PDA

You are viewing a trimmed-down version of the SkyscraperPage.com discussion forum.  For the full version follow the link below.

View Full Version : Sprawl gets the money; City gets the shaft



Steely Dan
01-18-2007, 04:43 PM
more fuel to the fire for the argument that our entire governmental structure is built with a bias that rewards sprawl at the expense of our central cities. this is a chicagoland specific article, but i think it's very pertinent to all of us in this forum who are concerned about issues of government subsidization of sprawl.


source: chicago tribune (http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-0701180110jan18,0,4719448.story?coll=chi-bizfront-hed)

State subsidy study: `Reverse Robin Hood'
Money granted found to be concentrated in wealthy neighborhoods

By Stephen Franklin
Tribune staff reporter
Published January 18, 2007

Draw a map of Chicago-area communities where businesses have received state subsidies. Now draw another of places plagued by joblessness.

The result, according to a watchdog group that examined 15 years of subsidies to companies in the six-county Chicago area, are two maps that barely touch.

It's the "reverse Robin Hood effect" of the state rewarding the rich, said Greg LeRoy, executive director of Good Jobs First, a Washington, D.C.-based non-profit group that has charted the impact of state-supported incentives on communities.

Illinois is not alone with this issue, LeRoy said, explaining that the group's recent studies of state subsidies to businesses in Minnesota and Michigan came to similar conclusions.

State subsidies given Chicago-area companies between 1990 and 2004 have "shortchanged" Chicago and nearby suburbs, prompting greater job sprawl and regional inequality, concluded the study, which LeRoy described as the first of its kind for Illinois.

The three-year-long effort, funded by the Ford Foundation, looked at $1.2 billion provided in 10 state subsidies.

The bulk of the money, about $951 million, was made available through Illinois industrial revenue bonds, the report's figures show.

The winners, according to the study, were the North and Northwest suburbs and the corridor near O'Hare International Airport.

Firms that moved to the airport corridor would have moved there "without any additional help" but instead benefited from $198 million in subsidies, LeRoy said.

The report also illustrated an imbalance in subsidies directed to more rural areas, as well as away from communities with large numbers of minorities.

While the city of Chicago had 38 percent of the region's population in 1990, it received about 15 percent of the subsidies given businesses between 1990 and 2004, the period the study examined, according to the report. That translated to Chicago receiving only $64 per capita.

"Subsidies are going to the places that need them the least," the report said, adding that "relatively few" state financial incentives have gone to firms in mostly African-American communities in Chicago or nearby suburbs.

The disparate results, LeRoy said, reflect the lack of rules that encourage business to locate in places that will foster economic development, take advantage of affordable housing and reduce job sprawl.

"Not having targeted rules means the rich get even richer," he said.

Still, LeRoy praised a 2003 state law that makes all of its business dealings available on the Internet because it allows greater public scrutiny. Another law, passed last year, boosts tax credits for firms that locate in areas with affordable housing.

Andrew Ross, a spokesman for the state's Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity, said Gov. Rod Blagojevich has not considered any move to rewrite the rules for state subsidies.

Ross defended the state's most recent efforts, saying "the governor has a very strong track record in making the investments that matter the most when it comes to working families." Ross said the bulk of the study deals with state subsidies given out during prior administrations.

Frank Beal, head of Chicago Metropolis 2020, a business-supported policy group that helped with the study, said he concluded that state subsidies aren't necessary for spurring economic growth.

"We don't need any of these subsidies," Beal said. "It's fairly clear we have no policy for giving away money in Illinois. It's who comes in the door."

Peter Skosey of the Metropolitan Planning Council praised the study for showing the need to link jobs, affordable housing and transportation to economic development.

Financial help for firms located far from downtown Chicago adds to some workers' commutes while it also creates jobs beyond the reach of others without cars, the study said.

Out of 782 subsidies reviewed by the watchdog group, only 141 were given to firms located within a half-mile of a Chicago Transit Authority station or bus line, the report found.

In addition, only 3 percent of the suburban firms that received subsidies "could be easily reached by CTA service," according to the report.

One of the wealthier suburban communities where businesses have benefited from state subsidies is Lincolnshire. Firms there have received about $9 million during the 15-year period, according to the study.

But Lincolnshire Village Manager Bob Irvin doubted whether subsidies have played a major role in firms' decision to put down roots in his community.

At the same time, he said, Lincolnshire has joined a clearinghouse to help provide state-sponsored industrial bonds to Lake County communities that need them.

In Harvey, a largely African-American community in the south suburbs, Mayor Eric Kellogg said local officials need to learn as much as they can about state subsidies so they can entice businesses to locate there.

A move in that direction, Kellogg said, was the recent creation of a local chamber of commerce.

But, he added, the state also has to inform communities like his about how to attract businesses with such subsidies. According to the report, Harvey firms have received $387,000 in state subsidies over the years.

Within Chicago, the Loop received a major share of the subsidies, and firms on the city's North Side and South Side did far better than those on the West Side.

On the South Side, most of the money went to firms in the Far Southeast Side or Southwest Side, areas where manufacturing traditionally had been located.

City officials declined to comment, saying they had not read the report.

1Post2
01-18-2007, 06:40 PM
The disparate results, LeRoy said, reflect the lack of rules that encourage business to locate in places that will foster economic development, take advantage of affordable housing and reduce job sprawl.

yeah, seems like all this is mostly a reflection of deeper problems. its hard for a neighborhood to get its fair share of subsidy if it doesn't have its fair share of business in the first place.

EastSideHBG
01-18-2007, 11:11 PM
Sad, but not surprising at all...where do you think the richies in our gov't would spend the money? In areas where there are lots of people they don't care about or their own backyards?

Jeff_in_Dayton
01-18-2007, 11:45 PM
This is certainly happening in Ohio, in the area between Dayton and Cincinnati.

There is a suburb there that uses the enterprise zone concept to give breaks to companies that locate in its industrial park conveniently located near the interstate exit. The town is pretty explicit as they want industry locating there so they can charge a local income tax on the workers to subsidize their local govt. Its a pure shell game concept to rob tax base from the city and other suburbs.

Then there is that TIF tool, which was intended to help redevelop old brownfield sites, but has been used here by a suburb to subsidize the development of a brand new "lifestyle center" (in anoverbuilt retail market) on a greenfield site adjacent to another freeway interchange.

Wheelingman04
01-19-2007, 04:25 PM
^ It is just ridiculous. I think it is happening all over the country just like this.

DJM19
01-19-2007, 05:53 PM
Yet if you listen to suburbanites, they think they are the neglected ones and the city is the one being given all the money

Chicago103
01-26-2007, 12:39 AM
Yet if you listen to suburbanites, they think they are the neglected ones and the city is the one being given all the money

Of course, their ideology is based on endless victimization even if it is fairly clear to an objective observer that it is the exact opposite. The real oppressors are playing possom and claiming they are the victims of the real victims, the cities. Maybe in some cases small towns in true rural areas are getting the shaft as well but I dont believe for a minute that sprawl is the victim and sprawl minded pundits try to get the rural small towns to band against the cities as the enemy when in reality the small towns that are being given the shaft are actually being held down by sprawl. Its deception on the level of a sith lord.

James Bond Agent 007
01-26-2007, 01:17 AM
I think people need to dig deeper for the reasons behind this.

Like it or not, most job growth occurs in the suburbs these days. If businesses in the suburbs are getting more subsidies than businesses in the center city, that's probably because there are more new and expanding businesses located in the suburbs . . . and more total jobs in the suburbs as well.

While the city of Chicago had 38 percent of the region's population in 1990, it received about 15 percent of the subsidies given businesses between 1990 and 2004,
This is dumb. Since businesses subsidies involves businesses and not residential populations, they should be looking at the relative proportions of jobs, not the relative proportions of residents.

James Bond Agent 007
01-26-2007, 01:20 AM
If anyone has stats on the relative proportions of jobs in the Chicagoland center city and suburbs, then we can get a much better idea on whether these subsidies are being fairly distributed or not.

DeadManWalking
01-27-2007, 12:39 AM
Personally I don't think businesses in the suburbs should be subsidized at all. Recently my city created a $40 million dollar TIF district for a Wal-mart and Sam's Club in a part of town that is purely suburban and thriving. Meanwhile many parts of the inner city have crumbling sidewalks, pot holes everywhere, and sewer issues.

Jaroslaw
01-27-2007, 02:52 AM
Everywhere in the world cities and city dwellers pay out more than they receive... it's true for Paris, true for Tokyo. Partly it's about progressive taxation, the richer you are (and Chicago is much richer than its suburbs), the more you pay. I know, this doesn't quite work for Detroit or Buffalo, but it's part of the equation here.

I think more deeply there is a bias, in every country, to value land... those who have land get subsidised. It's connected mentally to every country being protectionist about its own agriculture. And in the States, it goes even deeper because one of the strongest cultural genes that we have is the conquest of land.

Just trying to "know thine enemy." In any case, I think, as for Chicago, that it would be more productive to look in the mirror for its problems than to blame others. Blaming someone else usually does not get you results. Thinking about managerial efficiency, about unions, about the distribution of government spending, would be more useful. Chinese cities have private urban bus companies, for ****'s sake!

I keep getting the sense that when Daley went to all those foreign cities, he only learned about things he could see on the outside, like landscaping or the train to the airport. He didn't see deeply enough how they got there.



Forums Directory