappas' office.
Referendums for $45 million in infrastructure spending in Western Springs, $94.9 million in school upgrades in Northbrook, and for permission to go above state tax caps in the Northfield Park District, Prospect Heights and Roselle are on the ballot this spring.
And Pappas' office found a small number of voters — largely rich, white homeowners — tend to have the strongest turnout for these types of property tax votes.
The treasurer's office report compared turnout with census data on race, income and home ownership to reach its conclusions.
Pappas, whose office mails property tax bills, previously released an analysis showing low turnout on pocketbook issues further down ballot, arguing more voter engagement would keep rising taxes under control. Average turnout across the county for property-tax-related issues in the 2024 primary was just 20.9%, according to the report. Less than a quarter of all Chicago voters, for example, gave their say on the 'Bring Chicago Home' question, which did not pass.
'Rising property taxes always anger property owners. Despite that, most don't vote in referendums that determine whether their taxes go up or down,' Pappas said in a release.
In the 2024 elections, the treasurer's report found, the average turnout for property tax-related referendums went above 50% only in districts where the median household income was more than $100,000. Average turnout was just 34% in areas where median household income was below $82,000, which is the countywide median income.
Part of the difference is due to the fact wealthier districts put more of their referendum questions on the general election ballot, when voter turnout is typically higher.
But the study found for both 2024 elections, ballot drop-off — or the tendency to only vote on issues at the top of the ballot and skip things lower down like referendum questions — was higher in lowest-income taxing districts, too.
Turnout in south suburban Robbins was 14.1% when voters approved a park district request for a property tax extension last year. The median household income is below $38,000 there, and the referendum's passage added $132 to the annual property tax bill for a $100,000 home there.
Along the North Shore in Kenilworth, where median household income is over $250,000, turnout was more than twice the rate in Robbins when Kenilworth village officials requested permission for a $2.5 million beach bond issuance.
Referendum turnout in majority white taxing districts in 2024 was also 'significantly' higher than Black, Latino and majority-minority districts, the analysis found. While median drop-off rates in majority white and majority Black districts were less than 6%, that rate increased to '11% in majority Latino districts and nearly 13% in majority-minority districts,' the report said.
It was a similar phenomenon for referendums held from 2020 through 2023: 'majority white districts with median household incomes greater than $100,000 had the strongest voter turnout.'
Districts with high home ownership also corresponded to higher turnout in 2024, the analysis found. In districts where fewer than 80% of units were owner-occupied, average turnout was just 34%, but in taxing districts where 80% or more of residents own their homes, average turnout exceeded 55%. The trend was similar in 2023, officials say. Both homeowners and renters pay property taxes, but homeowners pay directly while renters have that cost factored into monthly leases.
Last year, voters approved 14 of 15 referendums from taxing bodies asking permission to borrow money above state limits. The lone failure was a nearly $90 million bond issue for Avoca School District 37 in the North Shore. Between 2020 and 2023, voters approved about 80% of similar referendums, last year's report found.
