HB2642 amends the Illinois Property Tax Extension Limitation Law (PTELL) in the Property Tax Code. The bill changes how a taxing district’s “limiting rate” is calculated by requiring the rate to be based on the highest aggregate extension from any year in which the district was subject to PTELL, rather than only the last three preceding levy years. It also specifies that an aggregate extension from a year when a district was allowed to temporarily increase its limiting rate or extension limitation cannot be used in that calculation.
In practical terms, the bill would alter the formula used to cap property tax growth for affected taxing districts, potentially changing future levy limits and the amount of property tax revenue districts may extend. The amendment is narrow in scope but significant for local governments, school districts, park districts, and other taxing bodies governed by PTELL because it changes the historical base used in the limiting-rate computation.
Impact
HB2642 would amend Section 18-185 of the Property Tax Code, which defines key PTELL terms including “limiting rate,” “aggregate extension,” and “debt service extension base.” The main legal effect is to revise the formula for calculating a district’s limiting rate by looking to the highest aggregate extension from any qualifying year, while excluding years in which a temporary increase was authorized. This would affect how county clerks and taxing districts compute property tax extension limits under PTELL and could influence annual property tax levies across affected districts.
Sentiment
There is no committee transcript or recorded vote history provided for HB2642, so the available context does not show direct support or opposition from legislators or witnesses. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears technical and revenue-focused rather than ideological, with its policy direction favoring a different method of calculating tax caps. Because no discussion or votes are included, sentiment cannot be reliably characterized beyond noting that the bill was introduced and not shown advancing in the provided record.
Contention
The likely point of contention is the effect on property tax growth limits. Supporters would likely view the bill as a technical correction or a way to stabilize the limiting-rate calculation by using the highest historical aggregate extension, while opponents may argue it could weaken the intended restraint of PTELL or produce higher future property tax levies for some districts. The exclusion of years with temporary rate increases may also be debated because it prevents districts from using unusually high, authorized levy years in the base calculation.
Relating to the authority of the Harris County Municipal Utility District No. 405 to exclude territory; validating and confirming all previous acts of the district.