Thanks, Kim. I was going to make that precise point to Mike S. The village's financial difficulties [which I have heard alluded to many times over the past decade], if real, should be addressed by telling the electorate what the needs are, how much they cost, and asking for the necessary tax rate to fund it. That's the honest way to do it. If the people vote "NO", then it means that they will accept fewer services OR they do not believe that the sky is falling. Example: If the money spent on Camiros over the past few years to inform us that "density is our friend" had been spent on tangible improvements, we would have something real now, such as better maintenance of our public lands. The TIF is an indirect, hidden tax increase. Cook County Commissioner Quigley estimates that Chicago's property taxes are 10% higher because of TIFs.
Riverside Info » About Riverside
Discussion from Workshop 2 - Sat. Feb 10
(116 posts)-
Posted Thursday Feb 22, 2007 12:01 #
-
Mike S - when this issue first surfaced it was all about the desire of residents to have more shopping choices. Now it's just money. The concept that we should sequester a rvenue stream for this Board and future Boards to use to make unspecified improvements may be your chosen way to raise funds, but not mine. And the fact that the TIF is back-loaded is proof that it is not a good method for dealing with the current shortfalls we are told exist. Taking money that now is scheduled for a lot of people - including the schools - and giving it to the Board to use for inducements for a developer to do what he had previously promised to do, and more, without it is foolish in the extreme. And trusting this Board that first wasted all that money with Camiros to assemble what we now see is a seriously flawed zoning ordinance, and then who went ahead and circumvented it anyway, is just plain stupid. IF we need $150K to finish the well house, and X dollars to fix - not enlarge for future development - our sewer and water - and other agreed upon projects of that kind, then they should get GO bonds or a tax rate increase to do it, and let the residents decide if they want it or not. But not just a few people evading the time honore way to do it and talking about all kinds of zany projects from boutique hotels to fixing a wall in the Swan Pond that doesn't need it before they know how the river course will alter. It's clear to most peopl that this is about a Development Agenda that wouldn't pass if they tried to finance it with bonds, so they (and their consultants) ame up with this. How much did we pay Kane McKenna for the TOD and this TIF proposal? A lot. Some people make money off these things, that's why they do it. And that's why it is being pushed.
Posted Thursday Feb 22, 2007 12:15 # -
MikeT, your comment: "MONEY ...for (a) a cash strapped Village administration, where, I was told in the last Financial workshop, the expenses exceed current income by around a couple million dollars a year - from my recollection. They are drawing from some kind of fund that is diminishing over time." Trustee Smith also made the intelligible remark that if we have to decide whether to meet police payroll or maintain the trees, the former would have to be the priority.
But I just stated that I do not see in any of the projections for TIF revenues that this money is going into the village operations fund. The $10M earmarked so far is NOT. Hence my confusion. If this were its purpose, and Lonnie has indicated it is not, WHY CAN'T WE GET A SIMPLE PRESENTATION OF THE ANNUAL BUDGETS, THEIR JUSTIFICATION, WHAT WE NEED MONEY FOR AND WHEN AND WHY, WHY WE CANNOT OTHERWISE PAY FOR IT, AND HOW AND WHEN THE TIF WOULD PAY FOR IT. Lonnie has indicated this as well.
I have asked this question on this forum a dozen times, even started threads on it, but the EDC members on this forum ignore the question. I presume from that that they cannot answer it.
Posted Friday Feb 23, 2007 06:15 # -
Spatny - its about money and creating a more attractive/vibrant CBD. What are your alternate suggestions?
Posted Friday Feb 23, 2007 10:25 # -
I've been giving them to you for months. Vision #5 remember, an Architectural Competition to see what can be done with it, generate focus and attention on Riverside, bring it into the public eye in the right way, and while that is going on, fix what infrastructure NEEDS to be fixed. Simultaneously, let's do some low cost promotion for Architectural Riverside. Each of those is a positive step that would not take anyone's property, allow us to look at things in a positive way, educate us (perhaps), and bring high profile publicity to the development and investment community and the public at large, and do it for a lot less than we paid for this TIF exercise. How many times do I have to repeat these. What's wrong with doing them. Come on, step up, make a decision. Don't wait for your mommy to tell you what to do. She hasn't done so well in the development sphere up to now. Neither has Daddy. You guys can do it. I'll try to help you in every way I can. What more can I offer?
Posted Friday Feb 23, 2007 10:53 # -
Catherine, thank you for clarifying that the TIF will not help in the operations - directly. I was repeating what I thought I heard in the Tues workshop. I believe, actually, that a person from the audience summarized it the way I said - covering the shortfall.
So if the TIF is not covering the shortfall, is the tif money, then, intended to be 'invested' into development projects with the expected return being higher EAV (tax revenue) and a little in the sales tax department?
Posted Friday Feb 23, 2007 13:51 #
Reply
You must log in to post.