Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: Bustos on the hot seat
Posted in:
* The Center Square…
Illinois businesses that suffered a financial loss from recent public protests and looting could get a break from the state.
State Sen. Dave Syverson, R-Rockford, has filed legislation to allow for a property tax credit in the same amount as whatever financial hit was taken.
“While it won’t cover everything, I think, at a minimum, these businesses that have already suffered under COVID, they ought to be compensated, or at least be given a small tax credit to make up for at least a portion of their losses,” Syverson said.
He says many businesses suffered losses that will be higher than the tax bill, which would mean a full waiver of the year’s property taxes.
Last week, Gov. J.B. Pritzker announced Pritzker $25 million from the state’s capital program would go to help businesses that sustained property damage due to looting during recent protests. Syverson said more is needed.
“The ones that won’t help are the stores couldn’t open up due to protests, those that law enforcement [advised] to close because of what might happen, or those businesses that had to hire private security because the city would not guarantee any protection,” Syverson said.
He said it’s most critical to provide assistance in communities where local authorities either chose not to enforce the law or could not provide adequate protection.
“The first job of any municipality is to provide a protection for individuals, their families, and their property,” Syverson said. “If they’re going to allow crimes to occur, then they should at least reimburse those who were victims of the municipality’s unwillingness to fulfill and follow the law.”
So, he addresses this by imposing a possibly huge unfunded state mandate on local governments?
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Jun 30, 20 @ 1:45 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: Bustos on the hot seat
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Like the unfunded mandate by the Governor to close businesses in areas with none or minimal Covid cases at the time. State should have been shelter in place county by county as the numbers justified such action.
Comment by Arock Tuesday, Jun 30, 20 @ 1:51 pm
=== Like the unfunded mandate by the Governor to close businesses in areas with none or minimal Covid cases at the time.===
You know a virus doesn’t understand borders, right?
LOL
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jun 30, 20 @ 1:55 pm
This is a tremendous failing thats falls squarely on the shoulders of those sworn to protect us.
Comment by Blue Dog Dem Tuesday, Jun 30, 20 @ 1:55 pm
Sounds like a way to blame “the other”. Isn’t there a lawyer willing to sue the local governments for refusing to protect property instead? Not saying it would be successful, just that if they can sue Pritzker numerous times why not go for it?
Comment by GregN Tuesday, Jun 30, 20 @ 1:56 pm
Most property taxes fund schools, so they’d be giving up the money when the police departments they don’t control fail to clamp down on protests.
Maybe it’s a good thing Center Square is around to give the good senator the press coverage he was looking for, or this proposal might have been a complete waste of time.
Comment by Socially DIstant Watcher Tuesday, Jun 30, 20 @ 1:59 pm
=== So, he addresses this by imposing a possibly huge unfunded state mandate on local governments? ===
Certainly. He wants to argue that he’s a champion of businesses, but he doesn’t want to be on the hook for funding the initiative. The GOP definition of responsibility includes the pronouns, “his, her or them.” It doesn’t include the pronouns, “me, we or us.”
Comment by Norseman Tuesday, Jun 30, 20 @ 2:00 pm
So essentially he’s saying “defund the police”?
Comment by Dance Band on the Titanic Tuesday, Jun 30, 20 @ 2:13 pm
If there is a money problem just place a 25% tax on everything shipped out of the liquor warehouses like they do cannabis.
Comment by Al Tuesday, Jun 30, 20 @ 2:13 pm
Did you really expect him to do it any differently? Promise the moon to those hurting, not that he would have done SOMETHING to minimize the destruction and then shift the cost to those who had nothing to do with it… not like we haven’t heard that done before.
Comment by Silent majority Tuesday, Jun 30, 20 @ 2:39 pm
Doesn’t insurance cover the recovery of looted and burned business?
Why is it that all the republican’t rhetoric is aimed at businesses? If you want to help businesses, you have to get people into the door with money in their pockets to buy something. What good is a business without customer?
Comment by Huh? Tuesday, Jun 30, 20 @ 2:40 pm
The way that some assessors have massively undervalued commercial property in some business friendly areas, he might not have fully thought through the consequences of drawing extra attention to commercial property taxes.
Most residents have no clue how much of the property tax burden has been shifted almost completely onto their shoulders over the years.
That’s what business friendly means after all.
Comment by TheInvisibleMan Tuesday, Jun 30, 20 @ 2:41 pm
“Isn’t there a lawyer willing to sue the local governments for refusing to protect property instead? Not saying it would be successful”
I’m saying it would be 100% unsuccessful under DeShaney v. Winnebago County, 489 U.S. 189 (1989) and Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005).
– MrJM
Comment by @misterjayem Tuesday, Jun 30, 20 @ 2:47 pm
===for refusing to protect property instead===
As MrJM notes, you can’t use the courts to force the police to protect you.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jun 30, 20 @ 2:55 pm
I might be willing to support this proposal, with a huge if:
(Imagine this “if” in 48 point type):
If
The business owner can prove their insurance company refused to pay for their damages,
and if (another 48 point if)
The business owner cooperated fully with local law enforcement in the investigation of said looting,
And if the damage has been repaired to all applicable building codes, and all inventory replaced that was looted,
Then I might be willing to consider a one-time credit equal to 25% of the damages from the looting.
But only one party gets it. No situations where a landlord claims a credit on the building and the tenant claims another credit on the inventory.
Comment by Lynn S. Tuesday, Jun 30, 20 @ 3:18 pm