Tax increment financing

Last updated

Tax increment financing (TIF) is a public financing method that is used as a subsidy for redevelopment, infrastructure, and other community-improvement projects in many countries, including the United States. The original intent of a TIF program is to stimulate private investment in a blighted area that has been designated to be in need of economic revitalization. [1] Similar or related value capture strategies are used around the world.

Contents

Through the use of TIF, municipalities typically divert future property tax revenue increases from a defined area or district toward an economic development project or public improvement project in the community. TIF subsidies are not appropriated directly from a city's budget, but the city incurs loss through forgone tax revenue. [2] The first TIF was used in California in 1952. [3] By 2004, all U.S. states excepting Arizona had authorized the use of TIF. The first TIF in Canada was used in 2007. [4]

If the cost of basic services increases, with TIF in place, the result is a revenue shortfall that has to be paid from sources other than tax revenues of the TIF district to prevent service cuts. TIF graph.pdf
If the cost of basic services increases, with TIF in place, the result is a revenue shortfall that has to be paid from sources other than tax revenues of the TIF district to prevent service cuts.

Use

Tax increment financing subsidies, which are used for both publicly subsidized economic development and municipal projects, [2] :2 have provided the means for cities and counties to gain approval of redevelopment of blighted properties or public projects such as city halls, parks, libraries etc. The definition of blight has taken on a broad inclusion of nearly every type of land including farmland, which has given rise to much of the criticism. " [2] :2

To provide the needed subsidy, the urban renewal district, or TIF district, is often drawn around additional real estate beyond the project site to provide the needed borrowing capacity for the project or projects. The borrowing capacity is established by committing all normal yearly future real estate tax increases from every parcel in the TIF district (for 20–25 years, or more) along with the anticipated new tax revenue eventually coming from the project or projects themselves. If the projects are public improvements paying no real estate taxes, all of the repayment will come from the adjacent properties within the TIF district.

Although questioned, it is often presumed that even public improvements trigger gains in taxes above what would occur in the district without the investment. In many jurisdictions yearly property tax increases are restricted and cannot exceed what would otherwise have occurred.

The completion of a public or private project can at times result in an increase in the value of surrounding real estate, which generates additional tax revenue. Sales-tax revenue may also increase, and jobs may be added, although these factors and their multipliers usually do not influence the structure of TIF.

The routine yearly increases district-wide, along with any increase in site value from the public and private investment, generate an increase in tax revenues. This is the "tax increment." Tax increment financing dedicates tax increments within a certain defined district to finance the debt that is issued to pay for the project. TIF was designed to channel funding toward improvements in distressed, underdeveloped, or underutilized parts of a jurisdiction where development might otherwise not occur. TIF creates funding for public or private projects by borrowing against the future increase in these property-tax revenues. [5]

History

Tax increment financing was first used in California in 1952 and there are currently thousands of TIF districts operating in the US, from small and mid-sized cities to large urban areas. As of 2008, California had over four hundred TIF districts with an aggregate of over $10 billion per year in revenues, over $28 billion of long-term debt, and over $674 billion of assessed land valuation. [6] The state of California discontinued the use of TIF financing due to lawsuits in 2011, and enacted the California Fiscal Emergency Proclamation 2010, thereby ending the diversion of property tax revenues from public funding, including the use of TIFs for the funding of the nearly 400 redevelopment agencies in the state. [7] [8] The RDAs appealed that decision, though they were eventually eliminated in February 2012 after the passage of the 2011 state budget. [9] [10]

However, in 2015, the California Community Revitalization and Investment Authority Act was made law, providing for the creation of Community Revitalization and Investment Authorities (CRIAs), funded by Tax-Increment Financing. The primary purposes of CRIAs are the development or preservation of affordable housing for low and moderate income households (a minimum of 25% of TIF funding must be placed in an affordable housing fund) and creation or upgrading of public infrastructure in economically disadvantaged areas as defined under the provisions of the law. [11] [12] Additionally, Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts (EIFDs) may be created and financed by TIFs in California. [13]

With the exception of Arizona, every state and the District of Columbia has enabled legislation for tax increment financing. [14] Some states, such as Illinois, have used TIF for decades, but others have only recently embraced TIF. [15] The state of Maine has a program named TIF; however, this title refers to a process very different than in most states. [16]

Since the 1970s, the following factors have led local governments (cities, townships, etc.) to consider tax increment financing: lobbying by developers, a reduction in federal funding for redevelopment-related activities (including spending increases), restrictions on municipal bonds (which are tax-exempt bonds), the transfer of urban policy to local governments, State-imposed caps on municipal property tax collections, and State-imposed limits on the amounts and types of city expenditures. Considering these factors, many local governments have chosen TIF as a way to strengthen their tax bases, attract private investment, and increase economic activity.

