Quicklinks to page section:
TIF districts explained
In 1977, the Illinois General Assembly authorized the Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act. Other Tax Increment Financing (TIF) laws followed in subsequent years. The original TIF statute authorized the use of future tax revenues to offset the current costs of land acquisition and improvements. But, in order to use TIF, local governments have to draw up redevelopment project plans, issue public debt to finance their plans, and agree to use future tax revenues to retire their debt. Once local authorities approve the government’s plan, the area is recognized as a TIF District. TIF Districts, usually, are authorized for twenty-three years. As a rule, every taxing entity within a TIF District “must allocate their incremental property tax revenues[, which are] derived from the redevelopment project area[,] to the payment of redevelopment project costs that qualify under the TIF Act.” This mandatory transfer of revenues has been challenged on many grounds, but Illinois courts support the practice because “[t]he eradication of blighted areas and [the] treatment and improvement of conservation areas and industrial park conservation areas . . . is . . . essential to the public interest.” Legislative and judicial support for TIF, initially, was based on the premise that this economic development tool would “promote the redevelopment of depressed urban areas” and serve as “a program of last resort to attract economic development to the most depressed areas in Illinois cities.” However, over time, TIF’s underlying rationale has changed, as “[it] mutated into a general economic development program firmly within the tradition of the private economic development model.” Currently, TIF is justified by its promise to expand local tax bases by increasing tax revenues, the number of taxpayers, or the number of taxable properties in the area. Typically, scholarly examinations of TIF ask whether this economic development tool delivers on its promise. Some research tests the relationship between TIF and standard measures of economic development. Other studies focus on the economic and social costs of TIF. A third category of work asks whether TIF distorts the local real estate market. Read the report about Cook County TIFs here - Northern Illinois University Law Review
If interested, here are more articles on TIFs
Overview of TIF districts, Illinois State Bar Association
Before City Hall loved TIFs, it shunned them as bad policy
The tiff over TIF
Tax Increment Financing: A Bad Bargain for Taxpayers
Should TIFs be tied to community benefits?
Correcting Crain's on TIFs
TIF Schemes harm taxpayers
TIF has a cost
Tax Increment Financing (TIF)
Straying From Good Intentions: How States Are Weakening Enterprise Zone and Tax Increment Financing Programs
If interested, here are more articles on TIFs
Overview of TIF districts, Illinois State Bar Association
Before City Hall loved TIFs, it shunned them as bad policy
The tiff over TIF
Tax Increment Financing: A Bad Bargain for Taxpayers
Should TIFs be tied to community benefits?
Correcting Crain's on TIFs
TIF Schemes harm taxpayers
TIF has a cost
Tax Increment Financing (TIF)
Straying From Good Intentions: How States Are Weakening Enterprise Zone and Tax Increment Financing Programs
How are TIFs monitored?
How can we assure that TIF is used appropriately and that TIF districts do not take on a life of their own? Since there is no approval agency other than the municipality itself, it is up to the community and the taxing bodies to be involved in developing and overseeing the TIF plan to make sure it meets the requirements of the law and the needs of the community as a whole.
TIF projects are made better by shining the light of day on them, whether through journalism, actively engaged advisory groups, participation in public hearings, or letters to the editor with varying points of view. This will help ensure that TIF projects do more than pass the snicker test. - Lynn Tolle Burger, The State Journal Register
TIF projects are made better by shining the light of day on them, whether through journalism, actively engaged advisory groups, participation in public hearings, or letters to the editor with varying points of view. This will help ensure that TIF projects do more than pass the snicker test. - Lynn Tolle Burger, The State Journal Register
STOP and ELIMINATE TIF Districts in Tinley Park
Tinley Park TIF Districts Further information on each of Tinley Park's TIF Districts (including related documents) can be found by clicking the name of the TIF below:
Local TIF districts in the news
Cook and Will County TIF Maps *Tinley Park residents are NOT sold on a special taxing district (TIF), read the news article. |
GOVERNMENT OWNED LAND IS PROPERTY TAX EXEMPT. SAY NO TO THE PURCHASE AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE TPMHC.
|
Why divert tax dollars away from local government for property developers?
