Jordan writes:
>Here is the test: News accounts state that the downtown Target project is
>receiving $127 million in TIF subsidies. Can someone with knowledge of the
>local tax structure please provide a liberal estimate of how many years it
>will take for the downtown Target store to pay back $127 million in local
>taxes?
There are bigger tests, too.
Is the property developable privately without TIF? If it is, then the city's
general fund gets the cash right away.
True, TIF districts fund NRP now, but let's not forget, one-seventh of the
city is tied up in such districts. That means non-TIF districts - you, me,
and unsubsidized businesses -- must bear a greater share of general-fund
needs.
It's entirely plausible that if we did fewer TIF deals - on DEVELOPABLE
property - we'd have more money in the general fund and could subsidize an
NRP-type program directly. (And if you're an NRP-hater, we could do some
other form of neighborhood assistance.)
Let's not fall into the trap of thinking we need to support bad
(over-subsidized) TIF deals to help neighborhoods.
On some level, the TIF-NRP link is an accounting gimmick that dedicates TIF
district revenues to the NRP account. But we're hurting everyone if we
subsidize property that would produce big tax revenues anyway (such as an
unsubsidized Target tower without the subsidized Target store). All it takes
is political courage and long-term vision not to hand out needless subsidy
bon-bons - and to be sure elected officials support the neighborhoods,
regardless of whether the cash comes from TIF or the general fund.
David Brauer
King Field - Ward 10
_______________________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
