HomeMy WebLinkAbout3. Discussion of Financial Incentives to Drive Economic Development 01/26/2016Village of Mount Prospect
Community Development Department
MEMORANDUM
TO: MICHAEL J. CASSADY, VILLAGE MANAGER
FROM: DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DATE: JANUARY 19, 2016
SUBJECT: BUSINESS INCENTIVES
During the recent strategic planning sessions, several Village Board members expressed an interest in
reviewing Village policies related to offering business incentives to attract/retain businesses. This
memorandum and attachments will summarize incentives that are available to the Village and review
how neighboring communities utilize incentives.
The attached publication from the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) entitled
Examination of Local Economic Development Incentives in Northeastern Illinois provides a thorough
review of the primary incentives that are available to communities. These incentives include Tax
Increment Financing (TIF), sales tax rebates, property tax abatements and property tax incentive
classes (class 6b, 7c etc.). The Village has utilized many of these incentives over the past few decades
as part of our economic development efforts.
Staff surveyed surrounding communities to determine what, if any, incentives they utilize to
attract/retain businesses. In addition to the incentives outlined in the CMAP publication, staff inquired
about other community's use of Business Improvement Districts (BID), Special Service Areas (SSA),
Industrial Revenue Bonds (IRB) and any other locally developed programs that they have created. The
following chart summarizes other community's use of these incentives:
Municipality
#
of
TIF
Sales Tax
Abatement
Class
6b
6b
Extensions
Class
7c
Property
Tax
Abatement
BID
SSA
IRB
Mount Prospect
1
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
N
N
Arlington Heights
4
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
N
Buffalo Grove
0
Y
N
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
Des Plaines
5
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
Elk Grove
3
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
Palatine
5
N
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
Prospect Heights
1
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
N
Schaumburg
1
N
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
Wheeling
5
Y
Y
N
Y
N
N
N
N
As this chart demonstrates, the most commonly used incentives in our region are TIF's, sales tax
abatements and Class 6b incentives. Staff from these communities indicated that they review each
request for incentives on a case by case basis and that their communities don't have any pre-
determined thresholds that must be met for consideration. As a general rule, communities will only
discuss sharing new revenues that would be generated from a new or expanding business, thereby
protecting existing revenue streams.
I also inquired about any unique incentive programs that were developed by these communities and
how successful they have been to date. The majority of the communities did not have any locally
developed programs. Those that did initiate programs have had very little success in implementing
them. The following is a brief overview of programs that have been established in the area:
Arlington Heights:
Small Business Sales Tax Rebate Program — provides a rebate of 1/3 of generated local sales tax to
retail users that occupy less than 5,000 square feet for a three year period to cover fagade/interior
buildout costs. The program was established 3 years ago and there have not been any successful
applications to date. The program is available throughout the Village and is funded by sales taxes
generated by the benefitting businesses.
Zero Interest Loan Program — provides 5 -year interest free loan to for-profit businesses that covers
costs associated with build -out and machinery expenses (maximum loan amount is $20,000). The
program is funded by a one-time fee applied to benefitting Class 6b applicants (10% of the first year 6b
incentive is used to fund this program). The program has been in place for three years and one loan
has been made (an architecture firm) and another is under review.
Des Plaines:
Business Assistance Program — provides grants for 5 programs that are all related to investment in
retail establishments. These programs include the Awning Program ($5,000), Fagade Rehabilitation
Program ($20,000), Interior Build -out Program ($15,000), Outdoor Dining Program ($10,000) and Multi -
Unit Retail Grant Program ($50,000). The grants match the private investment for the property and
their guidelines are very similar to our Fagade Rebate Program. The programs are funded by their 5
TIF's ($150,000) and their General Fund ($150,000) and are available throughout the entire community.
They provided $140,000 in grant funds to qualifying businesses in 2015.
Schaumburg:
Microenterprise Loan Program — the program provides 3 -year, interest free, forgivable loans to
businesses that qualify under the Department of Housing and Development income guidelines. The
loans can be up to $10,000 and be used for a wide range of business expenses so long as the
business hires at least one individual that meets the HUD income guidelines for low -mod benefit. The
program is funded by CDBG funds. It has been in place for several years but no loans have been
made to date.
Please forward this memorandum and attachments to the Village Board for their review and
consideration at their January 26th Committee of the Whole meeting. Staff will be at that meeting to
answer any questions related to this matter.
William J. Cooney, AICP
OTHER MUNICIPALITY'S
LOCAL ECONOMIC INCENTIVE PROGRAMS
APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS
ARLINGTON HEIGHTS
SMALL BUSINESS SALES TAX REBATE PROGRAM
Step One:
Preliminary Appointment with Department of
Planning & Community Development
Step Two:
Submittal of Application
Step Three:
Review Meeting with Department of Planning &
Community Development
Step Four:
Committee of the WholeNillage Board Approval
Instructions to Applicants
This is a preliminary instruction form to assist eligible applicants in preparing the
necessary submittals for the Arlington Heights Small Business Retail Incentive Program.
The incentive
Under this program, eligible new businesses can receive a rebate of as much as one-third
of local sales taxes generated. Eligible existing businesses can receive a rebate of as
much as one-third of local sales taxes generated on the increment over the prior year's
(base year) sales. The rebate will be remitted annually, not to exceed three years.
Requirements
Eligible applicants must meet the following requirements:
+ Tenant must make an investment in their business or physical facilities.
:The business must have a minimum five-year lease.
• Maximum store size is 5,000 square feet.
• An existing business must be expanding its square footage by at least 50%.
• Eligible businesses must be open no later than 10:00 a.m. Monday -Saturday.
Stores must be open until at least 7:00 p.m. Monday -Wednesday and until at least
9:00 p.m. Thursday -Saturday. Sunday hours are optional.
Eligible Retail Types
The following retail types are eligible under this incentive:
• Apparel
+ Books
+ -Clothing Accessories
r Electronics and Appliances
• Furniture
+ Household Accessories
• Shoes
Other retailers at the Village's discretion
VILLAGE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS
ZERO INTEREST LOAN PROGRAM
POLICY AND PROCEDURES
Prepared by:
Village of Arlington Heights
Department of Planning & Community Development
Phone: 847-368-5200
Fax: 847-368-5988
VILLAGE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS
Revised: November 2015
Purpose
The Zero Interest Loan Program is designed to provide financial assistance to prospective and
existing businesses within the Village of Arlington Heights. The program is intended to assist
companies' growth within the Village while enhancing a diverse business climate, both
communitywide and regionally. An ideal applicant will show, or have the potential for, long-
term growth within Arlington Heights.
Eiisibility
1. Eligible Businesses. The following are considered eligible businesses to apply for the Zero
Interest Loan:
• Any for-profit business interested in locating within the Village
• A for-profit business currently operating within Arlington Heights that is interested in
enhancing their operation
2. Improvements. Eligible costs may include:
• Start-up or relocation into an Arlington Heights property
• Expansion within current location
• Interior build -out
• Purchase of machinery or equipment
• Energy efficiency improvements
• Upgrades to technology
• Other improvements as may be approved by the Village that enhance occupancy
rates, employment figures, and/or tax revenue
3. Amount. If approved, an applicant is eligible to receive a loan of up to 50% of the total
project cost, not to exceed $20,000. The applicant will accrue no interest on the loan for a
maximum term of five years, but no longer than the remaining lease term.
4. Repayment. Loans shall become due and payable at the maximum term of the loan, with
quarterly loan repayments equal to the amount and duration of the loan. (e.g. — A $5,000
loan over 5 years = 20 quarterly payments of $250)
5. Ownership. Eligible applicants must be the business owner(s) or building owner(s). All
proposed improvements to the interior of the space must be submitted with written consent
from the property owner(s).
6. Fees. Professional, legal, architectural, and Village permit fees may be included, if
appropriate, as eligible costs.
7. Conformance. All improvements must conform to all building and zoning codes of the
Village of Arlington Heights.
8. Loan Structure. Applicant's cash flow must be greater than debt service on loan. The
structure for these loans shall be as follows:
2
(a) The Village shall loan up to 50% of the requested eligible costs at 0% interest, to be
repaid quarterly over the term of the loan. The loan shall not exceed $20,000. The
term shall not exceed five years.
(b) Loan funds would be made available to be paid to contractors for eligible expenses
when the appropriate papers (waivers of lien, proof of payment, proof of labor law
compliance, and other requirements) have been filed.
(c) Loan funds will be made available on a need basis and only for credit -worthy
businesses. Loans will be secured by lien on collateral. Collateral may include
business or personal real estate property. Other personal or corporate guarantees
may be required.
(d) The applicant must provide proof of financing and equity to pay for the remaining
eligible improvement expenses.
(e) The loan shall not be paid out until all the following have occurred:
• The project's construction drawings and financial structure have been approved;
• All related Village departments have completed and signed any related permits
or forms;
All loan agreements have been duly executed and properly recorded.
(f) The Village of Arlington Heights, at its sole discretion, reserves the right to decline
applications or withhold loan payments for any reason.
9. Expiration. Eligible businesses will be provided loans in the order in which they were
approved, and subject to available funding. This program is subject to availability of
funding and may be terminated by the Village.
Procedural Requirenients
All applicants must submit the following documents to the Department of Planning &
Community Development:
A. Zero Interest Loan Application Form (attached)
B. Executed Lease / Letter of Intent
C. Business Plan
D. Square Footage of Space
E. Current Number of Employees and Employment Projections for the Next Five Years
F. Quotes / Cost Estimates for All Purchases and Services Related to the Requested Loan
G. The Village May Require Additional Documentation or Information if Deemed Necessary
Village Staff may require submittal of real estate appraisals. The Village will also conduct credit
checks, title searches, and background investigations. These costs are to be incurred by the
applicant.
The City offers FIVE GRANT PROGRAMS TARGETED AT IMPROVING STOREFRONTS and enhancing
the City's shopping and dining opportunities
• AWNING PROGRAM
The City's Awning Program allows businesses to be reimbursed for up to 75% of costs for installation of
new awnings on commercial buildings, up to $5,000 per business.
a FACADE REHABILITATION PROGRAM
The City's Faoade Program allows businesses to be reimbursed for up to 50% of costs for facade
improvement work on commercial buildings, up to $20,000 per business.
• INTERIOR BUILD -OUT PROGRAM
The City's Interior Build -Out Program allows businesses to be reimbursed for up to 50% of costs incurred to
locate a business within the City of Des Plaines, up to $15,000 per business.
• OUTDOOR DINING ASSISTANCE
The City's Outdoor Dining Assistance Program allows businesses to be reimbursed for up to 50% of costs
incurred in the installation of outdoor dining areas, up to $10,000 per business.
• MULTI -UNIT RETAIL GRANT PROGRAM
The City's Multi -Unit Retail Grant Program allows property owners to be reimbursed for up to 50% of costs
incurred for rehabilitation of commercial shopping centers or mixed use retail buildings with two (2) or more
tenants, up to $50,000 per site.
The Microenterprise Loan Program assists small
Schaumburg -based businesses of five or fewer em-
ployees (including the business owner) start or expand
their businesses by providing 0% interest forgivable
loans. The program is targeted towards stimulating
economic growth and creating jobs for low -moderate
income individuals by employing them within the mi-
croenterprise. The business may be existing or new,
but must be a for-profit business located within the cor-
porate limits of the Village of Schaumburg.
This program is funded through the village's Commu-
nity Development Block Grant (CDBG) program, which
are funds allocated to the village on an annual basis
from the U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Devel-
opment. (HUD)
PROGRAM GUIDELINES
BUSINESS OWNER:
• Hire an employee that meets the HUD Income Limits
for low -moderate income individuals.
• Be an employee of the business and have no more
than five employees (including the business owner).
• Be in good standing currently and over the past five
years with all village departments and programs in-
cluding, but not limited to any CDBG funded pro-
grams, property code compliance, permits and
zoning compliance, etc.
• Complete at least one business training seminar per
year for the life of the loan through Harper College's
Business Development Center.
• Provide an approved business plan from a business
training or microenterprise training program.
• Submit mandatory quarterly reports to the Village of
Schaumburg on the use of the business loans, busi-
ness progress, and business plan updates. Failure to
do so may involve recapturing of funds.
BUSINESS:
• Create one, new, full-time job that must be held by a
low -moderate income person.
• Consist of no more than five employees (including
the owner) to participate in the program.
• Remain in operation a minimum of three years after
receiving the loans. In the event that a business must
close, a prorated portion of the loan must be repaid
to the Village of Schaumburg.
LOANS:
• Maximum loan amount of $10,000
• 0% interest rate.
• The loan will be forgiven at a rate of 1/36th per
month. If the business closes, the prorated balance
of the loan will become due.
Business Loans from the CDBG Program may be
used for:
- Payment of staff salaries
- Lease/acquisition of tenant space/property
- Acquisition of inventory
- Acquisition of furniture, fixtures, equipment
and tools
- Acquisition of manufacturing equipment (with
or without installation costs)
- Acquisition of supplies and raw materials
- Acquisition of vehicles used primarily in the
business
- Acquisition of software and computers
- Advertising costs
INCOME ELIGIBILITY:
The household income of the person hired must meet
the current HUD income limits at the time the person is
employed. The current income limits are as follows:
HOUSEHOLD
INCOME LIMIT
1 Person
$42,500
2 Person
$48,550
3 Person
$54,600
4 Person
$60,650
5 Person
$65,550
6 Person
$70,400
7 Person
$75,250
*Income figurer are for 2012 and determined by HUD. Income eligibility is based on Those
who make less tban 80% of the Median Family Income (MFI).
FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT:
Marisa Warneke
Community Planner
847.923.3851
mwarneke@ci.schaumburg.d.us
CO
COMNfUNITy DEVLLOPMLNT DPPARTAIL+NT
MICROENTERPRISE PROGRAM
VILLAGE OF SCHAUMBURG 101 SmAuMouRG CouRT, SCHAUNfBURG, IL 60193-1899
(PNONL) 847.923.4430 (FAx) 847.923.4474
CMAP
Examination of
Local Economic
Development Incentives
in Northeastern Illinois
August 2013
Table of Contents
ExecutiveSummary.................................................................................................................................. 4
Introduction............................................................................................................................................... 7
Backgroundand context.......................................................................................................................... 8
Analyzing local economic development incentives........................................................................16
Prevalence of local economic development incentives....................................................................20
Structure of incentive agreements....................................................................................................... 31
Local policies governing locally -based economic development incentives................................36
Goals of incentives from the community perspective..................................................................... 39
Regional economic impact of industries receiving local incentives ............................................. 43
How local economic development incentives influence site selection........................................46
Alignment between local government and business goals............................................................ 51
Conclusion: Supporting GO TO 2040.................................................................................................53
Appendix: Case study summaries........................................................................................................55
14 Chicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 1 Development Incentives
Figures
Figure 1: Tax Increment Financing districts.......................................................................................... 9
Figure 2. Incentive estimated amounts spent or committed to be spent across forty case studies,
by development and incentive type......................................................................................................18
Figure 3. Sales tax rebate data collection for 61 municipalities........................................................19
Figure 4. Number of municipalities known to have used locally -based incentives, 1996-2013...21
Figure 5. TIF incremental EAV relative to total EAV, by municipality, 2010 ..................................23
Figure 6. TIF funds expended between 2000 and 2010, per capita..................................................24
Figure 7. Municipalities known to have utilized sales tax rebates since 1996 ................................25
Figure 8. Estimated market value of commercial/industrial incentive class properties as a
percent of total commercial and industrial market value, by municipality, 2011 ..........................
29
Figure 9. Amount of TIF funding provided or committed in CMAP case studies ........................
31
Figure 10. Tax Increment Financing (TIF) and Redevelopment Agreement (RDA) scenarios ....34
Figure 11. Use of incentives by stated land use goal..........................................................................41
Figure 12. Goals and incentives addressed in CMAP region comprehensive plans, 2009...........42
Figure 13. Jobs multiplier by selected industries, 2012......................................................................44
Figure 14. U.S. average annual wages by industry, 2012..................................................................44
Figure 15. Number of additional jobs supported in the region from an increase of 100 jobs in
selected manufacturing, retail, or office development types, by sector, 2012 .................................45
Figure 16. Incentives to businesses by type and nature of development........................................47
Figure 17. Number of case studies using incentives for an intraregional move, for the expansion
of an existing business, or for a national firm's market expansion, by primary incentive used
anddevelopment type.............................................................................................................................48
Figure 18. Retailer regional market and site selection considerations............................................50
Figure19. Abt Electronics......................................................................................................................55
Figure 20. Geneva Commons................................................................................................................59
Figure 21. Oswego Commons...............................................................................................................
60
Figure 22. Brookside Marketplace........................................................................................................63
Figure23. Klee Building.........................................................................................................................67
Figure24. Southgate Market..................................................................................................................68
Figure25. Park Ridge Uptown..............................................................................................................70
Figure26. Whistler Crossing.................................................................................................................
72
Figure27. Prairie Park............................................................................................................................74
Figure28. ALDI.......................................................................................................................................
76
Figure 29. Dollar Tree Distribution Center..........................................................................................81
Figure30. Panduit...................................................................................................................................82
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 2 Development Incentives
Tables
Table 1. Commercial and industrial property tax abatements authorized by state statute .......
Table 2. Cook County assessment classes..........................................................................................
Table 3. Sales tax rebate agreements and average amounts by development type ....................
Table 4. General authority property tax abatements for tax year 2009 ........................................
Table 5. Components of 17 sales tax rebate agreements.................................................................
13
15
26
27
35
Chicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 3 Development Incentives
Executive Summary
Local incentives play a major role within the overall economic development landscape of
northeastern Illinois. In recent years, more than 70 percent of the regions 284 municipalities
have used at least one of four local economic development incentive tools: tax increment
financing (TIF), sales tax rebates, property tax abatements, and Cook County property tax
incentive classes. These incentives have been used to attract or retain a wide variety of
commercial, industrial, and residential uses including retail, auto dealerships, corporate offices,
manufacturing, warehousing, mixed-use, and affordable housing developments.
CMAP has examined the use of these incentive tools, focusing on their prevalence, structure,
associated community goals, types of firms receiving assistance, and the extent to which their
use supports the goals of GO TO 2040, the regional comprehensive plan. The following
summarizes key findings from this report.
State tax policy drives the prevalence of local economic development incentives
The vast majority of the regions municipalities, 202 out of 284, have deployed at least one of the
four primary incentive tools in recent years. State statute establishes the criteria and policies
that allow local governments to use tax revenue to incentivize development. These include the
criteria governing specific local incentives and the state tax policies that govern state sales tax
revenue sharing and differential property assessment levels in Cook County.
For example, while establishment of a TIF district requires satisfying state -imposed blight and
conservation area criteria, these districts persist throughout northeastern Illinois. A total of 157
municipalities currently have at least one district, and TIF accounts for more than 10 percent of
the total property tax base in 24 municipalities. Overall, TIF expenditures totaled $2.6 billion
between 2000 and 2010.
Sales tax rebates also remain common throughout the region. Since 1996, at least 137
communities have used this tool to attract or retain sales tax -generating developments like
shopping centers, auto dealerships, supercenter/discount stores, and home improvement stores.
The use of sales tax rebates will remain extremely common as long as the state tax system
provides communities with a fiscal incentive to encourage the development of retail and other
establishments that generate sales tax revenue. While this system allows municipalities to
recoup the costs of supporting a retail development, sales tax revenues often exceed the costs of
serving these developments. These fiscal benefits create intraregional competition among
communities for sales tax -generating developments.
The widespread use of Cook County incentive classes reflects the unique nature of Cook
County's property tax assessment classification system, a policy permitted under the state
constitution. In 2011, 5.8 percent of estimated commercial or industrial market value across
Cook County was designated with an incentive class. The prevalence suggests that the existing
classification system, which shifts the property tax burden toward commercial and industrial
properties, impedes economic development in many communities in Cook County.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 4 Development Incentives
Incentives often influence site selection for businesses making an intraregional
move or for a national firm expanding its market
Local economic development incentives typically encourage development in a particular
location rather than attract a business to the region as a whole. Incentives affect the site
selection process by reducing the cost of initial site improvements or local taxes over the long
term. This only influences where a development occurs in the region rather than whether it
occurs at all. CMAP's case studies indicate that the vast majority of local incentive deals
involve intraregional moves, the expansion of an existing business, or national firms expanding
their market. Only rarely did local incentives lure a firm from another state or assist a new
business. This aligns with the findings of various academic studies showing that tax differences
are more effective at influencing site selection within, rather than across, metropolitan regions.