As increases in property taxes are diverted to TIF district funds and property tax revenue to local government is flat for 23 years - what happens when costs in local government increase? Would property taxes increase even more? Would local government accrue debt? Also keep in mind that after the 23 year TIF term is up, it can be EXTENDED for 12 more years! Keep an eye on TIF financial reports (IL Comptroller link provided above).
Taxpayer funds should NOT be diverted from local government (Village and Schools) and provided as incentives for businesses and developers. The Panduit/Legacy district is primarily focused on the PRIVATE property owned by Panduit. Taxpayer funds should not be utilized to improve or incentivize the development or improvement of private property. Upon review of the Panduit/Legacy TIF, we also wonder why Tinley Park High School is included in the TIF. When Bremen CHSD 228 is currently listed as #14 in deficit spending [Lincoln-Way CHSD210 is #11], what affect does the Panduit/Legacy TIF have on Bremen CHSD 228/Tinley Park High School? The "Pro TIF" Illinois Tax Increment Association states "Tax Increment Financing is simple in concept. TIF calls for local taxing bodies to make a joint investment in the development or redevelopment of an area , with the intent that any short term gains be reinvested and leveraged so that all the taxing bodies will receive larger financial gains in the future." With the extremely high property taxes that Tinley Taxpayers are burdened with, is this a time to be creating or funding TIFs? Tinley Taxpayers need tax relief NOW, not in the future. The heavy use of TIF districts in Tinley Park may be having an adverse effect on the community and causing unnecessary property tax increases over the 23 year term of various TIF districts. |
TIF News 2017
Things to keep an eye on in downtown Tinley (updated 6/9/17):
MAIN STREET SOUTH TIF
(find the following data in the 2016 comptroller annual report)
LEGACY/PANDUIT TIF
MAIN STREET SOUTH TIF
(find the following data in the 2016 comptroller annual report)
- "Project 4" The Village continues to buy property along North Street (and has done so through eminent domain.. more on this in the Legacy TIF) for a parking garage they don't yet know how to pay for.
- "Project 5" The empty lot where the old Central Middle school stood was paid for by the Village and it is expected to be re-sold for residential development... in a TIF district.
- "Project 6" The Boulevard at Central Station, South Street mixed-use development. A 167 unit APARTMENT complex that is waiting for "Freedom Pond" to be completed (it states so right in the TIF paperwork). It also states that "The Village will grant a Cook County Class 8 property tax incentive for the property. The Village will reimburse the developer up to a maximum of $3,776,000 in qualified TIF redevelopment costs. Additionally, the Village will reimburse up to $2,000,000 in public improvements associated with, and serving, the development. Finally, the Village will share 50% of sales taxes generated by the new commercial establishments locating in the development for a period of ten years."
- "Project 7" Public Parking Facility and Community Park. "The Village has architectural designs completed for a public parking facility adjacent to the Oak Park Avenue Metra commuter rail depot that would provide additional parking required to support the proposed Tinley Park Place (project 4) and other existing and proposed developments in the area of the Oak Park Avenue depot. This parking facility would replace the existing surface parking lots north of the railroad tracks that are used primarily for commuter parking and provide additional parking to support adjacent commercial developments. In conjunction with this facility, a portion of the parking would be below grade with an urban style community park developed at surface level. This park is expected to have a performance stage and a central fountain/water feature that would also serve as an ice skating rink in the winter months. Funding to support this development beyond the design phase has not currently been determined."