Urban regeneration

In a 2015 literature review on best practices in urban regeneration, cities across the United States are seeking ways to reverse trends of unemployment, declining population and disinvestment in their core downtown areas, as developers continue to expand into suburban areas. Re-investment in downtown core areas include mixed-use development and new or improved transit systems. With successful revitalization comes gentrification with higher property values and taxes, and the exodus of lower income earners. [17] [18]

Successful city revitalization can't be achieved by megaprojects alone—signature buildings, stadiums or other such concentrated development efforts. Instead, "it must be multifaceted and encompass improvements to the cities' physical environments, their economic bases, and the social and economic conditions of their residents.

Mallach and Brachman 2013

Unintended consequences

Like any economic tool, TIF comes with drawbacks. Organizations such as Municipal Officials for Redevelopment Reform (MORR) use to hold regular conferences on redevelopment abuse, as well as local organizations like Chicago's 33 Ward Working Families. [19] [20]

Examples

Chicago

The city of Chicago, in Cook County, Illinois, has a significant number of TIF districts and has become a prime location for examining the benefits and disadvantages of TIF districts. The city runs 131 districts with tax receipts totaling upwards of $500 million for 2006. [32] Lori Healey, appointed commissioner of the city's Planning and Development department in 2005 was instrumental in the process of approving TIF districts as first deputy commissioner.

The Chicago Reader, a Chicago alternative newspaper published weekly, has published articles regarding tax increment financing districts in and around Chicago. Written by staff writer Ben Joravsky, the articles are critical of tax increment financing districts as implemented in Chicago. [33]

Cook County Clerk David Orr, in order to bring transparency to Chicago and Cook County tax increment financing districts, began to feature information regarding Chicago area districts on his office's website. [34] The information featured includes City of Chicago TIF revenue by year, maps of Chicago and Cook County suburban municipalities' TIF districts.

The Neighborhood Capital Budget Group of Chicago, Illinois, a non-profit organization, advocated for area resident participation in capital programs. The group also researched and analyzed the expansion of Chicago's TIF districts. [35]

In April 2009, the "TIF Sunshine Ordinance" introduced by Alderman Scott Waguespack and Alderman Manuel Flores (then 1st Ward Alderman) passed City Council. The ordinance made all TIF Redevelopment Agreements and attachments available on the city's website in a searchable electronic format. The proposal intended to improve the overall transparency of TIF Agreements, thereby facilitating significantly increased public accountability. [36]

According to an article published in the Journal of Property Tax Assessment & Administration in 2009, the increase in the use of TIF in Chicago resulted in a "substantial portion of Chicago's property tax base and the land area" being subsumed by these levy zones—"26 percent of the city's land area and almost a quarter of the total value of commercial property is in TIF districts" by 2007. The study notes the difficulties in establishing how effective TIF are. [3]

Albuquerque

Currently, the 2nd largest TIF project in America is located in Albuquerque, New Mexico: the $500 million Mesa del Sol development. Mesa del Sol is controversial in that the proposed development would be built upon a "green field" that presently generates little tax revenue and any increase in tax revenue would be diverted into a tax increment financing fund. This "increment" thus would leave governmental bodies without funding from the developed area that is necessary for the governmental bodies' operation.

Detroit

In July 2014, Detroit's Downtown Development Authority announced TIF financing for the new Red Wings hockey stadium. The total project cost, including additional private investments in retail and housing, is estimated at $650 million, of which $250 million will be financed using TIF capture to repay 30-year tax exempt bonds purchased by the Michigan Strategic Fund, the state's economic development arm.