Local communities often provide incentives without knowledge of whether the development
would have occurred anyway. Businesses are typically in an advantageous position to
negotiate incentives with local governments—they may have several sites to choose from and
may receive incentive offers from multiple communities in the region. This situation puts
communities in the difficult position of competing against each other for economic
development opportunities, many of which involve businesses or developers that intend to
select a site in northeastern Illinois and are choosing from several specific sites in the region.
Communities often provide incentives to maximize tax revenue, but these
investments may generate few spillover benefits to the larger regional economy
Based on available data, CMAP finds that many communities target incentives based upon
future tax revenues rather than overall economic impact. For example, local governments have
spent or committed significant amounts of sales tax rebates to firms that generate considerable
sales tax revenue but are associated with low jobs multipliers and low wages. In examining 137
sales tax rebates, CMAP found rebates averaging $2.5 million for home improvement stores and
$3.8 million for discount stores, despite the fact that one retail job supports just an estimated 0.3
to 0.9 other jobs in the regional economy and provides relatively low wages (an average of
$21,903 per year).
On the other hand, some local governments do use incentive tools to attract firms that employ
workers in high skilled jobs. Office or manufacturing developments typically provide lower
local tax revenues but higher regional economic benefits. For instance, one manufacturing job
supports between 1.7 and 4 jobs in other sectors and provides higher average wages ($41,373).
The economic benefits of these developments are more likely to spill over into other industries
and to support employment in a range of sectors including business services, retail, and human
services.
The use of local economic development incentives varies in terms of aligning
with the land use goals of GO TO 2040
GO TO 2040 prioritizes local government efforts to improve livability and encourages a future
pattern of more compact, mixed-use development that focuses growth where infrastructure
already exists. Communities often utilize local economic development incentives for goals that
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 5 Development Incentives
align with GO TO 2040, such as redeveloping an underutilized site, developing affordable
housing, or meeting other reinvestment strategies. Specifically, redevelopment can require the
consolidation of many small parcels under separate ownership, remediation of environmental
contamination, rehabilitation of existing structures, or an upgrade of public infrastructure. In
these cases, incentives can bridge the gap between market prices and high redevelopment costs,
meeting both public goals and private investment needs.
On the other hand, communities also use local incentives to compete for new developments on
undeveloped land, which typically does not entail extraordinary development costs. While GO
TO 2040 acknowledges that some greenfield development will occur, the plan does not
prioritize the associated expenditure of limited public resources toward these ends.
Proactive and collaborative planning does not always play a role in the use of
local incentives
While a significant majority of the region's local comprehensive plans include a heavy or
moderate focus on economic development, comparatively few of these plans discuss specific
incentives. While the general goals of incentive agreements and comprehensive plans often
coincide, it is unclear if incentives are being utilized to implement specific recommendations of
a plan or if their use is more reactive. In general, aligning incentives with community plans
builds on the analysis and public input that went into the plan, and ensures that public dollars
follow long-term desired outcomes and land use patterns.
Including clawback provisions in incentive agreements can also help protect community's
investments in development. Some local governments include a number of requirements in
incentive agreements, such as requiring the business or firm to stay in the community for a
certain number of years, hire community residents, generate a specific level of tax revenue, or
maintain or modernize infrastructure.
Employing incentives to compete with other communities over development runs contrary to
the type of collaborative planning efforts envisioned in GO TO 2040. These collaborative efforts
can help communities to gain efficiencies, share information, and strategically invest scarce
public funds. GO TO 2040 encourages the formation of inter -jurisdictional planning groups to
develop cooperative approaches to community challenges like economic development. Moving
forward, fostering a collaborative environment to facilitate economic development would better
utilize public resources and would benefit the region as a whole.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 6 Development Incentives
Introduction
GO TO 2040, the comprehensive regional plan for metropolitan Chicago, emphasizes the
importance of an efficient, equitable, and transparent state and local tax system to keep our
region economically competitive. Our current tax policies have an impact beyond the public
revenue they raise and can create incentives that shape the commercial and residential
development of our communities. Such decisions can be motivated by the imperative of raising
local revenues rather than by the goal of building a stronger regional economy and livable
communities. GO TO 2040 recommends moving toward a tax system that encourages effective
local land use decisions, generates good jobs, and triggers sustainable economic activity.
Shortly after the approval of GO TO 2040 in October 2010, CMAP assembled a Regional Tax
Policy Task Force, an advisory group consisting of representatives from local and state
government, business, civic organizations, and academia. Throughout 2011, this group
deliberated on a range of state and local tax policies affecting the economic competitiveness of
northeastern Illinois. One issue of interest to the Task Force was the use of local tax incentives,
specifically sales tax rebates, to spur the development of large, sales tax -generating
establishments. In its final report, the Task Force recommended that CMAP analyze the impact
of sales tax rebates on development decisions. In its discussion of this report, the CMAP Board
directed staff to conduct a detailed study on the prevalence of these rebates as well as other
local incentives, and also analyze the impact on local and regional economic development.
While many local investments in schools, infrastructure, public safety, and other public services
help to drive economic development, this report takes a narrower view, defining "economic
development incentives" as discretionary, direct financial outlays or tax relief tools to assist
specific businesses or developers. Once employed, local economic development incentives may
change the tax burden on specific private firms, shift the relative tax burden among different
sets of taxpayers, or alter the tax base of local jurisdictions. In northeastern Illinois, four
economic development incentive tools are frequently utilized by local governments. The most
prominent of these tools include 1) Tax Increment Financing (TIF) districts, 2) sales tax rebates;
3) property tax abatements; and 4) Cook County property tax incentive classes.
These incentives are often used by communities to attract development when site or market
conditions might otherwise compel a developer or business to choose another location. For
example, when a community is less competitive in terms of infrastructure, workforce, or its tax
system, it may use incentives to offset these factors and make the community more attractive for
development. For a community that is already competitive on these basic market
considerations, incentives are offered to attract a business that might be considering other,
similar, locations.
This report explores the use of local economic development incentives in northeastern Illinois,
and focuses on their prevalence, structure, goals from the community perspective, types of
firms receiving assistance, and the extent to which they support the overall economic, livability,
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 7 Development Incentives
and sustainability goals of GO TO 2040. This report focuses most specifically on observations
from a series of development case studies, all of which are summarized in the Appendix.
Background and context
While these locally -based economic development incentives are administered by local
governments, all have some basis in state law, which sets the relevant policies, limitations, and
criteria. This section provides an overview of this information for the four incentives studied in
this report: TIF; sales tax rebates; property tax abatements; and Cook County property tax
incentive classes.
Tax Increment Financing districts
Tax Increment Financing districts are created to fund economic development projects in
blighted areas where development would not otherwise occur or in conservation areas that may
become blighted. Property tax rates applied to increases in property value that occur after the
district is established, or the "tax increment," are used to fund TIF district projects. TIF was first
enacted in Illinois in 1977.1 Since then, the statute has undergone several revisions, including
one in the 1980s that allowed TIFs created prior to 1987 to receive state and local sales tax
increment, and a 1999 amendment that narrowed the criteria for determining blighted or
conservation redevelopment areas and projects.
Criteria
The current version of the Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Acte allows municipalities
to designate TIF districts that meet criteria as a blighted area or a conservation area. Improved
areas must meet at least five criteria to be considered blighted. For conservation areas, at least
half of structures in improved areas must be at least 35 years old and the area must meet at least
three of the criteria. Criteria include dilapidation, obsolescence, deterioration, presence of
structures below minimum code standards, illegal use of individual structures, excessive
vacancies, lack of ventilation, light or sanitary facilities, inadequate utilities, excessive land
coverage and overcrowding of structures, deleterious land use or layout, lack of community
planning, need for environmental remediation, and decline in property values.
Vacant areas can qualify as blighted by meeting two of the following criteria: obsolete platting,
diversity of ownership of parcels, tax delinquencies, deterioration of structures in neighboring
areas, need for environmental remediation, and decline in property values. Alternatively,
vacant land can qualify if it qualified as a blighted improved area before becoming vacant, is
subject to chronic flooding, or has an unused quarry, mine, rail yard, rail track, railroad right-of-
way, or disposal site.
1 Real Property Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act, Illinois Public Act 79-1525
2 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 8 Development Incentives
Areas that do not meet blight or conservation criteria can be eligible for TIF designation if they
are within a closed military base,3 within a half -mile radius of a proposed STAR Line station, or
are industrial parks in an area with a labor surplus .4
Revenues
TIF district revenues are generated from application of the current property tax rate to the
incremental Equalized Assessed Value (EAV), which is the difference between the current EAV
within the district, and the EAV at the time of establishment (the base EAV). Tax rates for all
taxing entities (counties, municipalities, school districts, and special districts) located in the TIF
district are computed using only the base EAV, which remains the sole "tax base" for these
entities over the life of the TIF.5 Revenue generated by taxes on the incremental EAV flows to
the TIF district, which is controlled by the municipality. The following chart illustrates how TIF
district revenue is generated.
Figure 1: Tax Increment Financing districts
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 3 9 10 ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 =5 __ _.
TIF district lasts for 23 years
Source: Chicago Metrawlitan Agency for Planning analysis.
This illustration represents the general concept of how a TIF district works. Property tax rates
are determined by dividing the property tax levy (requested revenues) by the EAV (property
tax base) within the taxing district. Typically, levies increase over time due to inflation and the
cost of providing services to more residents and businesses, but this often occurs in tandem
'Economic Development Project Area Tax Increment Allocation Act of 1995, 65 ILCS 110
4 Under the Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act, a labor surplus municipality has, at some point during the
preceding six months, an unemployment rate that is more than 6 percent and at least twice the national average
unemployment rate. Under the Industrial Jobs Recovery Law, 65 ILCS 5/11-74.6, the area can qualify under different
labor surplus standards if it meets other criteria outlined in the statute.
5 If the current EAV is lower than the base EAV, the current EAV is used.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 9 Development Incentives
with a rising tax base, keeping rates leveL6 Since TIF essentially freezes the tax base for
underlying jurisdictions, property tax rates become directly affected if levies increase or
decrease. While this constrains the ability of underlying taxing districts to some degree,
theoretically this higher incremental tax base would not materialize but for the TIF district. This
specific question has sparked much debate in northeastern Illinois and many other places
around the U.S. For example, in some TIF districts in northeastern Illinois, municipalities have
brokered agreements to provide underlying taxing entities with a proportion of the incremental
revenue. In addition, there have been unsuccessful legislative efforts in Illinois to require TIFs
to provide a portion of their revenue to underlying taxing districts such as school districts .7
Expenditures and projects
Any municipality can adopt a TIF district. Municipalities must identify the redevelopment
project area using the criteria discussed above and approve a redevelopment plan. In the
redevelopment plan, municipalities must find that development in the TIF would not
reasonably be expected to occur without the presence of the TIF. Redevelopment projects
undertaken in the TIF district must further the objectives of the redevelopment plan to eliminate
the conditions under which the area qualified as a blighted or conservation area.
Redevelopment project costs can include planning, marketing, property assembly, land
acquisition, site preparation and improvements, demolition, rehabilitation, reconstruction,
repair or remodeling of public or private buildings, replacing public buildings, infrastructure
improvements, job training, financing costs, and other taxing districts' costs attributable to the
redevelopment.
The statute also indicates several non -eligible costs including construction of a new privately -
owned building, and financial support to a retail entity moving to the TIF district while closing
an operation at another location within 10 miles of the TIF district, unless the previous location
contained inadequate space, had become economically obsolete, or was no longer a viable
location for the business. Redevelopment projects, as well as financial obligations issued to
finance projects, must be complete within 23 years from when the TIF district was approved. If
no projects have been initiated within a TIF district within seven years after the district was
approved, the TIF district must be repealed.
Sales tax rebates
In Illinois, sales of most tangible goods are subject to the Retailers' Occupation Tax or the
Service Occupation Tax, which are commonly known as the "sales tax." Sales taxes in Illinois
are imposed based on where the order originated, unlike most states, which impose sales taxes
based on where the goods were delivered. In a typical retail store, this distinction is not
relevant, because the goods are ordered by the purchaser and delivered to the purchaser in the
6 The Property Tax Extension Limitation Law requires that non -home rule taxing districts in PTELL counties limit the
annual increase in property tax extensions to the lesser of five percent or the increase in the Consumer Price Index for
all urban consumers. See 35 ILCS 200/18-185 through 35 ILCS 200/18-245
For example, see House Bill 1575, 97th General Assembly
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 10 Development Incentives
same transaction at the same location. In situations where the goods might be delivered to the
purchaser's home or office, this distinction is relevant, because the sales tax rate will be based
on where the order for the purchase was accepted, which could be a retail store, a warehouse, or
an office.
The Illinois state sales tax rate is 6.25 percent for general merchandise and 1 percent for sales of
qualifying food, drugs, and medical appliances. A portion of the revenue is disbursed to local
governments based on where the sale took place or where the final acceptance of the order
occurred. Municipalities (and counties for sales in unincorporated areas) receive 1 percentage
point of the 6.25 percent rate on general merchandise sales within their borders. They also
receive the full amount of the revenues from the 1 percent state rate on qualifying items.
Counties receive a quarter of a percentage point of the state rate on general merchandise sales
within their borders. The exception is the Cook County share, which is allocated to the
Regional Transportation Authority (RTA). In addition to receiving state sales tax revenues,
counties, municipalities, and other units of government like the RTA can impose local option
sales taxes under certain circumstances.
Sales tax rebates are agreements that municipalities and counties make with businesses to
rebate a portion of the sales taxes generated from the business back to the business or the
developer of the improvements on the property. This typically includes the local share of the
state sales tax, and occasionally the local option sales tax. Some rebates are simply a percent of
sales tax revenue generated by the company and have no time limits, minimums, or maximums.
Other agreements include provisions that define the number of years the agreement is in effect,
the maximum amount of revenue that can be rebated back to the business, or a minimum
amount of sales that must be reached before revenues are rebated. These agreements are made
with a variety of sales -tax generating establishments, including retail stores, auto dealerships,
and offices and warehouses where sales are sourced.
State statute provides guidelines under which municipalities and counties can issue agreements
to share or rebate sales taxes." Specifically, the Illinois Municipal Code9 and the Counties
Code10 include some limitations and requirements regarding these agreements. Under state
statute, agreements are not allowed if the sales tax would have been paid to another local
government absent the agreement and the retailer has a retail location or warehouse where
goods are delivered to purchasers in that other jurisdiction.
The statutes authorize any unit of government denied sales tax revenue because of an unlawful
agreement to file suit in circuit court against the offending municipality or county. Recently,
several local governments, including the RTA and Cook County, have filed court actions
against Sycamore, Kankakee, and Channahon, as well as the companies involved in the
s The retailers' occupation tax is a legal term in Illinois for what is commonly known as a 'sales tax.'
9 65 ILCS 5/8-11-21.
10 55 ILCS 5/5-1014.3.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 11 Development Incentives
agreements. 11 The lawsuits allege that the municipalities have entered into sales tax rebate
agreements to induce companies operating within the jurisdictions of the Plaintiffs (the 6 -
county RTA service area and Cook County) to claim that their sales are sourced through offices
in Sycamore, Kankakee, and Channahon.
Spurred in part by the lawsuit by the RTA and several other taxing bodies, newly enacted
legislation requires municipalities and counties to report data on sales tax rebates to the Illinois
Department of Revenue. On August 17, 2012, Governor Quinn signed Public Act 97-0976,
requiring municipalities and counties to file reports concerning sales tax rebate agreements with
the Illinois Department of Revenue (IDOR). The new statute requires municipalities and
counties to file reports regarding existing agreements by April 1, 2013, and thereafter within 30
days after a new agreement is executed. The reports include:
• The name of the business and county or municipality entering into the agreement
• The location of the business
• Whether the business maintains additional places of business in Illinois
• How the amount of sales tax to be rebated is to be determined
• The duration of the agreement
• The names of any businesses that would receive a share of the rebate
• A copy of the agreement
The bill does not implement complete transparency, however. Sales figures, the amount of sales
tax collected, and the amount of sales tax rebated will be redacted and would be exempt from
the Freedom of Information Act. IDOR was required to post the first reports (excluding the
copy of the agreement) to its website by July 2013, and will update this website monthly with
new reports.
Property tax abatements
Any district that extends a property tax can abate (or decrease) any portion of its taxes for
certain properties. Approximately 1,200 districts in northeastern Illinois imposed a property tax
in 2010, generating $20.1 billion in property tax revenue. 12 Implementation of abatements
requires municipalities and counties to solicit the participation of underlying districts, such as
school districts and townships, if they wish to abate a substantial portion of the property taxes.
The following table summarizes the abatements that taxing districts are authorized to offer to
property taxpayers.
11 The Regional Transportation Authority v. The City of Kankakee, The Village of Channahon, Minority Development
Company, LLC, MTS Consulting, LLC, Inspiring Development LLC, Corporate Funding Solutions, LLC, and XYZ
Sales, Inc., Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, Chancery Division (complaint filed August 23, 2011). The Regional
Transportation Authority v. United Aviation Fuels Corporation, United Airlines, Inc., and The City of Sycamore,
Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, Chancery Division (complaint filed January 14, 2013).
12 CMAP analysis of Illinois Department of Revenue data
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 12 Development Incentives
Table 1. Commercial and industrial property tax abatements authorized by state statute
Source_ 35 ILCS 200/18-165, 35 I LC5 200/18-184.5,35 1 LCS 200/18-184.10_
In addition, abatements can be granted under some other circumstances, including: 13
• Properties used for racing horses or motor vehicles
• Academic or research institutes
• Affordable senior housing
• Historical societies
• Properties in Enterprise Zones
• Low-income housing
• Properties owned by the surviving spouse of a fallen police officer, soldier, or rescue
worker
• New single-family residential buildings located in an "area of urban decay" (only home -
rule municipalities are authorized to abate)
• Properties that are the subject of an annexation agreement between the municipality and
the property owner (only municipalities are authorized to abate)
• Previously vacant properties
Property tax abatements lower a property owner's tax bill. However, property tax abatements
do not necessarily result in a reduction in revenue for taxing districts. An increased property
tax levy could potentially make up for any loss from abatements. This would also result in
higher tax rates and a shift in the burden of the abatement toward other taxpayers in the
district. However, if property tax revenue would not have been generated from the property if
not for the abatement provided, a property tax abatement would be neutral to other taxpayers
in the district.
13 35 ILCS 200/18
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 13 Development Incentives
MAXIM UM AGGREGATE
MAXIMUM
ELIGIBILITY
ABATEMENT PER PROPERTY
ABATEMENT PERIOD
Any commercial or industrial firm's property
$4 million
10 years
New electric ger eratingfacility. If it closes before the endoftheabate merit term,
Varies depending on
10 years
taxing districts must be repaid_ Authoritytogrant these expired on January 1, 2010_
the property's va I ue
Commercial or industrial development of at least 500 acres
$12 million
20 years
Commercial or industrial firm that expands its facility or increases number of employees.
$4 million
10 years
Abatement period may be renewed_
Corporate headquarters relocating from out of state as defined in the Corporate Headquarters
Relocation Act Instead of an abatement, property taxes are rebated to the firm Only applies to
school districts if the municipality reimburses the school district_ Authority to grant these expired
None
20 years
on August 1, 2006_
Property located in a business corridor created by an intergovernmental agreement between two
adjoining disadvantaged municipalities
None
10 years
Business that locates on facility that was vacant for at least two years
$4 million
2 years
Source_ 35 ILCS 200/18-165, 35 I LC5 200/18-184.5,35 1 LCS 200/18-184.10_
In addition, abatements can be granted under some other circumstances, including: 13
• Properties used for racing horses or motor vehicles
• Academic or research institutes
• Affordable senior housing
• Historical societies
• Properties in Enterprise Zones
• Low-income housing
• Properties owned by the surviving spouse of a fallen police officer, soldier, or rescue
worker
• New single-family residential buildings located in an "area of urban decay" (only home -
rule municipalities are authorized to abate)
• Properties that are the subject of an annexation agreement between the municipality and
the property owner (only municipalities are authorized to abate)
• Previously vacant properties
Property tax abatements lower a property owner's tax bill. However, property tax abatements
do not necessarily result in a reduction in revenue for taxing districts. An increased property
tax levy could potentially make up for any loss from abatements. This would also result in
higher tax rates and a shift in the burden of the abatement toward other taxpayers in the
district. However, if property tax revenue would not have been generated from the property if
not for the abatement provided, a property tax abatement would be neutral to other taxpayers
in the district.
