1. Township Consolidation Task Force

2. Purpose and Goals  The Task Force was created for the purpose to between July, 2015 and Labor Day, 2015 bring the McHenry County Board a township consolidation map they can support.  The Task Force consisted of three County Board members, one member from the McHenry County Citizens for Township Consolidation, and one member from the Township Supervisors Association  If the County Board supports the map then it will move forward as referendum on the ballot in March, 2016.

3. Clarification from the State’s Attorney’s Office  The assets and debts are combined and shared equally in the consolidated township.  The levy of each township would be added together and then the total is divided by the EAV of the consolidated township.

4. Township Functions  There are 3 mandated functions of townships  Assessments  Road Maintenance  General Assistance  Townships consist of two taxing bodies  Road District  Township (General Assistance, Assessments)  Townships make up on average 3.2% of tax bill

5. Map Scenarios Scenarios suggested from the public were reviewed for potential township consolidation. Various methods were used to identify potential taxpayer savings and service efficiencies. Considerations included:  removal of existing lines  employment structure  location of municipalities  township levies  township roads  township owned properties  parcel types

6. Scenario 1  Maximizes the number of consolidations and focuses on pairing townships  Cost savings may be seen through the elimination of half the elected officials (one supervisor, one assessor, one highway commissioner, and the township board members), but are speculative in nature

7. Scenario 2  Consolidates all but the most populous township (Algonquin)  Reduces the total number of townships from 17 to 8

8. Scenario 3  Focuses on consolidating the majority of larger municipalities into a consolidated township  Does not consolidate the four most populous townships  Three of the consolidations include three townships into one

9. Comparable Information As requested by the Task Force, the following information was collected and reviewed for each township:  Population  Equalized Assessed Value  Debt  Fund Balance  Appropriations  State Replacement Tax

10. Comparable Information (continued)  Total Levy  Municipal road transfers  Expenditures  Revenues  Elected Official Salaries/Benefits  Township roads/road miles  Township parcels

11. Open House  162 attendees  Vote for preferred map  Comment cards were available to ask questions and share concerns with the Task Force

12. Potential Consolidations Two consolidation areas of most consensus: Richmond & Burton, Chemung & Dunham  Richmond & Burton: historically shared services, boundary lines  Chemung & Dunham: Majority of Harvard would be in one township, proximity of township offices  Remaining consolidations did not have consensus but are being presented as Map Scenario 1*  * Proposal now consolidates Hebron with Alden and Hartland

13. Task Force Proposed Consolidations *areas outlined in green are the consolidations with consensus from the task force

14. Conclusions/Remaining Issues  Cost savings are speculative and dependent on newly elected officials  The lower levy of the consolidated township will increase  Differences in elected official salaries and benefits  Cost of increased supervision and added responsibilities  Lack of consensus among Task Force members on a map proposal