+50.8 percentage points above the 69% citywide benchmark
Anonymized count of properties in each assessment growth band.
Election Ward 3 is part of Aldermanic District 1 (Wards 1, 2, 3). Contact your alderperson with ward-level concerns about assessments, infrastructure, or Open Book process questions.
Who / What / Where / Why prompts for Ward 3 โ based on verified community submissions, not an official city audit.
Who can explain why 1 verified community submissions in Ward 3 show a median increase of +119.8% compared with the 69% citywide benchmark โ and whether any ward-specific valuation factors drove outliers?
What actions will council take if 100% of participating Ward 3 properties report increases above the 69% benchmark, while the ward weighted aggregate change is +119.8%?
Where in Ward 3 are homeowners seeing the largest concentration of above-benchmark increases, and will the city request targeted assessor review for those blocks before Board of Review closes?
Why does the arithmetic mean increase (+119.8%) differ from the weighted aggregate (+119.8%) in Ward 3, and how should council message that difference so residents do not confuse percentage averages with total tax-base shifts?
Who represents Ward 3 on council, and will you host a ward listening session before October Board of Review so residents can share record-card errors and infrastructure issues tied to their assessments?
What transparency will the city provide on levy decisions this fall so Ward 3 owners know whether their relative tax share change reflects assessment shifts, budget votes, or both?