LOCAL Voices
Simeonides: TIF answer to Georgetown development "neither simple nor clearcut"
On January 6, voters at a Town Meeting overwhelmingly chose to enter into Tax Increment Financing [TIF] with the State and Georgetown Land Development Authority. This arrangement has taxpayers forego a portion of anticipated future tax revenues from the site’s commercial property in order to pay back money the State loans to GLDC to remediate North Main Street.
The process leading to this point has been flawed and confused - with advocacy and overstatement dominating the discussion. At the meeting, debate was cut off. Had I the opportunity to comment, I would have said this:
Despite its characterization by some, GLDC’s proposal is neither simple nor clearcut. Most importantly, its passage raises unwarranted expectations. I recognize the exceptional work of many to bring into fruition the vision of a vibrant, mixed-use community village in Georgetown. I recognize the desire of nearby residents to rid themselves of the eyesore the site has become. I recognize the interest of Georgetown businessmen in seeing the increased foot traffic and revenue a development would bring.
However, residents should be clear – entering into TIF offers no guarantee the Master Plan vision will be realized. Agreeing to TIF is probably the lesser of two evils, but I’m concerned advocates turned the "vote" into a referendum on the Master Plan. The leadership of our Town should have done a better job explaining that approving the TIF will ultimately have very little impact on whether the Master Plan is realized. Whether or not the Master Plan is realized depends upon future economic and market conditions, currently unknown.
It has been said, for example, that TIF will “lock-in” the Master Plan, implying that the road work would prevent some future developer from putting in an undesirable development.
It won’t.
GLDC is apparently in such precarious financial straits that it needs TIF to complete the roadwork, but I have not seen anything that convinces me a future developer couldn’t manage to work around that road and put in high-density housing or some other undesirable construction regardless. And we would still owe the money.
Moreover, although the chair and vice-chair of the Board of Finance examined GLDC’s books, neither they nor anyone can say with certainty whether GLDC can survive as a viable entity and see the project through to completion. I personally have doubts. If it was solid as an ongoing concern, it wouldn’t need our $3.9 million, which everyone admits is a fraction of its total project cost. (If GLDC doesn’t need it, then our money is just gravy to its investors).
It has also been said the TIF carries no risk for the Town. I disagree. Every taxpayer has a right to expect that every fellow property owner pay their full and fair share of taxes. When taxpayers forego a portion of that revenue, they have a right to expect something in return. I fear residents have been led to the expectation that they will get the Master Plan. All they have bought is GLDC’s survival for another day.
Nick Simeonides
Redding