Isthmus on Edgewater

Please limit discussion in this area to local and state politics.
jman111
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 4366
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 12:43 pm
Location: Dane County
Contact:

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby jman111 » Mon Apr 04, 2011 4:44 pm

Huckleby wrote:That's not my argument, people should debate whether a particular project is in the public interest. I have no philisophical problem with TIF.

I think people DID try to debate the whether TIF was appropriate for Edgewater. That debate, it seems, was largely lost in the noise.

green union terrace chair
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3135
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 3:33 pm
Location: Memorial Union
Contact:

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby green union terrace chair » Mon Apr 04, 2011 4:55 pm

gargantua wrote:The major problem with the use of TIF in this instance is that this one project required so much of it. The amount of TIF available to a taxing authority is a finite number. I'm working from a probably year-old recollection of a really good Brenda Konkel summary of the city's TIF limitations, and several good, albeit smaller projects that can't get TIF now because Edgewater used it up.

Don't forget the four TIF rules that had to be disregarded or have exceptions made in order to get this project through.

Policy 2.1 Ineligibility of Luxury Housing
Policy 4.1 (8) 50% Rule
Policy 4.1 (10) Self-Supporting Rule
Policy 4.1 (12) Personal Guaranty

http://www.cityofmadison.com/planning/t ... POLICY.pdf

Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 9947
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Huckleby » Mon Apr 04, 2011 5:13 pm

If laws were disregarded, Fred Mohs and his phalanx of attorneys would have been all over it like white on rice.

Ducatista
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 4934
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 12:31 pm
Location: 53703

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Ducatista » Mon Apr 04, 2011 7:29 pm

Henry Vilas wrote:Wisconsin statutes say that TIF is reserved for blighted areas. It's the law.

Wisconsin adopted TIF legislation in 1975 in response to the challenges of eliminating blighted areas in depressed urban areas.

Gotta disagree with Huckleby on the quality of your TIF summary, HV. It's sloppy and inaccurate. Surprising, coming from you.

Your link goes beyond what you quoted to explain how TIF has expanded and grown more flexible over the years, particularly with the addition of the mixed-use TID. (Which, btw, joins blighted area as one of seven TIDs under TIF law).

green union terrace chair
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3135
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 3:33 pm
Location: Memorial Union
Contact:

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby green union terrace chair » Mon Apr 04, 2011 7:45 pm

Huckleby wrote:If laws were disregarded, Fred Mohs and his phalanx of attorneys would have been all over it like white on rice.

I didn't say "laws," did I? And if you can refute that all four of those that I listed were followed, I'd love to hear it.

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 23924
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Henry Vilas » Mon Apr 04, 2011 7:48 pm

I guess I was talking original intent. The term blighted is still in the regs, but now it is just a meaningless nod to fixing complex urban problems in distressed areas of the city. It seems that neither Edgewater nor Monroe Street Commons meet that outdated definition.

Ducatista
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 4934
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 12:31 pm
Location: 53703

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Ducatista » Mon Apr 04, 2011 8:01 pm

Fair enough.

I'm a fan of the more flexible TIF application, and I say that as a down homeowner paying an assload of taxes. I understand the "fat-cat developers milking the taxpayers" POV (not saying that's your take, Henry, though maybe it is), I just don't agree with it.

green union terrace chair
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3135
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 3:33 pm
Location: Memorial Union
Contact:

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby green union terrace chair » Mon Apr 04, 2011 8:10 pm

Henry Vilas wrote:I guess I was talking original intent. The term blighted is still in the regs, but now it is just a meaningless nod to fixing complex urban problems in distressed areas of the city. It seems that neither Edgewater nor Monroe Street Commons meet that outdated definition.

"Blighted" is one of those words that has a far less charged meaning in legalese than it does in normal conversation. I believe a certain percentage of cracked sidewalk panels on a block can lend to its blighted status, for example. Blighted means far less than boarded up windows, crack dealers and open portals to hell.

