Kane County Board holds town hall meeting on sales tax referendum in advance of April vote
On Monday, the Kane County Board hosted an in-person town hall meeting in Aurora to answer questions about the sales tax referendum question being put to voters in the county on April 1.
Next month, Kane County voters will be asked whether they support a 0.75% sales tax increase meant to boost funding for the county's public safety services.
The town hall was held at the Santori Public Library in downtown Aurora, and offered residents a chance to learn and ask questions about the referendum in advance of next month's election.
District 4 Kane County Board member Mavis Bates gave a presentation at Monday's town hall, emphasizing the public safety services the funds generated by the referendum would be earmarked for, per state law.
The majority of the county's funds already go toward public safety costs, Bates said on Monday.
'That's our main job, as it should be,' she said Monday.
The presentation also highlighted some of the public safety services that would be funded in part by the referendum, such as prosecuting child pornography cases, veterans suicide prevention support programs and opioid abuse prevention services. Bates also noted that some of the funds generated by a successful referendum would go toward upgrading aging public safety facilities.
A sales tax increase of 0.75% means buyers would pay 75 cents more in tax on every $100 they spend on items covered by the tax in Kane County. The county has said there are exemptions for essential items like groceries and prescription medications, which Bates noted are determined by Illinois tax law.
Bates said the referendum proposes a sales tax, rather than a property tax, so as to share costs with visitors to Kane County and because homeowners already contribute 'their fair share.'
'We've been working on a flat budget,' Bates said Monday, noting that the county has not seen a property tax increase – aside from increases for new construction – in more than a decade. 'Imagine if your family had had no raises, your Social Security checks had had no cost of living increases. … Our belt just keeps getting tighter and tighter and tighter.'
Bates said the sales tax offers another revenue option besides a property tax increase.
Separate from the proposed sales tax measure, the county board's approved 2025 budget does include a $2 million property tax levy increase, the first hike in the levy since 2013 except increases to account for new construction, according to past reporting. The property tax levy increase, excluding an increase for new construction, was proposed for 3.4% to match the Consumer Price Index, a measure of inflation set by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
While the sales tax referendum only addresses public safety expenses, Kane County Finance Director Kathleen Hopkinson has previously said that the referendum would have a spillover effect, freeing up some of the funds going toward public safety already to other departments and offices.
According to the county, services that would receive revenue from the successful passage of the referendum question include the offices of the sheriff, state's attorney, public defender, coroner and circuit clerk; KaneComm 911; Public Health and the Office of Emergency Management.
The proposed 0.75% sales tax hike is expected to generate upwards of $50 million annually, Hopkinson previously said. If voters don't approve the referendum question, the county would have to dip into its 90-day reserve funds to balance the 2026 budget, according to past reporting, provided spending remains about the same as 2025. That would leave the county with only about $8 million above the required 90-day reserves, Hopkinson has said.
A sales tax referendum has been top of mind for the county board for months, touted by some as a possible solution to the county's cash flow problems. The county has been dipping into its cash reserves to balance its budget, which officials have previously said will be used up by 2027 or 2028 if spending or revenue doesn't change.
For example, the county's proposed $416.6 million budget for 2025 uses $29.3 million in reserves from its general fund, not including millions in cuts proposed by the Kane County Board Finance Committee. The referendum wouldn't help balance the county budget until 2026, however, Hopkinson previously said.
In September, the Kane County Board approved putting the sales tax referendum question on the April 1 ballot.
In opposition to Bates' presentation, that was largely in support of the referendum's role in advancing public safety programs and infrastructure, public comments at Monday's town hall came in sharply against the measure over the cost to residents – including some pushback from within the county government.
Kane County Treasurer Chris Lauzen asked Bates a series of questions about the sales tax increase's expected collection, how much the county receives in general fund revenue and other finance questions, criticizing the county's spending and board members' not furnishing some figures about the budget at Monday's meeting.
Cheryl Dennin, a resident of the county, asked why the county's annual budget had increased significantly between 2020 and 2024.
According to county records, the 2020 budget's general fund expenditures increased from nearly $88 million to just over $92 million from 2019 to 2020. In 2023, that number reached just over $123 million, and went down to around $122 million in 2024.
Bates said that lower operating costs for the county during the COVID-19 pandemic were an 'anomaly' due to the influx of federal pandemic funds, and said that federal money the county no longer has was used to pay for some staff salaries during that time, though Dennin suggested that salaries alone were not enough to explain the increase in spending over the past few years.
'In order to retain the best of the best, we need to provide a good incentive to them,' District 6 Kane County Board member Sonia Garcia said on Monday about the need for salary increases to remain competitive with neighboring counties.
