Riverside Info » About Riverside

Workshop 3

(94 posts)

Tags:

1 2 3 ... 10

  1. Tim
    Member

    Corbi, Mike S, to carry over our discussion from the Mission thread.

    I have a better idea. I heard you are going to be on the TIF panel for Workshop 3.

    Why don't you have the TIF experts draft a model of what would have happened if a TIF was enacted in Riverside in 2000. They can apply the same parameters used to extrapolate the benefit of a TIF in the future to actual real financial data from the past.

    Then they can compare what 'would' have happended with a TIF in Riverside vs. what really happend without a TIF...ie, how much tax revenue the Schools actually levied from the proposed TIF district in 2000-2005 vs. what they would have levied if a TIF had been in place.

    I'm sure this comparison would be of interest to all sides.

    Posted Friday Feb 16, 2007 11:32 #

  2. Tim
    Member

    Corbi, I am also using data presented during workshop 1.

    The Village levy is capped at (5%)and 2004-2005 levy increase (the year of the assessmet) was limited to 3.7%.

    As presented in Workshop 1, the Riverside portion of District 96 levy alone went up 21.8% between 2004 and 2005. This doesn't jive with the 5% cap. I'll try to find more...one link I found from the late 90's stated Illinois school districts are capped at 18% growth (although this can be adjusted by local referendum vote).

    It would be useful to know what the school district caps are (since I think the 5% you are using is for the Village Levy increase cap, not the school levy increase cap).

    Posted Friday Feb 16, 2007 12:09 #

  3. MikeSedivy
    Member

    Tim - Believe it or not, I am not strictly tied to a TIF. The only reason I am posting on this forum is to attempt to correct inaccuracies stated, whether they be intentional or not. Yes I am bothered by inaccuracies that I feel are intentional and yes sometime I show my frustration. Again, I don't believe a better alternative has been promoted and I do not think "do nothing" and "raise taxes via referendum" are creative solutions.

    The Workshops have nothing to do with promotion of the TIF. As I understand - Workshop 3 is focused on alternative Economic Development Strategies. Maybe we'll come up with something viable.

    Posted Friday Feb 16, 2007 12:59 #

  4. KimJ
    Member

    Mike,
    I believe you are going to be on the panel next week along with other EDC persons.
    Which alternative to TIF will you be pursuing?

    Posted Friday Feb 16, 2007 13:02 #

  5. MikeSedivy
    Member

    I believe the format is that a bunch of alternatives will be identified and there will be a panel discussion on the plusses and minuses of each.

    Posted Friday Feb 16, 2007 13:10 #

  6. Tim
    Member

    Mike,

    I am not completely opposed to a TIF, and, like you, I am only trying to correct inaccuracies or, where it applies, deceptive logic. In fact, that is why, the other day, I requested if anyone knew of applicable models where TIFs were in place in similar Villages (in size and scale, and with the Historic Lankmark designation) to Riverside.

    No one stepped up. I was told it doesn't matter anyway.

    Sitting in workshop 1, we were flashed a slide that shows Riverside district 96 schools received a 21.8% increase in tax levy (see page 23 of link below) between 2004 and 2005. Corbi says the cap is 5% (although the Village is capped...he extrapolates that to the schools). 21.8% vs. 5% that's an discrepancy. Who is right? What is the school levy cap?

    http://www.riverside.il.us/vertical/Sites/%7B42F3B77D-FE50-43B3-96BF-EB06D8EB0A86%7D/uploads/%7B7934DA90-7875-419B-B7B3-44989AAF9930%7D.PDF

    Posted Friday Feb 16, 2007 13:18 #

  7. MikeSedivy
    Member

    Tim - I believe Kevin was referring to the percentage of a Riverside resident's tax bill that goes to District 96 and how that has been increasing as a % relative to the % that goes to the Village. I don't think it has anything to do with the cap.

    Posted Friday Feb 16, 2007 13:25 #

  8. Tim
    Member

    From another link,

    Tim - you're $800,000 was not real world due to caps. I think you just did Corbi's math for him.

    Good.

    Then show me where the schools are capped at 5% increase. Or even better, link me to the actual data for School district 96 and RB high school tax levys for 2000-2005.

    We can then replace my rough estimates with actual data from 2001-2005.

    Then we will know what the schools would not have gotten if the TIF was enacted in 2000.

    We can then compare the Actual number to Corbi's Tifonomics number.

    ...and I'll grant it that Kevin was confusing, but I recall he was using those numbers to illustrate how other taxing entities are allowed to increase at a greater rate than the Village because the Village is capped at 5% whereas the other taxing entities have different caps...

    Posted Friday Feb 16, 2007 13:33 #

  9. MikeT
    Member

    MikeS said --
    I do not think "do nothing" and "raise taxes via referendum" are creative solutions

    Let me try to distinguish a true "do nothing" alternative and the min min alternative (stay small) which has been sometimes been characterized as 'do nothing'.

    Do nothing means do nothing - do same as before.

    Min min means much much. I will say one item here:

    ..1) enforcing maintenance ordinances in the cbd

    I submit THAT little to-do is harder to do than getting 1,000 cars underneath Burlington. The latter would take 4 yrs, the former has been attempted for 20. It is hardly do nothing.

    I did rough notes on this here
    http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic.php?id=183&replies=1

    .

    On this subject, I wanted to bring up something I heard in the 2-5 board meeting that Jack W said. I believe he mentioned that they would not allow vinyl windows in the Tower building, or at least in the cbd.

    I noticed something odd in the Tower Building - there are, or seems to me to be, vinyl windows everywhere. It really sticks out like a sore thumb. It does not 'look right'. Is there some kind of ordinance about this in a historical building?

    Posted Friday Feb 16, 2007 13:45 #

  10. MikeSedivy
    Member

    Tim - I believe the same tax cap applies to school districts and its the lesser of 5% and CPI. Certainly a school district can't just randomly increase its tax revenue or they wouldn't need referendums. There is also the 7% tax cap that applies to homeowners to factor in.

    I thought I understood it - Is there someone out there who isn't guessing like Tim and I are???

    Posted Friday Feb 16, 2007 13:50 #

RSS feed for this topic

1 2 3 ... 10

Reply »

You must log in to post.