Finding money for projects

Here’s a quite well done review of a neighborhood in Chicago and how a magic bullet called Tax Increment Financing (TIF) didn’t create the revitalization funding that was projected. Two lessons here: 1) Not surprisingly, TIFs are not the sure-fire solution that they have been sometimes touted as. If the TIF district does not generate property tax increases naturally, it ain’t gonna work. 2) If a consultant generates a one-point, single-number projection of the future economic impact of any project, don’t accept it. Demand a range of potential outcomes that cover a range of possibilities – what happens if there is less development that full buildout? What if there’s a lot less? What changes to which factors in the assumptions will have the biggest impact on the outcomes – for example, if the land use mix changes from the initial game plan, how will different possible mixes affect the projected outcome? At this moment in history, we should be acutely aware of the fact that simple linear projections of the future aren’t worth the paper they’re printed on. If we settle for that kind of intellectual laziness, from either consultants or ourselves, we cannot pretend to be surprised when the results don’t turn out as we hoped. We must be more practical and more aware of the full range of possibilities if we are going to create wise – or just reasonably functional- communities. Hat tip to Storm Cunningham of www.revitaliz.com for this link.

Here’s a quite well done review of a neighborhood in Chicago and how a magic bullet called Tax Increment Financing (TIF) didn’t create the revitalization funding that was projected. Two lessons here: 1) Not surprisingly, TIFs are not the sure-fire solution that they have been sometimes touted as. If the TIF district does not generate property tax increases naturally, it ain’t gonna work. 2) If a consultant generates a one-point, single-number projection of the future economic impact of any project, don’t accept it. Demand a range of potential outcomes that cover a range of possibilities – what happens if there is less development that full buildout? What if there’s a lot less? What changes to which factors in the assumptions will have the biggest impact on the outcomes – for example, if the land use mix changes from the initial game plan, how will different possible mixes affect the projected outcome? At this moment in history, we should be acutely aware of the fact that simple linear projections of the future aren’t worth the paper they’re printed on. If we settle for that kind of intellectual laziness, from either consultants or ourselves, we cannot pretend to be surprised when the results don’t turn out as we hoped. We must be more practical and more aware of the full range of possibilities if we are going to create wise – or just reasonably functional- communities. Hat tip to Storm Cunningham of www.revitaliz.com for this link.

RT @restorm Chicago discovers TIF can’t revitalize all by itself in poorest neighborhoods. http://t.co/bBCBUjJU

Funding improvements – another reason to look under every rock.

Funding improvements – another reason to look under every rock.

From the Downtown Idea Reporter — sorry,  I don’t have the full story, but the following bit  is intriguing.  Who knew that the USDA would help fund a downtown parking ...