Kane County Board Chair Corinne Pierog also noted that infrastructure repairs were also increasing expenses – replacing air conditioners at the Kane County Judicial Center and elevators at the courthouse, for example.
Brian Anderson, a resident of Sugar Grove, also criticized the county's hiring of a lobbyist, which board members said was hired to help the county save money in the long run. After some back-and-forth, Bates ultimately called the meeting.
This town hall was the fourth hosted by the county about the referendum. They will be holding three more in-person meetings for residents to ask questions and offer feedback on the referendum: at the St. Charles Public Library at 5:30 p.m. on March 6, at the Geneva Library at 5:30 p.m. on March 10 and at the Sugar Grove Public Library at 5 p.m. on March 25.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News24
32 minutes ago
- News24
Fake Sassa grants ‘news' is exploding online. Here's how to spot the lies
YouTube channels and fake news websites are pumping out dozens of false stories about Sassa grants and jobs every month. These hoaxes prey on vulnerable recipients, spreading confusion, false hope or panic. Many are clearly fake, Andrew Thompson writes, but they have still managed to infiltrate public discourse and be widely shared. South Africa's social grant system is under digital siege. A flood of fake news targeting the South African Social Security Agency (Sassa) has spread across Facebook, YouTube and a network of low-quality, foreign-run websites. These stories are designed to mislead, confuse or panic grant recipients, often with the aim of generating clicks and ad revenue by preying on vulnerable beneficiaries. YouTube channels with tens of thousands of subscribers and some videos with hundreds of thousands of views have together uploaded hundreds of fake videos this year alone. They claim imminent changes to payouts, onerous new rules, or exciting bonuses. Dozens of websites posing as job boards or news sites have also published false notices about new jobs, grant amounts, pension cuts, and backlogged payments. Screengrab None of these channels have any connection to South African state institutions, yet they continue to reach large audiences and prompt real-world concern, forcing Sassa to issue repeated denials. In May, Sassa issued a media statement highlighting the extent of the problem and warning that it is 'concerned about the mushrooming and the rapid spread of fake news and disinformation targeting the Agency and its services almost daily'. It stressed that it has made no announcements about 'double grants', changes to pension rules, or automatic top-ups, which are among the most popular fake news stories that tend to gain traction. 'Furthermore, reports have been spreading like wildfire that Sassa has announced 'New Rules Could Affect Your Pension' from 10 June. The report has even gone further and announced various dates for different provinces. This is not an official announcement from Sassa,' the cautionary statement reads. How fake Sassa grant news spreads: volume, panic, and false hope The wave of Sassa disinformation in 2025 has followed two broad patterns, regardless of the medium or the outlet disseminating it, and the content is broadly split into two themes: fake job adverts and fake grant updates. The job advertisements regularly go viral. They claim that well-paid government positions requiring no experience are available and often direct users to deceptive forms or clickbait sites that mine data. These regularly appear as images on fake government letterheads that circulate widely on platforms like Facebook, WhatsApp and X. SASSA The fake grant updates employ a more familiar disinformation approach with a different motive. These mostly AI-generated false news articles report on increased or double payments, pension rule changes, or Sassa 'deadlines' that risk non-payment of grants. All are presented without basis, and often spill over from clearly fake websites into public discourse. Fake news websites and YouTube accounts repeatedly publish variations of similar videos and articles, many of which use text-to-speech tools and AI-generated thumbnails to appear convincing. The tone ranges from panic ('rules changing next week!') to false reassurance ('you can still claim your R7 000 today'). Most rely on sheer volume, hoping that one story or job advert will catch on and spread - as many already have. News24's Disinformation Desk has counted hundreds of fake news articles about Sassa currently online, and although many fade into obscurity, an increasing number are breaking through requiring official responses. Screengrab For now, the motive of these platforms appears to be financial gain. Most of the videos are hosted on monetised channels, and the websites link to Google Adwords accounts. If these get enough traction from panicked recipients, they will generate some revenue for the owners. Yet ironically, much of the vitality of this material reveals itself on platforms like WhatsApp without direct links to the source, which do not generate the website owners income but have the same impact on grant recipients. The majority of the Sassa disinformation that gains mainstream traction appears not to have an overt political motive or agenda, yet. Instead, it is riding on the wave of attention afforded by this vulnerable target market, many of whom are understandably deceived by the deluge. Rapid-fire Sassa debunks from the last few months alone News24's Disinformation Desk has identified hundreds of fake news stories and videos targeting Sassa recipients published in the last few months alone. Here are the most prominent examples, with their themes often emulated across other fake news sites: A viral post linking to a website called All Provinces Jobs claimed that 'South African government jobs 2025' were open for applications. The link leads to a fraudulent website not affiliated with any government department. Similar posts appeared on Facebook pages falsely advertising hiring opportunities through Sassa, often featuring job titles and closing dates to lend false credibility and create a sense of urgency. YouTube channels 'SASSA Benefits Updates' and 'Stimulus Sam' have released several dozen videos each about grant payments in South Africa, including that increased Sassa payments would be made in June 2025. The videos utilise text-to-speech narration featuring a vaguely South African accent and footage that is clearly created with generative AI. Both channels are entirely fake. A report hosted on the fake news website Debtcol Council claimed that 'new rules could affect your