SouthSide Improvement District - Yay for new taxes (neighborhoods, live)

[UKyank]

Any one have any further insight on this: South Side Neighborhood Improvement District

I'm particularly not keen in that the southside property owners are being tapped to pay an extra tax but there seems to be no requirement of residency to be on the Committee deciding what to do with the money collected.

[Aqua Teen Carl]

As much as I love Southside I have to admit that there are a dozen or so neighborhoods that should be higher on the list for improvements.

[BrianTH]

Property owners often want a higher level of service than the relevant jurisdiction is willing and/or able to provide. Hence NIDs and BIDs. In this case, it is sort of like an end-run around the City's legacy costs, which is an interesting although not unproblematic idea.

Incidentally, generally they have to be renewed after a short term of years. They almost always are.

Edit:

Oh, and the Board of a NID or BID is elected by the property owners of the jurisdiction, from the property owners of the jurisdiction. A residency requirement would be a little odd because it isn't funded by residents, it is funded by property owners (an overlapping but not identical set).

[UKyank]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Oh, and the Board of a NID or BID is elected by the property owners of the jurisdiction, from the property owners of the jurisdiction. A residency requirement would be a little odd because it isn't funded by residents, it is funded by property owners (an overlapping but not identical set).

I didn't see that before.....though there are people listed on the initial board, wonder how that would work - if the proposal passes, would there then have to be an immediate local election before the NID came into existance as the people listed now weren't elected.

I'm just wary of a situation where the resident property owners pay the majority of the taxes & the business owners decide what its spent on as thats what the initial board is mainly made up of.

What i'm really not a fan of is this:
"Formation of an Improvement District is voluntary. The community must want an Improvement District in order for one to pass. State law says that if 40% or more of affected property owners register their disapproval of the District, one cannot be formed. In short, if South Side does not want an Improvement District, one cannot be formed"
Shouldn't it be the other way around.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by UKyank

if the proposal passes, would there then have to be an immediate local election before the NID came into existance as the people listed now weren't elected.

I don't know any details about this case, but usually there is a charter or something like that which explains how the Board is going to be elected. They typically have a significant ramp up period before they are really doing much, so there is usually going to be plenty of time for that election process.

I'm just wary of a situation where the resident property owners pay the majority of the taxes & the business owners decide what its spent on as thats what the initial board is mainly made up of.

How the elections are conducted and how the funds are collected are certainly legitimate issues. If I owned property on the South Side I would want to know those details before deciding whether or not to support this ID.

Shouldn't it be the other way around.

Superficially that seems to say you need 60% to be in favor, but I haven't looked into it.

[jimmyev]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Property owners often want a higher level of service than the relevant jurisdiction is willing and/or able to provide. Hence NIDs and BIDs. In this case, it is sort of like an end-run around the City's legacy costs, which is an interesting although not unproblematic idea.

Incidentally, generally they have to be renewed after a short term of years. They almost always are.

Edit:

Oh, and the Board of a NID or BID is elected by the property owners of the jurisdiction, from the property owners of the jurisdiction. A residency requirement would be a little odd because it isn't funded by residents, it is funded by property owners (an overlapping but not identical set).

How is this legal under the Voting Rights Act?

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by jimmyev

How is this legal under the Voting Rights Act?

Short answer: BIDs and NIDs are not considered governments. They are more like HOAs and such.

[Pghuser]

Originally Posted by UKyank

I didn't see that before.....though there are people listed on the initial board, wonder how that would work - if the proposal passes, would there then have to be an immediate local election before the NID came into existance as the people listed now weren't elected.

I'm just wary of a situation where the resident property owners pay the majority of the taxes & the business owners decide what its spent on as thats what the initial board is mainly made up of.

What i'm really not a fan of is this:
"Formation of an Improvement District is voluntary. The community must want an Improvement District in order for one to pass. State law says that if 40% or more of affected property owners register their disapproval of the District, one cannot be formed. In short, if South Side does not want an Improvement District, one cannot be formed"
Shouldn't it be the other way around.

All state law. This will pass. The Flats needs it. The city cannot provide the level of services that is required for that community. It's barely surviving at it's current level as far as city services goes.

[Pghuser]

Originally Posted by UKyank

Any one have any further insight on this: South Side Neighborhood Improvement District

I'm particularly not keen in that the southside property owners are being tapped to pay an extra tax but there seems to be no requirement of residency to be on the Committee deciding what to do with the money collected.

Everyone on the Committee owns property or lives in the Flats.

[UKyank]

Originally Posted by Pghuser

The Flats needs it. The city cannot provide the level of services that is required for that community. It's barely surviving at it's current level as far as city services goes.

I disagree with this opinion, especially in light of the amount of money the area generates for the city - nor is this proposal slated to raise money for basic city services anyways.