California

In an article published in 1998 by Public Policy Institute of California, Michael Dardia challenged the governing redevelopment agencies' (RDAs) assumption "that redevelopment pays for itself through tax increment financing. The claim is that RDAs "receive any increase in property tax revenues (above a two percent inflation factor) in project areas because their investment in area improvements is responsible for increasing property values." [37] :ii Dardia argued that property tax revenues channeled to tax increment financing results in revenues lost to "other local jurisdictions—the county, schools, and special districts" [37] and if the RDAs "are not largely responsible for the increase in property values, those jurisdictions are, in effect, subsidizing redevelopment, with no say in how the revenues are used." [37]

In fiscal year 1994–1995—the most recent year for which figures are available—redevelopment agencies (RDAs) received 8 percent of the property tax revenues collected in the state of California, amounting to $1.5 billion. These are revenues that, absent the RDAs, would have gone to other public agencies such as the state and counties.

Michael Dardia 1998

By December 6, 2010, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger issued a fiscal emergency [38] which was reaffirmed by Governor Jerry Brown in December 2011 to underscore "the need for immediate legislative action to address California's massive budget deficit." Governor Brown enacted measures to stabilize school funding by reducing or eliminating the diversion of property taxes from the public sector including, school districts, to RDAs. New legislation including Assembly Bill 26 and Assembly Bill 27 were passed, which led to the elimination of California's nearly 400 redevelopment agencies thereby stopping the diversion of property tax revenues from public funding. The RDAs appealed the decision, however they were eventually eliminated. [9] The state reintroduced the option of tax-increment financing for the funding of Community Revitalization and Investment Authorities (CRIAs) in 2015, the latter being authorities created by local governments to create or upgrade infrastructure and create or preserve affordable housing for low and moderate income households. [11] [12] Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts (EIFDs) in the state are also financed by a tax-increment bond and their purposes are largely similar, though the requirement for use and the projects covered are somewhat different. [13]

Alameda

In 2009, SunCal Companies, an Irvine, California-based developer, introduced a ballot initiative that embodied a redevelopment plan for the former Naval Air Station Alameda and a financial plan based in part on roughly $200 million worth of tax increment financing to pay for public amenities. SunCal structured the initiative so that the provision of public amenities was contingent on receiving tax increment financing, and on the creation of a community facilities (Mello-Roos) district, which would levy a special (extra) tax on property owners within the development. [39] Since Alameda City Council did not extend the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement with Suncal, this project will not move forward. In California, Community Redevelopment Law governs the use of tax increment financing by public agencies. [40]

Iowa

In 2002 economists at Department of Economics Iowa State University, claimed that "existing taxpayers, its householders, wage earners, and retirees are aggressively subsidizing business growth and population" TIF designated zones in Iowa. [41]

Wisconsin

TIFs were established in Wisconsin in 1975. In 2001 critics argued that TIF supported developers to develop in green spaces citing a 2000 1,000 Friends of Wisconsin report which stated that 45% of tax incremental financing districts were used to develop open space land. [42] [43]

Denver

From 1995 through 2005 Denver tax payers were able to leverage over $5 billion in private investment by committing to over half a billion dollars of TIF subsidies. At that time new TIF subsidized projects under consideration included the "redevelopment of the old Gates Rubber Factory complex at I-25 and Broadway, and the realization of Denver's ambitious plans for the downtown Union Station area." [2] :6 Denver's urban landscape was transformed from 1995 through 2005 through TIF-subsidized projects such as "the landmark resurrection" of the Denver Dry Goods building, the Adams Mark hotel, Denver Pavilions, and REI flagship store, Broadway Marketplace shopping area and the demolition of the old Woolworth's building, the relocation and expansion of Elitch's into the Six Flags Elitch Gardens Amusement park, the redevelopment of Lowry Air Force Base and the redevelopment of the old Stapleton airport – "the largest urban infill project in the nation." [2] :6

By 2005 the City Denver had already "mortgaged over $500 million in future tax revenue to pay off existing TIF subsidies to private developers" and was preparing to "increase that sum substantially with several new TIF projects in the next five years." In 2005 the "diversions of tax revenue to pay for TIF subsidies [represented] an annual cost of almost $30 million to Denver taxpayers, and [were] rising rapidly." [2] :57 By 2007 TIF tax expenditures in the form of forgone tax revenue totaled nearly "$30 million annually – equal to almost 7% of Denver's entire annual General Fund revenues" and at that time the amount was rapidly increasing. [2] :6 In a 2005 study it was revealed through wage surveys at TIF projects "that jobs there pay substantially less than Denver average wages, and 14%-27% less even than average wages for comparable occupational categories." [2] :2