pension' from 10 June. Sassa has confirmed that this is also false. Another story on that website claimed application backlogs had been cleared, while yet another suggested a new top-up payment was in progress. All are fabricated. A website called Prabh Honda published a story about Sassa grant suspensions, which is entirely baseless and without truth. A piece on Rise Up WV, a website responsible for several prominent fake news items, stated that grant beneficiaries needed to reapply for doubled payments due to 'SASSA system updates'. There is no basis for this in any of Sassa's official communications. Why it matters - and how to protect yourself or family members Many of the intended recipients of these grants are older, economically vulnerable, and may not be experienced with digital literacy or fact-checking online. The combination of desperation and trust in anything that looks official makes this a fertile ground for exploitation via disinformation. These false reports don't just casually mislead - comments beneath even palpably false news items and videos indicate the confusion and desperation many experience about this topic. This fake news also distracts Sassa, which is already stretched in the payment grants, by forcing them to correct disinformation. To stay safe, advise family members of the following: Check only official Sassa channels: Information is reliably published on and Sassa's verified X and Facebook pages. Do not trust any information sent via WhatsApp or Facebook Messenger. Sassa does not communicate important information via forwarded messages. Never enter personal information into a form on a website claiming to offer Sassa job opportunities. Ignore YouTube channels with videos claiming to be the Department of Social Development or Sassa. Sassa's official YouTube page is not used to share news about grants. When in doubt, don't share: spreading false information, even with good intentions, can cause unnecessary panic.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Supreme Court gives DOGE access to millions of Americans' private Social Security data
The Brief The Supreme Court ruled DOGE can access personal data from the Social Security Administration. The case marks the first Supreme Court decision involving DOGE, once led by Elon Musk. The dissent warned the decision puts Americans' sensitive information at risk. WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Friday gave the green light for the Trump administration's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to access one of the country's most sensitive databases — the Social Security Administration's internal systems — which hold information on nearly every American. The 6–3 decision, split along ideological lines, marks the first major Supreme Court ruling involving DOGE, the controversial agency once led by Elon Musk. The Court's majority reversed a lower court's order that limited DOGE's access under federal privacy law, siding with the administration's argument that the restrictions were hampering its anti-fraud mission. Liberal justices dissented, warning the decision erodes vital privacy protections. The backstory The Department of Government Efficiency — or DOGE — was established during President Trump's second term and tasked with rooting out government waste and inefficiency. Its first director was Elon Musk, who called the Social Security program a "Ponzi scheme" and repeatedly targeted it as a key source of fraud. Although Musk has since stepped away from DOGE, the department has continued aggressive efforts to audit and investigate various federal programs. Social Security has remained a top priority. The administration argued that unfettered access to the SSA's internal systems was essential to detect abuse, duplication, and improper payouts — particularly in disability and survivor benefits. Dig deeper The case originated in Maryland, where U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander ruled that DOGE's demand for open access to Social Security data amounted to a "fishing expedition" based on limited evidence of wrongdoing. She blocked broad access but allowed DOGE staff with training and security clearance to view anonymized data, and permitted expanded access only if a specific need was documented. The Trump administration appealed, arguing the court was overstepping its role and interfering with executive branch operations. An appeals court upheld the partial block, but the Supreme Court has now lifted it entirely. Solicitor General John Sauer told the Court the restrictions "micromanaged" DOGE's work and undermined its mission. The other side Opponents of the ruling, including the plaintiffs represented by the advocacy group Democracy Forward, argue that the Social Security Administration contains deeply personal data: salary history, school records, family relationships, medical conditions, and more. They warned that handing this information to a politically driven agency without individualized review poses massive privacy risks. Labor unions and retiree groups joined the lawsuit, saying the system could be weaponized against vulnerable Americans. The dissenting justices agreed. "There is no meaningful check here on the breadth or use of the data," one wrote. "We risk turning privacy law into an empty promise." Why you should care This decision expands the Trump administration's ability to conduct sweeping audits across government agencies using personal data. While supporters frame it as a win for accountability and fraud reduction, critics say it weakens safeguards that prevent misuse of federal databases. It also sets a precedent for how much control the courts can — or cannot — exert over federal agency operations, a core issue as Trump's administration continues to consolidate executive power. What's next With the Supreme Court's backing, DOGE is expected to move quickly in analyzing Social Security data. Critics worry this could lead to mass denials of benefits or politically motivated reviews. Supporters say it could lead to cost-saving reforms. The agency, which has faced more than two dozen lawsuits, remains under scrutiny. Legal challenges are ongoing regarding its personnel decisions, data practices, and oversight authority. The Source This report is based on coverage from the Associated Press and court documents related to the Supreme Court decision in the DOGE v. Democracy Forward case. Additional background was gathered from statements by the U.S. Solicitor General, District Court Judge Ellen Hollander's original ruling, and legal filings from the plaintiff groups, including labor unions and the nonprofit Democracy Forward.
