(Ed.note: This was a comment on the recent July 2007 Common Council minutes that I have posted for better visiability. )
Comment - Show Original Post
Bill Connors said...
Unfortunately, the Common Council has been fooled into thinking that using pay-as-you-go financing somehow changes the realtity that the city, ultimately, will pay for the infrastructure for commercial lots on bare ground, something it has never done in the past, and something that cities with any sense avoid doing at all cost. If this goes through, there never will be another commercial lot developed in this city without the city paying for the infrastructure. Furthermore, other developers, such as John Morning, who did not receive tax dollars to pay for the infrasturure for their new commercial lots in the past will ask to receive tax dollars to be treated fairly. This is a huge waste of the taxpayers' dollars. It is too bad the city's professional advisors don't have the guts to speak up and tell the Council what a bad deal this is.
Bill Connors
1:52 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You know I had my issues with Mr. Connors over different things but the one thing he always did was answer a question and explain things. Something current city gov. trys its best not to do. We were lucky to have him, and we are lucky that he continues to give his insight on our blog, he is very knowledgable, and does a excellent job of explaining things.
ReplyDeleteSome people have no concept of the value of money, or how hard it is for the rest of us to make. Giving this group access to the city tax funds was like giving a spoiled rich kid a credit card.
ReplyDeleteIt sure seems to me like the Mayor is working this equation backwards..."Mayor Decker called for clarification of motion language to accommodate other potential district projects..."
ReplyDeleteThen we find: "add the language “or acquire land” in the commercial areas of TID #6."
So now we're preparing to use TIF money to buy land?
Clearly she has a plan that is outside the normal rules so she is changing the rules to accommodate her plan. Unfortunately, there is no way to know if this is prudent.
I agree with Bill that someone should be looking out for the public a bit more and helping the Council folks see the pro's and con's of their actions.
I attended a three day seminar put on by Ehlers, detailing TIF in public finance, and they gave much more time to the "pay as you go" theory than they appeared to here. And this seminar was geared for people with a strong finance background.
It feels like there is manipulation at play, and without a lot more information it's just not possible to know if this is a sound choice.
It isn't right that they are making such decisions in a vacuum.
We should be demanding more communication and explanation from our elected officials.