Website Home   or   Forum Home

Riverside Info » About Riverside

21. MikeSedivy
    Member

    There have been a number of programs discussed just in the last 7 months or so that I have been on the EDC. Main Street was not one of them - certainly if that had not been investigated prior to my tenure then it was an oversight. I would love to hear more about Main Street if there is anyone out there familiar with the program. Our next EDC Meeting is January 4 at 7:30 and we would also love to hear from you then.

    I do not think anyone supporting the TIF is putting Economic Development ahead of the schools. I happen to believe that a TIF would be beneficial to the schools in the long run although there is a slight sacrifice in the short-run. Maybe I misinterpreted Dr. Lamberson's comments at the last public meeting, but I heard him offer qualified support for the TIF and asked that a shorter period than 23 years be considered. He appeared to have a very good grasp of the subject. I put a lot of faith in our Superintendents and School Boards to represent their interests. I suggest you take your case to them because I think we have a few threads showing the initial impact to the schools to be anywhere from $0 to $1,000,000 a year. I assume the TIF would be DOA if Dr. Lamberson concluded that this would kill the schools and voiced such an opinion. In analyzing your numbers, please remember that we are tax capped, so growing the current tax revenue at the cap appears to be the appropriate analysis. Also, the draft of the Redevelopment Plan assumes significant development as a result of the TIF. I think it is faulty to assume that same development would occur without the incentive.

    Posted Saturday Dec 23, 2006 11:37 #

22. MikeSedivy
    Member

    Catherine & Chris - you are correct. Looks like "But for" has multiple applications/meanings.

    Posted Saturday Dec 23, 2006 11:47 #

23. HollyMachina
    Member

    Mike, thanks for your reply. I know nothing about finance including the Main Street program. If I have a chance, I'll google it & see what I come up with. I will be out of town during your EDC meeting but honestly, I have little interest in attending as, like I said, I have no finance experience. I doubt I'd have much to offer.

    Dr. Lamberson DOES have a good grasp of TIF's as he was involved in two before he came to Riverside. Please ask him about it. As I remember, one school district was hurt by a TIF and the other benefitted. I missed the last district 96 board meeting (Dec 19) but at the November one, each board member spoke about their worry that the TIF might hurt the school district & even asked Dr. Lamberson to look into the possiblity of hiring an attorney that has experience in representing school districts w/ (& impending) TIF's. I'll try to get the minutes from that November meeting.

    I did a quick spread sheet & discovered a number of interesting things. I'm wondering if I should add another thread as this really involves the schools & the numbers. I think I will.

    Posted Saturday Dec 23, 2006 12:02 #

24. MikeSedivy
    Member

    One idea that has been floated is to include Central and Hauser in the TIF district. This would make it a much clearer path to get money back to the schools. The counter to that is 1) what about the other schools? and 2) because of contiguity requirements this would necessitate a considerable amount of extra homes to be included in the TIF district. Does anyone have thoughts on that?

    Posted Saturday Dec 23, 2006 14:42 #

25. ChrisHajer
    Member

    I don't think there is any chance that the TIF boundaries will be redrawn to include Central and Hauser (and the D96 office too.) I just don't see it happening.

    1. It's not fair to any other schools in the district (Ames, Blythe, Hollywood) or RB.
    2. If it were redrawn to include those two schools, it would necessarily have to include more houses. There's no good reason for that: it's just a requirement that the boundaries of a TIF be continguous.

    I think Doug Pollock suggested it might be possible for D96 to be reimbursed or exempted from the freeze on the increment in this comment:
    http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic.php?id=4&replies=112#post-50

    I'm not summing it up very well, so it would be best to reread Doug's comment. The point is, I think there is a greater chance of this happening than redrawing the boundaries of the proposed TIF.

    Posted Saturday Dec 23, 2006 15:53 #

26. DouglasPollock
    Member

    Chris, I agree that we probably do not want to start adding houses to the TIF District; if anything, the Village should study the impact of removing all single-family residential properties from the TIF District.

    In regards to reimbursement of school districts, I am told that this has been done and in fact, it is my understanding that River Forest has this exact set up with their local school district for a River Forest TIF.

    In other threads, I see many questions about the Village's ability to "guarantee no eminent domain". To the extent that nothing in life is guaranteed, I agree that the Village cannot give up their right to eminent domain. But there is no question, in fact I would say ABSOLUTELY no question, as to the Board's ability to establish a policy via Resolution or Amendment to the TIF or TOD Plans that they will not use eminent domain within the proposed TIF District. Just as with any Board policy or regulation (e.g. zoning, building code, water rates, speed limits, etc.), a new board could come in and change that policy or even the present Board could change that policy. But such a change would be subject to public scrutiny - just like with any of the other aforementioned Village policies, plans or regulations.