All three referendums asking voters for home rule powers also passed last year in Richton Park, Roselle and Glencoe. Those powers allow municipalities to impose different kinds of taxes, issue new debt and go beyond state caps on property tax increases.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
42 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Being a progressive activist made me miserable
Advertisement My anxiety, depression, and PTSD symptoms were at their worst when I was most invested in the left-wing ideology I'd built my professional and social life around. That all changed in late 2020, when I quit my job after months of growing disillusionment. I 'graduated' from therapy at that point, and over the following years, my mental health kept improving, despite fluctuating income and the eventual loss of formerly close connections. Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up As my political views and social networks shifted, my emotional trajectory tracked with longstanding research showing that the further left a person's political views lean, the more likely they are to be diagnosed with certain kinds of mental or emotional distress. Researchers have documented a happiness gap between conservatives and liberals for decades. This pattern holds across Advertisement Such uncharitable assumptions about conservatives reflect a cultural problem that I believe at least partially drives this happiness gap: leftists' unwillingness to fairly consider other viewpoints or question their own. Though they are often well-intentioned, their culture subverts those intentions. Leftists often embrace negative beliefs and are often unwilling to rethink those beliefs — even when those beliefs distort or contradict reality. Sabrina Joy Stevens is a communications consultant. Sam Cruz For example, the belief that racism, sexism, and other forms of bigotry are the root cause of inequalities and disparate outcomes ignores countless other macroeconomic, cultural, and natural conditions that affect people's choices and circumstances. This causes people on the left to misinterpret reality in divisive, anxiety-inducing ways that undermine their social and emotional well-being. Leftists' tendency toward self-segregation not only weakens the social support necessary for mental health, it makes it harder for them to encounter information that could help them abandon unhealthy ideas and thought patterns. It also increases the likelihood that they will spend more of their time surrounded by people who share their psychological struggles. By denigrating and dismissing perspectives they disagree with, many leftists forfeit opportunities to cultivate relationships and habits of mind that promote mental health. Advertisement My political evolution If there is anyone who should be a lifer in the lefty political camp, it's me. I am a college-educated Black woman raised by lifelong Democrats. I am an advocate by nature, with a lifelong passion for civil and human rights. I actually ran my first campaign in elementary school, unseating our safety patrol captain for abusing his power. After my dad survived the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center, where he worked, I became an antiwar activist in the hope that peace activism could prevent more terrorism. In college, I joined multiple causes promoting environmentalism and fighting against animal cruelty, human rights abuses, sweatshop labor, mass incarceration, educational injustice, racial injustice, and gender inequality. I added union organizing to the list of my causes after being mistreated as a public school teacher in my early 20s, and eventually I became a professional communications strategist, working at several progressive advocacy organizations. I should note, though, that there is nothing inherently or exclusively 'progressive' about these causes. Any well-meaning person could take an interest in promoting issues like workers' rights and environmental protection, because there are multiple ways to pursue cultural and policy shifts that support those goals. But after years of learning from left-leaning professors, and especially after enduring ideological purity conflicts where more militant left-wing partisans convert, silence, or push out peers who are less committed to leftist ideology, I conformed. To fully advance civil and human rights, I believed, being a leftist was required. Advertisement My disenchantment with left-wing ideology began during the spring of 2020, when the disconnect between progressives' alarming rhetoric — such as the assertion that racism constituted a deadly pandemic of its own — and our unserious actions became too frustrating for me to ignore. Then, as now, professional progressives and left-leaning politicians claimed that our country was all but collapsing under the weight of bigotry and fascism. Yet we continued the same performative protests, petitions, and social media stunts as ever. Meanwhile, more-militant leftists responded to the perceived urgency of the moment by rioting. Hearing our narratives echoed by those destroying ordinary people's livelihoods and property disturbed me. This began a process of investigating whether the ideas I'd been steeped in were actually based in reality. That prompted me to reexamine and eventually abandon the 'systemic injustice' worldview I learned in college and subsequent activist spaces, along with the accompanying 'oppressors versus victims' narrative. Though I would never want to relive 2020's public health, political, or economic crises, I am grateful for the way they disrupted the echo chambers I used to inhabit. That enabled me to engage with contradictory evidence and spot logical fallacies in my political beliefs that were harder to notice when I was constantly surrounded by like-minded people. The enforcers of ideological conformity Lefty partisans' dominance of many influential professions and institutions makes rethinking harder to do. Though the 'progressive left' and 'establishment liberals' are estimated to account for just Advertisement It's important to note, however, that this dominance didn't happen by chance. It's the result of leftist pressure campaigns in various professions, institutions, and organizations. For example, left-wing activists in academia agitate to change curriculum, admissions, and hiring decisions in ways that promote their ideology in the classroom and beyond. They protest to get certain ideas taught and other ideas and speakers suppressed, and they use practices like Even spaces like online