LEGACY/PANDUIT TIF
- "Freedom Pond" is being built to support proposed developments in the South Street TIF, including the 167 unit apartment complex on South Street. Trouble is, the TIF ALLOWS FOR DISPLACEMENT (I.E. EMINENT DOMAIN) of any of the 75 residences in this TIF district...
|
MAIN STREET NORTH TIF
(find the following data in the 2016 comptroller annual report)
OAK PARK AVENUE TIF
(find the following data in the 2016 comptroller annual report)
TINLEY PARK MENTAL HEALTH CENTER TIF
(find the following data in the 2016 comptroller annual report)
- "Project 6" Forest Glen subdivision (site work began 2007). The TIF records state "A developer acquired the heavily wooded property that had formerly been the site of the local Lions Club Pool and adjacent picnic grove. The developer plan proposed to construct eight (8) single family homes on the property. The Village provided financial assistance toward this project with the construction of the bridge and some of the adjacent roadway improvements. A portion of the bridge costs are to be recaptured as the residential lots are developed. The developer sold two lots, and constructed one home before walking away from the project. The developer turned over the remaining lots to the bank in lieu of foreclosure. The downturn in the housing markets and the general economy associated with the Great Recession are significant factors in the lack of greater activity with this development." AND THIS IS WHY OUR VILLAGE GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT BE INVOLVED IN REAL ESTATE.
OAK PARK AVENUE TIF
(find the following data in the 2016 comptroller annual report)
- "Project 3" “Gambone’s parking lot (completed 1997). A restaurateur acquired property at the southwest corner of 179th Street and Oak Park Avenue to provide additional parking for their existing restaurant located immediately north of the parking lot site. The Village provided TIF financial assistance toward the costs of construction of the parking lot to relieve parking and traffic flow concerns on the adjacent roadways and impacts to neighboring homes and businesses. The site has been vacant since 2010 and the restaurant building was demolished in 2015." Tax dollars... gone.
- Mack Industries even got $30,000 from the Oak Park Avenue TIF in 2016.
TINLEY PARK MENTAL HEALTH CENTER TIF
- T.B.D....
What we say:Tinley Park is overrun with FIVE TIF districts... slush funds of our tax dollars are being siphoned from public entities to give to developers to build structures the market does not necessarily want/need, but the Village has envisioned for it's new-urbanism "Legacy Plan" utopia. TIF's open the door to crony capitalism, and we've already seen developers who have donated to the campaigns of our political leaders. TIF districts need to be dissolved, repealed, gone extinct. There are better ways to incentivize development in our Village, ways that are fair to any developer or business looking to move into town. Furthermore, the mixed-use development, urban landscape that Village planners are going for (and made mandatory) in our downtown section of TP does not seem suitable, or in demand. First floor commercial spaces have gone vacant for years, property owners are unfairly locked into an urban planner's vision, and development is at a stand still because of Village interference. Village government needs to get out of the way and let the free market take over.
|
STOP Taxpayer funded planning & development of TPMHC property
The village of Tinley Park has hired multiple firms regarding the development of land at the site of the old Tinley Park Mental Health Center campus. Taxpayer funds are paying a least 7 different planning firms hundreds of thousands of dollars to look into ways to develop property which the village DOES NOT OWN. At the TAXPAYERS EXPENSE, the village has hired:
Village Officials believe that if they have a plan on developing this property that they would be able to purchase the land (at the taxpayer's expense) without taxpayer approval. Besides a hefty purchase price, it is estimated to cost over an additional $12 million dollars just to clean the asbestos and contaminants at the site. The Village has indicated that they'd like to find a developer that would cover the cost of land remediation, which we assume was mentioned to diffuse public outrage over the project. Does anyone actually believe that a developer paying for land remediation costs would not pass the expense through to the land parcel purchasers, builders, buyers, etc.?
There are a lot of big ideas that politicians can come up with, but the problem is that TAXPAYERS are the on the hook for the bills and liabilities. Where is the line drawn in a government's role? Is land planning, purchasing and development really a necessary role for a municipality? With property taxes as high as they are, spending more of OUR money is the last thing we want our village doing. The postcards mailed to residents at TAXPAYER cost for a pet project of the Village board is pure WASTE. The Village is spending money discussing land which it does not own. To date, residents have received at least 3 large post cards over a project for STATE OWNED property that the village is interested in buying with TAXPAYER funds. How much taxpayer dollars has the Village spent with planning firms, on the advertising campaign and public meetings regarding this project so far?
