Riverside Info Topic: A More Easily Controlled Advisory, Non-Binding Referendum: Joint Review Board

Riverside Info Topic: A More Easily Controlled Advisory, Non-Binding Referendum: Joint Review Board http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/ Discussion Forum for Riverside Illinois en Sun, 12 Feb 2012 20:16:32 +0000 Catherine on "A More Easily Controlled Advisory, Non-Binding Referendum: Joint Review Board" http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic/a-more-easily-controlled-advisory-non-binding-referendum-joint-review-board/page/2#post-4958 Wed, 25 Apr 2007 10:36:58 +0000 Catherine 4958@http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/ Yes, I recall something called a workshop for the affected taxing bodies that was just before the public meeting. I thought it was not for the public at that time so I did not go. See Wiaduck's letter to the editor Landmark today. All those voters who were deluded into voting down the TIF recovered their senses, apparently, to signal their approval of the B2 zoning. No, what people said is they don't want condos or apartments on the ground floor in the business area. There are not any now, I have never seen any since I have been living here, and I don't want to see any in the future. The referendum question had nothing to do with the B2 zoning ordinance. Now he is also saying that all of the inconsiderate clods who voted down the TIF don't even care (waah!) what the taxing bodies think. Translation: let's move the TIF question away from the voters and over to the rubber stamp of a JRB as soon as possible. Maybe some people already know what is best for those taxing bodies. Or maybe some people just don't want more big ugly monster condos with bad architecture marching down the streets downtown, blocking out the sun, ruining the historic center of town with its proximity to Swan Pond, with their new owners' cars clogging the streets around the train tracks and near the schools around Burlington and Longcommon. Elisa on "A More Easily Controlled Advisory, Non-Binding Referendum: Joint Review Board" http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic/a-more-easily-controlled-advisory-non-binding-referendum-joint-review-board/page/2#post-4953 Wed, 25 Apr 2007 01:35:12 +0000 Elisa 4953@http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/ Yeah - that's it --- Daley and Peraica are "uninformed" and are gullible enough to believe all kinds of "disinformation" that is being spread by anti-TIF proponents and are so foolish that they are falling for the "red herring" trick! I pity those two...they just don't get it. MikeT on "A More Easily Controlled Advisory, Non-Binding Referendum: Joint Review Board" http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic/a-more-easily-controlled-advisory-non-binding-referendum-joint-review-board#post-4951 Wed, 25 Apr 2007 00:05:34 +0000 MikeT 4951@http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/ Great link, Elisa. From the sept 06 meeting that was linked to... <blockquote>According to academic research, TIFs have very little positive impact upon equalized assessed value growth. Simply asserting that equalized assessed value increases in a TIF area does not establish a causal relationship; this value might have increased without the TIF. EAV totals in the annual TIF reports suggest there is growth that cannot be attributed to TIF activity. Of the 45 TIFs that had not yet received any public investment and had no debt service, only eight had negative equalized assessed value growth. The remaining 37 TIFs are growing in value without any public finance activity or subsidized private activity. The LaSalle Street TIF will be in effect for 23 years, with 12 additional optional years. As a result of the proposed ordinances and proposed resolution, the County Board would have input into the decision to create a new TIF, the TIF would be reflected on tax bills, and the State would be requested to perform statistical analysis on the effectiveness of TIFs. TIFs shrink the available tax revenue for other agencies. Countywide governments are negatively impacted by TIFs. TIFs increase everyone's tax rate. </blockquote> interesting to see those powerhouses present in the meeting such as daley and peraica. Elisa on "A More Easily Controlled Advisory, Non-Binding Referendum: Joint Review Board" http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic/a-more-easily-controlled-advisory-non-binding-referendum-joint-review-board#post-4950 Tue, 24 Apr 2007 23:46:56 +0000 Elisa 4950@http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/ My knee jerk reaction would have been that Cook County would not have bothered to come to little old Riverside for a TIF JRB meeting, but in looking at the Quigley proposal and other Cook County information on TIFs, they would most likely be interested in putting their two cents worth into the discussion. <a href="http://www.co.cook.il.us/secretary/CommitteePages/Meeting%20Reports/Finance%20Committee/2006/09-28-06ph.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.co.cook.il.us/secretary/CommitteePages/Meeting%20Reports/Finance%20Committee/2006/09-28-06ph.htm</a> MikeT on "A More Easily Controlled Advisory, Non-Binding Referendum: Joint Review Board" http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic/a-more-easily-controlled-advisory-non-binding-referendum-joint-review-board#post-4949 Tue, 24 Apr 2007 23:14:13 +0000 MikeT 4949@http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/ here is a link to a bit on the jrb votes. I would still love to know more detail on this jrb thing, especially since that is where all the trustees, save smith, want to go now. <a href="http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic.php?id=229&page&replies=39#post-3779" rel="nofollow">http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic.php?id=229&page&replies=39#post-3779</a> Elisa on "A More Easily Controlled Advisory, Non-Binding Referendum: Joint Review