In part 1 of a three part series researchers "explained the history and mechanics of TIF, and analyzed the total cost of TIF to Denver taxpayers, including "hidden" costs from increased public service burdens that TIF projects do not pay for." [44] In "Who Profits from TIF Subsidies?" researchers "examined the types of businesses Denver attracts through TIF, and the profit rates of developers with whom Denver partners to bring TIF projects into existence, and the transparency of the TIF approval process." [45] In part three of the study researchers examined "quality and housing affordability at TIF-subsidized projects." [2] :2

Applications and administration

Cities use TIF to finance public infrastructure, land acquisition, demolition, utilities and planning costs, and other improvements including sewer expansion and repair, curb and sidewalk work, storm drainage, traffic control, street construction and expansion, street lighting, water supply, landscaping, park improvements, environmental remediation, bridge construction and repair, and parking structures.

State enabling legislation gives local governments the authority to designate tax increment financing districts. The district usually lasts 20 years, or enough time to pay back the bonds issued to fund the improvements. While arrangements vary, it is common to have a city government assuming the administrative role, making decisions about how and where the tool is applied. [46]

Most jurisdictions only allow bonds to be floated based upon a portion (usually capped at 50%) of the assumed increase in tax revenues. For example, if a $5,000,000 annual tax increment is expected in a development, which would cover the financing costs of a $50,000,000 bond, only a $25,000,000 bond would be typically allowed. If the project is moderately successful, this would mean that a good portion of the expected annual tax revenues (in this case over $2,000,000) would be dedicated to other public purposes other than paying off the bond.

Community revitalization levy (CRL) in Canada

By 2015 major Canadian cities had already implemented community revitalization levies (CRL)—the term used for TIFs in Canada. [4]

Alberta

In April 2012, it was proposed that the Alberta government change regulations so that the Community Revitalization Levy (CRL) could be applied to remediation costs "incurred by a private developer." [47] :18

The CRL does not currently allow the levy to be used for remediation costs incurred by a private developer. While the CRL is quite a comprehensive approach that is not widely used, it is suggested that a change in regulation to allow the levy to apply to remediation costs would provide incentive to brownfield redevelopment in applicable circumstances.

13 April 2012 Alberta Brownfield Redevelopment Working Group

The Calgary Municipal Land Corporation (CMLC)—an arms-length a subsidiary of the City of Calgary, established in 2007, to revisit land use in the longtime deserted chunk of land in the east downtown core along the Bow River [48] —used a CRL to develop Downtown East Village, Calgary making Calgary the first Canadian city to use the CRL. [4] The CMLC "committed approximately $CDN 357 million to East Village infrastructure and development" and claims that it "has attracted $CDN 2.4 billion of planned development that is expected to return $CDN 725 million of revenue to the CRL." [4] The designated levy zone for the Rivers District CRL is wider than the East Village, making it financially sound since it collects taxes for twenty years on its anchor building, the 58-storey Bow tower, and from developments in nearby Victoria Park (Calgary). [28]

In an interview with the Calgary Sun in February 2015, Michael Brown, CRL president and CEO said they were looking into a CRL [28] for the development of the West Village similar to that used to finance the remediation of the East Village. In August CalgaryNEXT sports complex was proposed as a potential anchor to the levy zone. Local politicians expressed concern about the funding model, which proposed that the city would front between $440 and $690 million of the projected cost, most which would only be recouped over a long period of time. [49] Mayor Naheed Nenshi commented that one of a number of challenges to the CalgaryNEXT proposal was the requirement of a community revitalization levy, along with the need for a land contribution from the city, "and significant investments in infrastructure to make the West Village a complete and vibrant community." [50] Edmonton, Alberta creating a CRL to revitalize the downtown with a massive development project including a new arena, park development and upgrades including sewers which total approximately $CDN 500 million. [4] The city hopes to "generate approximately $941 million in revenue in a medium-growth scenario." [4]

Ontario

As of 2015, Toronto's mayor John Tory plans on creating a levy zone to finance a C$2.7 billion SmartTrack surface rail line project spanning 53 kilometres. [4]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1978 California Proposition 13</span> Ballot initiative which capped property tax at 1% and yearly increases at 2%

Proposition 13 is an amendment of the Constitution of California enacted during 1978, by means of the initiative process. The initiative was approved by California voters on June 6, 1978 by a nearly two to one margin. It was upheld as constitutional by the United States Supreme Court in the case of Nordlinger v. Hahn, 505 U.S. 1 (1992). Proposition 13 is embodied in Article XIII A of the Constitution of the State of California.