Back in 2014 the approved contract for just ONE planning firm was estimated at $105,800, and we count the Village using 7 planning firms, as listed in various reports. This is just the cost of the IDEAS. Notice in the 2014 article above, the Village underestimated the land remediation cost at $6 million - In 2016 the estimated cost is DOUBLE, $12 million estimated land remediation cost. According to articles we found on hospital and other contaminated commercial sites cleanup, costs were in the range of $75 million to $200 million. Community residents must be aware of hazardous waste sites and the threats and costs they present. Even Tinley's retired Mayor considers the Old State Mental Hospital an "Environmental Nightmare". Details on the TPMHC facility/closure can be read here.
As of July 2016, Tinley Park is looking to hire an additional consultant on a sports complex feasibility study.
- Farr and Associates (land use and development, also operates the website and facebook page regarding the project for the village)
- SB Friedman (market analysis and developer outreach)
- Sam Schwartz (pedestrian and bike planning)
- Hey and Associates (hydrology and ecology analysis)
- Wetlands Research Inc.
- Robinson Engineering (cost estimating)
- Site Design Group (landscape and architecture)
Village Officials believe that if they have a plan on developing this property that they would be able to purchase the land (at the taxpayer's expense) without taxpayer approval. Besides a hefty purchase price, it is estimated to cost over an additional $12 million dollars just to clean the asbestos and contaminants at the site. The Village has indicated that they'd like to find a developer that would cover the cost of land remediation, which we assume was mentioned to diffuse public outrage over the project. Does anyone actually believe that a developer paying for land remediation costs would not pass the expense through to the land parcel purchasers, builders, buyers, etc.?
There are a lot of big ideas that politicians can come up with, but the problem is that TAXPAYERS are the on the hook for the bills and liabilities. Where is the line drawn in a government's role? Is land planning, purchasing and development really a necessary role for a municipality? With property taxes as high as they are, spending more of OUR money is the last thing we want our village doing. The postcards mailed to residents at TAXPAYER cost for a pet project of the Village board is pure WASTE. The Village is spending money discussing land which it does not own. To date, residents have received at least 3 large post cards over a project for STATE OWNED property that the village is interested in buying with TAXPAYER funds. How much taxpayer dollars has the Village spent with planning firms, on the advertising campaign and public meetings regarding this project so far?
Back in 2014 the approved contract for just ONE planning firm was estimated at $105,800, and we count the Village using 7 planning firms, as listed in various reports. This is just the cost of the IDEAS. Notice in the 2014 article above, the Village underestimated the land remediation cost at $6 million - In 2016 the estimated cost is DOUBLE, $12 million estimated land remediation cost. According to articles we found on hospital and other contaminated commercial sites cleanup, costs were in the range of $75 million to $200 million. Community residents must be aware of hazardous waste sites and the threats and costs they present. Even Tinley's retired Mayor considers the Old State Mental Hospital an "Environmental Nightmare". Details on the TPMHC facility/closure can be read here.
As of July 2016, Tinley Park is looking to hire an additional consultant on a sports complex feasibility study.
The Tinley Park village board could determine that any dreamt up use of the land at 183rd and Harlem Avenue could be excellent use of the state owned land. The board can even find and hire multiple planning firms to support the boards' narrow vision. The problem is: a) the village doesn't own this land, b) the taxpayers didn't authorize their money to be spent on land planning, and c) the taxpayers didn't authorize the purchase of this land. The fact is, land at 183rd and Harlem Avenue is valuable commercial land. No matter what is built there, proper code will protect the village. Tax income will be derived. That's what matters! Tinley Park: Zone it, don't own it.
The cost of a land planning endeavor is not beneficial to taxpayers and any return on taxpayer investment would not be realized for many, many years (if at all). Current home and business owners paying the cost of this project are not benefiting. If private industry develops the land there is no cost to us, and the benefits would be received by us immediately. This is a no brainer - let private industry develop the land.