13 35 ILCS 200/18
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 13 Development Incentives
Property tax incentive classes
Cook County assesses commercial and industrial property at a higher percentage of market
value than residential property. This typically results in a higher property tax burden for
business taxpayers, although the magnitude of the impact varies from place to place. This
classification system does not exist in the collar counties, where business and residential
taxpayers with similar market values share similar tax burdens.
State statute requires that properties be assessed at 33 1/3 percent of their market value,14 except
in counties allowed to apply property classification. The Illinois State Constitution of 1970
authorized counties with more than 200,000 residents to apply different assessment ratios
depending on the type of property, as long as the highest class does not exceed 2.5 times the
level of assessment of the lowest class. 15 Counties that would like to apply property
classification must enact an ordinance. 16 These provisions allowed Cook County to enact an
ordinance to classify property for assessment purposes, a practice it had been employing for
many years prior to its legal authorization. Currently, Cook County is the only county in the
State that has enacted an ordinance providing for property assessment classification.
In Cook County, vacant, farmland, and residential properties are assessed at 10 percent of
market value. Commercial, industrial, and not-for-profit properties are assessed at 25 percent
of market value. The result is that commercial and industrial taxpayers incur higher effective
tax rates than residential property within the same taxing district. In addition to these general
residential, commercial, and industrial categories, the classification includes various incentive
classes that reduce the level of assessment on certain properties for a period of years.
Commercial and industrial properties that are awarded an incentive class are assessed at the
same percentage of market value as residential property for a ten-year period, which is
renewable for certain classes. Table 2 provides an overview of the classes and assessment levels
in Cook County.
14 35 ILCS 200/9-145
15 Illinois Constitution, article IX, § 4
16 35 ILCS 200/9-150
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 14 Development Incentives
Table 2. Cook County assessment classes
CLASS
DESCRIPTION
ASSESSMENT RATIO
1
Vacant
10%
2
Farmland, single-family residence, multi -family residential with 6 units orfewer, mixed-use commercial and
building with 6 units or fewer and smaller than 20,000 square feet
10%residential
3
All other multi -family property
10%
4
Not-for-profit
25%
5a
Commercial
25%
5b
Industrial
25%
6b
Industrial development incentive
10%*
C
Industrial or commercial incentive for brownfield redevelopment(not renewable for commercial)
10%*
7a/7b
Commercial development incentive (not renewable)
10%"
8
Commercial or industrial incentive for development in areas in need of revitalization
10%'
9
Multi -family housing incentive for new or redeveloped buildings with 35% of units leased at rents affordableto low-
or -moderate -income persons
10%
S
Multi -family incentive for Section 8 contract
10%
L
Landmark incentive (not renewable forcommercial)
10%'
"Unless class is renewed after the initial IO -year period, year 11 is assessed at 15 percent and year 12 is assessed at 20 percent.
Source: Cook County ordinances §74-63 and 574-64.
When an incentive class is provided to a parcel that previously was assessed at the full value,
the property tax burden is shifted from that parcel to other taxpayers within the taxing district.
Typically, the property tax incentive class shifts the tax burden away from commercial or
industrial properties receiving the incentive class and toward residential taxpayers as well as
commercial and industrial properties not receiving the incentive.
To receive an incentive class, an application must be filed with the Cook County Assessor's
Office. In addition, the municipality where the property is located must pass a resolution or an
ordinance stating that the municipality supports the incentive class designation. Other taxing
districts that would be affected by lowering the assessment level for the property do not have to
provide approval. This report will address the industrial development incentive (6b), the
commercial development incentive (7), and the incentive for commercial and industrial
development in areas in need of revitalization (8).
For a Class 8 incentive, the property must be located in an Empowerment Zone in Chicago or in
the South Suburban Tax Reactivation Project (Bloom, Bremen, Calumet, Rich, and Thornton
townships). Otherwise, the area must be found to be economically depressed as shown by
factors such as substantial unemployment, low median family income, aggravated
abandonment, deterioration, and underutilization of properties, lack of viable commercial and
industrial buildings, a pattern of stagnation or decline in property taxes, or a lack of economic
feasibility for private development.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 15 Development Incentives
Analyzing local economic
development incentives
Given varying reporting requirements, analyzing the effectiveness of locally -based economic
development incentives presents some methodological challenges. Availability of information
on locally -based incentive agreements made with businesses and developers varies by the
incentive type and the community providing the incentive. Moreover, it is rarely possible to
prove that a development would not have happened but for an incentive or whether an
incentive caused positive or negative economic development outcomes for a community or for
the metropolitan region. As a result, most previous research has focused on using indirect
methods of assessing the impact of incentives rather than on validating counterfactual
statements that a development would or would not have occurred but for an incentive.
Much of the prior research on incentives has relied on broader datasets of property values to
study the relationship between the use of incentives and changes in property values or other
measures of growth. 17 Other researchers have used tax differences among states or
communities to assess the impact of incentives on development."' In contrast, CMAP is
interested in specific information about the use of incentives, such as the structure of the
agreements, the context under which they are used, what types of industries received them, and
the extent to which the use of incentives aligns with sustainable development goals outlined in
GO TO 2040. This focus had a direct effect on the research methods utilized by CMAP. A case
study approach was used to obtain detailed data regarding how incentives were used for
specific developments. Prior to selection of case studies, a larger dataset of incentives was
compiled using publicly available information, and this was used to assess the prevalence of
incentives in northeastern Illinois.
Methodology
To both analyze the prevalence of incentives and find appropriate case studies, CMAP
compiled a list of developments known to have received incentives with the assistance of a
consultant, S.B. Friedman Development Advisors. The completeness of the list depended on the
data available. Where possible, the development, the location, the date, the incentive used, and
17 See Russell Kashian, Mark Skidmore, and David Merriman, "Do Wisconsin Tax Increment Finance Districts
Stimulate Growth in Real Estate Values?" (working paper, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, 2007); Rachel Weber,
Saurav Dev Bhatta, and David Merriman, "Does Tax Increment Financing Raise Urban Industrial Property Values?"
Urban Studies 40, no. 10 (2003): 2001-2021; Richard Dye and David Merriman, "The Effects of Tax Increment Financing
on Economic Development," Journal of Urban Economics 47 (2000): 306-328; Richard Dye and David Merriman, "The
Effect of Tax Increment Financing on Land Use." in The Property Tax, Land Use and Land Use Regulation, ed. Dick
Netzer (Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2003), 37-61; John E. Anderson, "Tax Increment Financing: Municipal
Adoption and Growth," National Tax Journal 43, no. 2 (1990):155-163; Peter S. Fisher and Alan H. Peters, "Industrial
Incentives: Competition among American States and Cities," Employment Research 5, no. 2 (1998):1, 3-4.
18 See Ernest Goss and Philip Peters, "The Effect of State and Local Taxes on Economic Development: A Meta -
Analysis," Southern Economic Journal 62, no. 2 (1995): 320-333; Daphne A. Kenyon, "Theories of Inter urisdictional
Competition," New England Economic Review (March/April 1997):14-35; Michael Wasylenko, "Taxation and Economic
Development: The State of the Economic Literature," New England Economic Review (March/April 1997): 38-52.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 16 Development Incentives
the amount were included. In conjunction with other publicly available datasets, this
information was used to analyze the prevalence of economic development incentives in the
region. The final list included 1,293 projects in TIF districts completed since 1999, 137 sales tax
rebate agreements made since 1996, 2,440 buildings receiving a property tax incentive class in
2011, and 25 properties receiving property tax abatements since 2003 within the region. The TIF
data and incentive class data represent a relatively complete set, while the sales tax rebate and
property tax abatement data include only what was available through public records or other
knowledge of these projects.
Next, a set of 40 case studies -19 TIF projects, 12 sales tax rebates, 6 property tax abatements,
and 3 property tax incentive classes—were selected for further analysis. The aim of case study
selection was to provide some diversity in terms of geography and development type. S.B.
Friedman Development Advisors engaged in extensive research to gather more detailed data
and information about these case studies. Data sources included publicly available data from
state government, local governments, and the media, as well as information provided through
interviews with the communities providing incentives in the case study developments. The
case study information typically includes specifics on the type of firm, the structure and value
of the incentive agreements, the goals governments have for using the incentives, and other
dynamics specific to each development.
With this information, CMAP compiled statistics on transparency, prevalence, structure, type of
development, and community goals in order to examine the how incentives are used by local
governments. By looking at the types of development that receive incentives, CMAP analyzed
the wider regional impact of the case study development types, measured by the extent to
which the expansion of different kinds of industries supports additional economic activity
within the region. While it is not possible to verify whether a specific development would have
occurred without an incentive, CMAP looked more broadly at the role of incentives in site
selection and local government decision-making to drill deeper into the dynamics between
incentives and regional economic development.
The following chart provides an overview of the types of developments included and the
amount of the incentives provided to the developments in the 40 case studies analyzed for this
report. The amounts committed, expended, or estimated to be expended on development
projects for each case study were primarily less than $5 million. Developments receiving
property tax abatements tended to collect smaller incentive amounts, while developments
funded with TIF received large amounts in several instances. Whereas TIF funding is a tool
used across a range of development types, other incentives tend to be slightly more focused in
their application. Sales tax rebates were predominately used for retail and auto dealerships, but
they also played a role in other sales tax -generating establishments that were actually offices or
distribution facilities. These offices are established as sales offices or credit offices, and are
sometimes also the headquarters location of a business. Industrial users may be manufacturers
or distributors that also sell on-site or, like a grocery delivery service, have no retail outlets.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 17 Development Incentives
Figure 2. Incentive estimated amounts spent or committed to be spent across forty case studies,
by development and incentive type
in -Xions of dollars * INCENTIVE CLASS 0 PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT j SALES TAX REBATE
*SALES TAX REBATE IN COMBINATION WITH ANOTHER INCENTIVE *TIF
$25
$20
$15
$10
$5
$0
Manufacturing Distribution
Office
Auto dealer
Residential Mixed-use
Nate: Depending on the case study, amounts include dollars previously expended. projected to be expended or committed to be expended.
Source: Chicago Metmpntitan Agency for Planning analysis of developments, a ppend ix of Examination of Local Economic development Incentives Report.
Transparency of locally -based incentives
V
Overall, the transparency of data and information on local economic development incentives
proved to be extremely uneven. No comprehensive source for data on local incentives currently
exists. For TIF districts, municipalities must provide annual reports to the Illinois Office of the
Comptroller, by law. 19 These reports provide basic information about project spending,
contracts, and other financial obligations in TIF districts, but not all municipalities are in
compliance with the law. However, there are effectively no penalties for failing to provide
annual TIF reports, and several municipalities have never provided them. As a result, CMAP
was unable to include those municipalities in this analysis.
19 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-5 and 65 ILCS 5/11-74.6-22
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 18 Development Incentives
The Illinois Department of Revenue's sales tax rebate reporting provides information on current
sales tax rebate agreements, but this does not include sales figures, sales tax revenue collected,
and the amount of tax revenue rebated. Some municipalities make this sales tax rebate
agreement information available in publicly available documents, while others do not.
Prior to the availability of the Illinois Department of Revenue sales tax rebate reporting, CMAP
utilized a variety of sources for data collection on sales tax rebates, including municipal
budgets, municipal comprehensive annual financial reports (CAFR), and newspaper articles.
CMAP was able to determine that at least 61 municipalities in northeastern Illinois have made
sales tax rebate agreements since 1996. After including the IDOR reporting data, CMAP
determined that 137 municipalities in northeastern Illinois have actually used this tool. The
following figure provides an overview of how the 61 municipalities that were established prior
to the release of the IDOR reporting database currently share this data.
Figure 3. Sales tax rebate data collection for 61 municipalities
INFORMATION INCLUDED: MISSINGI) ort)
1) NAME OFTHE BUSINESS
AND MISSING BOTH
2) EITHERTHEAMOUNTOR
PERCENTAGE REBATED
Information in Comprehensive lAnnual Financial Report or bud � -t
MEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEM
MEMEMEMEMEMEMEME
23 12
Information only in board meeting minutes
■■■■■■■■■
MEMEMEME
16 3
Information only elsewhere on the municipality's website
1
Information only found in newspaper article
I
0 to 20 30 40 so
Source: Chicago- Metropolitan Agency for Planning analysis of various sources, including news
articles, municipal budgets, and municipal comprehensiive annual financial reports.
This figure only includes municipalities from which CMAP was able to obtain data. As a result,
it is heavily weighted toward municipalities that provide data in accessible ways, such as
through their annual budgets or CAFRs. However, just 23 out of the 61 municipalities provided
key information like the name of the business as well as information about the terms of the
agreement in their CAFR or budget. For savvier members of the public, much of this
information could be found by reading publicly -accessible council or board meeting minutes.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 19 Development Incentives
CMAP was unable to obtain a comprehensive source for property tax abatements. IDOR has
information on the annual amount of property taxes abated aggregated by county. Only Will
County provides a list of abatements by parcel and taxing district. CMAP was also able to
obtain information about several other property tax abatements from newspaper articles as well
as directly from a limited number of taxing districts like Lake County. CMAP also has
information on all parcels receiving an incentive class through the Cook County Assessor's
Office, including the location, the taxpayer name, the assessed value, the size of the land and the
building, as well as specific details about the improvements to the property.
Prevalence of local economic development
incentives
Overall, the majority of municipalities in the region, 202 out of 284, are known to have deployed
at least one of these four incentive tools in recent years. The figure below shows numbers of
municipalities with a current TIF district, a known use of sales tax rebates since 1996, a current
Cook County property tax incentive class, and/or a known current property tax abatement.
Again, due to data limitations, this figure does not represent the full universe of local economic
development incentives. Rather it is meant simply as a snapshot of the municipalities in the
region that utilize incentives.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 20 Development Incentives
Figure 4. Number of municipalities known to have used locally -based incentives, 1996-2013
157 0 TIF DISTRICT _ - SALES TAX REBATES 0 ■PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENTS 03 ■PROPERTY TAX INCENTIVE CLASSES
NO INCENTIVES
box represents one municipality. Many municipalities utilize more than one type of incentive, which are represented by overlapping boxes.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII! Illllllllllllllllllllllf IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII! °°°°°°°°IIIIIII�
Q33[30:3030
11 03030
E] QQ:hQ3Q:3Q3Q:38@0 E E E
E E
1:1 01130:303MERMWE
E E
1:11:11:11:11:101013303130
E E
1:11:11111 E] ❑ 1:1
'@@@13 1:11:1 11
❑❑❑❑❑❑11EEN03❑❑❑
110 13 110 11 QW-iMR803 111:111
1:11:11:11:11:11:10101 FJR@Q3Q3 El El EI
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 0i ROREQ30
E] E] E] E] E] E] 0 Q@R@13U El E] [:p
E E
1:11:11:1110 El UjUER803
REQ3Q3UQ3Q3 El 1:1 El 1:1
"� 11 ❑ 1111 MER0303 1111 11 11
Note: Includes current incentives, except for sales tare rebates, which include current incentives as well as any known use of sales tax rebates since 1996.
Source: Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning analysis of various sources, including annual TIF reports, II linoi s Office of the Camptrollerdata, Cask County Assessor data, news articles,
municipal budgets, and municipal comprehensive annual financial reports.
Tax Increment Finance districts
The use of TIF is extremely common in northeastern Illinois. Figure 5 provides an overview of
the 157 municipalities that currently have TIF districts .20 The map breaks down this
information further by showing the incremental EAV within TIF districts relative to the total
EAV within the municipality. This shows how much of the municipality's property tax base is
dedicated to generating revenues for its TIF districts. Most municipalities with TIF have only
one district and the tax increment accounts for less than 5 percent of EAV. In 20 municipalities
20 Newer TIF districts may not yet have expenditures on development projects.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 21 Development Incentives
(including the City of Chicago and 19 suburban municipalities), TIF accounts for 10 to 30
percent of the total EAV. This represents a substantial proportion of a municipality's EAV, and
thus may lead to higher tax rates over time for overlapping jurisdictions. On the more extreme
end, incremental TIF EAV accounts for more than half of the base in four municipalities. This
means that the current incremental EAV for the TIF district is greater than the regular EAV, and
the TIF district has a larger tax base than the municipality and any other taxing district that
generates revenues from property within that municipality.
Figure 6 summarizes public TIF expenditures per capita between 2000 and 2010, by
municipality, showing a range of $0 for TIF districts that have not yet begun to spend their
revenue or have not yet generated incremental revenue, up to $117,238 in expenditures per
capita made on economic development or infrastructure projects within the TIF district from
incremental revenues generated. Overall, spending totaled $2.6 billion during the period.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 22 Development Incentives
Figure 5. TIF incremental EAV relative to total EAV, by municipality, 2010
M
d
r.r
KENIbALL
O 5
MILES I T'
Proportion of municipality's EAV
dedicated to TIF district
ES -0%-9-9%
10-0%-299%
55.0%- 65.5%
NO TIF DISTRICTS
+a•l Metra Raul
13 County bounddrle5
GRUNDY
(Aux Sable
township)
97 rA
Note No --.,p Mies fdl hetween 30%and SS% Source: Chicago Mefmpolit— Agenry for Planning analysis of lil'—i5 Depaetment of kevenue data
Chicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 23 Development Incentives
Figure 6. TIF funds expended between 2000 and 2010, per capita
source' Chicago Mermpnlilan Agency for Planninq anakysis of dales fmm annual TIF rnports and U 5 Census RL -1
® Chicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 24 Development Incentives
Sales tax rebates
Based on available information, at least 137 municipalities (and one county) are known to have
utilized sales tax rebates since 1996. These municipalities were identified based on CMAP's
research of past and current sales tax rebate agreements as well as information on all current
agreements made available via Public Act 97-0976. The following map provides an overview of
the municipalities that CMAP determined have past or current sales tax rebate agreements.
Figure 7. Municipalities known to have utilized sales tax rebates since 1996
I&
ra
P
5o,rce Chicago Metr000fitan Agency far Planning —1, -al various sou+res.mduding Illinois Deoa -t al Revenue dela. news articles,+nomcipaI budgets, and mvn�cioal comprehensive annul
financial reports
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 25 Development Incentives
WILL
�
0 5GRUNDY
(Aux Sable township)
Arm
MILES
Sales tax rebates
■
'
NO KNOWN SALES TAX
REBATE AGREEMENTS
■ CURRENT OR PRIOR SALES
TAX REBATE AGREEMENTS
+-+Metra Ball 0 County boundaries
5o,rce Chicago Metr000fitan Agency far Planning —1, -al various sou+res.mduding Illinois Deoa -t al Revenue dela. news articles,+nomcipaI budgets, and mvn�cioal comprehensive annul
financial reports
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 25 Development Incentives
Prior to the availability of the database on all current sales tax rebate agreements, CMAP
identified 138 sales tax rebate agreements across 62 local governments. From its primary
research on sales tax rebates, CMAP was able to determine which development types typically
receive these incentives. Not surprisingly, retail makes up most, though not all, of these
development types. Of the 138 total agreements identified, 45 (33 percent) were used for auto
or other vehicle dealerships. Supercenter/discount stores, shopping centers, home
improvement stores and other large retailers also received a large percentage of sales tax
rebates, and in recent years, grocery stores have become a more common recipient of sales tax
rebates. Furthermore, some agreements are made with sales offices and distribution centers
that generate sales tax. The following table provides an overview of the types of sales tax
rebates identified by CMAP, as well as the average total rebate amount provided to each
developer or business. A portion of these developments may have received other incentives in
addition to the sales tax rebates.
Table 3. Sales tax rebate agreements and average amounts by development type
DEVELOPMENT TYPE
NUMBER OF
AGREEMENTS
IDENTIFIED
AVERAGE AMOUNT
OF SALES
TAX REBATE
Auto or other vehicle
dealership
45
$886,944
Supercenter/discount
stare
18
$3,771,243
Shopping center
16
$2,461,500
Sales or distribution
13
n/a
Grocery or drug store
10
$1360,281
Other large retailer
8
$551,250
Home improvement store
7
$2,452,840
Electronics
6
$2,317,750
Department store
4
n/a
Restaurant
4
n/a
Entertainment
3
n/a
Other
3
n/a
Note: Average assistance amounts were based on available data on sales tax rebates anly.
Many projects receive assistance from multiple incentive types, and the dataset only includes
sales tax rebate amounts for most developments. Averages for categories were excluded when
more than half of the agreements had no data available on the amount of assistance.
