Teardown timeout

OP’s village board reaches out:

Oak Park trustees are looking to stop teardowns that are threatening predominantly single-family blocks in multifamily zones.

At a study session Thursday, trustees directed Village Attorney Ray Heise to draft an ordinance that would prohibit demolition permits to be issued for single-family homes and small flats in multifamily districts for 90 days.

Trustees expect to have a first reading of the ordinance at a special meeting tomorrow, and vote to adopt it Monday.

That’s fast work, but

"We have the power as a home-rule community to do it," said Trustee Robert Milstein, who led the charge for a moratorium. "We need to have some courage as a board."

We can’t let that power go to waste, can we?

Switching to Peraica

Brian Lantz, 305 Home Ave, is one of three Oak Parkers, of 10 letter-writers in all, in Sunday 7/23 Chi Trib decrying the Toddler Stroger coronation as county board president nominee. Lantz suggests secession: "We have" services we need. It’s a "duplication of county government."

Two others, Carmen Vitello and Jane Jeffries, explicitly say they will vote Republican in November. "I have always voted Democratic, but I hope there is a groundswell among Democrats to support Tony Peraica to show the party that we really want change and reform," wrote Vitello, who is not listed. "I've been a proud Democrat until last week. Now I’m ashamed," wrote Jane Jeffries, also not listed. "I voted for Forrest Claypool in the primary, and for the first time in my life, I’ll be voting Republican this fall."

Now. Is OP village board President Pope in for a dollar, having been in for a dime for the April primary, when he made calls for defeated Dem candidate Forrest Claypool? Will he be making calls for Peraica?

A taxing matter

From Nancy in Lake Bluff about OP tax-cutting:   Lower taxes encourage development, thereby increasing the tax base.  OP trustees fail to recognize this.  One only had to listen today to remarks by the new treasury secretary, as he was sworn into office, to understand the logic behind lower taxes.  He unapologetically proclaimed that lowering taxes worked for the federal government.  Tax revenues are way up and the budget deficit has gone way down. 

 

Me:  In some way or other, this would work for Oak Park.

Column up

This month’s Wednesday Journal column is up and running.  It’s about local-govt intervention in the business lives of all of us — see the recently posted Lane Bryant episode — and all-around leftist leanings in OP.

Trustees know shopping!

Oak Park

is the target of a recent lawsuit, filed after officials decided Lane Bryant doesn't fit the "kind and quality" of shops desired for the building.

Sun-Times reports.

In a downtown known for its trendy shops and clothing stores, Village President David Pope said officials want "a more broad-based retailer" to fill the building rather than one with "a niche market."

Lane Bryant specializes in clothing for women sizes 14 to 28.

Since when does local government make marketing decisions for developers?

What's the deal on Stroger? Hard to know what to believe

. . . says Mark Brown, who at the end of his description and attempt to figure out the Stroger in Wonderland happenings says something that must be occurring to lots of people beside Tony Peraica:

All I can say for an absolute certainty, though, is that this situation has been nothing but good for the Republican nominee, Commissioner Tony Peraica, who is looking more and more like a contender.

In Oak Park, for instance, lawns were loaded with signs for Forrest Claypool, Stroger’s opponent in the recent primary.  Will those become Peraica signs this fall, even in Democrat Oak Park?

OP spending money

OP business owner Paul Hamer —  has Frame Warehouse on Harrison St. — on retrieving freebies to developers through added sales tax:

People do not realize how small the sales tax pie is that goes to our village. It’s only one percent of the total 8.76 percent collected [that is, one% of purchase amount]. That means a business with a million dollars in sales only generates $10,000 for our community. The total sales tax deposited in village coffers for the entire downtown business district in 2003 was only $350,000. In our $100 million village budget, that’s nothing.

As for the Shops of OP, whose developer got lots of freebie help:

 2003 Actual real estate taxes from The Shops: $ 353,238

 2003 Projected real estate taxes with no public investment: $284.534

 Gross yearly Shops tax increase: $68,704

But there’s also the debt servicing by the village, which has led to a net yearly loss of $263,060

Would the developer have paid $6.5 million of his own money to make $20 million? [counting his recent sale of The Shops for $20 mill]  I think so. There was no need to ever get us involved financially.

Which leads to the question why the village trustees felt themselves competent in this matter in the first place.

The Shops didn’t increase our sales tax base, didn’t increase our real estate tax base enough to cover our costs, and has not led to a downtown revival—all the things that were promised to us.

………………

The TIF district tax hole that previous village boards have dug for us is deep, and it is not totally clear to me how we will be able to dig our way out without severe sacrifices to local public education or dramatic local tax increases.