knitting communities and breastfeeding support groups have been beset by leftists Advertisement One field where left-wing activism has distorted public knowledge is climate science. Many climate activists believe that carbon emissions are the biggest threat to our future and that government interventions are the most important solution. Accordingly, the activist-approved narrative on climate focuses on dramatic information they hope will scare people into supporting such interventions. Longtime climate scientist how members of his field are incentivized to oversimplify and overemphasize climate change at the expense of other relevant information: 'I sacrificed contributing the most valuable knowledge for society in order for the research to be compatible with the confirmation bias of the editors and reviewers of the journals I was targeting.' Neither Pielke nor Brown ever denied the existence or significance of climate change. Nonetheless, left-wing climate activists and academics slandered both men as 'climate deniers,' 'unhinged,' 'irresponsible,' and so on. By discouraging scientists and journalists from sharing nuanced and practical explanations of our environmental challenges, militant climate activists have fostered an alarmist conversation that causes millions of people unnecessary anxiety. Thankfully, some researchers are finding the courage to stop self-censoring. But hardline activists and academics continue to label those who deviate even slightly from their approved narrative 'climate deniers,' which functions as a thought-stopping tactic. A more extreme example of this dynamic exists in the field promoting gender drugs and surgeries for youth. Gender activists within academia and prominent medical organizations built the alleged 'expert consensus' on these interventions with deceptive practices like In the communications training sessions I lead, I regularly warn clients against manipulating audiences through fear and anger — for example, by mislabeling reasonable objections as 'bigotry.' Not only does this poison public discourse, it sabotages campaigners' own mental health. I speak from experience here. The belief that entrenched, identity-based socioeconomic systems dictate most of our life outcomes fosters what psychologists call an external locus of control, Reflecting on my journals and medical history during my last few months of therapy, I noticed that my PTSD symptoms, from an experience I had suffered years before, had gotten considerably worse once I started working in progressive organizations. They peaked in 2018 and 2019 while I was working at a feminist legal organization. I spent my days there generating and consuming alarmist rhetoric for our internal and external campaigns, and my free time in a social media bubble full of people mirroring my then-obsessive Trump hatred. I spent multiple hours a day catastrophizing with my friends and colleagues, doing the exact opposite of what I was trying to learn in therapy. Around that same time, attorney Greg Lukianoff and psychologist Jonathan Haidt published 'The Coddling of the American Mind.' In that book, they share Lukianoff's hypothesis that by reinforcing politically induced cognitive distortions (for example, promoting the idea that controversial speech 'harms' marginalized people), colleges and universities were inadvertently performing reverse cognitive behavioral therapy on students. I ultimately found it very insightful, but only after ignoring it for years simply because my tribe hated Lukianoff and Haidt. Back when 'Coddling' debuted, Lukianoff and the organization he leads, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, or FIRE, held villain status in my circles because they opposed cancel culture and weren't aligned with our stance on Title IX regulations. and those accused of it' (emphasis added), was reasonable. But in our communications, we accused groups like this of demanding ' If leftists honestly examined the shortcomings of their beliefs, they could improve their mental and political prospects. But their pride often gets in their way. When you spend years vilifying anyone who disagrees with you, it's difficult to notice (much less concede) when they have a point. Particularly for those in academia and professional advocacy — whose incomes are tied up in their faulty beliefs — there's also a strong financial disincentive against rethinking. Academics whose work offends their most dogmatic colleagues risk not only their reputations but funding and career opportunities. Likewise, activist organizations that attempt to course-correct risk being financially and socially punished by the very supporters they helped to radicalize. That perverse incentive against self-correction is one of the many risks of building a supporter base on exaggerated, emotionally manipulative communications. Yet failing to adjust their approach is costing them credibility, while exacerbating burnout and mental illness among staff and supporters. I understand that dilemma. It cost me a lot to rethink my beliefs, but those losses hardly compare to the freedom I've gained by divesting from left-wing ideology and culture. Leaving the left allowed me to relax and reclaim the energy I previously spent feeling unjustifiably threatened by disagreement or stressing over how everything I think or do might be perceived by judgmental peers. Losing fake friends freed up space for real ones. Dropping unethical clients freed up space to pursue other passions and work with principled people who care more about solving problems than enforcing ideological conformity. Instead of vetting clients based on which 'side' they represent on an arbitrary political spectrum, I now consider whether they can show that their ideas and approaches would protect our inalienable rights to life, liberty, and property. Rejecting demands for ideological purity freed me to deepen my Christian faith, follow evidence instead of emotional appeals, and develop an outlook on life that doesn't make me anxious or depressed. I've chosen political independence now. Doing this in a partisan environment is challenging, but reclaiming my reasoning and emotional well-being from unhealthy tribal dynamics has been well worth it. Doing good in the world doesn't have to feel terrible. Being 'part of the solution' doesn't require being part of a political tribe. It simply requires us to have the humility and curiosity to prioritize truth over personal validation, acknowledging that we're not always right and that those we consider opponents aren't always wrong.