Source: CMAP analysis of vanious sources, in cluding news articles, municipal) budgets, and
municipal comprehensive annual financial reports
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 26 Development Incentives
Property tax abatements
Based on available data, property tax abatements appear to be less widespread in the region
than other types of incentives. CMAP has not identified a comprehensive set of examples
throughout the region because, while IDOR provides data on abatement totals by county,
publicly available information on individual agreements is limited. Property tax abatements
appear to be used most frequently for industrial properties. Sometimes property tax
abatements are used in conjunction with other types of incentives, like sales tax rebates. The
following table provides a summary of general abatements used in the region in 2009, relative
to the total amount of property taxes extended to taxpayers by all local governments, by county.
Table 4. General authority property tax abatements for tax year 2009
Source: I I I i nois Department of Revenue, 6/21/2013_
A single development receiving a property tax abatement will typically be awarded abatements
from more than one taxing district. Because abatements are typically applied as a flat
percentage of the tax bill, the value of the abatement is typically higher for taxing districts with
higher tax levies. Just as most property tax revenues go to school districts, the value of
abatements provided is also highest for school districts. Counties, municipalities, and to a
lesser extent, townships and special districts, also provide general abatements to property
owners.
Property tax incentive classes
In Cook County, property tax incentive classes are widely utilized. In 2011, 2,440 commercial or
industrial buildings had an incentive class in 83 municipalities (out of 134 total municipalities
either completely or partially in Cook County).21 The popularity of the incentive classes is one
indicator that the Cook County property tax assessment classification system adversely affects
the tax burden for businesses. To the extent that communities provide commercial and
industrial taxpayers with incentive classes, they can change this dynamic somewhat by shifting
the tax burden back toward residential properties as well as other commercial/industrial
properties not receiving this incentive.
21 Analysis of data from Cook County Assessor
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 27 Development Incentives
NUMBEROF
TOTAL
TOTAL PROPERTY
PARCELS
COUNTY
PROPERTYTAX
TAX EXTENSION
RECEIVING AN
ABATEMENTS
ABATEMENT
Kane
$29,498
$15,793,394,824
27
Kendall
$383,512
$3,369,658,049
1
McHenry
$86,098
$10,435,655,050
124
Will
$1,228,754
$22,240,823,906
4
Source: I I I i nois Department of Revenue, 6/21/2013_
A single development receiving a property tax abatement will typically be awarded abatements
from more than one taxing district. Because abatements are typically applied as a flat
percentage of the tax bill, the value of the abatement is typically higher for taxing districts with
higher tax levies. Just as most property tax revenues go to school districts, the value of
abatements provided is also highest for school districts. Counties, municipalities, and to a
lesser extent, townships and special districts, also provide general abatements to property
owners.
Property tax incentive classes
In Cook County, property tax incentive classes are widely utilized. In 2011, 2,440 commercial or
industrial buildings had an incentive class in 83 municipalities (out of 134 total municipalities
either completely or partially in Cook County).21 The popularity of the incentive classes is one
indicator that the Cook County property tax assessment classification system adversely affects
the tax burden for businesses. To the extent that communities provide commercial and
industrial taxpayers with incentive classes, they can change this dynamic somewhat by shifting
the tax burden back toward residential properties as well as other commercial/industrial
properties not receiving this incentive.
21 Analysis of data from Cook County Assessor
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 27 Development Incentives
The following map provides an overview of the estimated market value of commercial and
industrial incentive class parcels relative to the estimated market value of all commercial and
industrial parcels, by municipality. All of the municipalities with more than half of their
commercial and industrial property in an incentive class are in an Enterprise Zone, a specific
area targeted by the State of Illinois for tax rebates, exemptions, and other incentives to
stimulate business development and retention. Most Enterprise Zones encourage
municipalities to offer incentive classes to property owners.
Chicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 28 Development Incentives
Figure 8. Estimated market value of commercial/industrial incentive class properties as a percent
of total commercial and industrial market value, by municipality, 2011
Estimated market value of commercial
or industrial incentive class property
as a per, of total commercial and
industrial market value
Source. Arwlysis of data from Cook County Rssessor .nd SS Friedman Development Advisors.
The use of incentive classes has become more prevalent in recent years. The number of
commercial and industrial properties in Cook County receiving an incentive class has increased
35.5 percent, and incentive class properties share of total estimated market value of commercial
and industrial properties increased from 3.5 percent to 5.8 percent between 2007 and 2011.
Chicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 29 Development Incentives
Implications
Economic development incentives are widely used in northeastern Illinois. Clearly, there is an
interest among northeastern Illinois communities in attracting and retaining economic
development, and communities believe that utilizing incentives will make them a more viable
location. In some cases (sales tax rebates and TIF funding) this results in a direct financial
outlay to businesses and developers. For property tax incentive classes, and to some extent
property tax abatements, the tax burden is reduced for businesses and developers, and that
burden is shifted to other taxpayers. In all cases, the incentive, as well as the resources used to
negotiate the incentive, represents an investment in economic development outside of ongoing
public services and capital projects. Incentives also promote specific land uses within the
region's communities, with potential long-term impacts.
TIF use in the region is pervasive and around 5 percent of the region's total property tax base
goes toward generating revenue for public and private development projects in these specific
areas. For some communities, TIF accounts for a large portion of the overall resources for
capital projects. Maintaining and replacing capital infrastructure is a basic function of
municipalities and, while municipalities' resources to fund capital improvements may be
constrained by political or economic factors, the need for substantial use of TIF for funding
capital improvements may indicate that sufficient municipal funding for capital improvements
had not been set aside over the long term.
For sales tax rebates, extensive use indicates that significant amounts of sales tax revenue are
being paid to private developers and businesses. Communities receive a portion of state sales
tax revenue generated within their borders. This situation motivates municipalities to provide
sales tax rebates, because if they cannot attract the sales tax -generating establishment, they
receive no sales tax revenue. However, the purpose of state sales tax revenue sharing is to
provide resources for the public services that support the sales -tax generating development.
The provision of sales tax rebates means that a portion of the revenues are being paid to private
firms rather than being used for public services. Either the rebates result in unmet public
service needs, or the sales tax revenue generated was beyond the amount needed to cover
public service needs within the community that attracted the retailer.
The prevalence of Cook County incentive classes indicates that the property tax assessment
classification system impedes economic development in many communities in Cook County.
The tax burden shift created by classification results in businesses in Cook County shouldering
more of the property tax burden than residents. This disproportionate burden does not exist in
the collar counties. To the extent that communities provide all commercial and industrial
taxpayers with incentive classes, they remove this tax burden shift.
Lastly, limited data availability makes it difficult to determine exactly how many local
governments are utilizing incentive tools, though a rough order of magnitude can be
determined using other methods. Most communities in northeastern Illinois are utilizing
incentives, but many are not providing taxpayers with complete documentation of how this
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 30 Development Incentives
public money is being spent. Transparency is essential to good governance and accountability,
but the transparency of data on local incentives is uneven. Like disclosing any other budgetary
or financial reporting of local government expenditures of tax revenues, it is important to
provide taxpayers with a full accounting of the incentives used for economic development
projects and the incentives provided to businesses and developers.
Structure of incentive agreements
The structure of incentive agreements varies across incentive type and the development itself.
The exception is the structure of Cook County property tax incentive classes, which all provide
the same assessment reduction from 25 percent of market value to 10 percent of market value.
In addition, many developments receive multiple incentives, which may include state or federal
incentives. Using the 40 case studies, the following summarizes the common structures of TIF,
sales tax rebate agreements, and property tax abatements, across the region.
Tax Increment Financing
In the case studies analyzed by CMAP, TIF agreements provided or committed a wide range of
funding ($380,000 to $26 million) for private developments. The amount of funding depended
on the size of the project, the level of public improvements provided, and the extent that
development in the TIF district has actually occurred and generated incremental revenue.
Unlike other incentives, TIF funding to a project is not limited to the amount of property or
sales tax revenue generated by the development receiving funds. Any incremental property tax
revenue generated within the TIF district can be used to fund a project. Figure 9 provides an
overview of TIF funding provided or committed to developments in the case studies.
Figure 9. Amount of TIF funding provided or committed in CMAP case studies
RETAIL : MIXED-USE INDUSTRIAL RESIDENTIAL El OFFICE
$0 $5r000,000 $10,000,000 $15,ODOro00 $20r000,000 $25,000,000
TIF funds spent or committed to be spent
Source: Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning analysis of developments, case studies in appendix of Examination of Local Economic Development Incentives Report
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 31 Development Incentives
TIF spending tended to be larger than spending for other incentives. Case studies receiving
only TIF and no other local incentives accounted for 16 of the 40 case studies, but for more than
half of the amounts spent or committed. In contrast, sales tax rebates (alone or in tandem with
another incentive) accounted for 17 case studies, but the amount spent, committed, or projected
to be spent was only half of TIF. In part, this may be a result of the incomplete data on amounts
spent and committed for sales tax rebates. Property tax abatements and incentive classes
tended to provide smaller amounts than TIF and sales tax rebates. To some extent, many TIFs
have more capacity to generate revenue than the
amounts provided to other incentive types. They tend
to have boundaries larger than the size of any
particular development project and funds are
generated over a 23 -year period.
When municipalities provide TIF funding to a private
or non-profit entity, they create a redevelopment
agreement (RDA) that governs the amount of TIF
funds provided and any requirements that a developer
or non-profit must meet to receive those funds. Other
taxing bodies can also receive TIF funds for capital
projects, via an RDA or memorandum of
understanding. An RDA will provide details on the
development project, as well as what aspects of the
development project will be paid for with TIF funds.
A private developer may also be subject to
requirements such as the type of development to be
constructed, the size of buildings, amount of parking,
affordable housing units, number of jobs retained or
created, consideration of community residents for jobs,
or the amount of open space. Some agreements
include clawback provisions that require developers to
repay TIF funds if these requirements are not met or
prevent developers from receiving TIF funds at all.
The developer may be paid with the incremental
property taxes generated by the TIF, or incremental
property taxes may be used to pay off a bond issued to
provide funding for the project, or both. Payments to
the developer may be made at once or as project
milestones are met, such as the completion of a
building. Agreements are structured such that the
municipality is not required to utilize its general
revenues if the revenues generated by the TIF are
insufficient to meet funding commitments.
EChicago Metropolitan
Agency for Planning Page 32
How have municipalities used
clawbacks in incentive agreements?
Several of the agreements reviewed for
the case studies included clawback
provisions. Clawbacks allow
communities to ensure that their goals
for the incentive are met, such as long-
term occupancy of a property or
additional jobs.
For example, Downers Grove required
Bill Kay Nissan to purchase the property,
remodel the property, install a public
sidewalk, and continue to operate the
dealership on the property for at least 12
years. If Bill Kay Nissan ceased to
operate during years 1 through 3 of the
agreement, all sales tax rebate and TIF
reimbursement must be repaid. The
repayment amount dropped to 75
percent during years 4 and 5 and 50
percent during years 5 through 10.
For the Chicago Manufacturing Campus,
the City required Ford to operate the
assembly plant and provide at least 750
jobs for a ten-year period at the supplier
park, and lease at least 75 percent of the
supplier campus during the initial ten-
year period. In addition, for a 60 -month
period (not required to be consecutive)
during the ten years, at least 1,000 jobs
must be provided.
Clorox received property tax abatements
from eight taxing districts to locate in
Minooka in 2006. The abatements
required the company to stay until 2012.
When the company relocated to
University Park in 2011, they were
required to repay the $773,000.
Local Economic
Development Incentives
However, TIF funds can be expended in many ways beyond directly assisting a private
development. For example, TIFs can fund district -wide infrastructure improvements, assist
overlapping taxing districts with capital projects, be used to assemble land, or improve
problematic sites prior to any prospective development projects. In the latter cases, a developer
may subsequently be sold that land at a price that meets market constraints but is below the
cost of improvements done by the municipality. This is effectively a TIF subsidy, but may not
generate an RDA or other contract requiring specific developer improvements in exchange for
the land cost write-down, although statute does require that the municipality pass an ordinance
approving the sale. Alternatively, a municipality may utilize TIF funds to complete
improvements like streetscaping, storm sewer improvements, street repaving, or other projects.
These projects can improve an area's attractiveness to private development, but will not lead to
an RDA with subsequent private developers. Figure 10 indicates common TIF funding and
RDA scenarios.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 33 Development Incentives
Figure 10. Tax Increment Financing (TIF) and Redevelopment Agreement (RDA) scenarios
TIF -WIDE PUBLIC
INFRASTRUCTURE
PROJECTS
MUNICIPALITY
USES TIF $ TO:
• Purchase land
• remediate env. issues
and/or construct
infrastructure for /
a specific site
OtIM
• •
MUNICIPALITY
MAY:
-Issue TIF -backed
Bonds
NO RD
• Use reserves and wait
for TIF repayment
• Only use available
TIFF funds
■LAND ■■■■■�+
■
■
■ If improvements .�
completed as Part `
■ of ROA
�. • •,rDEVELOPE'R,
•'RECEIVESTIF
•FUNDLAND
L� S/ —A r
RD.
• •
ROA with cdawback •EVE •.
NOT RECEIVE
SUBSIDY
DEVELOPER
RECEI VES TIF
FUNDS/LAND
`Statute requires an ordinance apprcwing the land sale, but not an RDA.
Source: Chicago Metmpditan Agency for Planning analysis.
Note: This graphic outlines several common ways in which developers can receive a TIF subsidy and how
community stipulations regarding project outcomes may impact the conditions attached to that subsidy. Indirect
subsidies like infrastructure improvements are covered in the top third, and processes for direct TIF assistance are
covered in the bottom third. Land write-downs and remediation activities may be direct or indirect subsidies,
depending upon the agreement structure, and are covered in the middle of the chart.
Sales tax rebate agreements
Sales tax rebates are typically structured by rebating a set proportion of sales tax revenues for a
period of years, or until a certain maximum rebate is met. In some agreements, the retailer must
meet a certain sales threshold before the municipality will rebate the sales taxes. In some cases,
the developer requests reimbursement for an infrastructure improvement, and the
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 34 Development Incentives
reimbursement is made by the municipality through the sales tax rebate. In other cases,
municipalities use rebates as an incentive to attract or retain a business or development that
may have instead located elsewhere. The following table provides an overview of some typical
components of sales tax rebates among the 17 case studies that received them.
Table 5. Components of 17 sales tax rebate agreements
"8 case studies had no maximum rebate
Some sales tax rebate agreements have clawback provisions. Such provisions require the
business or developer to repay incentive funds if certain requirements, such as remaining in the
community for a certain number of years, are not met.
Property tax abatements
Property tax abatements tend to follow similar structures. Property tax abatements are typically
provided to a taxpayer by more than one taxing district. The structure of the agreement takes
the form of a simple percentage of property taxes abated for a period of years, but the
proportion of the abatement as well as the term may be different across taxing districts. The
term of the abatement ranged from three to eight years in the case studies. In two of the case
studies, 50 percent was abated for five years. In three other cases, the proportion abated
decreased annually, in two cases going from 75 percent, to 50 percent, to 25 percent of property
taxes, and in another case, going from 50 percent and gradually decreasing to 10 percent over
the course of eight years. Property tax abatements may also include clawback provisions. The
most common property tax abatements are statutorily limited to $4 million.
Implications
The structure of incentive agreements varies widely across incentive types, developments, and
communities. This variation impacts the amount and duration of funding provided as well as
the potential outcomes for municipalities. For example, the value of an incentive class is limited
by the fact that they last for just 12 years if they are not renewed. On the other hand, TIF
funding is generated over the course of 23 years, a period over which a substantial amount of
funding can be generated. TIF funding is also generated for an area that is often larger than a
specific development project and is generated from the entire aggregate property tax rate.
Sales tax rebates and property tax abatements typically provide lower levels of funding to
developments than TIF because they usually last for significantly less than 23 years or are
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 35 Development Incentives
RANGE
MOST COMMON
Rebate proportion
10%-75%
50%
Rebate term
3 years -100 years
10
Maximum rebate
$300,000 - $5.1 million
N/A
(excluding none)*
Sales threshold before
$p -$75 million
$0
rebate is given
"8 case studies had no maximum rebate
Some sales tax rebate agreements have clawback provisions. Such provisions require the
business or developer to repay incentive funds if certain requirements, such as remaining in the
community for a certain number of years, are not met.
Property tax abatements
Property tax abatements tend to follow similar structures. Property tax abatements are typically
provided to a taxpayer by more than one taxing district. The structure of the agreement takes
the form of a simple percentage of property taxes abated for a period of years, but the
proportion of the abatement as well as the term may be different across taxing districts. The
term of the abatement ranged from three to eight years in the case studies. In two of the case
studies, 50 percent was abated for five years. In three other cases, the proportion abated
decreased annually, in two cases going from 75 percent, to 50 percent, to 25 percent of property
taxes, and in another case, going from 50 percent and gradually decreasing to 10 percent over
the course of eight years. Property tax abatements may also include clawback provisions. The
most common property tax abatements are statutorily limited to $4 million.
Implications
The structure of incentive agreements varies widely across incentive types, developments, and
communities. This variation impacts the amount and duration of funding provided as well as
the potential outcomes for municipalities. For example, the value of an incentive class is limited
by the fact that they last for just 12 years if they are not renewed. On the other hand, TIF
funding is generated over the course of 23 years, a period over which a substantial amount of
funding can be generated. TIF funding is also generated for an area that is often larger than a
specific development project and is generated from the entire aggregate property tax rate.
Sales tax rebates and property tax abatements typically provide lower levels of funding to
developments than TIF because they usually last for significantly less than 23 years or are
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 35 Development Incentives
derived from tax bases and/or rates that are lower than the composite property tax rate used for
TIF. However, several sales tax rebates have very large terms and no maximum rebate. In
these cases, communities are committing to provide high levels of funds to businesses and
developers; over time, these funding levels could reach well beyond the amounts provided
through TIF. Moreover, there are no statutory criteria regarding how businesses and firms must
use their sales tax rebates, unlike TIF, which requires that funds go toward public
improvements or statutorily -defined private development costs.
However, TIFs can be used to support private sector development in many ways that are not
easy to track, such as land consolidation with a lower -than -cost sale to a developer. While these
types of actions are still taken to achieve a public good, such as redevelopment, they are less
transparent than RDAs because they are not explicitly tracked and reported.
Over time, TIF funds and sales tax rebates have the potential to fund a substantial portion of a
private development project. While this may be desirable in unique cases to support a specific
public good, substantial diversion of public funds to private development projects should be
undertaken only when the project meets key long-term planning goals and could not otherwise
be achieved.
Local governments do have the ability to design TIF, sales tax rebate, and property tax
abatement agreements in a manner that ensures that the funding is used to benefit the
community. Local governments can include requirements in any rebate or TIF agreement, such
as requiring the business or firm to stay in the community for a certain number of years, hire
community residents, generate a specific level of tax revenue, or construct an infrastructure
project. Tying funding to desired outcomes, gives local governments a certain amount of
control over the investments they are making in private development. However, long-term
local government funding commitments are often paired with shorter -term commitments by the
private sector because businesses cannot necessarily commit to operating over the long-term.
Even with clawback provisions, providing an incentive does not guarantee any particular short-
term or long-term outcome, only that a municipality's potential loss is minimized. However,
municipalities do not always exercise their ability to include these provisions, which can result
in a loss of public funds.
Local policies governing locally -based
economic development incentives
While state statute governs some aspects of local economic development incentives, some local
governments have policies governing how economic development incentives are used within
their community. The policies typically include criteria that must be met by developments to
receive incentives such as adding additional jobs, increased sales tax revenue, construction of
public improvements, minimum capital investments, or evidence of a financial gap in the
development project's costs. Policies also sometimes include limitations on the amount of
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 36 Development Incentives
incentives that can be provided. The following section describes some examples of these
policies and guidelines.
Some communities have policies that limit the value of the incentives that can be provided to
developments. For example, Chicago TIF funding cannot not exceed $5,000 per job created or
retained within the central business district or $10,000 per job created or retained outside of the
central business district, although these limits are subject to change based on special merit
considerations.
Both Homer Glen 22 and Highland Park23 provide sales tax rebates for a maximum of ten years.