The Baltimore Development Corporation (BDC) is a nonprofit corporation and public-private agency contracted by the City of Baltimore to promote economic development.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Redevelopment</span> New construction on a site that has preexisting uses

Redevelopment is any new construction on a site that has pre-existing uses. It represents a process of land development uses to revitalize the physical, economic and social fabric of urban space.

A tax-allocation district (TAD), also known as tax increment financing, is a defined area where real estate property tax monies gathered above a certain threshold for a certain period of time to be used for a specified improvement. The funds raised from a TAD are placed in a tax-free bond (finance) where the money can continue to grow. These improvements are typically for revitalization and especially to complete redevelopment efforts.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">SouthSide Works</span> Mixed-used development in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, U.S.

SouthSide Works is an open-air retail, office, entertainment, and residential complex located on the South Side of the city of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, U.S. and just across the Monongahela River from the Pittsburgh Technology Center, the University of Pittsburgh and Carnegie Mellon University. The $300 million complex opened in stages between 2002 and 2004 and offers more than 34 acres (140,000 m2) of shops, offices, hotels and apartments, and has a new urbanist design. The site has over 330,000 square feet (30,000 m2) of specialty retail, restaurant, hotel, and apartment space. In addition, the site has 700,000 square feet (70,000 m2) of office space.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Value capture</span>

Value capture is a type of public financing that recovers some or all of the value that public infrastructure generates for private landowners. In many countries, the public sector is responsible for the infrastructure required to support urban development. This infrastructure may include road infrastructure, parks, social, health and educational facilities, social housing, climate adaptation and mitigation tools, and more. Such infrastructure typically requires great financial investment and maintenance, and often the financing of such projects leans heavily on the government bodies themselves.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mixed-use development</span> Type of urban development strategy

Mixed use is a type of urban development, urban design, urban planning and/or a zoning classification that blends multiple uses, such as residential, commercial, cultural, institutional, or entertainment, into one space, where those functions are to some degree physically and functionally integrated, and that provides pedestrian connections. Mixed-use development may be applied to a single building, a block or neighborhood, or in zoning policy across an entire city or other administrative unit. These projects may be completed by a private developer, (quasi-)governmental agency, or a combination thereof. A mixed-use development may be a new construction, reuse of an existing building or brownfield site, or a combination.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Port Covington</span> Neighborhood of Baltimore in Maryland, United States

Port Covington or Baltimore Peninsula is a neighborhood in Baltimore, Maryland.

The Urban Redevelopment Authority of Pittsburgh (URA) is the City of Pittsburgh’s economic development enterprise, committed to building a prosperous and equitable economy for the City. The URA helps bridge public and private interests to invest in financially viable equitable developments that promote housing affordability, economic mobility, entrepreneurship and neighborhood revitalization. Its work creates and sustains quality jobs, thriving neighborhoods, healthy communities and sustainable businesses for the benefit of all Pittsburghers.

A tax increment reinvestment zone (TIRZ) is a political subdivision of a municipality or county in the state of Texas created to implement tax increment financing. They may be initiated by the city or county or by petition of owners whose total holdings in the zone consist of a majority of the appraised property value.

An economic development incentive is known as "cash or near-cash assistance provided on a discretionary basis to attract or retain business operations." These benefits principally encompass tax and economic incentives provided by federal, state, or local governmental bodies. Entities such as utilities and non-profits, can also make incentives available for these purposes. They accord the recipient a monetary benefit or an in-kind benefit. Private enterprises, including individuals, are generally the ultimate beneficiaries of economic development incentives. Depending on the incentive in question, other qualified parties are eligible to receive it, as in the case of municipalities, utilities, or economic development agencies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rogers Place</span> Multi-use indoor arena in Alberta, Canada

Rogers Place is a multi-use indoor arena in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. Construction started in March 2014, and the building officially opened on September 8, 2016. The arena has a seating capacity of 18,347 as a hockey venue and 20,734 as a concert venue.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Housing trust fund</span>

Housing trust funds are established sources of funding for affordable housing construction and other related purposes created by governments in the United States (U.S.). Housing Trust Funds (HTF) began as a way of funding affordable housing in the late 1970s. Since then, elected government officials from all levels of government in the U.S. have established housing trust funds to support the construction, acquisition, and preservation of affordable housing and related services to meet the housing needs of low-income households. Ideally, HTFs are funded through dedicated revenues like real estate transfer taxes or document recording fees to ensure a steady stream of funding rather than being dependent on regular budget processes. As of 2016, 400 state, local and county trust funds existed across the U.S.

