Website Home   or   Forum Home

Riverside Info » About Riverside

21. MikeT
    Member

    Yes, I heard 'resolution'..by someone. I took that to mean a VIllage Trustee resolution. This is not what I am speaking of now, nor what I was asking for during Mike's time at the mic, and this is not the limiting factor that should be done if Riverside were to do a TIF.

    During the last six months, I have witnessed what it means to have a Trustee Resolution: 48 hours before a meeting there is a an agenda item placed. At the meeting, a trustee asks to second it. If there are 4 ayes, it gets implemented.

    This can be rolled back with exactly the same amount of ease, lack of hurt, lack of cost and lack of burden to the ones in power. It is for all practical intents, meaningless, in fact, for the purposes of providing even a modicum of the preservation of private property rights in a TIF. It does not really significantly reduce the power of the TIF to enable or facilitate the emiment domain.

    On the other hand, also during this last six months, I have seen what it takes to revise and re-do a TIF document, to go through the 120 day review period of public vetting. There is significant time, money, including distinct votes for money allocation to a consultant, and public relations costs placed on the municipality that are greater than what the state of Illinois would place on a municipality in a ED exercise without a tif. They are certainly significantly greater than a Trustee resolution.

    With all due respect to the Trustee who uttered this, I suspect he or she knew that it was toothless, and thus was it proferred. If it were really uttered by the one leading the TIF charge, then it is even more understandable.

    We may have clarified who said / what said / when said and why said. Thanks, Elisa. And thanks to Catherine for bringing up this extra detail of the 5/7 meeting.

    Posted Thursday May 10, 2007 14:45 #

22. Catherine
    Member

    It was the case. You repeated the question after it had already been stated that ED was out, because you didn't hear what he said.

    That doesn't mean they can't use their separate power of ED to take land for a clear public purpose, such as municipal parking, having nothing to do with the TIF. You will recall that Mr Wiadick once claimed that the people on Forest need parking. Hence my suggestion that the village or the businesses or someone over there buy that property and make it a parking lot.

    Posted Thursday May 10, 2007 17:27 #

23. MikeT
    Member

    Here are a couple of posts from someone who knows more about TIFs than I that indicate that a vetting process would need to be followed (my emphasis). But who knows? The TIF consultant is sick, and we do not have a dime to call him anyway. He once told me similar things as I caught him on the way out of a meeting.

    But even if he said something is the case, it would have to be trudged through an eminent domain process in the courts in order to fully assess it. One thing seems clear: the municipality could not use TIF monies to do eminent domain assuming it is proscribed in the tif plan. But then, from what I can see of the TIF accounting, I bet it would be hard to distinguish a TIF dollar from a non TIF dollar.

    One reason I like the referendum system of raising funds is that it is for a specific purpose and well understood and bought into by the people paying for it. I definitely would like all the villagers to vote on taking someone's house for a parking lot. Makes it nice and clear.

    http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic.php?id=81&page=2&replies=50#post-913
    corbi328
    Member
    A couple of clarifications. Just because a property is on the properties of interest list does not mean that the Village will acquire that property or that it has to acquire it via ED. Also, to be fair and completely above board, there is one more clarification. Even if the property is not on the properties of interest list but is within the TIF boundaries, it could be acquired by the Village using eminent domain. What would be required is a material amendment to the TIF redevelopment Plan, which implies that the Village would have to re-initiate the whole process (i.e. hold public hearings, convene the joint review board etc... ). Obviously a very cumbersome process and one that the Village would probably want to avoid at all costs.

    and

    http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic.php?id=4&page=3&replies=122#post-355
    corbi328
    Member
    Kim thanks for relaying that story. I do want to add some color to the last part of your post. Only the properties currently identified as possible targets for acquisition are at risk to be acquired during the life of the TIF. For additional properties to be acquired, this would constitute a major change in the draft redevelopment Plan and Project and would necessitate a restarting of the TIF process (i.e public meeting, public hearing, Joint Review Board, etc...). I guess in theory it could happen but in my mind it is highly unlikely as it would be very cumbersome and expensive.

    Posted Thursday May 10, 2007 20:43 #

24. Catherine
    Member

    Yes, well, I wouldn't rely on Corbi's judgment, or interpret it that way. There is eminent domain power under the TIF, and the separate eminent domain power of the village. The latter would be the old fashioned, pre-Kelo type eminent domain for a clear public purpose, the former the Kelo inspired real estate speculation of the TIFs. But once they sort out all the amendments to the TIF document, you could send a letter to the village attorney requesting clarification of your status.

    Posted Friday May 11, 2007 08:07 #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.