Based on early budget projections, if the village board is to move forward with its wide array of new goals—-ranging from increases in street and alley repairs to business district improvements—-it’s going to have to close a $2.1 million funding gap.
Including both expenditures in capital improvements, as well as general staff, programming and planning costs, the funding for various board initiatives (see sidebar) is currently expected to cost more than $3 million.
To help minimize the impact of those costs, staff has proposed offering village employees early retirement incentives, eliminating currently vacant positions and ending village funding of other governments’ trash removal and recycling.
In addition, the board is considering new government "efficiencies," including expanding its in-house adjudication program to deal with building and health code violations. The program is currently only directed at parking ticket violations.
Also under consideration is pooling health care with other local taxing bodies, and contracting Oak Park’s services to other neighboring municipalities. Currently, for instance, Oak Park village employees provide for a fee IT services for the Village of River Forest.
Also left on the table following a board budget session Thursday were a number of potential tax increases. Despite the objections of Village President David Pope and Trustee Ray Johnson, the board majority left up for discussion a quarter-percent increase in sales tax, which would generate $500,000, and a new food/beverage tax, which would raise $525,000. The sales tax increase would bring Oak Park in line with the City of Chicago, whose sales tax now totals 9 percent.
Johnson and Pope argued strongly against the new food and beverage tax, saying it would unfairly burden existing businesses and make it hard to bring in new ones.
"When people can say Oak Park is not business friendly, and here’s the 10 ways, it makes it more difficult to attract businesses," Pope said.
However, most board members supported the idea, saying it wouldn’t deter restaurant patrons and isn’t anti-business.
"It would only be $1 on a $100 bill. I know restaurateurs may have a different point of view, but it’s our responsibility to make business districts more attractive to the type of people these restaurants need to draw," said Trustee Greg Marsey.
Off the list of revenue generating ideas, however, is a property tax increase. Any hike was nixed by a narrow majority of the board, with Pope, Johnson and Trustee Robert Milstein the notion’s only champions.
Johnson argued that the tax "spreads the pain around" to everyone, rather than just businesses. Milstein said he’d be willing to raise it more than by the proposed 1 percent.
Several trustees, however, objected, saying it would send the wrong message to taxpayers following the triennial county reassessment.
"Property owners have borne this load for far too long. Let’s look at things that are more use-associated," said Trustee Geoff Baker.
The only cost-savings measure to generate significant debate is a staff proposal to offer an early retirement incentive to village employees, which is expected to save roughly $380,000. Village Finance Director Greg Peters said 50 employees would be eligible for the program. The budget projection assumes that 25 percent of those employees would participate. To qualify, employees must have worked at the village for 20 years, and be at least 50 years old.
While Pope said he would give the idea a full "thumbs down," adding that he’d be concerned that the village would be losing some of its most experienced employees, the remainder of the board supported the program.
Other board members said it gives the village the option to reduce costs, "thank" long-time employees, and bring in workers with new skills.