Non-profit housing developers build affordable housing for individuals under-served by the private market. The non-profit housing sector is composed of community development corporations (CDC) and national and regional non-profit housing organizations whose mission is to provide for the needy, the elderly, working households, and others that the private housing market does not adequately serve. Of the total 4.6 million units in the social housing sector, non-profit developers have produced approximately 1.547 million units, or roughly one-third of the total stock. Since non-profit developers seldom have the financial resources or access to capital that for-profit entities do, they often use multiple layers of financing, usually from a variety of sources for both development and operation of these affordable housing units.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Urban Land Conservancy</span> US non-profit organization

Urban Land Conservancy (ULC), a Denver-based nonprofit established in 2003, that acquires and develops real estate assets. ULC targets properties to address issues of affordable housing and equitable access to essential services.

Business improvement districts in the United States (BIDs), also known as local improvement districts (LIDs), are United States special districts within a city that are overseen by a nonprofit entity. In the United States, business improvement districts are typically funded by an additional tax assessment, with the tax increase going toward improvements of the area.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Harper Court</span>

Harper Court is a mixed-use commercial development in the Hyde Park community area on the South Side of Chicago, Illinois, United States, that includes a Hyatt Hotel and a 12-storey office tower that is leased and occupied by the University of Chicago. Although the hotel opened on September 17, 2013, the commercial structure, which also has extensive retail and parking space, officially opened on November 8, 2013. The University of Chicago exercised its option to purchase most of the development on November 13 and then put most of what it acquired up for sale in March 2014. The University provided much of the financing and retains a master lease over the retail tenants. The development was acquired by Clal Insurance Company in July 2014.

Tax increment financing (TIF) is a local public finance tool available to municipal governments in the state of Maine. TIF in the state of Maine refers to a program different from tax increment financing in most states. TIF in Maine refers to a process by which a local government in the state can underwrite their revenues in order to earmark tax funds and receive more funding from the state.

The Fourteenth Finance Commission of India was a finance commission constituted on 2 January 2013. The commission's chairman was former Reserve Bank of India governor Y. V. Reddy and its members were Sushma Nath, M. Govinda Rao, Abhijit Sen, Sudipto Mundle, and AN Jha. The recommendations of the commission entered force in April 2015; they take effect for a five-year period from that date.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Urban wealth fund</span> Holding company

An Urban Wealth Fund (UWF), Local Wealth Fund, or Community investment fund is a local government-owned Public Wealth Fund, a holding company that owns, manages, and develops operational and real estate assets, mainly within its jurisdiction at the city, county or regional level of public administration. Government surpluses could also be invested in bonds, equities such as the stock market, or private equity.