Boston Globe
2 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Supreme Court allows DOGE team to access Social Security systems with data on millions of Americans
The DOGE victories come amid a messy breakup between the president and the world's richest man that started shortly after Musk's departure from the White House and has included threats to cut government contracts and a call for the president to be impeached. The future of DOGE's work isn't clear without Musk at the helm, but both men have previously said that it will continue its efforts. Advertisement In one case, the high court halted an order from a judge in Maryland that has restricted the team's access to the Social Security Administration under federal privacy laws. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'We conclude that, under the present circumstances, SSA may proceed to afford members of the SSA DOGE Team access to the agency records in question in order for those members to do their work,' the court said in an unsigned order. Conservative lower-court judges have said there's no evidence at this point of DOGE mishandling personal information. The agency holds sensitive data on nearly everyone in the country, including school records, salary details and medical information. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said the court's action creates 'grave privacy risks' for millions of Americans by giving 'unfettered data access to DOGE regardless — despite its failure to show any need or any interest in complying with existing privacy safeguards, and all before we know for sure whether federal law countenances such access.' Justice Sonia Sotomayor joined Jackson's opinion and Justice Elena Kagan said she also would have ruled against the administration. Advertisement The Trump administration But U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander in Maryland found that DOGE's efforts at Social Security amounted to a 'fishing expedition' based on 'little more than suspicion' of fraud, and allowing unfettered access puts Americans' private information at risk. Her ruling did allow access to anonymous data for staffers who have undergone training and background checks, or wider access for those who have detailed a specific need. The Trump administration has said DOGE can't work effectively with those restrictions. Solicitor General D. John Sauer also argued that the ruling is an example of federal judges overstepping their authority and trying to micromanage executive branch agencies. The plaintiffs say it's a narrow order that's urgently needed to protect personal information. An appeals court previously refused to immediately to lift the block on DOGE access, though it split along ideological lines. Conservative judges in the minority said there's no evidence that the team has done any 'targeted snooping' or exposed personal information. Advertisement The lawsuit was originally filed by a group of labor unions and retirees represented by the group Democracy Forward. It's one of more than two dozen lawsuits filed over DOGE's work, which has included deep cuts at federal agencies and large-scale layoffs. The plaintiffs called the high court's order 'a sad day for our democracy and a scary day for millions of people. Elon Musk may have left Washington, D.C., but his impact continues to harm millions of people.' Liz Huston, a spokesperson for the White House, applauded the order. 'The Supreme Court allowing the Trump Administration to carry out commonsense efforts to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse and modernize government information systems is a huge victory for the rule of law.' The nation's court system has been ground zero for pushback to President Donald Trump's sweeping conservative agenda, with hundreds of lawsuits filed challenging policies on everything from immigration to education to mass layoffs of federal workers. In the other DOGE order handed down Friday, the justices extended a pause on orders that would require the team to publicly disclose information about its operations, as part of a lawsuit filed by a government watchdog group. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington argues that DOGE, which has been central to Trump's push to remake the government, is a federal agency and must be subject to the Freedom of Information Act. But the Trump administration says DOGE is just a presidential advisory body aimed at government cost-cutting, which would make it exempt from requests for documents under FOIA. The justices did not decide that issue Friday, but the conservative majority held that U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper ruled too broadly in ordering documents be turned over to CREW. Advertisement Associated Press writers Mark Sherman and Chris Megerian contributed to this report.
