Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Effingham focus group hears support and trade-offs for using TIFs and business-district funds to attract private development
Summary
City staff explained TIF districts, business-district sales taxes, enterprise zones and prevailing-wage implications at an Effingham focus group; attendees broadly supported using public tools to spur local business growth but raised concerns about long-term revenue and distribution to other taxing bodies.
Effingham residents, business leaders and city staff spent a large portion of a community focus group reviewing the trade-offs of committing public money to private development and the tools the city can use.
City staff explained three common tools: tax-increment financing (TIF) districts, business-district sales-tax increments and enterprise-zone abatements. "The TIF District money comes from the increment on the improvement to properties in that district," a city staff member said, describing how added property value within the district generates funds for infrastructure and façade programs. Staff also noted that projects funded through business-district revenue can trigger prevailing-wage requirements.
Andrew Grundlow, a local developer who described his experience with tax-increment financing, defended the mechanism as a way to make projects feasible that otherwise would not happen. He said developers often rely on a temporary diversion of newly created tax revenue into public infrastructure so the private project can proceed; "you're not taking money necessarily from a coffer. You're creating value and then temporarily offsetting that tax stream," he said.
Attendees pointed to past cooperative infrastructure projects as examples of how grants and incentives have worked in practice. City staff cited a recent $2.5 million road project on Tease Avenue and Airport Road that leveraged state grants and IDOT funds, with a local cost of about $80,000.
Survey results shared at the meeting showed roughly 70% of respondents favored the city committing funding to private-sector development, and participants said their priorities for public assistance were local-business growth (about 27%) and retail (about 20%). Several speakers urged careful design of incentives so that public benefits (jobs, upgraded infrastructure, broader tax base) outweigh costs and to be transparent with school districts and other taxing entities that may be affected when TIFs freeze the taxable base during the life of a district.
No formal decisions were made; staff said feedback from the focus group will be folded into the steering committee's review and the draft comprehensive plan.
The city is continuing outreach, and staff invited attendees to submit additional comments by email for the steering committee to consider.