Both limit rebates to 50 percent of revenues, but in Highland Park, the amount may be reduced
to the extent that new revenues will replace revenues generated by previous or existing
businesses. Also in Highland Park, existing businesses can receive a 75 percent rebate of
incremental sales tax revenues generated above the prior year. St. Charles has a different
method for limiting incentive amounts for TIF funding and sales tax rebates; assistance cannot
exceed 75 percent of the total projected revenue for the development .24
Many communities also include criteria that developments must meet in order to receive
incentives. As part of a related CMAP research project, 20 communities were interviewed about
their use of fiscal impact analyses when considering land use decisions. The vast majority of
communities interviewed indicated that a request for incentives generated the need for a fiscal
impact analysis and/or an analysis of the return on investment that a community receives in
exchange for providing an incentive.
Policies that include criteria tend to address specific attributes of the development or the
expected results of the development in terms of additional jobs or increased tax revenue. For
example, Highland Park only provides sales tax rebates for new businesses that make a
minimum capital investment of $250,000 or existing businesses that generate at least $1 million
in taxable sales annually. Crystal Lake has criteria for sales tax rebates that depend on the type
of development. Auto dealerships must have at least $5 million in taxable sales and project
costs of at least $250,000 for new dealerships and $1 million for existing auto dealerships.25 In
other communities, like Tinley Park, there are several ways that a development can meet criteria
for receiving an incentive, including economic, fiscal, or meeting the community's targeted
development needs.
22 Village of Homer Glen Board of Trustees Meeting, January 22, 2013,
http://www.homer leg nil.or /hg omerglenil/MinutesFolder/MinsBoardBoardMinutes2013/M13-0122-
BoardMeetingMinutes.pdf
23 City of Highland Park, Sales Tax Rebate Program Guidelines to Facility Business Attraction and Retention,
http://www.cityhpil. com/documents/3/sales%20tax%20rebate%20guidelines %20-%20revised%202012. pdf
24 City of St. Charles Economic Incentive Policy 2009-4, March 2, 2009,
http://www.stcharlesil. gov/sites/default/files/codebook/policies/2009-04/12200904.12df
25 City of Crystal Lake, Incentives, http://www.crystallake.org/index.asi2x?12age=133
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 37 Development Incentives
In addition, some communities, like St. Charles, only provide sales tax rebates to developments
that would not be financially feasible but for the incentive. Similarly, Yorkville 26 requires that
developments have a defined gap between project costs and project revenues.
Some communities indicate that developments receiving incentives must be consistent with
planning goals. Highland Park requires developments to be consistent with the City's
comprehensive plan, while other communities like Chicago and St. Charles mention several
planning goals that a development could meet, like the rehabilitation of historic structures or
streetscape enhancement.
Fewer policies address the potential market viability of a development. Park Forest27 requires
that developments prove financial feasibility and that the development team have a minimum
level of experience and commitment to the project. Without independent assessment of market
feasibility, communities may invest in developments that have a high potential of failure. In
these cases, communities may be required to invest additional funds to remediate the impacts of
a failed development.
In the community interviews, several communities indicated that businesses and developers
have come to expect incentives like sales and property tax abatements, and expressed the
concern that if a community is unwilling to provide these funds, businesses will locate in a
neighboring community. In fact, acknowledgement of this issue was found in St. Charles'
incentive policy. The policy states that that it is not the City's intent that these incentives be
used to relocate sales tax -generating establishments from neighboring communities or to allow
requests for incentives "to induce a bidding war for City funds."
Just a few incentive policies were studied for this report, but many communities throughout the
region have policies governing incentives. In the community interviews referenced above,
several communities expressed the need for establishment of internal policies regarding
incentives, such as placing maximums on the amount of funds available to a project or limiting
incentives to expansion of existing businesses. Having policies in place is important to ensuring
that any incentives provided for development are in line with established community goals. In
addition, established procedures for analysis can ensure that communities determine the impact
of the development prior to providing an incentive. St. Charles' policy states that developments
that receive incentives must not place extraordinary demands on the City's infrastructure or
services, which would likely have to be determined through fiscal impact analysis.
Overall, most local policies studied set out to limit incentive amounts or ensure that incentives
were only provided to developments that would result in particular outcomes for the
26 City of Yorkville, Resolution No. 2008-46, Economic Incentive Policy,
http://www.yorkville.il.us/docs/Economic Incentive Policdf
27 Village of Park Forest, Development Incentive Policy,
http://www.villageofparkforest. com/clientupl oads/Economic_Development/Incentive Policy. pdf?PHPSESSID=2028d6
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 38 Development Incentives
community. However, for any new development, residents of other communities may be
employed at the business, may buy goods or service from the business, or may be involved in
the production of goods that are sold at the business. Customers or employees may cross
multiple jurisdictions to travel to the new development, burdening transportation and
infrastructure networks in adjacent communities. Sometimes, the development itself is even
relocating from a different community. From a regional perspective, these are key impacts, as
other communities are always involved in a development's economic structure in some manner.
Yet, the policies examined for this report did not consider how a project will impact other
neighboring communities, including public service impacts on neighboring communities and
whether the business was relocating from a nearby community.
Goals of incentives from the community
perspective
From the case studies, CMAP was able to determine some of the goals that communities have
stated for using economic development incentives. While these goals vary, commonalities
emerge. The most frequent expectations from the local
community's perspective are to grow the overall tax
base, create jobs, and improve infrastructure, either on or
adjacent to the site. While some of the incentives in the
case studies were used for infill redevelopment of
existing underutilized sites, others were provided for
new greenfield development. The goals stated in
incentive agreements are also commonly found in
municipal comprehensive plans, but it is unclear from
most incentive agreements and ordinances if there is a
direct connection between provision of an incentive and
planned goals.
Within the case study set, approximately half of the
retail, office, and industrial development case studies
included stated economic and fiscal goals. Economic
goals included increasing employment, and were
accomplished either through direct subsidies or funding
of infrastructure improvements on behalf of a
development project. Infrastructure was part of all case
studies where TIF funding was provided.
EChicago Metropolitan
Agency for Planning Page 39
Incentives for infill
development
A number of the incentives
provided to case study
developments were used to
encourage infill development in
existing communities. For
example, the Klee Building in
Chicago was redeveloped using
$1.2 million in TIF funds.
Redevelopment was completed
in 2007, resulting in 64
residential units (13 affordable),
and 20,000 square feet of retail
and office space. The total
development cost was $18.7
million, which includes
rehabilitating the Klee Building,
demolishing three other
neighboring buildings, and
constructing two new buildings
to complement the Klee
Building.
Local Economic
Development Incentives
In several case studies, sales tax rebates were used to fund infrastructure projects. Sales tax
rebates tend to fund infrastructure work required to support the new development, such as
road, utility, traffic signal, landscaping, facade improvements, and stormwater detention work.
Incentives for brownfield development
Many of the incentives provided to case study
developments were used to encourage
development where extraordinary development
costs made the site less attractive to developers.
In Broadview, a 63 -acre parcel previously served
as a parts distribution warehouse, but had been
vacant since 1992. The 22nd & 17th Avenue TIF
district was established in 1993 to attract
developers to the site. Broadview Village Square
opened in 1994 at a cost of $65 million. Anchors
include a SuperTarget and a Home Depot. A $23
million bond was issued to pay for site preparation
including demolition and remediation.
These infrastructure improvements
are required by local jurisdictions to
ensure that the project does not
degrade existing infrastructure
networks. To make a site more
attractive to developers,
communities provide
reimbursements for these required
infrastructure improvements
through sales tax rebates. TIF funds
can be used for similar
improvements if the area also meets
blight conditions, but are often
targeted toward more unusual costs
such as environmental remediation,
stabilizing poor soil conditions, or land assembly in a previously -developed area. The intent of
funding these kinds of projects is to encourage desired development on sites that have costs
and/or risks well above that which the market would normally bear.
Incentives are typically used to encourage certain types of land uses or implement any number
of stated planning goals, from affordable housing and transit oriented development to shopping
centers and industrial parks. Figure 11 analyzes the stated land use goals across 27 case studies
where this information was provided, and organizes the results by development type and
whether the development is considered infill. The majority of the case studies involved infill
developments of various types, from mixed-use, transit -oriented development to retail. A lesser
percentage involved non -infill land that is undeveloped, or greenfield development.
Chicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 40 Development Incentives
Figure 11. Use of incentives by stated land use goal
0 TIF DISTRICT E PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENTS SALES TAX REBATES PROPERTY TAX
INCENTIVE CLASSES
Number of case studies
dw
Retail orMixed-use
Residential
Mixed-use
Industrial
Infill development
Mixed use,
Retail
Industrial
auto dealer with affordable
transit -oriented
(no specific land use)
all other
housing
INFILL
UNDEVELOPED
Source: Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning analysis of developments., appendix of Examination of Local Economic Development Incentives Report
Some communities have found that incentives can help catalyze infill development or make
difficult sites more attractive to a developer or business. Incentives can also fill the gap between
development costs and market prices for residential developments, including affordable
housing and mixed use developments. Higher costs associated with these types of
development include environmental remediation, decked or underground parking, site
assembly in an area with many landowners, higher construction costs for multi -story
development, and higher market risk for some component of a mixed-use development.
That being said, incentives are also utilized for undeveloped sites that do not necessarily have
these extraordinary development costs. In these cases, the goal from the community's
perspective is to expand the tax or economic base through a major new development like a
shopping center or a distribution center. New development often requires costly new
transportation and utility infrastructure investment as well as long term maintenance paid for
by the municipality. Providing incentives on top of these additional costs represents a major
investment of taxpayer dollars toward development that will require continuing support in
terms of public services.
Relationship to community plans
Local comprehensive plans help provide a long range community vision and strategy and
represent a major investment of time and energy. They generally outline land use, economic,
transportation, infrastructure and other goals that relate directly to those outlined in many of
the incentive agreements. CMAP recently analyzed the content of the comprehensive plans for
219 of the region's communities.211 This analysis found that a significant majority of the region's
28 The analysis was completed in 2009. The analysis set was comprised of all plans which were published 1990 or later
and for which copies could be obtained. For additional information, see http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/moving-
forward/human-capital-in-detail/-/asset_publisher/Q4En/blog/a-look-inside-metropolitan-Chicago%E2%80%99s-
existing-local-plans/276584?isMovingForward=1
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 41 Development Incentives
comprehensive plans have a heavy or moderate focus on economic development and explore
other topics related to specific land use goals. However, comparatively few discussed specific
incentives to implement these goals.
Figure 12. Goals and incentives addressed in CMAP region comprehensive plans, 2009
0 MODERATE EMPHASIS EHEAVYEMPHASIS
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOALS
Economic development
79 122
Joh creation
52 7
Support business/industriall parks
55 33
Mixed use development
moommommomm�fififififififiEE ����������������������� ■����������
96 28
Redevelopment, reuse, and infill
�����������0 ■
����������������������� FiFiFiFiFi�����E���E
����������������������� Q �������������MEMEMEMEM ■EMEME E EMENEE�
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INCENTIVE STRATEGIES
Tax increment finance districts
MENNEN
ENNE������������������ ����������■
56 is
Other economic development incenti es
1MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
00101001010010010
33 6
? 50 100 ISO 200
Number of plans
Source: Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning. analysis.
While the general goals of incentive agreements and comprehensive plans often coincide, it is
unclear if incentives are being utilized to implement specific recommendations of a
community's comprehensive plan or if their use is more reactive. Sales tax rebates and property
tax abatements require no connection to a community plan or strategy, and incentive classes
and TIF funds, while limited in the types of areas in which they can be provided, are similarly
separate from the planning process. As described in the section on local incentive policies,
communities in the region have approached guidelines for the provision of incentives in a
variety of ways, some of which include a required connection to the community plan.
When municipalities make the decision to support a specific development or employer by
providing an incentive, it is critical that this investment of public dollars supports community
goals and community land use plans. Aligning incentives with community plans builds on the
analysis and public input that went into the plan, and ensures that public dollars are being
invested in outcomes and land use patterns that are desired over the long term.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 42 Development Incentives
Regional economic impact of industries
receiving local incentives
Local economic development incentives have been used to attract or retain a wide variety of
businesses, including retail, auto dealerships, corporate office, manufacturing and warehousing
industries. Incentives often represent considerable investments for local governments. From
the local perspective, these deals can work to implement a wide variety of planning goals;
however the economic benefit for the region at large is much less clear.
These incentives are offered to businesses with the expectation of growing the local tax base or
providing job opportunities. The provision of these incentives is oftentimes driven by the
structure of the overall state and local tax system, which rewards certain types of developments
more than others. One of the central public policy issues under exploration by CMAP is the
common disconnect between local fiscal benefit (as measured by the growth in one local tax
base) and the regional economic benefit (as measured by output and wages.)
The case studies include a number of different types of firms, all of which have varying levels of
regional impact. Employment multipliers are one tool to show the extent that an expansion of
one industry supports additional economic activity within the region. For example, a job
multiplier of 2.7 suggests that the increase of one job in a specific industry leads to an additional
1.7 jobs in the regional economy. CMAP used an input-output model developed by Economic
Modeling Specialists Inc. (EMSI), which is specifically tailored to produce data on metropolitan
Chicago. The following chart provides an overview of job multipliers for the region for various
industries included in the case studies. These industries also provide varying levels of wages,
which are illustrated on the subsequent chart.
Chicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 43 Development Incentives
Figure 13. Jobs multiplier by selected industries, 2012
GENERAL WAREHOUSE RETAIL NEW CAR DEALERS
ANDSTORAGE 11
CORPORATE, SUBSIDIARY, AND ®MANUFACTURING
REGIONAL MANAGING OFFICES
01.6
41111111111111111111�13 -1.9
2.0
1
0 1 2 3 4 5
Jobs muitipiier
Note: retail and manufacturing ranges include several examples that appeared in the case study
developments. Retail includes household appliance stores, electronics stores, supermarkets,
department stores, and discount department stores. Manufacturing includes plastics material
and resin manufacturing, automobile manufacturing, and motor vehicle supplier manufacturing.
Source: Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning analysis of Economic Modeling Specialists
Inc. data.
Figure 14. U.S. average annual wages by industry, 2012
Average annual earnings of production and nonsupervisory employees
$0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000
Source: Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning analysis of U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data.
Chicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 44 Development Incentives
At the low point, one retail job supports only an estimated additional 0.3-0.9 jobs. These jobs
also provide very low wages. Similarly, warehousing jobs have lower multipliers and lower
wages. On the other hand, manufacturing and corporate offices have much higher multipliers
and higher wages. However, this trend was not exhibited for new car dealers, which had lower
economic multipliers, but higher average wages.
Furthermore, additional jobs in industries with high multipliers, like manufacturing, tend to
support jobs in industries with lower multipliers. However, the reverse is not true; industries
with lower economic multipliers tend not to support jobs in industries with higher economic
multipliers. The following chart provides three examples of the number of additional jobs that
would be supported in the region if 100 jobs were added in a motor vehicle supplier
manufacturing facility, a department store, and a corporate office. For example, an additional
department store with 100 employees supports 42 jobs in other industries within the region, two
of which are in manufacturing. At the same time, an additional motor vehicle supplier
manufacturing facility with 100 employees supports an additional 183 jobs in other industries,
including 39 in other manufacturing industries and 17 in retail. Corporate offices also support
jobs in other industries. If an additional 100 corporate office jobs were created in the region, 170
other jobs would be supported, including 19 in retail.
Figure 15. Number of additional jobs supported in the region from an increase of 100 jobs in
selected manufacturing, retail, or office development types, by sector, 2012
Number of additional jobs supported in the region from an increase of 100 jobs in manufacturing, retail, or office development, by sector
EMANUFACTURING IRETAIL CORPORATE OFFICES BUSINESS SERVICES' OTHER"
Motor vehc e supply manchctu-ing (steering and suspenslor components`,
39 17 6 60 61
iiDepartment stores
y i }*
7 A 17 19
6 19 1 63 81
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
ncI udur fi-or, e c. rIm'e-ale trnde. orcfessional, scientific, and technical services, transportation and warehousing, real estate, rental, leasing, administrative, support,
t,,t,,monoge:-ert,nd remadot on seryces
"Includes utilities, I�formsior. ar —mentr mining, quarrying, oil and gas extraction, construction, healthcare, social assistance, private education services, arts, entertainment, recreation,
offier services, ag,i re, forestryfshing, hunting, accommodation, food service
Source. Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning analysis of Economic Modeling Specialists Inc. data.
Based on the available data, it appears that many local governments are targeting incentives
based upon local tax revenues rather than overall economic impact. For example, based on data
from the set of 137 sales tax rebate agreements, it appears that on a per -case basis, local
governments are spending or committing significant amounts of incentive dollars to firms that
may generate sales tax revenues, but have low jobs multipliers and/or low wages. For example,
sales tax rebates averaged by type of retailer for retail ranged from $2.5 million for home
improvement stores to $3.8 million for discount stores.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 45 Development Incentives
While providing incentives to office or manufacturing developments may provide better
economic benefits, they often do not provide the same level of tax revenue as a retail
development, which provides sales tax revenue in addition to property tax revenue. However,
the difference between economic and fiscal benefit is that the economic impact spills across
municipal borders while the fiscal impact of a development is limited to the local government
accruing the revenue. As a result, there is a disincentive to investing in developments that
produce wider economic benefits, but that may not provide the same level of tax revenue as a
sales -tax generating establishment.
Some developments may not produce high levels of tax revenue, but provide a substantial level
of economic benefits to the region and can support economic development across sectors. For
example, manufacturing in particular tends to support additional jobs within the industry as
well as in other industries within its supply chains. Manufacturers are also an important source
of innovation, in that they rely heavily on research and development. In fact, 85 percent of
private research and development in northeastern Illinois comes from the region's
manufacturing cluster. 29 Industries like manufacturing also leverage the geographic and
infrastructure advantages of the region's extensive freight network, as well as its highly skilled
workforce.
How local economic development incentives
influence site selection
The purpose of most local economic development incentives is to influence business site
selection, but these tools represent only one factor among many in these decisions. Locally -
based incentives can serve to offset higher taxes or high costs for land and site improvements.
They typically work to incentivize development in a particular location rather than counteract
any larger -scale metropolitan market or labor force considerations. The case studies indicate
that many of these deals involve "intraregional" (within northeastern Illinois) moves or the
expansion of an existing business. Only rarely do these types of tools work to lure a firm from
another state or other part of the country.30 This is consistent with the findings of various
academic studies showing that tax differences are more effective at influencing site selection
within regions than across regions .31
29 CMAP, Manufacturing Cluster Drill -Down, 2013, http://www.cmal2.illinois.gov/policy/drill-downs/manufacturing
30 Given that northeastern Illinois shares state borders with Wisconsin and Indiana, there is some limited evidence
from the case studies that these local tools have been used to attract or retain a business within Illinois.
31 See: Ernest Goss and Philip Peters, "The Effect of State and Local Taxes on Economic Development: A Meta -
Analysis," Southern Economic Journal 62, no. 2 (1995): 320-333; Michael Wasylenko, "Taxation and Economic
Development: The State of the Economic Literature," New England Economic Review (March/April 1997): 38-52; Robert
Lynch, "Re -thinking Growth Strategies: How State and Local Taxes and Services Affect Economic Development,"
Economic Policy Institute, (2004).
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 46 Development Incentives
Of the 40 case studies analyzed,
21 involved incentives provided
to specific businesses, rather
than to developers. The
following chart provides an
overview of the businesses
receiving incentives, and
whether the development was
part of a national firm's market
expansion or whether it was a
firm moving or expanding
within the region. 19 of the 21
businesses receiving incentives
were either moving from
Use of incentives for businesses located in northeastern
Illinois
Abt Electronics moved to Glenview from Morton Grove in 2002. A
sales tax rebate for the development was approved in 2000. In
2008, the Village extended the rebate agreement for an additional
15 -year period because Abt was approaching its maximum rebate
of $11 million under the 2000 agreement. Under the 2008
agreement, which will expire in 2023, the sales threshold was
dropped to $75 million and the maximum was removed.
The stated reasons for extending the agreement included that Abt
has been a significant employment and sales tax revenue
generator. They have allowed the Village to lessen its
dependence on a property tax levy. Also, according to the Village
Board Report, Abt indicated several factors that may result in the
store relocating to another community, such as the increase in the
Cook County sales tax, nearby road work, and the economy.
another place in the
metropolitan region or
expanding their market. The following chart breaks down these case studies by development
type and by the primary incentive received by the business.