A must read article highlighting the issue of a $49 million dollar publicly funded sports "park" in Westfield Indiana that the residents were not able to use: Click Here to Read. That's a big red flag for Tinley Park taxpayers to be aware of. Also, the profitability of a Lisle "sports complex" hasn't come to fruition, and taxpayers are now on the hook for DEBT! Going back to the Westfield Indiana Grand Park (sports park), it is not comparable to a similar sports park in Tinley Park for multiple reasons...
- Indiana has a more favorable Personal, Property and Business Tax Climate than Illinois. See the report here.
- Indiana has no prevailing wage law. Illinois does, which means labor costs in Illinois are much higher than in Indiana.
- Indiana has lower insurance costs, including workers compensation insurance.
- Westfield Indiana is a more affluent city than Tinley Park. Westfield residents have a higher income, more disposable income and a lower cost of living. See the report here.
- Westfield Indiana did not have to contend with the costs of a hazardous site cleanup before building the 400 acre sports park.
Most recently in nearby Bridgeview, after ten bond sales since 2003—most recently one in 2015 for $16 million to resolve debt shortfalls from previous bond sales [regarding the development and building of a 20,0000 seat capacity soccer stadium]—Bridgeview taxpayers are on the hook for $241.2 million in long-term debt that the village plans to pay off by 2045. Read the rest of the article HERE.
Something more for residents to consider... even as Tinley Park gained businesses, like the shopping area at 191st and Harlem Avenue (Target, Best Buy, PetSmart, Kohls, etc.), our property taxes have NOT gone down! Our property taxes did not go down after the Tinley Park Convention Center was built, and our taxes have not gone down having a Music Venue, hotels and other amenities and industry in our village. Furthermore, our property taxes have not gone down with the expansion of video gambling throughout town. The problem is obviously not in attracting more business to the area, the problem is out of control spending by our Village and Schools. It's also worth noting that even though a building or property is vacant, someone is STILL paying property taxes on that lot. It's not a matter of property or sales tax income being needed on vacant properties. It's a matter of too much spending in local government.
Based on our outrageous property taxes it's apparent that the Village cannot operate a reasonable budget. We certainly don't want this same Village managing OUR money on a large project that we don't need. Just like families in this community have to balance their budgets on the "what do we need vs. what do we want" determination, this village needs to start abiding by the same.
Private industry exists to serve residents with what they want and need. We don't need our "tax dollar managers" using OUR money to figure this out. No private industry would build something a community does not want or need. Private industry does market studies before developing property. The sky will not fall if Tinley relinquishes control or manipulation of this land.
More on the TPMHC Development in the News:
Residential development in a TIF district = Higher taxes for the rest of the Taxpayers
At least 3 Tinley Park TIF districts look to entail large residential development projects that will BURDEN TAXPAYERS AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS. The article link below explains how TIF districts funnel money away from schools and burden taxpayers. The Mayor in this Missouri town mayor says "Not one child will be added to any school district.... We have no residential development in our TIF. There will be a lot of money coming in, and no burden to anyone." This is NOT the case in Tinley Park.
Unverifiable "Economic Impact"
There is no way to truly calculate "economic impact" studies that developers and planners like to tout when "selling" an idea or concept. Many reports have been passed around town regarding other community funded developments and the multi-year "economic impact" it has on the community. "Economic impact" is not direct revenue to one venue, it's a compilation of revenue projections within a general area. "Economic impact" estimates are difficult to track and nearly impossible to verify.
Articles on [unverifiable] economic impact:
Speaking of "economic impact", what is the "economic impact" of the Tinley Park music venue (Hollywood Casino Amphitheater)? Furthermore, what would the traffic impact be with the music venue and the addition of another large venue at 183rd and Harlem? The music venue ties up traffic for hours on weekends and during events.
Lastly, while reviewing revenue projections, economic impact studies and articles on other developments, it's important to understand the difference between revenue and income. It takes a LOT more than an economic impact or revenue projection article to truly understand the economics of various businesses and organizations.
