Through a Glass Darkly II

Let's call this an open letter to Mayor England, and by extension, his lieutenants.

First, let us point out that we have never been rigid opponents of the use of tax increment financing (TIF) districts. Their novelty may have worn off, but their utility is not questioned by this blog. Especially in the current anti-social and anti-democratic environment fostered by a few idealogues, TIFs may be the only effective way of salvaging the promise of our city.

However, we are concerned by what appears to be subterfuge in the pending proposal on the city council's agenda to expand some of our TIF districts.

From what we have been able to gather in the past 48 hours, it appears that at least one of these "expansions" is little more than a diversion of funds from the tax rolls with no pressing need for the diversion.

A new residential development is the ostensible beneficiary of TIF bonds in an expanded State Street TIF district. Yet, the developer himself warrants that he does not need (and presumably did not ask for) TIF bonding to complete his project.

Don't hold me to these figures, but the way I hear it, about $4.5 million would be bonded out for infrastructure improvements in the State Street TIF district. The specific development being used as the stalking horse for this expansion, however, would cost only about $500,000 for streets, curbing, sewers, and attendant infrastructure implementation.

It might well be that this blog would be highly supportive of dedicating a portion of "new" tax revenues to improving the district's infrastructure. But because we are not "inside the tent," we can only assume that another Pauline end run (as in the previous post) is being attempted by the administration.

Is the England administration attempting to race through an approval of TIF expansion without telling us the truth? Are they unwilling to defend the expansion on policy grounds, but willing to muscle its approval through an inexperienced council?

We'll grant that the current schedule for the council calls for a pre-meeting educational session about the philosophical and practical aspects of TIF districts. A few minutes later, the council will be voting on the expansion.

We understand that a few council members, even those who might ordinarily be persuadable, are bristling at the lack of transparency in this latest England throwdown showdown vote.

Mr. England and his delegate, Mr. Malysz, owe it to us to shoot straight with us and to justify this proposed TIF expansion. No matter what goals and dreams this administration may have, there is no excuse for seeking legislation that is designed in darkness. Government in the sunshine is the price the executive must pay to earn public support.

Until we see more transparency, we must urge the defeat of this administration-sponsored measure. Our representatives, and especially the compromised D5, should demand an open deliberation of this measure with a full council in attendance. Anything less would mark them as complicit in a process that cultivates suspicion. Mushrooms may grow well in the basement. Illicit crops (with grow lights) may thrive in underground settings.

But confidence in government is a crop that requires sunlight. Let's wait until the sun comes up on this measure.