Figure 16. Incentives to businesses by type and nature of development
0 INTRAREGIONAL MOVES OR EXPANSIONS OF EXISTING BUSINESSES
NATIONAL FIRM MARKET EXPANSION
RELOCATION OF BUSINESSES FROM OUTSIDE THE REGION OR
CREATION OF NEW BUSINESS
Source: Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning analysis of developments, appendix of
Examination of Local Economic Development Incentives Report.
all Chicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 47 Development Incentives
6
Industrial/
Industrial/ office
Auto dealer
Retail
manufacturing
distribution
Number of case studies
Source: Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning analysis of developments, appendix of
Examination of Local Economic Development Incentives Report.
all Chicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 47 Development Incentives
The next chart breaks down the 19 intraregional moves and market expansions by development
type and the incentive used. More than half of the case studies illustrated in Figure 17 were
retail developments or distribution centers.
Figure 17. Number of case studies using incentives for an
intraregional move, for the expansion of an existing business, or
for a national firm's market expansion, by primary incentive used
and development type
nRETAIL AUTO DEALER OFFICE
InINDUSTRIAL/MANUFACTURING 52 INDUSTRIAL/DISTRIBUTION
Incentive class Sales tax rebate Abatement TIF
Number of case studies
Source: Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning analysis of developments, case studies in
appendix of Examination of Local Economic Development Incentives Report.
Retail site selection
Incentives to a retail development in a regional or sub -regional market area that is already
attractive for development help determine the precise location where the development will
locate, but not whether the retail development will come to the region at all. For retailers, a
preferred market area has a stable or growing population matching the retailer's target
demographic groups, and there must be a market opportunity in the form of a lack of
competition or a market niche that is not being fulfilled .32 Additionally, a retailer will consider
costs of expansion, such as developing new warehouse or distribution facilities to serve its new
stores, creating a market presence through advertising, and similar hard and soft expansion
costs. The retailer will also evaluate the presence and current success of similar retailers in the
expansion area. These are larger, regional factors that individual communities cannot directly
control.
32 William M. Bowen, Kimberly Winson-Geideman, and Robert A. Simmons, "Financing Public Investment in Retail
Development," in Financing Economic Development in the 21s1 Century, ed. Sammis B. White, Richard D. Bingham, and
Edward W. Hill (Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, Inc, 2003), 250-265.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 48 Development Incentives
As shown in Figure 18, selection of a
retail site within a larger market area
involves many factors. At base, these
involve a combination of market
requirements and initial development
costs. Market requirements include:
proximity to customers that meet a
retailer's age, income, lifestage, and
lifestyle requirements; spatial
relationship to competing retailers and a
brand's other stores; and, potentially,
location in a retail cluster. There are
also factors that affect the visibility of a
site, such as traffic levels, access
considerations, and visibility from the
roadway or within a development.
Lastly, the costs of each site will vary
due to a number of factors, including
lease or purchase costs; necessary site
improvements such as site preparation,
demolition, improvement of existing
infrastructure and/or brownfield
remediation; required improvements to
adjacent public infrastructure such as
How do retailers plan expansions?
Mariano's, a supermarket brand under Roundy's, has
recently constructed a number of new grocery stores
within the Chicago region. They plan to continue their
expansion due to the opportunities they see in the greater
Chicago area market. According to the company's recent
filing with the federal Securities Exchange Commission:
We entered the Chicago market in July 2010 through
the opening of our first Mariano's Fresh Market store
in Arlington Heights, Illinois. As of November 1, 2011,
we have opened four stores in the Chicago market,
which, since opening, have generated higher average
weekly net sales per store compared to stores in our
other markets. Given its favorable competitive
dynamics and attractive demographics, including a
large population and average household income that
exceeds the national average, we believe the Chicago
market provides us with a compelling expansion
opportunity. We expect to open four to five stores per
year in the Chicago market over the next five years,
and have secured six leases for future stores in
attractive locations as of November 1, 2011.
Roundy's Corporation, "Form S-1: Registration Statement under The
Securities Act Of 1933," December 5, 2011,
http://www.sec.qov/Archives/edqar/data/1 536035/000104746911009884
/a2206531zs-1.htm
roads or water mains; and, local costs such as property taxes or utility taxes. A retailer will seek
to locate at a site that meets its demographic, traffic, and access requirements and provides the
best cost value.
Development incentives have an impact on the retail site location process by reducing the cost
of initial site improvements and/or local taxes over the long term. This does not create a better
market for a retailer, but instead makes an individual site more attractive by reducing standard
costs or by paying for extraordinary costs that market -rate development does not normally take
on, like brownfield remediation. Thus, incentives may affect retail development at a particular
site, but would not necessarily result in additional retailers in a particular market area.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 49 Development Incentives
Figure 18. Retailer regional market and site selection considerations
RETAIL REGIONAL MARKET AREA SELECTION
RETAIL MARKET AREA BASED ON:
• Company strategy
• Demographics
• Competition
• Market opportunity
• Existing distribution network
Source: Chicago Metropolitan Agency tar Planning analysis.
RETAIL SITE SELECTION
i 30K VEHICLES PER DAY
it ■ ■
■■ 111111
�
`� COMPETITOR
1911 „ � 1919
IIIPo'it "POTENTIALSITE #2
VIII 11111111190 IlllU IIIIIIIIIIIIIII 111111
ZaK VEHICLES PER DAY
■ IIIIUIrr" "'
p0
■ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ■
¢9
POTENTIAL SITE #3
COMPETITOR
■ MAJOR RETAIL
■■■■`
CLUSTER
■■■OW,
ADJACENT
RESIDENTIAL
SITE SELECTION BASED ON:
• Demographics within site market area
• Location of competition, retail clusters, existing stores
■ Traffic, Access & Visibility
• Costs:
Impacted by • Required Infrastructure improvements
incentives • Lease/purchase price
• Taxes
• Pre-developmenttimeline
Industrial, warehousing, and office site selection
For industrial and office development, site selection is based on a complex set of factors
involving transportation infrastructure, workforce considerations, and access to customers or
suppliers. An area of the metropolitan region would have to satisfy the firm's criteria on these
factors if the region were to be considered at all. If the region is being considered for an
industrial or office facility, local incentives could play a role in the specific location within the
region that is chosen.
Site selection for manufacturing facilities involves factors such as the labor market, the skill
level of the workforce, labor costs, transportation costs, utility costs, and the proximity of
suppliers and consumers. Because most of the costs involved in a manufacturing facility are for
supplier inputs and labor, taxes and incentives account for a very small portion of the overall
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 50 Development Incentives
cost of facility operations .33 Thus,
incentives may not be a deciding factor
until a particular region is identified for
a location. After a region is selected,
more significant costs such as labor and
transportation costs are going to vary
less across sites, resulting in local taxes
and incentives becoming the variable
cost. Similar factors exist for
warehousing facilities, although a site's
location within the firm's logistics
network is an important factor.
Location for corporate offices also
depends on factors such as the labor
market, skill level of workforce, labor
costs, access to transportation, the public
services available for employees and
their families, and quality of life
considerations. These factors are
considered typically under a multi -stage
process, where geographic areas are
selected first, followed by identification
of various sites within the selected
geographic areas .34 If a firm was to
consider northeastern Illinois for a
corporate office, identified sites within
northeastern Illinois and other regions
Locating logistics and warehouse facilities
Clarius Park Joliet, a speculative logistics facility
being constructed near 1-80, 1-55 and intermodal
facilities, is capitalizing on the Chicago region's
assets with regard to transportation access.
Developer Kevin D. Matzke said of the project
location:
On a national level, Chicago factors into almost
every large industrial user's logistics model due
to its large population, geographic centrality and
the fact that all Class 1 rail lines converge in
Chicago. On a regional level, Joliet makes
perfect sense, since it is located less than 50
miles from downtown Chicago, it is the crossing
point between Interstates 55 and 80, and it is
located very close to both the BNSF and UP
intermodal facilities.
Joliet is one of several communities in the immediate
area of the 1-55/1-80 interchange that are
experiencing substantial new industrial development.
This area has added 26 million square feet of
industrial development since 2000, with 21 million
more square feet currently proposed.
National Real Estate Investor, "Construction of $70M Clarius Park Joliet
Underway, First Building Delivery Slated for 1Q 2013," August 12. 2012,
http://nreionl ine.com/m idwest/construction-70m-clarius-park-moliet-
underway-first-building-delivery-slated-1g-2013; CMAP analysis of
Costar data
under consideration would be evaluated on a number of factors, including qualify of life
factors, taxes, issues related to the site, and any incentives offered.
Alignment between local government and
business goals
Local economic development efforts can help improve the tax base and the quality of life for
residents. The economic development incentive tools researched for this report come into play
when local governments believe that a business or developer requires a financial incentive to
33 Daphne A. Kenyon, Adam H. Langley, and Bethany P. Paquin. Rethinking Property Tax Incentives for Business
(Cambridge, Mass: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, 2012), http://www.lincolninst.edu/pubs/2024_Rethinking-
Property-Tax-Incentives-for-Business
34 Joseph S. Rabianski, James R. DeLisle and Neil G. Cam, "Corporate Real Estate Site Selection: A Community -
Specific Information Framework," Journal of Real Estate Research 22, no. 1/2 (2001): 165-197.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 51 Development Incentives
locate in the community. At the same time, businesses and developers desire these financial
incentives from local governments. Businesses exist to maximize profits, and receiving an
outlay of public funding reduces the cost of development for the business.
Businesses are typically in an advantageous position to negotiate incentives with local
governments. They may have several sites to choose from, and may obtain incentive offers
from multiple communities in the region. This puts communities in the difficult position of
competing against each other for economic development opportunities, many of which are from
businesses or developers that intend to select a site in northeastern Illinois and are simply
choosing from several specific sites in the region. Only the business knows the level of public
funding that is required for them to develop a particular site and whether an incentive is
required for the development at all. Some communities require proof that there is a financial
gap that must be met for a development to receive incentives, although in some cases that proof
is only provided by the developer being evaluated. As a result, many communities provide
incentives without knowing whether the development would have occurred regardless of the
incentive or what kinds of incentives were offered by other communities.
Undoubtedly, northeastern Illinois has real redevelopment needs. Many areas of the region
have vast amounts of available infill land, and these areas may also be experiencing a depressed
economic base or a low tax base. These areas would benefit from additional economic
development efforts, some of which may be in the form of incentives. At the same time, this
report has shown that many of these incentive deals involve new greenfield developments
which typically do not have extraordinary development costs. Some communities are spending
public funding and other resources competing over these developments. From a regional
perspective, these kinds of deals are problematic because the business likely would have located
in the region regardless of these efforts.
Unfortunately, local governments are in a difficult position. If they do not offer economic
development incentives, some businesses may decide to locate in a neighboring community that
does provide an incentive. There are benefits associated with being selected for a development,
such as an increased property tax base, and depending on the type of development, increased
sales tax revenue, additional retail options in underserved areas, or closer employment
opportunities for residents. While the community must also bear costs associated with the
development, such as public service and infrastructure costs, neighboring communities may
also have to incur some of these additional costs, but without receiving additional tax revenue
that may be generated in part by their own residents.
Local governments operate largely under state law, which provides local governments the
ability to use tax revenue to incentivize development projects. A policy environment where any
community has the ability to provide incentives to businesses encourages competition among
communities rather than cooperation. If even one community offers an economic development
incentive, it would be at an advantage relative to a similar community not offering one.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 52 Development Incentives
Fostering an environment where local resources are targeted toward collaborative efforts would
require reforms to the statutes that encourage incentive competition.
Conclusion: Supporting GO TO 2040
Local economic development incentives play a major role within the overall economic
development landscape of northeastern Illinois. These incentives have been used to attract or
retain a wide variety of commercial, industrial, and residential uses including retail, auto
dealerships, corporate offices, manufacturing, warehousing, mixed-use, and affordable housing
developments.
CMAP analyzes local incentives from the perspective of GO TO 2040, the region's
comprehensive plan that links transportation, land use, the natural environment, economic
prosperity, housing, and human and community development. The plan encourages strategies
that support investment in existing communities, maintain the regions existing infrastructure,
and encourage sustainable economic growth and efficient governance.
Communities often utilize local incentives for goals that align with GO TO 2040, such as
redeveloping an underutilized site, developing affordable housing, or meeting other key
reinvestment goals. Specifically, redevelopment can require the consolidation of many small
parcels under separate ownership, remediation of environmental contamination, rehabilitation
of existing structures, or an upgrade of public infrastructure. In these cases, incentives can
bridge the gap between market prices and high redevelopment costs, meeting both public goals
and private investment needs.
On the other hand, communities often use local incentives to compete over new developments
on undeveloped land that typically do not have extraordinary development costs. While GO
TO 2040 acknowledges that some greenfield development will occur, the plan does not
prioritize the associated expenditure of limited public resources toward these ends.
GO TO 2040 also emphasizes efficient governance and access to information. Unfortunately,
limited data availability often makes it difficult to determine exactly how many local
governments are utilizing incentive tools. Like disclosing any other budgetary or financial
reporting of local government expenditures of tax revenues, it is important for state and local
governments to provide taxpayers with a full accounting of the incentives used for economic
development projects.
Local communities often provide incentives without knowledge of whether the development
would have occurred anyway. Businesses are typically in an advantageous position to
negotiate incentives with local governments— they may have several sites to choose from and
may receive incentive offers from multiple communities in the region. This situation puts
communities in the difficult position of competing against each other for economic
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 53 Development Incentives
development opportunities, many of which involve businesses or developers that intend to
select a site in northeastern Illinois and are choosing from several specific sites in the region.
GO TO 2040 strongly supports coordination between communities. Intergovernmental
approaches are often the best way to solve planning problems in economic development.
Employing incentives to compete with other communities over development often runs
contrary to this strategy. Collaborative efforts can help communities to gain efficiencies, share
information, and strategically invest scarce public funds. Moving forward, fostering a
collaborative environment to facilitate economic development would better utilize public
resources and would benefit the region as a whole.
Chicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 54 Development Incentives
Appendix: Case study summaries
Case studies are organized according to incentive type and location. When more than one
incentive type was utilized, the case study is classified by the incentive type that provided the
most funding.
Sales tax rebates
Cook County
Abt Electronics, Village of Glenview
Figure 19. AN Electronics
.i
Source: flickr user Zo187
Abt Electronics moved to Glenview from Morton Grove in 2002. A sales tax rebate for the
development was approved in 2000. According to a Village Board Report, the original
agreement allowed for a 50 -percent sales tax rebate for 15 years up to a maximum of $11
million, after a sales threshold of $100 million in sales. In 2008, the Village extended the rebate
agreement for an additional 15 -year period because Abt was approaching its maximum rebate
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 55 Development Incentives
under the 2000 agreement. Under the 2008 agreement, which will expire in 2023, the sales
threshold was dropped to $75 million and the maximum was removed.
Also under the agreement, the Village is guaranteed a taxable sales base of $275 million in years
1 through 5 and $250 million in years 6-15. In addition, Abt must maintain at least 900
employees at the facilities in years one through five, 750 in years six through 10 and 600 in years
10 through 15. If these provision is not met, Abt will have to pay back all of the rebates received
during the previous five years.
The reason for extending the agreement was multi -fold. Abt has been a significant employment
and sales tax revenue generator. They have allowed the Village to lessen its dependence on a
property tax levy. Also, according to the Village Board Report, Abt indicated several factors
that may result in the store relocating to another community, such as the increase in the Cook
County sales tax, nearby road work, and the economy.
Abt Electronics currently employs 1,100 and at least $15 million has been paid under this
agreement to date.
Source: Village of Glenview, Village Board Report on Consideration of a Resolution authorizing an
addendum to the economic development agreement between the Village of Glenview and Abt
Electronics, September 2, 2008; various Village of Glenview Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports,
2006 through 2011
Matteson Auto Mall, Village of Matteson
In 1997, the Village of Matteson entered into an agreement with Miller Consolidated to develop
an auto mall on an undeveloped site. The agreement followed the loss of an Oldsmobile
dealership, although it is unclear where that dealership was located.
Matteson Auto Mall was completed in 2001 on a 102 -acre, 25 -parcel piece of undeveloped land
purchased from Marathon Oil. The mall was built at a cost of $36.9 million. Miller sold half of
the parcels to auto dealerships and leased three parcels for other uses. Ten auto dealerships
were constructed and operating in the mall at its peak. In the middle of the mall, there is a
conservation area with nature trails and wet lands. The Village provided significant site
improvements, including sewer, water main, street lights, streets, sidewalks, landscaping,
detention, and wetland creation for the mall.
Initially, three dealerships from other areas in southland relocated to the mall, generating
complaints that the large incentives provided by taxpayers pitted communities against each
other. Today, seven dealerships are currently still in operation, with three vacant dealerships.
In addition, several other parcels are currently vacant.
Sales tax rebates ranging from 50 percent to 60 percent for 20 years were provided to all
dealerships, with a clause that each dealership had to sell a minimum number of cars to receive
the rebate. Matteson also issued $3.5 million in bonds to pay for public improvements. In
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 56 Development Incentives
addition, several taxing bodies provided a 50 percent property tax abatement for 10 years, up to
a maximum of $4 million as limited by statute, to several of the dealerships. Rich Township
High School District 227 provided the property tax abatement to the initial dealerships.
Elementary School District 159 provided abatements to dealerships constructed during both
phases of the project. Two dealerships that did not receive an abatement received a property
tax incentive Class 8.
In 2009, a TIF district was established for just the vacant parcels in the mall to encourage
development on the vacant parcels, although there has not yet been any funding provided from
development projects through the TIF district.
Source: Email communication with the Village of Matteson, February 20, 2013; Charles Stanley,
"Matteson Gives Green Light to Huge Car -lot Complex," Chicago Tribune, June 18,1997; Marilyn Thomas,
"Suburbs Cry In Pain Over Tax -revenue Drain that's Matteson's Gain," Chicago Tribune, November 19,
1998
DuPage County
Caputo's, Village of Addison
Caputo's Market moved from another shopping center in Addison to this location in the Lake
Mill Plaza Shopping Center. They rehabbed the new location, which is about twice the size of
their original location. The rehab was completed in 2007 at a cost of $5 million. Caputo's also
later resurfaced the shopping center parking lot and renovated the facade of the whole
shopping center.
The incentive was provided because Caputo's had been renting in another shopping center, and
wanted to move to a larger facility, which this move allowed them to do. In addition, an
incentive was provided for improvements to the shopping center. Caputo's received 50 percent
of sales tax revenue generated over the amount generated in 2002 for five years or until $200,000
is met. This agreement existed from 2004 to 2008, and a second agreement was made covering
2009 through 2013, with the same structure, and with a maximum of $600,000. The rebate
would only be provided if the entire shopping center was rented out, the facade renovated, and
the parking lot resurfaced by 2007. These conditions were met in 2006.
Source: Email communication with the Village of Addison, February 1, 2013; Village of Addison Budget
and Financial Plan, May 1, 2009 — April 30, 2010.
Lowe's, Village of Carol Stream
In 2003, the Village approved a sales tax rebate agreement with Lowe's for a 163,000 square foot
store to be built on undeveloped land. The site required $2 million in preparation, including
stormwater detention, wetlands mitigation, and landscaping to shield the property from a
residential area nearby. Under the agreement, 70 percent of sales tax revenue goes to Lowe's
for 15 years, after the first $100,000, which goes to the Village, with a $700,000 maximum. To
date, $560,709 has been paid to Lowe's.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 57 Development Incentives
Source: Village of Carol Stream Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended April
30, 2012; Annemarie Mannion, "Carol Stream OKs Lowe's store tax breaks," Chicago Tribune, July 23, 2003
Lee Lumber, City of Oakbrook Terrace
Lee Lumber is a building materials and lumber business that operates several showrooms in
northeast Illinois and northwest Indiana. In 2003, Lee Lumber opened a window, door, and
cabinet showroom and credit department in a shopping center. As a result, all sales involving a
credit application were sourced to Oakbrook Terrace.
The 2003 agreement provided a sales tax rebate of 70 percent for 10 years with an automatic
renewal of an additional 10 years unless either Lee Lumber or the City provides notice not to
renew. The agreement assumes that Lee Lumber's business has closed if taxable credit sales
sourced in the City fall below $5 million a year. In addition, if Lee Lumber relocates outside of
the City during the initial 10 -year period, then they must repay Oakbrook Terrace a portion of
the rebate. According to the agreement, the City provided incentives because the company
stated it would otherwise not locate its "single order -acceptance point" and corporate
headquarters in the City. In 2011, the showroom closed and in 2012, the credit department
moved to the Chicago corporate office. Plato's Closet is now operating in the space.
