The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.

TIF as a mechanism isn't welfare in and of itself, it just ends up being used that way a lot.

The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.

Joravsky and Dumke cover TIF districts better than anyone. I'm eager to read what they have to say. Isn't the biggest TIF district the Loop?

I don't have a problem with using TIFs on the L, for whatever it's worth. The Fulton Market area is growing and needed its own station (though maybe not necessarily the Death Star it got), and the North Side Red Line was falling apart.

You shouldn't need a TIF for that though. It should be paid for from a regular taxing body. TIFs are specifically designed to hide the money and where it's going. It's something a mayor can use to reward his friends and supporters on the backs of the taxpayers.

I guarantee the average Chicagoan doesn't understand what a TIF is or how it operates or why it's a tax increase. Why the fuck should Joe Taxpayer provide money for the Pritzkers to build another hotel?

You shouldn't need a TIF for that though. It should be paid for from a regular taxing body. TIFs are specifically designed to hide the money and where it's going. It's something a mayor can use to reward his friends and supporters on the backs of the taxpayers.

I guarantee the average Chicagoan doesn't understand what a TIF is or how it operates or why it's a tax increase. Why the fuck should Joe Taxpayer provide money for the Pritzkers to build another hotel?

Watch this thread closely for a link to Joravsky's response wherein he takes this pro- rich guy drivel apart piece by piece.

In fact, while I'm on the subject, this gets at the heart of why Mayor Rahm's Marriott Hotel/DePaul basketball arena deal is so horrendous.

In that deal, the mayor's planning to spend at least $55 million in TIF dollars to buy tax-producing land in the South Loop that, once we own it, won't pay any property tax dollars. 'Cause government owned land is tax exempt.

It runs counter to the TIF program's purpose! In the case of Marriott/DePaul, we're spending money to lose money.

But before we throw ourselves at Mayor Rahm's feet and say thank you, master, thank you, let's remember that TIFs are supposed to be for the poorest of the poor.

And that the poor still fare worse than the rich when it comes to doling out TIF handouts in the age of Mayor Rahm.

So that although it's nice that the mayor gave $10 million to build that Whole Foods in Englewood, he still has another $19 million to give to build anything in Englewood before it catches up with the $29 million he gave some of the world's wealthiest developers to build an upscale skyscraper in River North.

Also, it's great, as Greg notes, that Mayor Rahm's dedicating TIF money for Finkl Steel and Mount Sinai.

But, to be accurate, those deals are leftovers from the Daley administration—you can read about them right here. I loved bashing Mayor Daley as much as the next guy. But it's kind of sneaky to attack him now that he's out of power just to try to make Rahm look good. As is the rage, these days.

By and large, Mayor Rahm's using the TIF program as sort of his own little infrastructure slush fund.

I agree that's better than using it to feed $40 million to the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, as Mayor Daley once proposed.

The problem is that Mayor Emanuel's not equitably dividing the TIF-funded infrastructure pie.

Just to give you two contrasting examples . . .

In the first four years of his reign, Mayor Rahm allowed the Near South TIF District—in the South Loop, one of the fastest growing parts of town—to bring in more than $60 million in TIF money, according to city records.

Of that, he dedicated about $6 million for street resurfacing.

In contrast, the Roseland/Michigan TIF district—in one of the city's poorest areas—gathered $1.1 million. Of which nothing was spent on street resurfacing.

In another words, when it comes to TIFs under Mayor Rahm, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Just like under Mayor Daley.

If the mayor's going to use TIFs as a general fix-stuff-up fund, he should dole out they money equitably, so that all wards—rich and poor—get the same share.

In any event, when you hear people tell you TIFs are just thimbles of water in oceans of need, please be aware that they're basically doing Mayor Rahm's bidding.

I understand why Rahm harps on that point. He wants you to think that $400 million a year is chump change so that you'll leave him alone to spend it any old way he wants.

Shame on you, Greg, for providing him cover.

The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.

You understand the argument, "but for" that money the project would be considered by a private developer.

I don't think you are viewing these things in the larger context. This is not just a matter of someone building at a location. Chicago is in competition for investment with places far beyond its borders. Withdrawing from the competition will lead to worse problems than those created by not incentivizing investments.