LOYAL. LOCAL. COMPLETE.
A multi-year shortfall in property tax revenue, totaling nearly three-quarters of a million dollars, has prompted the Paris 95 district to initiate an ongoing investigation involving legal, financial and government officials.
During the Paris-Union 95 monthly board meeting on Monday, June 9, Superintendent Mary Morgan Ryan told the board the district has not “received the expected amount of local tax revenue for several years.”
Morgan Ryan explained that she has begun working with the district’s law firm, Robin Schwartz, to define the “size and shape of what’s going on with this collection shortfall.”
The Illinois State Board of Education is also aware of the potential issue, Morgan Ryan noted, and financial consultant Julie Harrelson has kept the state board informed on the matter. However, formal state action is delayed until the district and its team uncover and present more conclusive data.
A partner from the district’s law firm, Scott Ginsberg, was also present at the meeting to explain the details, concerns and processes the firm and Morgan Ryan have been working through.
“We’ve identified a shortfall of about $740,000, which is the gap between what we believe the school district should have received since 2018 and what they actually received,” Ginsberg said.
While most of the funds were collected properly, significant losses were documented in the tax years 2019, 2022 and 2023. Losses that, Ginsberg said, are “well above what would be expected in a school district like yours.”
According to Ginsberg’s calculations, the school district had a collection shortfall of $182,091 (95 percent collection rate) in 2019, and over $500,000 in the last two years, excluding 2024, which has not yet been calculated. $296,389 (93 percent collection rate) in 2022 and $223,690 (95 percent collection rate) in 2023.
Ginsberg theorized a complex landscape of clerical errors, outdated practices and administrative confusion that may have contributed to the revenue shortfall.
“The county clerk position is a very specialized and difficult position,” Ginsberg said. “They’re taking massive numbers and they’re applying a very complicated calculation using a number of regulations and laws that put limitations and requirements on what they do.”
Ginsberg also noted the misuse of the certificate of error process. The procedure is legally intended to correct simple clerical mistakes, such as typos or “Scrivener’s errors,” but appears to have been used improperly to adjust tax bills after the fact. Ginsberg described it as “a confusing collaboration between government officials in their county offices.”
Morgan Ryan and Ginsberg stressed that while no one is accusing county officials of misconduct or malice, there is a clear need for process improvement or stricter adherence to the law.
“We’re not accusing anybody of doing anything other than just doing the best they can with the information they have … We don’t have a clear understanding of who did what and why we have this shortfall,” the attorney said.
After hearing the presentation, school board president Greg Sabens questioned the county’s response to Ginsberg’s findings.
“What is the county clerk and the treasurer saying? I mean, it’s three-quarters of a million dollars they owe us,” Sabens asked.
“They’re not saying a lot and it’s a problem… You know, at some point, somebody’s going to have to explain to us where that money is. And so far, we’ve been real polite with each other, but nobody’s given us a good explanation where this money is,” Ginsberg responded.
Ginsberg emphasized that the district’s goal now is not to assign blame but to fix the process going forward, and potentially recover some of the lost revenue.
“If the tax process results in an administrative error that results in a shortfall of funds for a taxing district, you can go back two years and collect the additional money,” he said. “You’re still gonna be taxing your taxpayers to collect it, but at least the school district can be made whole for the past two years if we can identify the error that resulted in the shortfall, and so that’s our main option.”
Morgan Ryan, Ginsberg and the board agreed to table the topic, pending further discussions with the county, until the board’s next meeting in July, where they hope to have more definitive answers to where the money is and how it got lost.
“We’re still operating on theories, even though our theories are starting to come together more. That’s what we know based on our investigation so far,” Ginsberg said. “It’s a mess, and it’s something that is turning out to be more difficult to trace than it should be. It’s public documents. It’s public money. It should all just be easily accessible to understand where all the money that’s collected goes, and if money wasn’t collected, why not? And that, and that’s where we are right now.”
The Prairie Press reached out to the offices of the county clerk and state’s attorney for comment but did not receive a response prior to press time.
However, State’s Attorney Philip Dobelstein did make a comment during a public Edgar County Board meeting on Wednesday, June 11.
“For the purposes of transparency and to avoid the county board being blindsided by any news articles, at the District 95 school board meeting Monday evening, they had a discussion regarding issues regarding collection shortfalls,” he said.
“I met with the general counsel on Tuesday, and at that point, they provided their numbers to me that they believe are the collection shortfall amount. As far as I can tell, based on our numbers, there’s some discrepancy regarding what I can see the county treasurer has distributed to District 95 and what District 95 is reporting and collected,” Dobelstein said. “Since everything was provided on Tuesday, we haven’t had a chance to do a full investigation into why there’s a discrepancy in the numbers and where they’re getting their numbers from.”
Dobelstein told members of the county board that he is working closely with the district superintendent, the county clerk and the county treasurer’s offices to “resolve the issue.”
“We’re going over the number and working with the District to figure out where the discrepancy is and what the solution is,” Dobelstein said.
In response to the attorney’s report, board chairman Jeff Voigt said the elected officials involved in the situation have been “fully cooperating.”
“They have been communicating since this issue has come up, and I want to assure the board that everybody is communicating and doing their best to get this issue resolved,” Voigt said.