Shouldn’t we be making the TIF application process less easy?
l3wis Before the first reading of the amended TIF application process was even presented, city councilors were already buckling (video) including mayoral candidate and city councilor, Greg Jamison (article);
Councilor Greg Jamison presented an amendment to the TIF ordinance but is planning a few changes before the next reading.
Instead of requiring each investor to list his or her name on the application for TIF financing, he’s asking that those with a stake of 10 percent or more disclose that they’re invested in the project.
Basically, if it is a $3 million dollar project and you invest $299,999.99 to the project, your name will be left off of the investor list. What’s the point of doing it at all? While I don’t think the legislation had much of a chance of passing the entire council anyway, this watered down version, even if it passes, will accomplish little of the original goal; TRANSPARENCY to THE PUBLIC of who is asking for government assistance through a tax rebate program. This isn’t about the developers, it’s about the public knowing who is benefitting from the programs. Jamison mentions in the meeting that the developers have told him that their investors are their ‘intellectual property’ and they don’t want to give that up. Well guess what? You don’t have to in a private development, but once you ask to borrow or take away from the citizens ‘intellectual property (our tax dollars)’ then it is no longer a ‘private deal’.
Obviously it is no secret that Huether and his wife have made property investments in this community. It is also no secret that Erpenbach is personal friends with some of these developers (Mike Crane comes to mind) and has received buckets of money in campaign donations from them (even though she doesn’t have a challenger). Some have asked me what kind of property investments her or her husband may have, heck people have asked me about the other councilors. Maybe this isn’t about protecting the ‘intellectual property’ at all but about protecting the council’s private investments in property?
Also, I am getting tiresome of the lip service the council keeps giving us on amending city ordinance. It reminds me of the ACA and the stripping of the most important part of the legislation, Single-Payer option.
Why does this council continue to propose amendments then bail or water down those amendments at the second reading? Lip service. It makes them appear they are ‘making changes’ when all they really are doing is shuffling papers.
Besides the investors being listed, the bigger, better change would be limiting TIF’s for their intended purpose, affordable housing and cleaning up blithed areas. That intention has been thrown by the wayside a long time ago.
Not to mention the money taken away from the tax rolls for specifically the county;
The growing number of criminal cases in Minnehaha County is putting a strain on the county budget and could lead to higher taxes.
It’s one of the biggest issues Minnehaha County Commissioners face right now with a county jail that’s bursting at the seams and a state’s attorney’s office that is overloaded with cases.
The county will likely have to build a new multimillion dollar jail in the next few years but the growth in property taxes isn’t keeping up with the rise in crime on the county level.
At the same time, city resources are increasing as sales tax revenues rise. This means more spending on police officers who are arresting criminals and putting them in the crowded county jail.
So while we are giving property tax rebates to the already sickly rich developers and their investors, while proposing property tax increases on the rest of us. Enough of the Insanity!