References

  1. Caves, R. W. (2004). Encyclopedia of the City. Routledge. p. 659. ISBN   978-0-415-86287-5.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Tony Robinson; Chris Nevitt; Robin Kniech (2005). "Are We Getting Our Money's Worth? Tax-Increment Financing and New Ideas New Priorities New Economy Urban Redevelopment in Denver Part III: Are We Building a Better Denver?: Job Quality & Housing Affordability at TIF-Subsidized Projects" (PDF). Denver, CO: Front Range Economic Strategy Center. Archived from the original (PDF) on 21 September 2017. Retrieved 1 February 2024.
  3. 1 2 Sherri Farris; John Horbas (2008). "Creation vs. Capture: Evaluating the True Costs of Tax Increment Financing" (PDF). Journal of Property Tax Assessment & Administration. 6 (4). Archived from the original (PDF) on 23 September 2015. Retrieved 28 August 2015.
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Kyle Bakx (May 22, 2015). "Risky business as Canadian cities turn to neighbourhood levies: Expert warns the levies can be 'direct subsidies for the developers'". CBC News. Retrieved 28 August 2015.
  5. Various, (2001). Tax Increment Financing and Economic Development, Uses, Structures and Impact. Edited by Craig L. Johnson and Joyce Y. Man. State University of New York Press.
  6. California State Controller's Annual Report on Redevelopment Agencies, 2007-2008 (PDF), archived from the original (PDF) on 2010-01-05, retrieved 2009-12-04
  7. "Urban Renewal Dead in California," The Antiplanner, Thoreau Institute (2 January 2012).
  8. See California Redevelopment Association v. Ana Matosantos.
  9. 1 2 City of Cerritos v. State of California, 239 Cal. App. 4th 1020Cal: Court of Appeal, 3rd Appellate Dist. 2015 (California Courts - State of California25 August 2015).
  10. "Redevelopment Agency Dissolution". www.dof.ca.gov. Retrieved 2019-10-08.
  11. 1 2 Southern California Association of Governments (October 2016). "Mission Impossible? Meeting California's Housing Challenge" (PDF). p. 29. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2019-12-12. Retrieved 2019-09-20.
  12. 1 2 "Recent Affordable Housing Developments in California and the Los Angeles Region". katten.com. Retrieved 2019-09-20.
  13. 1 2 Southern California Association of Governments (October 2016). "Mission Impossible? Meeting California's Housing Challenge" (PDF). p. 27. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2019-12-12. Retrieved 2019-09-20.
  14. Council of Development Finance Agencies 2008 TIF State-By-State Report accessed 2014-3-21.
  15. Arkansas (2000), Washington (2001), New Jersey (2002), Delaware (2003), Louisiana (2003), North Carolina (2005), and New Mexico (2006).
  16. Michael Havlin (25 May 2013). "Maine Voices: TIF helps communities that don't need it: State economic development support should go to towns that can't now take advantage of complex property tax schemes". Hampton, Maine: Portland Press Herald. Retrieved 28 August 2015.
  17. "Urban regeneration: What recent research says about best practices". Harvard Kennedy School's Shorenstein Center and the Carnegie-Knight Initiative. Journalists Resource. January 29, 2015. Retrieved 28 August 2015.
  18. Alan Mallach; Lavea Brachman (May 2013). Regenerating America's Legacy Cities. Cambridge, MA; Phoenix, AZ: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. p. 52. ISBN   978-1-55844-279-5 . Retrieved 28 August 2015.
  19. Burt, Nicholas (Nov 18, 2019). "The Case for Abolishing the Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Program". www.workingfamilies33.org. Archived from the original on Mar 3, 2024. Retrieved Mar 3, 2024.
  20. "Redevelopment.com website". Archived from the original on 2010-05-02. Retrieved 2009-12-04.
  21. Dye, Richard; Merriman, David (March 2000). "The Effects of Tax Increment Financing on Economic Development". Journal of Urban Economics . 47 (2): 306–328 via Elsevier Science Direct.
  22. Merriman, David (2018). Improving Tax Increment Financing (TIF) for Economic Development. 113 Brattle Street, Cambridge, MA 02138-3400 USA: Columbia University Press. ISBN   978-1-55844-378-5.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location (link)
  23. 1 2 3 Quigley, Mike (April 2, 2007). "A Tale of Two Cities: Reinventing Tax Increment Financing" (PDF). house.gov. Archived from the original (PDF) on Dec 29, 2014. Retrieved Mar 15, 2024.
  24. 1 2 3 Nordtvedt, Kenneth (Nov 1, 2015). "The Dark Side of Tax Increment Financing" (PDF). leg.mt.gov. Archived (PDF) from the original on Dec 13, 2015. Retrieved Mar 15, 2024.
  25. 1 2 Joravsky, Ben (Nov 1, 2007). "TIFs for Dummies". Chicago Reader . Vol. 37, no. 6. Archived from the original on Oct 18, 2021. Retrieved Mar 15, 2024.