Articles on [unverifiable] economic impact:
Speaking of "economic impact", what is the "economic impact" of the Tinley Park music venue (Hollywood Casino Amphitheater)? Furthermore, what would the traffic impact be with the music venue and the addition of another large venue at 183rd and Harlem? The music venue ties up traffic for hours on weekends and during events.
Lastly, while reviewing revenue projections, economic impact studies and articles on other developments, it's important to understand the difference between revenue and income. It takes a LOT more than an economic impact or revenue projection article to truly understand the economics of various businesses and organizations.
Village Planning FAILS
The dilapidated property around town is plenty of evidence of village planning gone wrong - we don't need any more big ideas from the board. In case anybody needs a reminder of past big ideas (some which have been taxpayer funded by millions) that have failed, here are just a few:
How about Tinley Park's gross underestimation ($1 million short!) on the cost of a retention pond, and then their failure to follow through on the agreement made with Orland Hills? OR how about Tinley Park investing taxpayer dollars into a PRIVATE business, which is not as successful as anticipated... or as "sold" to taxpayers. Here's even more on that private business deal, which includes a link to the contract.
Furthermore, even though this "project" somehow passed approval in the Village, check out this large, gaudy sign the Village Park District spent $25,000 taxpayer dollars on for a DOG PARK! Seriously... "Residents are right to be mad about Tinley Park dog park arch" ...and it could cost another $3,500 to remove the arch and leave the gaudy columns. Apparently, the Village wanted to make it clear that the road ended into a dog park, so motorists would not drive into the park and the "jurassic park sign" was determined by commissioners to be the best bet? Wouldn't it have been safer, cheaper and more reasonable to put a few concrete pillars or install a standard metal barricade at the end of the road?
Currently, decaying properties and vacant land is sitting in place, due to a village board that is holding out for developers to come in and build what suits their narrow vision. The village should allow private developers the ability to build what is suitable and needed by residents. We're not sure where the Village board is going when transitioning from high end retail, expensive apartments, and parking garage amenities/attractions, to rowhouses and then low-income housing. This Village needs to let residents and businesses determine the vision for their own community. The ideas in which the board has found fitting have not only been protested by the local residents, but the ideas have not come to fruition because the market does not need it.
The Village board needs to stop playing Monopoly with taxpayer money.
Rolling the dice on a taxpayer-funded development at 183rd and Harlem Avenue (or any other property in the Village) isn't an opportunity for taxpayers. It's a gamble, a major gamble. Changing the system that created this problem is the opportunity. Actually, it's revolutionary. The entire system of our municipalities and school districts need to be restructured into a fiscally responsible structure.
- The Boulevard at Central Station
- Tinley Park Roundabout Project
- Downtown Rowhouses Project
- More Rowhouses
How about Tinley Park's gross underestimation ($1 million short!) on the cost of a retention pond, and then their failure to follow through on the agreement made with Orland Hills? OR how about Tinley Park investing taxpayer dollars into a PRIVATE business, which is not as successful as anticipated... or as "sold" to taxpayers. Here's even more on that private business deal, which includes a link to the contract.
Furthermore, even though this "project" somehow passed approval in the Village, check out this large, gaudy sign the Village Park District spent $25,000 taxpayer dollars on for a DOG PARK! Seriously... "Residents are right to be mad about Tinley Park dog park arch" ...and it could cost another $3,500 to remove the arch and leave the gaudy columns. Apparently, the Village wanted to make it clear that the road ended into a dog park, so motorists would not drive into the park and the "jurassic park sign" was determined by commissioners to be the best bet? Wouldn't it have been safer, cheaper and more reasonable to put a few concrete pillars or install a standard metal barricade at the end of the road?
Currently, decaying properties and vacant land is sitting in place, due to a village board that is holding out for developers to come in and build what suits their narrow vision. The village should allow private developers the ability to build what is suitable and needed by residents. We're not sure where the Village board is going when transitioning from high end retail, expensive apartments, and parking garage amenities/attractions, to rowhouses and then low-income housing. This Village needs to let residents and businesses determine the vision for their own community. The ideas in which the board has found fitting have not only been protested by the local residents, but the ideas have not come to fruition because the market does not need it.