an hour ago
Army restores the names of seven bases that lost their Confederate-linked names under Biden
WASHINGTON -- Seven Army bases whose names were changed in 2023 because they honored Confederate leaders are all reverting back to their original names, the Army said Tuesday. The announcement came just hours after President Donald Trump previewed the decision, telling troops at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, that he was changing the names back. Fort Bragg, which was changed to Fort Liberty by the Biden administration, was the first to have its original name restored after the Army found another person with the same last name. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who was with Trump at Fort Bragg, signed an order restoring the name in February. 'Can you believe they changed that name in the last administration for a little bit?' Trump said. 'We'll forget all about that.' In March, Hegseth reversed the decision changing Fort Benning in Georgia to Fort Moore. To restore the original names of the additional seven bases, the Army once again found service members with the same last names to honor. Those bases are Fort A.P. Hill, Fort Pickett and Fort Robert E. Lee in Virginia, Fort Gordon in Georgia, Fort Hood in Texas, Fort Polk in Louisiana and Fort Rucker in Alabama. The decision strips names chosen in 2023 to honor top leaders, such as President Dwight D. Eisenhower, as well as Black soldiers and women. No women are included in the new Army list. There was no immediate cost estimate for changing all the signs at the bases, just two years after they were revamped. Originally it was named after Confederate Gen. Ambrose P. Hill, before being renamed Fort Walker after Mary Edwards Walker, a doctor who treated soldiers in the Civil War and later received a Medal of Honor. Now it will be named to commemorate three different people: Medal of Honor recipients Lt. Col. Edward Hill, 1st Sgt. Robert A. Pinn and Pvt. Bruce Anderson for heroism during the Civil War. Fort Pickett was changed to Fort Barfoot in honor of Tech Sgt. Van Barfoot, a Medal of Honor recipient who served in World War II. It will now honor 1st Lt. Vernon W. Pickett. He received the Distinguished Service Cross for heroism during World War II when he fired grenades while pinned down by enemy machine gun fire and destroyed enemy positions. He was captured, then escaped and rejoined his unit, but was killed in action. Fort Lee was changed to a hyphenated name, Fort Gregg-Adams, and was the only one to commemorate someone who remained alive at the time — Lt. Gen. Arthur J. Gregg. He was known as a logistics leader and died last year. Lt. Col. Charity Adams — the other half of the name — led the first female Black unit of the Army deployed in World War II. Fort Lee will now be named for Pvt. Fitz Lee, who received the Medal of Honor for heroism during the Spanish-American War, when he moved under fire to rescue wounded comrades. Fort Gordon was changed to Fort Eisenhower to commemorate the former president's time leading Allied forces in Europe in World War II. It will now be named for Medal of Honor recipient Master Sgt. Gary I. Gordon. He was honored for his valor during the 1993 Battle of Mogadishu in Somalia, where he defended wounded crew members at a helicopter crash site and held off an advancing enemy force. Fort Hood was changed to Fort Cavazos in honor of Gen. Richard Cavazos, the Army's first Hispanic four-star, who served in the Korean War and got the Distinguished Service Cross. It will now honor Col. Robert B. Hood. He received the Distinguished Service Cross for heroism during World War I, when he directed artillery fire in France. Fort Polk was changed to Fort Johnson after Black Medal of Honor recipient Sgt. William Henry Johnson, who served in World War I. It will now honor Silver Star recipient Gen. James H. Polk. Then-Col. Polk was honored for gallantry during World War II, when he led reconnaissance and combat missions under fire. He later served as head of U.S. Army Europe. Fort Rucker was named Fort Novosel after Medal of Honor recipient Chief Warrant Officer Michael Novosel, who served in World War II and Vietnam. It will now honor Capt. Edward W. Rucker. He received the Distinguished Service Cross for heroism in World War I when he flew deep behind enemy lines in a daring air battle over France.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump vows to 'liberate' Los Angeles as mayor imposes curfew