Board" http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic/a-more-easily-controlled-advisory-non-binding-referendum-joint-review-board#post-4948 Tue, 24 Apr 2007 22:54:13 +0000 Elisa 4948@http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/ So then they had a meeting with the advisory commissions - and not with the affected taxing bodies (except for d96) as was stated in the document? [Edit: I think our responses are crossing in cyberspace!] MikeT on "A More Easily Controlled Advisory, Non-Binding Referendum: Joint Review Board" http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic/a-more-easily-controlled-advisory-non-binding-referendum-joint-review-board#post-4947 Tue, 24 Apr 2007 22:50:36 +0000 MikeT 4947@http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/ they called them the Commissioners (play peter gunn theme, please), I believe. One guy there was the Zoning Commission. He sat next to me. Afterwards, I discovered he was the person behind the Olmsted Commons plan -aka TJMAX-, the one that satisfies current zoning (unlike the VC), and only needs a TIF to go. "Just add a TIF", bang! Riverside is now on the map! Yes, d208 was there too. the superintendent was there. He asked a simple question, 'how will the tif be paid?', and received a real long, and expensive, reply from Mr McKenna, the consultant. So I think it was commissioners and affected taxing bodies. why no minutes? maybe the riverside village manager took the minutes that day as I was told she did on behalf of the clerk on the only other day they ever discussed the tif substantively, on 4-14. It is hard to hold the maps and take minutes. btw, we are still waiting from a statement from district 208 on the tif. Elisa on "A More Easily Controlled Advisory, Non-Binding Referendum: Joint Review Board" http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic/a-more-easily-controlled-advisory-non-binding-referendum-joint-review-board#post-4946 Tue, 24 Apr 2007 22:50:27 +0000 Elisa 4946@http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/ My other concern about the JRB is what happens if the taxing bodies are a no show? This happened in Clarendon Hills: "September 28th 2005 Hopefully no one else wasted their time and effort to try to talk to Joint Review Board members and help them make an informed decision. This thing was decided some time ago. Of the seven taxing bodies that were to appear on the JRB, only four showed up. After the usual S.B. Friedman riveting presentation and a few unanswered questions from the audience, the JRB voted 4 to 1 to approve the TIF. Of course the only one opposed was the person representing residents of the district." I can imagine that some of the taxing bodies wouldn't bother. If that is the case, then is it a simple majority? But I guess the whole thing doesn't matter because the JRB vote is not binding, is it? Elisa on "A More Easily Controlled Advisory, Non-Binding Referendum: Joint Review Board" http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic/a-more-easily-controlled-advisory-non-binding-referendum-joint-review-board#post-4945 Tue, 24 Apr 2007 22:38:12 +0000 Elisa 4945@http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/ OK, that all comes back to me! I have a habit of revisiting old documents and looking at them with fresh eyes - or through a different lens, if you will. What affected taxing bodies were there - just district 96? or were they all there? I also wonder why there are not minutes from that meeting to be found - only the powerpoint show from McKenna. MikeT on "A More Easily Controlled Advisory, Non-Binding Referendum: Joint Review Board" http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic/a-more-easily-controlled-advisory-non-binding-referendum-joint-review-board#post-4944 Tue, 24 Apr 2007 22:33:08 +0000 MikeT 4944@http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/ I went to that meeting. I believe it was also called a commissioners meeting. public was invited to listen but could not talk or ask questions. it was the first public trotting of the tif. this was the meeting that was held the day of the central and hauser veterans day programs, and in which I felt it sadly ironic that they were going to 'take my house' coercively reducing basic property rights after I watched those moving programs about the sacrifice of our veterans to support those basic freedoms. Also this is the session where I anticipated incisive questioning from the school board members, and all I got was stuff like, District 96 board member to Pres. Wiaduck, <blockquote>'riverside is infamous in its lack of support of developers. Once the developers are incented to come to Riverside with this TIF, WILL YOU HAVE THE INSTITUTIONAL WILL to FOLLOW THROUGH and SUPPORT THE DEVELOPERS?' </blockquote> Mr Wiaduck shook his head yes. I heard later that the district 96 board member who uttered this question was a part time real estate developer. Oh yeah, People: can you see now why the Village Board to a member yesterday, except for the next trustee of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , smith, wanted to get to the JRB? Kittens. <a href="http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic.php?id=297&page&replies=21#post-4576" rel="nofollow">http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic.php?id=297&page&replies=21#post-4576</a> . couple links on this <a href="http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic.php?id=35&page&replies=38#post-508" rel="nofollow">http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic.php?id=35&page&replies=38#post-508</a> <a href="http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic.php?id=229&page&replies=39#post-3679" rel="nofollow">http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic.php?id=229&page&replies=39#post-3679</a> <a href="http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic.php?id=210&page&replies=26#post-3373" rel="nofollow">http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic.php?id=210&page&replies=26#post-3373</a>