Source: City of Oakbrook Terrace Ordinance No 02 — 45, An ordinance approving an economic
incentive agreement with Lee Lumber and Building Materials Corp; Economic Incentive Agreement
between the City of Oakbrook Terrace and Lee Lumber and Building Materials, Corp, December 19, 2002;
City of Oakbrook Terrace Annual Operating Budget Fiscal Year 2012-2013; City of Oakbrook Terrace,
Minutes of the Regular City Council and Committee of the Whole meeting, June 26, 2012.
Kane County
Gander Mountain, City of Geneva
This area had been annexed by the City of Geneva in 1993. In 2003, Gander Mountain
redeveloped a vacant Big Kmart, which closed in 2002 along with 284 other Kmart stores. This
was the company's third store in Illinois, with the others in Peoria and Rockford. It is unclear
when Big Kmart was built, but the adjacent shopping center was built in 1997.
The incentive agreement was signed in 2003. In years 1 and 2, Gander Mountain received no
rebate. In years 3 through 7, if annual gross sales were less than or equal to $23,750,000, Gander
Mountain received a 25 -percent sales tax rebate. If annual sales exceeded that amount, Gander
Mountain received a 50 -percent rebate. In exchange, Gander Mountain was required to make
facade improvements and site improvements. During the term of the incentive agreement,
rebates totaled $145,000. In addition, Kane County planned to make improvements to Randall
Road totaling $482,000 using sales tax revenue collections. According to the agreement, the City
provided the incentives because the development will meet service needs of residents, increase
economic opportunities and conditions, increase employment opportunities, and enhance the
tax base.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 58 Development Incentives
Source: Development Economic Incentive and Reimbursement Agreement City Of Geneva & Gander
Mountain Company, March 17,2003; Telephone communication with the City of Geneva, February 5,
2013; Barbara Kois, "Outdoors retailer to open store," Chicago Tribune, November 14, 2002
Geneva Commons, City of Geneva
Figure 20. Geneva Commons
Source: Jaffe Company
The Geneva Commons Lifestyle Shopping Center opened in 2003 with 610,979 square feet of
retail space. Geneva annexed this property in 1996. Anchor tenants include Dick's Sporting
Goods and Barnes & Noble. Currently, 68 out of 82 spaces are occupied.
The agreement was made in 2002 for a sales tax rebate of 25 percent to the developer for 7 and
one half years from the date the first store opens or up to $1,677,482. The rebate is meant to
reimburse for various roadway improvements and landscaping. As stated in the agreement, the
development would not be economically viable without the incentive, and the development
will service the needs of residents, increase economic opportunities, enhance commercial
economic conditions, stimulate commercial growth, and enhance the tax base of Geneva.
Source: Restated Development Economic Incentive and Reimbursement Agreement City of Geneva and
Geneva Retail Company, LLC., April 10, 2002; Summary of Geneva Sales Tax Rebates; Geneva Commons
website, http://www.shopgenevacommons.com, accessed May 1, 2013
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 59 Development Incentives
Kendall County
Oswego Commons, Village of Oswego
Figure 21. Oswego Commons
Source: Ryan Company
This shopping center was constructed in 2001 on an undeveloped parcel, and houses a Home
Depot, Target, Dominick's, Kohl's, and several restaurants. It is 500,000 square feet with 1,375
parking spaces. The Kohl's was constructed in 2006.
A sales tax rebate agreement was made in 2002, providing a 70 -percent sales tax rebate in the
first two years, 75 percent in years 3 and 4, 50 percent in years 5 through 7, and a 25 -percent
rebate in years 8 through 10. There is no maximum. CMAP estimates that rebates may have
reached $3.4 million. Kohl's received a separate rebate of 50 percent of sales tax revenues for 10
years, up to $1 million. The Village's budget stated that incentives were provided to pay for
infrastructure improvements and "to ensure the Village would secure bringing these large retail
facilities to Oswego." Infrastructure improvements included widening of U.S. 34 as well as
public utility upgrades.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 60 Development Incentives
Source: Village of Oswego Fiscal Year 2008/2009 Budget; Village of Oswego, Illinois Comprehensive
Annual Financial Report for the Year Ended April 30,2007; Village of Oswego, Illinois Comprehensive
Annual Financial Report for the Year Ended April 30, 2009
Lake County
Peapod, Village of Lake Zurich
Peapod is an Internet grocery that started in 1989 in Skokie. It has since expanded nationally.
In 2001, Peapod completed a new 93,750 square foot distribution center in Lake Zurich, which
functions as the point of sale for all Peapod deliveries originating from it. The building was
constructed in a new industrial park that was being built on undeveloped land that had been
newly annexed by Lake Zurich.
The incentive agreement was signed in 1999. Peapod receives 50 percent of sales tax revenue
generated over a sales threshold for 30 years. The sales threshold was $6 million in 2000, and
grows annually with CPI for all urban consumers for the Chicago area. The reasons for
providing the rebate stated in the ordinance include that the property has been vacant
(undeveloped), the project will create employment opportunities, the project will enhance the
Village's revenues and tax base, and that the project would not be possible without the
incentive. Between 2005 and 2012, $2.4 million was paid to Peapod (data for 1999 through 2004
was unavailable).
Source: Village of Lake Zurich Resolution No. 99-03-01A, A Resolution Approving and Authorizing
Execution of an Economic Incentive Agreement with Beacon Home Direct, Inc, March 1, 1999
CDW Computer Centers, Village of Mettawa and Village of Vernon Hills
CDW Computer Centers is a computer and technology sales company headquartered in Vernon
Hills. The retail showroom is also located in Vernon Hills, although most sales are through
telephone and online orders. CDW's Mettawa office opened in 2002. The Mettawa office had
approximately $100 million in sales in fiscal year 2011.
Mettawa is a small village, with 547 residents. It has few commercial businesses, but is home to
the Lake Forest Oasis on the I-94 Tollway. After coming to an intergovernmental agreement
with the City of Lake Forest regarding annexing the Oasis property owned by the Illinois State
Toll Highway Authority (Tollway), Mettawa shares 50 percent of the sales tax revenue
generated by the Oasis with Lake Forest. Together, the Oasis and CDW represent 70 percent of
the total sales tax revenues in the Village.
Under the sales tax rebate agreement, CDW gets 50 percent of the sales tax revenues generated
at the Mettawa office until 2098. It is unclear when the initial agreement was signed, but it was
amended in 2002, and then amended again in 2004. It is unclear why Mettawa offered a sales
tax rebate. Vernon Hills, who also provided a sales tax rebate, indicated at the time that they
were concerned that CDW may move or expand in another municipality because other
municipalities provide incentives such as TIFs and sales tax rebates.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 61 Development Incentives
When CDW moved its corporate headquarters to Vernon Hills in 1997, it received a sales tax
rebate. It opened an additional facility in Vernon Hills in 2000. In the amended version of the
rebate agreement, CDW receives 50 percent of sales tax revenue until July 31, 2019, assuming
Vernon Hills collects at least $2 million. If sales taxes fall below $2 million, but are above
$650,000, the rebate is 35 percent, for sales tax receipts between $500,000 and $650,000, the
rebate is 20 percent, and below $500,000, there is no rebate.
Source: Village of Mettawa Annual Financial Report Year Ended April 30,2010; Village of Mettawa
Annual Financial Report Year Ended April 30, 2011; Village of Vernon Hills, Minutes of the Committee of
the Whole, September 7, 1999, http://www.vernonhills.org/village/minutes/1999/0907COW.htm
Will County
Romeoville Crossings, Village of Romeoville
The shopping center was constructed in 2007 on an undeveloped parcel at a cost of
approximately $35 million. The shopping center houses a Wal-Mart, Firestone Tire, and an
Autozone. A Sam's Club is expected to open in fall 2013. Most of the smaller parcels in the
shopping center are currently vacant. The Wal-Mart is expected to have annual gross sales of
more than $60 million.
The incentive agreement began in 2008 when Wal-Mart opened. The developer receives 50
percent of sales tax revenues up to a maximum of $5.1 million. The maximum is increased by
$100,000 if two sit-down restaurants (one of which can be substituted for two fast casual
restaurants) apply for building permits. There are no sit-down restaurants in the shopping
center currently. Initially, the rebate was to last for seven years, but the time limit was later
removed because revenues in the early years had been impacted by the economic downturn.
The developer was required to reserve three locations in the shopping center for sit-down
restaurants for three years. There can be no more than two banks or financial institutions and
no arcades, no laundromats, pawnshops, currency exchanges, tattoo parlors, tobacco stores, or
dollar stores in the shopping center. Also, the developer was required to make off-site road
improvements, as well as other infrastructure and facade improvements.
According to the agreement, the Village provided incentives because the developer stated that
the development would not have otherwise occurred, the Village's population has increased but
there is not a large presence of "nationally -recognized retail stores" to serve them, and new
retail development needs to generate substantial sales tax revenues for the Village so a property
tax increase is not required.
Source: Village of Romeoville Request for Village Board Action, An Ordinance Authorizing the Executive
of an Economic Incentive Agreement, August 10, 2007; Economic Incentive Agreement between the
Village of Romeoville and Air -Web LLC.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 62 Development Incentives
Brookside Marketplace, Village of Tinley Park
Figure 22. Brookside Marketplace
t7
n
Source: Village of Tinley Park
The shopping center opened in 2008 on an undeveloped parcel near I-80. The 455,853 square
foot, 2,500 parking space development cost $74 million. Tenants include retail and restaurants
such as SuperTarget, Michael's, Best Buy, Ross, and Kohl's.
The Village of Tinley Park provided a sales tax rebate of 50 percent of revenues after a $75,000
threshold for 10 years or until $5 million is rebated. In addition, the Village reimbursed the
developer for infrastructure costs totaling $4.0 million. This included costs of roadways,
bridges, traffic signals, landscaping, lighting, and utilities. Tinley Park's incentive policy lists
reasons that a potential incentive would be considered. The list includes several criteria that
could be met by this project, including the creation of at least 25 full-time jobs paying more than
the area's average wage with full benefits and retail sales of at least $5 million.
Source: Village of Tinley Park, Economic Development and Incentive Policies, October 18, 2011; Tinley
Park Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Fiscal Year Ended April 30, 2011; Email communication
with the Village of Tinley Park, February 11, 2013
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 63 Development Incentives
Tax Increment Financing
Cook County
Broadview Village Square, Village of Broadview
The 63 -acre parcel previously served as a parts distribution warehouse for the Illinois -based
Komatsu Dresser Company, but the warehouse had been vacant since 1992 when the operation
was moved to Tennessee. The 22nd & 17th Avenue TIF district was established in 1993 to
attract developers to the site, which is adjacent to the North Riverside border. Broadview
Village Square opened in 1994 at a cost of $65 million. Anchors include a SuperTarget and a
Home Depot. A $23 million bond was issued to pay for site preparation including demolition
and remediation.
Source: Robert Lundin, "Broadview's Retail Plaza a Hard Sell," Chicago Tribune, December 5,1994;
"Komatsu to close Broadview plant," Chicago Sun -Times, October 7,1991; Village of Broadview Financial
Statements As of and for the Year Ended April 30, 2012
Stateline Industrial Area, Calumet City
In 1988, Calumet City started a planning and implementation process to address the growing
number of vacant, former industrial and commercial properties on State Street and State Line
Avenue at the City's eastern boundary. The community is built out completely, so the goal of
redevelopment was to increase the tax base, bring new jobs, and attract retail to the community.
This area is located in a TIF district (designated in 1994) and an Enterprise Zone. The
redevelopment area is primarily used for warehousing and distribution activities, but also has
some retail. Development primarily occurred between 1998 and 2008. Property tax revenues
doubled from $362,000 to $777,000, despite the lower assessment levels as a result of the
incentive classes.
Various developments received $4,050,000 in TIF funding as well as property tax incentive
classes 6 and 8. In addition, a U.S. EPA grant totaling $200,000 and an Illinois EPA grant of
$88,305 was awarded. Additionally, land acquisition in 1994 was funded through TIF -backed
bonds totaling $13 million. Nearly all of the parcels originally purchased by the City have been
redeveloped. The reason for providing the incentives was that the area required site
remediation and preparation, including removing 30 underground storage tanks and clean up
of environmental contamination.
Source: S.B. Friedman and Company, "Fiscal Analysis of Brownfield Redevelopment," March 10, 2009,
http://www. cmap.illinois. gov/documents/20583/9080cfc5-7482-46a6-bOcd-cb42aea24781
United Airlines, City of Chicago
United was headquartered in Elk Grove Township. As part of an effort to consolidate real
estate assets, the company considered moving to San Francisco, Denver, or Chicago. An
agreement was made in 2007 for the company to move its corporate headquarters to 77 West
Wacker Drive in Chicago. The agreement included $5,475,000 TIF funding for redeveloping the
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 64 Development Incentives
office space as well as a maximum of $10 million in fuel tax rebates. United also received a $1
million grant from the Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity. The
agreement required United to stay for ten years, relocate 365 FTEs to this location, retain at least
325 FTEs during the ten-year period, and occupy at least 137,000 square feet for 15 years.
Project costs totaled $23.0 million. United received the funds from the TIF but only received 2
percent of the fuel tax rebates because they stopped sourcing fuel to that location.
Later, United decided to relocate its operational headquarters, and considered several locations,
including two in the City of Chicago and two in suburban locations in the region. The company
ultimately went with Willis Tower, after receiving an offer of TIF funding. In addition, United
moved its corporate headquarters to Willis Tower from the 77 West Wacker Drive site. The
agreement provides United with $25,889,768, which includes $24,389,768 in TIF funds and $1.5
million in TIF funding for job training. The first payment to United would be for $2,400 per FTE
relocated to Willis, up to $3 million, but the company would only receive the funds if at least
1,000 employees were located. The second payment will be up to $6 million, with the first
payment deducted. For the following eight years, United will receive 1/811, of the remaining TIF
amount including interest, annually. United also received a $10 million grant, payable over five
years. United will have to relocate a minimum of 2,500 FTE positions to Willis Tower, and
retain this number of positions for ten years, and occupy at least 400,000 square feet.
Redevelopment costs for the company will range from $64.0 million to $71.8 million, depending
on the amount of office space redeveloped. United is currently leasing 830,000 square feet in
Willis Tower.
Even though the City of Chicago stated that the agreement from 77 West Wacker Drive could
have been shifted to Willis Tower, United returned the TIF funds to the City following the move
out of the 77 West Wacker Drive location. It is unclear why United returned this incentive,
because they have 4,000 employees in Willis Tower, which is more than the job requirements of
the two agreements combined.
Source: Community Development Commission of the City of Chicago Resolution No. 06- CDC- 73,
Authority To Negotiate A Redevelopment Agreement With United Air Lines, Inc. within the Central
Loop Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Project Area, and to Recommend To the City Council of
the City of Chicago the Designation of United Air Lines, Inc. as the Developer, September 12, 2006;
United Air Lines Redevelopment Agreement By and Between The City of Chicago And UAL Corporation
and United Air Lines, Inc., October 31, 2007; Staff Report to the Community Development Commission
Requesting Developer Designation September 8, 2009; United Air Lines Redevelopment Agreement by
and between The City of Chicago and UAL Corporation and United Air Lines, Inc., November 19, 2009;
Gregory Karp, "United returns TIF funds to city," Chicago Tribune, November 12, 2012.
Chicago Manufacturing Campus, Hegewisch, City of Chicago
The 3.5 million square foot Ford assembly plant has been operating at 2611, and Torrence Ave
since 1925. A TIF district was established in 1994 to support infrastructure work and
environmental remediation for potential industrial development projects. In 2001, an
agreement was made between Ford and CenterPoint Properties Trust to develop an adjacent
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 65 Development Incentives
property for suppliers to the plant. According to materials provided by the City, Ford was also
considering a supplier campus for Atlanta, from which they also solicited an incentive package.
The Chicago Manufacturing Campus opened one half -mile from the plant on a 155 -acre site in
2004 with twelve suppliers. Having suppliers nearby was expected to enhance efficiencies and
reduce transportation costs for Ford and its suppliers. The campus and related infrastructure
cost $288 million. The campus, which was formerly a steel mill, includes four multi -tenant
buildings with 1.7 million square feet. The suppliers intended to employ 1,400 people. At the
time of the agreement, Ford had been employing 2,200, and following the opening of the
campus, added an additional 400 employees.
A redevelopment agreement in 2003 provided TIF funding totaling $17,183,334, while a grant
from the City of Chicago provided $4.8 million. These funds were used to pay for the land
remediation and site preparation costs involved in preparing the campus. In addition, a
separate infrastructure agreement was made in 2003 for off-site infrastructure improvements to
benefit the plant and the supplier campus, including $30 million in roadway realignments and
upgrades, and $170 million in new bridges and grade separations at the rail lines. These
improvements are expected to be completed by 2015. The railroads and Ford contributed $10
million to the improvements, while the remaining $190 million was funded through City of
Chicago general obligations bonds, the State's Illinois First capital program, Federal Highway
Administration funds, and the TIF district provided $1 million. In addition, the area is in an
Enterprise Zone, which resulted in a sales tax abatement of $726,256 and a designation of a
Class 6 incentive class, which reduced property taxes.
The agreements required Ford to operate the assembly plant and provide at least 750 jobs for a
ten-year period at the supplier park, and lease at least 75 percent of the supplier campus during
the initial ten-year period. In addition, for a 60 -month period (not required to be consecutive)
during the ten years, at least 1,000 jobs must be provided.
Even as other Ford assembly plants in the Midwest have closed in recent years, Ford continues
to invest in its Chicago plant. The national economic recession resulted in the Ford plant going
down to one shift in 2008, but in 2010, it was announced that a second shift would be again
added to the facility, resulting in 1,200 jobs. In 2011, a third shift was added, resulting in
another 1,200 jobs. However, news reports have indicated that laid -off transfers from Ford
plants in other states may be used to fill many of those jobs. Currently, the Ford plant employs
an estimated 4,000. While the supplier park at one point employed 1,400, some of the suppliers
closed during the recession. Approximately 400 were employed at the supplier park as of 2010.
Source: Kate MacArthur, "New jobs at Chicago Ford plant will go to out-of-towners first," Crain's
Chicago Business, November 7, 2011; 2011 Annual Tax Increment Finance Report, 126th and Torrence
Redevelopment Project Area; CMAP analysis of CoStar data; Chicago Manufacturing Campus
Infrastructure Agreement Dated as of March 21,
2003, http://www.ci!yofchicago.org/content/dam/city/depts/dcd/tif/T 010 ChicagoManufacutringCampu
sRDA.pdf; Chicago Manufacturing Campus Redevelopment Agreement, March 21, 2003; Andrea
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 66 Development Incentives
Holecek, "Visteon to close its local doors," Times of Northwest Indiana, September 26,
2006, http://www.nwitimes.com/business/local/visteon-to-close-its-local-doors/article b9e98b5d-Oc80-
56fe-a9dc-f86ce084004f.html; Kathleen Kerwin, "Ford To Suppliers: Let's Get Cozier,"
BloombergBusinessweek Magazine, September 19, 2004, http://www.businessweek.com/stories/2004-09-
19/ford-to-suppliers-lets-get-cozier; Stephen Kronfeld, "CenterPoint and Ford join forces," CoStar Group,
January 17, 2002; Andrew Deichler, "Ford Unveils New Explorer, Launches Chicago Expansion," CoStar
Group, July 26, 2010; Ford, "Chicago Manufacturing Campus Opens With Suppliers Manufacturing Just -
In -Time Inventory," August 10, 2004, http://media.ford.com/article display.cfm?article id=18911.
Klee Building, Portage Park, City of Chicago
Figure 23. Klee Building
Source: flickr user Mark 2400
The Irving Cicero TIF district was established in 1996 to redevelop the 6 -corner intersection of
Irving Park, Cicero, and Milwaukee. The City of Chicago bought the Klee building from the
owner for $1.8 million using eminent domain. In 2005, an agreement was made to create a
mixed-use retail and residential redevelopment. Redevelopment was done in 2007, resulting in
64 units (13 affordable), and 20,000 square feet of retail space, which houses a Vitamin Shoppe, a
Pearle Vision, Accelerated Rehab Centers, a chiropractic office, and two remaining commercial
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 67 Development Incentives
spaces. The development includes 69 underground parking spaces for the residential units and
23 surface spaces for retail customers.
The project received $1,163,000 in TIF funds for the $18,718,699 development. This includes
rehabbing the Klee Building, demolishing three other neighboring buildings, and constructing
two new buildings to complement the Klee Building (one that is 5 stories like the Klee building,
and the other a single story retail building). The project anticipated to create 20 full and part
time jobs through the retail component. The agreement requires the developer to use its best
efforts to maintain a minimum of 20 full-time and part-time positions for ten years.