Ducatista
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 4934
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 12:31 pm
Location: 53703

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Ducatista » Mon Apr 04, 2011 10:50 pm

Ducatista wrote:...I say that as a down homeowner...

Ha! Make that "downtown." I'm actually super perky.

Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 9947
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Huckleby » Tue Apr 05, 2011 12:37 am

If the Edgewater project turns out to be an economic booster (jobs, indirect business activity, profitability of the joint itself) who gives a flying fig about TIF?

Kashka-Kat
Senior Member
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 4:03 pm
Location: East side/ First Street
Contact:

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Kashka-Kat » Tue Apr 05, 2011 9:18 am

Huck,
I honestly don’t know what exactly you’re trying to convey - warm fuzzy what? Or what constitues the “lampooning” ie having some element of satire or humor. If you want clarification on my position (???) just ask

Im pretty much indifferent to that hotel, I don’t know anyone who will afford to stay there, it’s a big hulky thing that wont add much esthetically (unlike that one shore-hugging idea that came out early on). Or economically. So no, it cannot be compared in any way to to the public good offered by a high quality public school…. But fine, for better or worse they finagled the approvals and variances, it’s private property so have at it. The issue for me is solely the element of public funding aka corporate welfare. 16 mil is a lot to spend for stairs going down to the lake which are sometimes (but not always) open to the public.

Yes I know TIF is supposed to come back to us in the form of higher taxes paid, but as has been reportedTIFS have been mostly failing to perform as intended esp in neighborhoods with already top dollar property values and this project is full of questionable assumptions like it will be full every night at $200 per room …. Which means I guess that the state govt contracts wont apply – as state rate is only 70 a night and state govt has been heavy user there. Well maybe all Walker s appointees will pay $200 I dunno! In any event, the thrust of my argument had more to do with inequitable use of TIF in this city.

Btw Mr Soglin replied to me and informed me that no the Edgewater TIF cant be rescinded, the city is obligated -unless the developer doesn’t go thru with it. So there y ou have it!

Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 9947
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Huckleby » Tue Apr 05, 2011 1:39 pm

Kashka-Kat wrote: I honestly don’t know what exactly you’re trying to convey
I made a side-point that being for the project and against TIF is an easy position to take. (Actually though, I don't see any evidence that anyone who is against TIF has any enthusiasm for the Edgewater project. They are "for it" only in the limited sense of emphasizing their open-mindedness.)

Kashka-Kat wrote: The issue for me is solely the element of public funding aka corporate welfare.
OK, you are against TIF on ideological grounds.

Kashka-Kat wrote: 16 mil is a lot to spend for stairs going down to the lake which are sometimes (but not always) open to the public .... In any event, the thrust of my argument had more to do with inequitable use of TIF in this city.

I see a lot more value in the project, and I doubt this particular project can be done without TIF. It represented a big investment of outside money into Madison - go for it.

Kashka-Kat
Senior Member
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 4:03 pm
Location: East side/ First Street
Contact:

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Kashka-Kat » Wed Apr 06, 2011 10:34 pm

No, I'm against misuse of TIF.

If funds are used on inappropriate projects, then there's that much less available for deserving ones (i.e. in actual blighted neighborhoods).

Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 9947
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Huckleby » Thu Apr 07, 2011 12:42 am

I don't make a distinction on the use of TIF for blighted areas or TIF for fat cat developers. To me, its all good, as long as the ends justifies the means. (I know TIF was orginally intended as a program for poor areas, but I approve of its evolution into a general tool, do not consider large projects in nice neighborhoods "inappropriate.")

I'm fat cat friendly, and this is exactly where I disagree with you and others ideologically.

Ducatista
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 4934
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 12:31 pm
Location: 53703

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Ducatista » Thu Apr 07, 2011 7:53 am

I'm a fat cat-loving liberal, and I vote!

(Whoa. All that stands between me and being a fat, cat-loving liberal is a single comma.)


Return to “Local Politics & Government”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests