These figures and a host of other information related to Lakewood’s $66 Million Dollar TIF and the Intergovernmental Agreement with D200 have been public on The Lakewood Tax-Fighter & Better Government Project website for quite sometime (Link Below).

https://www.lakewoodtaxfighter.com/issues-property-tax-time-bomb

What I find most telling is the Redevelopment Agreement itself, which can be found at the link.

Former president Erin Smith along with previous board members continually stated that “it is not a $66 Million Dollar TIF”

Yet here it is in black and white.

Current trustee, Jason McMahon continues to state “Residential development will NEVER happen!”

Yet, here it is in black and white!

Cleverly, the $$ allocation for this “affordable housing” line item is only $1 Million. But, those who understand, know that the dollar amounts of each line item can be increased or decreased to any amount, so long as the combined aggregate amount does not exceed $66 MILLION.

To this, president Smith and her protege, Jason McMahon, continue to reply “but, we plan to only build senior housing or something of that nature.” but, I can’t seem to find that stipulation anywhere, in any of the documents.

I guess we’ll just have to trust them!

Are you talking about the same tax fighter whom voted YES to a fire contract that’s cost will escalate infinitely every year with our property values but then vowed to reduce our property tax levy by 10%?

Talk about a REAL “property tax time bomb”.

How will Lakewood increase revenue outside of the property tax levy while simultaneously decreasing the property tax levy to pay for this commitment?

The TIF will be dissolved and the Lakewood taxpayers will take the hit.

The tax fighter helped set the REAL “property tax time bomb” and it will cost Lakewood residents.

It seems thus info has been on the radio fighter Web date for some time.

Looks like xall just copied it.

Some journalism cal

Jason, keep up the good work, stay focused on the facts, and don’t let the personal snipes slow you down.

I read the fire service contract over and over and over again and still don’t understand how anyone could have voted in favor of it.

It is a true ticking time bomb for the residents of Lakewood, as the costs of fire protection will exponentially rise.

By the way, you can’t spend TIF money on Lakewood East expenses, so won’t the extra costs of police and fire protection need to be borne by Lakewood taxpayers as a free benefit to TIF properties?

Crooks, nothing but crooks.

What is interesting is that Crystal Lake taxpayers haven’t wised up to the fact that:

with only a service contract in place which can be dropped in the future (as it has in the past), Crystal Lake taxpayers—but NOT Lakewood taxpayers— are on the hook for:

1. unfunded pension liabilities of firemen. This is growing year by year and accruing to CL taxpayers obligated to pay into CL fire District but not Lakewood who is just under contract?

2. funding increased needs of Lakewood TIF (maybe more equipment, personnel?) without any increased payments by Lakewood, because any increased TIF EAV is not considered increased (taxable) Lakewood EAV?

If I were a Lakewood taxpayer I would thank heaven that CL taxpayers are generous enough (or not paying attention) to subsidize the cost of Lakewood fire&rescue provision:

CL taxpayers (and most other municipalities) are taxed by the district as a function of home value, and are thus liable for future unfunded pension and OPEB liabilities…and if you look at relative property tax rates of what CL or Woodstock homeowners pay vs. Lakewood homeowners, you might want to keep that quiet so those generous CL taxpayers don’t wise up and demand fair share payments from Lakewood.

Cl fire= .79% of EAV

Woodstock Fire= .92% of EAV

Lakewood Village TOTAL (including police and everything else)= 1.05%of EAV

looks like a big bargain for fire&rescue absent any accruing pension liability, plus freebie increased service provision obligation to Lakewood TIF, no?

Or, Lakewood could always pay to build, outfit, and maintain its own fire&rescue department as many incorporated Villages have done.

Have you run those cost comparisons?

It’s worth taking a moment to reflect on the purpose of TIFs and how Lakewood’s TIF District was created.

In general, government is not supposed to favor one business over another.

This is a principle often violated, but still a good principle.

And a TIF favors new businesses at the expense of existing businesses.

It’s a subsidy, a kickback.

So the law attempts to restrict TIFs by saying they should only be used in blighted areas, and only if they met a “but for” test.

The “but for” test says that “but for” the TIF, development wouldn’t happen.

Lakewood defined the Crystal Woods Golf course as “blighted”.

That’s a ludicrous abuse of the law, but absent someone willing to pay for a lawsuit to challenge the Village, they got away with it.

In order to meet the “but for” test, they hired a firm to give that opinion.

I asked the Village three questions about the firm giving the opinion:

* how many TIFs had they reviewed?

* how many TIFs had they approved?

* had they done any studies after the fact to confirm their findings?

The answers from Village staff and board members were, “We don’t know, we don’t know, and we don’t know.”

So much for oversight.

I did ultimately get answers to my questions.

he answers were 50, 50 and no.

In other words, the firm had reviewed 50 TIF districts and approved every single one.

100%.

Now, studies show that most TIF districts in Illinois do not result in development that would not otherwise have occurred.

But let’s assume this firm got lucky, and that every TIF they reviewed actually had a 66% chance of being successful.

What are the odds, in that case, that they got 50 in a row with no duds?

A billion to one.

That’s not a typo.

A billion to one.

Personally, I find that highly unlikely.

In fact, what seems much more likely is that the firm gave exactly the opinion they were paid to give, as they always had in the past.

And they never went back to see if any of the TIF districts they had approved had actually resulted in development that would not have occurred anyway.

Never.

In short, they only “evidence” that the TIF would succeed was their unsubstantiated opinion.

So the creation of the TIF district in Lakewood was done through obvious abuses of the law.

Yet some would argue that, despite these abuses, the TIF district should be maintained, and that if Lakewood can grab some money from other governments, well, that the end justifies the means.

Some favor this even if there’s no benefit to Lakewood’s taxpayers because a bad TIF district just moves taxes from one government to another without saving the taxpayers any money.

Some would go further and argue that the only way to get development is by using TIFs, despite the clear evidence that the vast majority of development all across this country, and even here in McHenry County, occurs without TIFs or other government subsidies.

I wonder if Jason would care to read that piece, Patrick.