To primarily vote primarily in Chicago, the voters were still in darkness whether their choice would be counted on the so -called Chicago Home Honor Collection.
The lawyer was in court on Wednesday debating the fate of chief Takht in the progressive agenda of Mayor Brandon Johnson. But Circuit Court Judge Kathleen Burke did not rule whether the case could proceed.
The interests of large real estate opposed bringing Chicago home, and sued to invalve the question that voters to charge more expensive property to change the city’s real estate transfer tax structure and slightly lower for the first $ 1 million.
The Building Owners and Managers Association and many other real estate interests expected the question to prevent the display on ballot papers. But since those ballot papers have already been printed, if Boma wins, no vote will be counted on the referendum.
Advocates representing the interests of large real estate, who on Wednesday filed a lawsuit against the city and the lawyers of the board of the election. The judge promised to issue an order soon on the fate of the question.
Boma’s suit against the Chicago Board of Election releases the three-part nature of the question, which reduces the tax rate for low-value houses, and what they say lacks what the additional money will fund.
Judge Murphy has many mobility to weight, including the speed of the city and election board rejecting speed and whether the city can intervene in the case.
The referendum questions ask voters to change the tax rate on the sale of one -time property.
The current city tax on the sale of real estate is a flat 0.75%. To reduce the tax charged at the first $ 1 million – up to 0.6% – to increase the rate of more than $ 1 million and $ 1.5 million to increase the rate of more than 3%to increase the rate of more than 3%.
The city council approved the referendum in November, which was expected to bring an additional $ 100 million in revenue.
Michael Casper, a lawyer of Boma-led coalition, argued on Wednesday that the referendum collects “unfairly” adds to the decrease and two different growth, an example of “loggling”. He also said that the Election Board – not the city – is the only body that can give them relief, as they print ballot and tally votes.
Charles Lemine, a lawyer representing the Election Board, argued that the city is a more suitable party to respond to the claims, and that the board was not responsible for the words of the question. Johnson’s Administration – Not currently a party for the suit – to file a proposal last week and also to dismiss the suit.
Both Johnson and the Chicago alliance for the homeless confident that the ballot would arise a ballot question, describing the lawsuit as a “political maneuvers” to confuse voters and protect the interests of corporate real estate.
Meanwhile, the political campaign for voters has so far been a costly. One vote against the real estate transfer tax – a major funding committee, which votes for realteers, has increased by more than $ 750,000 in the previous year. The largest group in support – end homeless – has raised over $ 1 million in a single period. 501 (C) (4) expects more money flow for the opposition – sometimes referred to as a dark money group – called Chicago Forward.
Backers estimate that 93% sales will be subject to reduced tax rate, while large commercial properties such as offices, large apartment buildings, stores and industrial sites will have a huge burden.
The interests of real estate argue that a yes vote will give the city an empty check, a message that they are enacting on the campaign mark.
A mango and new “no” vote website paid by the campaign of realtors says that there is no “plan” to spend the estimated revenue from the tax hike and that there is a “seating” of millions of dollars in federal funding to build housing in the city.
City officials have said that funds can help in assisting emergency fare, buying and rebuilding the shelter and paying for direct housing assistance.
[email protected]