[Peace-discuss] The mall

[Susan Davis]

>thanks to Al and Carol for forwarding articles on malls.  This has 
>actually been a research interests of mine for about the last 10 years, 
>although the free-speech issues haven't been in the foreground for me 
>until working with aware.
>
>If I understand the proposed new agreement correctly, it makes use of the 
>tax increment financing district around Lincoln Square.  Taxes, I believe 
>property taxes, on the new development will be set for the first few years 
>at an old assessment level -- under $500,000, according to the News 
>Gazette's story.  It's a question whether that is underpriced are 
>overpriced, but my guess is it is potentially underpriced or 
>underassessed.  At that low level, apparently taxes are recycled back into 
>the city's general pool that supports the school district, the Park 
>District, and more.  In a few years however the property will be 
>reassessed, presumably a much higher level if things are going well, and 
>then taxes on this newer higher assessment are rebated to the developer, 
>via the tax increment financing district, to be used only in the immediate 
>area of the development.  So, if I have this correct, there is 
>prospectively a huge tax subsidy to this development, with the arrangement 
>actually cutting school system out of the higher future level of taxation 
>if the development is successful, at least for a period of time.
>
>this is a very common way of publicly subsidizing developers around the 
>United States these days.
>
>To me it means that free speech in the mall is the absolute minimum we 
>should be asking for, since we're going to be paying for it twice -- or, 
>even three times, if you think in terms of buying things in the mall, 
>rebated taxes to provide services and upgrades for the mall, and figuring 
>out how to fund our school system with money from elsewhere.
>