In reviewing comments from this thread from long ago, I was struck with a few things. Way back in January, there was a lot of speculation from pro-TIF people and people who were willing to support a limited TIF that once certain issues were taken care of, the TIF would be readily acceptable to most residents.
Some assumptions that were made:
1. The schools would be made whole, (or would have a deal or at least meetings with the Board). To my knowledge, that has not happened.
2. There was also the assumption that the "numbers" would be forthcoming with regards to the schools. To my knowledge, that has not happened.
3. The issue of the parking garage and eminant domain was not really a concern. The comments ranged from "the board has no intention of ever doing that" to "don't worry, there is a way to take ED off the table". To my knowledge, the board has made no comments in public to back off of that issue. [Edit: Ms. Rush's comment: "I recall that I was explaining that a Parking Structure would be an unlikely choice to have happen as the Board knows that it would not be acceptable to the community...the Board is —˜educated' about the community (in this context, I meant that they are aware that this would be a really difficult decision and would be the absolute last resort to address the parking situation). The discussion was to underscore the unlikelihood that any parking structure would ever be built in Riverside." If this is the case, then why don't they draft words to that effect in the TIF proposal?]
4. There was qualified support from the EDC for a TIF that was "pay as you go". I have seen "pay as you go" dropped from the Village's conversation lately. Why is that?
I have to wonder if the people who were supportive of a limited or qualified TIF are still in support when it appears as if the limits or qualifiers are not going to happen. If so, how?