The Village board needs to stop playing Monopoly with taxpayer money.
Rolling the dice on a taxpayer-funded development at 183rd and Harlem Avenue (or any other property in the Village) isn't an opportunity for taxpayers. It's a gamble, a major gamble. Changing the system that created this problem is the opportunity. Actually, it's revolutionary. The entire system of our municipalities and school districts need to be restructured into a fiscally responsible structure.
A letter from an angry resident
We were asked to post this letter for all Village leaders, and all the community to see:
I want a golden egg and I want it now!
"We all want a lot of things in life, but it's infringing on MY RIGHTS when YOU TAKE MONEY OUT OF MY POCKET and use it for things I DID NOT AUTHORIZE. My property taxes are not meant to go to a community purchase and development of land, and my property taxes are not meant to start, operate or support a business or development. My tax dollars are to fund the schools and village operations. That's all. A big problem I have with YOUR ideas (that include MY MONEY) is that there is nothing holding YOU responsible for the outcomes of YOUR idea(s). For example, take embattled superintendent Lawrence Wyllie of Lincoln-Way CHSD 210. He [allegedly] ran a reckless operation with taxpayer funds, collected an extravagant salary then retired with an extravagant pension. When the incompetence and recklessness of District management came to light, Wyllie quickly sold his home and is on the lam. Meanwhile an entire community of students, families and taxpayers are left holding the debts and liabilities [allegedly] caused by the actions of Wyllie. Don't present and inflict YOUR ideas/decisions upon an entire community, and don't present ideas that are a conflict of interest, self serving or of self interest either. Some Village board members, hired land planners, and even a few residents want to force their agenda/ideology upon ME and an entire community. What is holding the "decision makers" of these projects accountable for their decisions and votes? It's time the "decision makers" in our communities and schools are held accountable, BY CONTRACT, for the decisions they make. "Decision makers" wanting to flee from results of their policies/decisions should be prohibited from doing so, by contract. If "decision makers" believe their policies and decisions are good ones, then they should be held accountable for the LIFESPAN of their policy or decision - just as communities and taxpayers are. "Decision makers" must have skin in the game, and they must also reap what they sow. Lastly, for any resident, if YOU are content paying high property taxes, if YOU are OK with funding land development, then sign up and let the Village know to keep your rates high... DON'T speak for me." - Angry Tinley Park Taxpaying Resident |
|
Contact the Mayor and Trustees with complaints, questions and concerns:
Brian S. Maher, Trustee
[email protected] T.J. Grady, Trustee [email protected] Michael J. Pannitto, Trustee [email protected] |
Jacob C. Vandenberg, Trustee
[email protected] Brian H. Younker, Trustee [email protected] Kevin L. Suggs, Trustee [email protected] |
Contribute:
Post Guidelines: Tinley Taxpayers welcome all Tinley Park residents and businesses to contribute data, research and information to assist in the movement to have property taxes reduced through lower Village and School spending. Content posted on this page is expected to adhere to the conduct guidelines. Content that violates these guidelines is not tolerated.
Page Links:
Home Page
Property Taxes
Village of Tinley Park Data
Stop Taxpayer-funded Developments
Tinley Park Schools Data
The Reserve
Salary Graphs
Legislators
Govt. Transparency
How did we get here?
How can we fix this?
Imagine If
Who we are
TIP LINE
Taxpayer Greivances
Collaborate
Open Forum
Sources
Downloads
FAQ's
Home Page
Property Taxes
Village of Tinley Park Data
Stop Taxpayer-funded Developments
Tinley Park Schools Data
The Reserve
Salary Graphs
Legislators
Govt. Transparency
How did we get here?
How can we fix this?
Imagine If
Who we are
TIP LINE
Taxpayer Greivances
Collaborate
Open Forum
Sources
Downloads
FAQ's