The mayor of Los Angeles has imposed a night-time curfew for part of downtown as a fifth day of clashes over President Donald Trump's immigration raids erupted in America's second-biggest city. Karen Bass said she was declaring an emergency as businesses were being vandalised and looted. Nearly 200 people were arrested in the city on Tuesday. Trump defended his decision to deploy 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines to LA, vowing to "liberate" the city and prevent it being "conquered by a foreign enemy". The immigration raids that triggered the protests last Friday are continuing with National Guard troops now protecting border control agents on enforcement operations. Chaotic protests also sprung up on Tuesday night in cities around the country, from Seattle to Chicago: Texas Governor Greg Abbott sent National Guard troops to San Antonio, where immigration rallies are being planned In Atlanta, Georgia, riot police used tear gas on protesters who fired fireworks towards officers at a demonstration attended by hundreds NYPD told the BBC "multiple" arrests were made after some protesters failed to disperse after several thousand marched into lower Manhattan LA's mayor told reporters earlier: "I have declared a local emergency and issued a curfew for downtown Los Angeles to stop the vandalism, to stop the looting." The order affects one-square-mile of LA where the protests have been concentrated and will be in effect beginning on Tuesday night from 20:00 PST (04:00 GMT) until Wednesday morning at 06:00 PST. Live updates from the protests Los Angeles police responding to the protests made 197 arrests on Tuesday, up from 114 on Monday, 40 on Sunday and 27 on Saturday, Bass told Tuesday's press conference. The mayor said 23 businesses had been looted on Monday night, though she did not provide an estimate of financial losses to the city from all the at-times violent disorder. "We reached a tipping point," she said of her decision to impose a curfew. The unrest has been restricted to pockets of the sprawling city. For much of Los Angeles it was a normal Tuesday as tens of thousands of children went to school, commuter traffic choked the streets and tourists strolled Hollywood Boulevard. LA police chief Jim McDonnell said the curfew was "not about silencing voices", but was a necessary measure to save lives and safeguard property. Bass also said Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had provoked the unrest by conducting raids on Latino areas in the city in recent days. "If [the raids are] going to go on for 30 days, and that's what the rumour is, and, if we want to see our city peaceful again, I will call upon the administration one more time to end the raids," she said. On Tuesday, National Guard troops, who were previously guarding federal buildings, began assisting ICE agents with their "daily enforcement operations", a spokesperson for the agency told the BBC. Marines were guarding federal officials and property on Tuesday, Marines Corps General Eric Smith said. They do not have arrest authority. Everything we know about the demonstrations Trump's deportation drive is perfect storm in city of immigrants Could Trump invoke the Insurrection Act? The military deployment to the LA area will cost $134m (£99m), the Pentagon said. Addressing troops at Fort Bragg in North Carolina, Trump described the protests as a "full-blown assault on peace and public order". The Republican president said he plans to use "every asset at our disposal to quell the violence and restore order right away". In televised remarks on Tuesday night, California's Governor Gavin Newsom hit back at Trump's unusual deployment of the military for a domestic law-enforcement matter. "This brazen abuse of power by a sitting president inflamed a combustible situation, putting our people, our officers, and even our National Guard, at risk," he says. Earlier in the day a federal court denied an emergency request from California to block the use of troops sent to Los Angeles. District Judge Charles Breyer scheduled a hearing on the motion for Thursday.