    Posted Saturday Dec 23, 2006 16:17 #

27. HollyMachina
    Member

    I found this article when I googled "river forest tif."

    http://www.wednesdayjournalonline.com/main.asp?SectionID=3&SubSectionID=15&ArticleID=6092&TM=31967.62

    Here's a quote from it, "In the short term (which has been going on for more than a generation), TIF districts deprive schools of tax dollars with the promise of greater returns in the future. (There is also the legitimate side issue of whether the village has invested TIF funds prudently to maximize the long-term payoff.)"

    There are all sorts of deals school districts can make w/ village's & their TIF money including carve-outs & straight cash. In the RF deal, the school districts will get $5 million of the TIF money. I think OP did some carve-outs & straight cash. Because making deals is so prevalent in villages that have TIF's, this makes me question those that say TIF's can be good for schools. Also, so far, I've only seen schools making deals (screaming & yelling) w/ villages AFTER the TIF's are in place. This makes me think that in the beginning of the TIF's life, not THAT much of the schools money is diverted to the TIF fund. Whereas later on (maybe 12 years into the TIF or sooner) when the increment is larger are the schools really feeling the hit. I am not convinced that even w/ a "deal" our schools will be better off w/ this TIF.

    Posted Sunday Dec 24, 2006 08:21 #

28. MikeSedivy
    Member

    If the TIF is "working", then the increment should be growing considerably. It is then tempting to say "hey what about me?" when there is a big pot of increment generated. I don't see this as a bad thing, but I think it is faulty logic to assume this is money that is "lost" for the schools because it most likely wouldn't have been there in the first place if the TIF weren't created to spur re-development. This seems to be precisiely why Dr. Lamberson requested a shorter TIF period. I believe vocal opposition from the Superintendent(s) or a majority of the school board(s) would block the enactment of the TIF and I would prefer to defer to them because they are the closest to that specific issue. I understand that the TIF could be passed against a thumbs-down from the Joint Review Board, but the hurdle is higher and I can't fathom this Village Board taking such action.

    Posted Sunday Dec 24, 2006 10:24 #

29. MikeT
    Member

    I really do not want the 45 + 14 day TIF countdown to start ticking, including the formation of the JRB, with the level of questioning that I have seen thus far from the school administration.

    To wit...

    The following are some of the skeptical and critical questions from the school board and the superintendant that I heard from my vantage point in a public room for two public hearings.

    **11-9 commissioners meeting on the TIF**
    After the presentation of the proposed TIF by the consultant, I heard one district 96 school board member ask the following question to the village administration:

    After the developers were attracted to Riverside with the TIF funds, would the administration have the 'institutional will' to follow through and support the developers' projects? This was said in light of Riverside's supposed infamous slow moving/obstructionism that has made, in the past, development so difficult in Riverside.

    **11-21 Public comment meeting**
    I heard Dr Lamberson say to the TIF consultant and to the village administration that he would give 'extra credit' to any child whose family would move into the TIF district. This was said, I believe, so that district 96 could avail itself of some of the reimbursement funds that are in the TIF budget.

    I am very confident that this is what I heard. If someone heard something else, feel free to clarify or to add to my characterization. If there were minutes taken, or if there is a video archive, the exact words can be reported.

    I know our school board is composed of smart people, so I must be be missing something when, in a similar school district (Pleasantdale of nearby Burr Ridge), the school board voted a solid 7-0 to fight a TIF tooth and nail (expending $175,000 from their school coiffers). Basically, the Pleasantdale school board did not like the sequestering of their school funds. This sounds reasonable to me.

    I'd like to find out why there is not more skepticism expressed. Maybe it is happening in closed doors? Until then, please do not let the horse out of the barn and the TIF clock tick towards its inexorable conclusion.

    mike

    Posted Monday Dec 25, 2006 01:49 #

30. MikeSedivy
    Member

    I believe the Village has heard the complaints on its processes loud and clear and that great strides are being made or at least attempted. I believe this was what all of the zoning clarification effort was about. I also recall hearing a Commissioner from the Planning Commission speak up and discuss the efforts and progress made on that front.

    As far as Dr. Lamberson's comment, I am not sure what point you are making. A "tuition reimbursement" for new students attracted to the District is a good thing, no?

    Posted Monday Dec 25, 2006 14:27 #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.