  26. "Redevelopment: The unknown government". Coalition for Redevelopment Reform. Archived from the original on 2008-07-25. Retrieved 2009-12-04.
  27. "Subsidizing Redevelopment in California" (PDF). Public Policy Institute of California. Retrieved 2009-12-04.
  28. 1 2 3 James Wilt (10 January 2013). "Blighted streets, no more". Fast Forward Weekly. Retrieved 26 August 2015.[ permanent dead link ]
  29. Richard Dye; David Merriman (September 1999). James H. Kuklinski (ed.). "The Effects of Tax-Increment Financing on Economic Development" (PDF). American Dream Coalition. p. 47. Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 28 August 2015.
  30. Richard Dye; David Merriman (2000). "The Effects of Tax-Increment Financing on Economic Development". Journal of Urban Economics. 47 (2): 306–328. doi:10.1006/juec.1999.2149. S2CID   54771066.
  31. Wimbley, Lacretia (Jan 25, 2024). "St. Louis-area TIF districts cost public schools' minority students over $260 million, report finds". STLPR . Archived from the original on Jan 26, 2024. Retrieved Mar 17, 2024.
  32. "City of Chicago TIF Revenue Totals by Year 1986-2013" (PDF). Cook County Clerk's Office. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2014-08-21. Retrieved 2014-08-19.
  33. "articles by Reader staff writer Ben Joravsky on Chicago's TIF (tax increment financing) districts". Chicago Reader. Retrieved 2008-05-29.
  34. "TIFs 101: A taxpayer's primer for understanding TIFs". Cook County Clerk's Office. Archived from the original on 2009-12-15. Retrieved 2008-05-29.
  35. "Research". Neighborhood Capital Budget Group of Chicago, Illinois. Archived from the original on 2008-05-09. Retrieved 2008-05-29.
  36. "Research". 32ND WARD SERVICE OFFICE. Retrieved 2015-05-13.
  37. 1 2 3 Michael Dardia (January 1998), Subsidizing Redevelopment in California (PDF), Public Policy Institute of California, retrieved 28 August 2015
  38. "Fiscal Emergency Proclamation by the Governor of the State of California". Governor of the State of California. 20 January 2011. Archived from the original on 6 September 2015. Retrieved 28 August 2015.
  39. "Alameda Point Development Initiative Election Report Executive Summary Part I" (PDF). City of Alameda. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2009-12-29. Retrieved 2009-12-04.
  40. "California Community Redevelopment Law". Archived from the original on 2010-01-10. Retrieved 2009-12-05.
  41. David Swenson & Liesl Eathington (2002). "* David Swenson and Liesl Eathington, "Do Tax Increment Finance Districts in Iowa Spur Regional Economic and Demographic Growth?" (2002)" (PDF). Department of Economics Iowa State University. Retrieved 9 June 2016.
  42. David E. Wood; Mary Beth Hughes (April 2001), "From Stumps to Dumps: Wisconsin's Anti-Environmental Subsidies" (PDF), Center on Wisconsin Strategy, University of Wisconsin–Madison, archived from the original (PDF) on 1 March 2012, retrieved 28 August 2015
  43. Matthew Mayrl (2005). Refocusing Wisconsin's TIF System On Urban Redevelopment: Three Reforms (PDF). Center on Wisconsin Strategy, University of Wisconsin–Madison) titled (Report). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2006-08-12. Retrieved 2006-09-09.
  44. Tony Robinson; Chris Nevitt; Robin Kniech (2005). "Are We Getting Our Money's Worth? Tax-Increment Financing and Urban Redevelopment in Denver Part I: What Do TIF Subsidies Cost Denver?: The Increasing Scale of TIF and Its Budget Impacts". Denver, CO: Front Range Economic Strategy Center. Archived from the original on 1 February 2024.
  45. Tony Robinson; Chris Nevitt; Robin Kniech (2005). "Are We Getting Our Money's Worth? Tax-Increment Financing and Urban Redevelopment in Denver Part II: Who Profits from TIF Subsidies?" (PDF). Denver, CO: Front Range Economic Strategy Center. Archived from the original (PDF) on 21 September 2017.
  46. "Growth Within Bounds: Report of the Commission on Local Governance for the 21st Century" (PDF). State of California. Retrieved 2009-12-04.
  47. Alberta Brownfield Redevelopment Working Group (13 April 2012). "Alberta Brownfield Redevelopment: practical approaches to achieve productive community used" (PDF). Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development (ESRD). Alberta Brownfield Redevelopment Working Group. p. 48. Archived from the original (PDF) on 26 March 2015. Retrieved 5 September 2015.
  48. Barb Livingstone (14 August 2015). "Calgary's urban influencer series: Michael Brown". CREB. Retrieved 28 August 2015.
  49. Johnson, George (2015-08-19). "Let King begin the courtship". Calgary Herald. p. C1.
  50. "Statement from Mayor Naheed Nenshi regarding the "CalgaryNext"". Office of the Mayor, City of Calgary. 18 August 2015. Retrieved 27 August 2015.