Source: Chicago Klee Development LLC Redevelopment Agreement dated as of January 14, 2005 by and
between the City of Chicago and Chicago Klee Development LLC; Jeanette Almada, "$20M Deal Would
Bring Retail, Housing to Six Corners," Chicago Tribune, January 25, 2004; Jeanette Almada, "Six Corners
Project Advances," Chicago Tribune, March 21, 2004; Grant Pick, "Six Corners at the Crossroads," Chicago
Reader, November 6, 2003.
Southgate Market, Near West Side, City of Chicago
Figure 24. Southgate Market
Source: S.B. Friedman and Company
The Jefferson/Roosevelt TIF district was established in 2000. The developer of Southgate
Market reconstructed the Taylor Street viaduct as well as access ramps to the viaduct from a
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 68 Development Incentives
parking garage for the shopping center. The agreement stated that the developer reconstructed
the viaduct instead of CDOT because the construction schedule of the center conflicted with the
schedule for the reconstruction of the viaduct. It is unclear when CDOT would have
reconstructed the viaduct. The TIF funds totaling $6.5 million were used to pay back the
developer for the construction of the viaduct. Funds from other TIF districts (River South and
Canal/Congress) were also used. This area had extraordinary site challenges due to the old
viaduct and the proximity to the railroad. Southgate Market opened in 2007. It is a retail center
that houses 15 stores including a Marshall's, Whole Foods, and Petsmart.
Source: Redevelopment Agreement by and between The City of Chicago and Canal/Taylor Central LLC,
November 1, 2005
Food 4 Less, West Englewood, City of Chicago
The 69th and Ashland TIF district was established in 2004 in the economically depressed West
Englewood neighborhood. Of the area's 63 tax parcels, 54 percent were vacant at the time the
district was established. The area included a 7 -acre property that formerly housed a CTA bus
barn. The bus barn was demolished in 1998.
The former site of the CTA bus barn was redeveloped into a retail center, which includes 400
parking spaces, a Food 4 Less, a gas station, two banks, a RadioShack, and several other stores.
The Food4Less opened in 2006 at a development cost of $11,878,878, and the remainder of the
retail center opened in 2006 at a cost of $6,419,268. Food4Less and the developer attempted to
purchase the property from the CTA in 2002, but there were unanticipated environmental
remediation problems that required significant additional funding. TIF funds totaling
$1,925,000 were provided to the developers to fund the unexpected environmental cleanup
costs as well as increased construction costs that resulted from a delay in the schedule.
Source: Resolution No. 04- CDC -14 Authority To Negotiate Redevelopment Agreements With Ralph's
Grocery Company And Finch Limited Partnership Within The 69th/Ashland TIF Redevelopment Project
Area, And To Recommend To The City Council Of The City Of Chicago The Designation Of Ralph's
Grocery Company And Finch Limited Partnership As Developers, September 14, 2004; Designation Of
Ralph's Grocery Company, Doing Business As Food 4 Less Midwest, As Project Developer, Authorization
For Execution Of Redevelopment Agreement And Issuance Of Tax Increment Allocation Note
(69th/Ashland Redevelopment Project) For Construction And Operation Of Grocery Store And Related
Facilities At 1601 West 69th Street, February 9, 2005
McGrath Acura, Village of Morton Grove
The Waukegan Road TIF District was established in 1995. The area previously housed several
blighted motels, a Walgreens, and a bank. The Walgreen's and the bank were redeveloped
after initial land assembly. Later, a redevelopment agreement for an Oldsmobile dealership
was created, but this agreement was voided when the Oldsmobile brand was canceled. The
Village reacquired the property, and sold the site to the developer of McGrath Acura.
McGrath Acura was completed in 2004 at a cost of $16,106,738. The site required several
improvements, such as storm water detention, perimeter fencing, and site landscaping. The
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 69 Development Incentives
incentive agreements were made in 2002 to reimburse developer for site improvements. TIF
funding totaling $4,106,738 was provided.
In addition, a sales tax rebate was provided for 6 years with a maximum of $500,000. Every
year, a maximum of 1/611, of the $500,000 will be rebated, unless sales tax revenues fall short of
this. If so, the agreement will continue for an additional two years. For the sales tax rebate, if
the dealership leaves within four years of the end of the agreement, they must pay the rebate
back. If they leave between four and eight years after the end of the agreement, they owe half
of the rebate back to the Village.
Source: Village of Morton Grove, Ordinance 02-01 Authorizing a Redevelopment Agreement for the
Waukegan Road TIF District Redevelopment Area B, January 28, 2002; Waukegan Road TIF
Redevelopment District Fiscal Year 2010 Annual Report
Park Ridge Uptown, City of Park Ridge
Figure 25. Park Ridge Uptown
Copyright OKW Architects, Inc.
Uptown Park Ridge is a mixed-use residential and retail development in downtown Park Ridge.
Prior to redevelopment, there were two auto dealerships and a water reservoir on the other side
of a six -way intersection from the City's central business district. Prior to establishing the TIF,
the City purchased the two dealerships at a cost of $5.3 million, and determined that that water
reservoir should be moved because it was leaking. The Uptown TIF district was designated in
2003.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 70 Development Incentives
The $123.7 million development was completed in three phases between 2005 and 2009. The
project is a mixed use walkable development including 189 residential market rate units and
70,000 square feet of retail space. Retailers include Trader Joe's, clothing stores, and restaurants.
The condominiums are substantially sold -out and the retail space is leased. A fourth phase on
the site of the Napleton Cadillac has not yet occurred, although the dealership was demolished.
As of 2004, expected revenues for the project, include TIF revenues totaling $44.9 million, new
sales tax revenue totaling $14.3 million, and revenues from land sales totaling $9.5 million.
TIF funds were used because the old water reservoir and two former car dealerships caused
major site preparation and land assembly challenges. In addition, the six -way intersection
caused traffic management issues. Of the total development cost, $16,808,000 in TIF funds were
spent on various costs, including infrastructure (sitework, street, sidewalk, lighting, utility,
streetscaping, roadway and signals, public parking (structured and surface)). Of the 652
parking spaces, most are private for residential or retail spots, but 100 public spaces were built
with TIF funds. In addition, the City is sharing TIF funds with the park district and the school
districts totaling $13.2 million. For the new water reservoir, the City issued bonds totaling
$16,770,000. $4.9 million will be paid with TIF funds and sales tax revenues, and the remainder
will be paid with water revenues.
However, due to declining property values in recent years, TIF incremental property tax
revenue has been insufficient to cover debt service on the bonds and the intergovernmental
payments to the park and school districts. To date, the TIF district has borrowed more than $5.0
million from the general fund. Projections indicate that loans from the City's general fund may
be required in future years.
Source: Annual Tax Increment Finance Report, Uptown TIF, FY2010, FY 2011, and FY2012; Uptown TIF
Strategic Plan, June 24,
2013, http://www.12arkridge.us/assets/1/Events/The%20Ul2town%20TIF%20Strategic%20PIan.12df;
Redevelopment Agreement dated January 5, 2005 by and between the City of Park Ridge and PRC
Partners, LLC; City of Park Ridge, Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Year Ended April 30,
2012; SB Friedman Development Advisors, Shops and Residences of Uptown Park Ridge
summary, http://sbfriedman.com/sites/default/files/lames%20Felt%20Award Summary.pdf.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 71 Development Incentives
Whistler Crossing, Village of Riverdale
Figure 26. Whistler Crossing
Source: Metropolitan Planning Council
Pacesetter was a privately -owned 397 -unit townhouse development. The units eventually fell
into disrepair, and a neighboring shopping center had closed down, all contributing to blight in
the area. In addition, the layout of the development resulted in isolation from the rest of the
Village, as well as problems with access for public safety vehicles. A TIF district was
established to rehabilitate the area and ensure that affordable housing would remain available
for those residents that had utilized Housing Choice Vouchers.
The redevelopment project began in 2007, with the goal to convert the area to a mixed -income
and mixed-use community including both for -sale and rental housing options. The area
received LEED-ND certification, which means that it was recognized for integrating smart
growth and green building principles into a cohesive neighborhood design. The new
Chicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 72 Development Incentives
development currently has 106 affordable rental units, 24 rental market rate units, and a grocery
store. This is a multi -phase project, and only phase I is complete.
This $38 million redevelopment and rehab project received $1.6 million in TIF funding which
went toward redeveloping the residential units as well as toward infrastructure improvements
like streets, sidewalk, and alleys. The project also received $10,940,000 in other incentives,
including Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity grants, Illinois Housing
Development Authority grants, a federal HOME grant, as well as tax credits including the
federal Low -Income Housing Tax Credit and the Federal Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit.
Source: Annual Tax Increment Finance Report, FY2010, 1381h Stewart TIF 4; Urban Land Institute
Chicago, Riverdale, Illinois A Vision for the PaceSetter Neighborhood, 2003 Technical Assistance Panel;
Karin Sommer, "Groundbreaking for Pacesetter/Whistler Crossing Redevelopment Project on November
13," Metropolitan Planning Council, November 21, 2007
Phoenix Lake Business Park, Village of Streamwood
This area had been vacant prior to the establishment of the TIF district in 2001. However, the
land was zoned for industrial. The area is surrounded by Phoenix Lake to the south, residential
to the north and west, and retail to the east. The cost of improvements to the land is high
because wetland on the site had become a dumping site. The 41 -acre development has seven
lots. Five of the seven lots have been developed and sold. Total development costs have been
$22,550,240 so far.
The developer is being reimbursed $1.5 million to construct a street that runs through the
middle of the industrial park, with 70 percent of the TIF revenue generated annually going
toward this reimbursement. In addition, the remaining 30 percent of the TIF revenue will go
toward reimbursing the Village for $1.5 million that had been paid out of the Village's operating
funds for other street construction. In addition, it appears that the property is eligible for a
Class 6 incentive class.
Source: Village Of Streamwood Comprehensive Annual Financial Report For The Year Ended December
31, 2011; Tony Perri, "Work at new TIF site to start," Chicago Tribune, October 07, 2001; Tony Perri,
"Business Park is Finally a Go," Chicago Tribune, November 20, 2001; Village of Streamwood, 2013
Budget Executive Summary; Annual Tax Increment Finance Report, FY2010, Buttitta Drive/Francis Ave
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 73 Development Incentives
Prairie Park, Village of Wheeling
Figure 27. Prairie Park
Source: Smith Family Construction
The North Milwaukee Avenue/Lake-Cook Road TIF district was established in 2003 and
expanded in 2007 in an area that contained a mix of improved and vacant land. The area was
found to include both blighted parcels as well as parcels that qualified as a conservation area.
In 2004, the Village made a redevelopment agreement with a developer to construct the Prairie
Park at Wheeling, which was to be a five -building condominium development with 306 units.
During the economic recession that began in 2007, the development ran into financial problems,
which resulted in additional funding from the Village. The development has cost $91.7 million,
although a planned fifth building has not been built. It is estimated that the development may
cost $124.2 million. To date, 62 units in the constructed buildings remain unsold. Other
projects in this TIF district have included a Westin Hotel (a $125 million project that utilized $23
million in TIF funding) as well as infrastructure improvements.
TIF funds were provided to aid in environmental cleanup, mitigate chronic flooding, convert
existing land uses to mixed-use residential/commercial developments, encourage development
on vacant properties that previously housed condemned buildings, fund infrastructure
improvements, and provide for open space and landscaping. In 2004, the Village agreed to
provide TIF funds totaling $3 million. The Village agreed to provide an additional $1.5 million
in 2006. Originally, $775,969.28 was to be paid once buildings 4 and 5 were constructed. In
2009, this was modified; instead, half of this would be provided immediately to the developer,
and the other half would be provided upon completion of the clubhouse. In 2010, the Village
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 74 Development Incentives
provided additional TIF funds totaling $6 million to help the developer avoid foreclosure of the
property. Of the $6 million, $2.5 million was tied to the completion of the clubhouse, ring road,
and infrastructure. An additional $3.5 million will be paid as condo units are sold. Because
there were not sufficient funds in the TIF district, the Village had to take out a revenue bond for
the $2.5 million. To date, just 15 more units sold, so of the $3.5 million, only $450,000 has been
paid out. The developer has recently asked for the rest of the $3.5 million from the Village, but
the Village was not willing to provide it.
Source: Village of Wheeling, Further Expanded Redevelopment Project Area, Amended May 2008;
Village of Wheeling, FY2011 Annual Tax Increment Finance Report; Redevelopment Agreement For The
Prairie Park Development Comprising A Part Of The North TIF District Of The Village Of Wheeling,
April 2, 2004; First Amendment to the Redevelopment Agreement for the Prairie Park Development
Comprising a part of the North TIF District of the Village of Wheeling, June 15, 2006; Second Amendment
to the Redevelopment Agreement for the Prairie Park Development Comprising a part of the North TIF
District of the Village of Wheeling, February 9, 2009; Village of Wheeling, Board Meeting, January 21,
2013, http://www.wheelingil.gov/webcasts/VB/2013/Jan_21_2013/Default.html; An Ordinance Approving
and Authorizing the Village President and Clerk to Execute a Restated Redevelopment Agreement for the
Prairie Park Development Comprising a Part of the North TIF District of the Village of Wheeling, July 12,
2010; Minutes Of The Regular Meeting Of The President And Board Of Trustees Of The Village Of
Wheeling, June 21, 2010; Sheila Ahern, "Wheeling votes to give developer $6.5 million," Daily Herald,
July 13, 2010.
DuPage County
Bill Kay Nissan, Village of Downers Grove
The Ogden Avenue corridor is primarily commercial, and is home to several auto dealerships.
A TIF district was established in 2001, and, in 2010, the Ogden Avenue Site Improvement
Strategy (OASIS) program was established to provide businesses a matching grant for certain
site improvements, such as landscaping, facade improvements, stormwater facilities, and
transportation infrastructure improvements. In addition, TIF funds as well as CMAQ and STP
funds have been used to pay for sidewalk, curb cut construction, and curb cut reductions in the
corridor.
In addition, the Village provided sales tax rebates to several auto dealerships over the past
decade (both within and outside of the TIF district). Bill Kay Nissan, who was leasing its auto
dealership, purchased the property, renovated the facade, and remodeled the showroom in
2005. A combination of a sales tax rebate and TIF funds were provided to reimburse Bill Kay
Nissan for its costs in purchasing the property. The agreement includes a sales tax rebate of 25
percent for seven years on sales above a $25 million base. The agreement also provides an
annual payment of $35,000 for ten years from the TIF, unless after the seven year period is over
the sales tax rebates totaled less than $250,000. If that is the case, then the TIF payments are
increased to $45,000 for the final three years.
The agreement requires the Bill Kay Nissan to purchase the property, remodel the property,
install a public sidewalk, and continue to operate the dealership on the property for at least 12
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 75 Development Incentives
years. If Bill Kay Nissan ceases to operate during years 1 through 3 of the agreement, all sales
tax rebate and TIF reimbursement must be repaid. The repayment amount drops to 75 percent
during years 4 and 5 and 50 percent during years 5 through 10.
According to the agreement, the purpose of providing the incentives was to prevent blight,
encourage development to enhance the local tax base, generate increased tax revenues, and
stimulate employment within the TIF district.
Source: Redevelopment/Sales Tax Rebate Agreement Between The Village Of Downers Grove and J.K.
Pontiac D/B/A Bill Kay Nissan, February 15, 2005; Annual TIF Report Year Ending December 31, 2010,
Ogden Avenue TIF Corridor
Block 300, City of Elmhurst
The Elmhurst Central Business District TIF district was established in 1986, and extended for
another 12 years in 2004, although as part of the extension, parcels in Block 300 were released
from the original project area in 2006 and 2007. In addition to property tax increment, this TIF
district also receives incremental sales tax revenue. A plan for a subarea of the central business
district, Block 300, called for redevelopment of a bank building for mixed uses as well as multi-
family residential development. A mixed-use rehabilitation of the bank building and a new
condominium building with 122 units were completed in 2005 at a cost of $34,291,310. TIF
funds totaling $1,141,810 were used to fund streets, sidewalks, landscaping, utilities, and
streetscaping.
Source: City of Elmhurst FY2010 Annual Tax Increment Finance Report; City of Elmhurst, Downtown
Plan, February 2006; City of Elmhurst, Market Assessment, April 2007
Kane County
ALDI, City of Geneva
Figure 28. ALDI
Source: Geneva Patch
Chicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 76 Development Incentives
A TIF district was established in a commercial corridor on East State Street under eligibility as a
conservation area. The corridor is a half mile from the central business district in Geneva. Since
the TIF was established in 2000, several retail and other commercial establishments, including
CVS and ALDI, have located in the district. The area in the district had significant site issues
and required parcel assembly and environmental remediation.
The ALDI was completed in 2007 and contributed to the significant improvements that have
been made in the corridor. The development cost $3,050,000. The TIF provided $450,000 of the
total development cost. In addition, ALDI received a sales tax rebate in 2008 of 50 percent of
revenues for ten years or up to a maximum of $300,000.
Source: Annual Tax Increment Finance Report FY2010, East State Street TIF District; East State Street Tax
Increment Financing Redevelopment Project and Plan, December 1, 1999; City of Geneva, Summary of
Geneva Sales Tax Rebates
Spring Hill Gateway, Village of West Dundee
This shopping center is adjacent to the Spring Hill Mall, and has struggled with vacant
storefronts and a poor layout with an inward orientation from the road, resulting in poor
visibility. A TIF district was established in 2008 to redevelop the Spring Hill Gateway as well as
11 other properties in the area. Other projects in the TIF district include an L.A. Fitness
constructed on a former Toys R Us site. At the time the TIF district was established, the vacancy
rate for Spring Hill Gateway was 40 percent.
Since the TIF district was established, the completion of the improvements to Spring Hill
Gateway and the attraction of additional tenants were stalled as a result of the property going
through foreclosure. The east side of the center is now out of foreclosure and owned by the
bank. It is currently under contract to a new developer who will be proposing additional work
as part of the redevelopment plan. The west side of the center has been transferred to a new
owner and is being marketed for lease, but there is continued litigation with respect to the
foreclosure.
Projects are budgeted at $30.6 million. Thus far, the TIF has expended $4 million on
infrastructure improvements and land assembly, while $12 million in private funds has been
spent on project costs such as construction of new storefronts facing the street and new signage.
The TIF funds were actually a transfer from the Village's operating budget, and the Village is
waiting to be repaid from TIF revenues.
Source: Jacob Hurwith, "WD ends fiscal year in black," The Courier -News October 19, 2010; Annual Tax
Increment Finance Report FY2010, West Dundee; Email communication with the Village of West Dundee,
February 01, 2013 and June 26, 2013
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 77 Development Incentives
Lake County
Lincolnshire Downtown, Village of Lincolnshire
The Village's only TIF district was established in 1989, and was created to develop a downtown
area. At the time of the TIF district's establishment, much of the area was undeveloped. The
development includes a commercial "village green' area as well a 2 -building condominium
development housing 62 units. TIF funds totaling $7,845,539 were spent on the development.
Source: Village of Lincolnshire FY2010 TIF Report; Village of Lincolnshire Comprehensive Plan Update,
2012
McHenry County
Woodstock Station, City of Woodstock
The project area was formerly Woodstock Die Casting, which closed in 1990. The City acquired
the property in 1993, demolished the buildings in 1997 and performed environmental
remediation on the land. A TIF district was established in 1997 to assist with the redevelopment
of the site and the surrounding downtown area.
This 11 -acre, proposed transit -oriented development is adjacent to the Woodstock Metra
Station. To date, approximately $2.5 million has been spent on projects including the
installation of water and sewer lines, street construction, the resurfacing the commuter parking
lot and streetscaping. Plans for commercial uses, condominiums, and town houses stalled
when the property went into foreclosure in 2009. At that time, ten townhouses had been built
by the developer. Another developers' plans for senior housing on the property were recently
considered by the planning commission, but were withdrawn due to local concerns regarding
the design, proposed age restrictions, and density of the project.
Source: Annual Tax Increment Finance Report FY2010, City of Woodstock Downtown TIF
Redevelopment Project Area; City Of Woodstock Plan Commission Minutes, February 23, 2012; City of
Woodstock, Fiscal Year 2012/2013 Annual Budget; Woodstock Environmental Plan, 2010
Will County
Bailly Ridge, Village of Monee
TIF district #3 was designated in 2001 on undeveloped parcels adjacent to an I-57 interchange.
The Bailly Ridge Corporate Center is a 412 -acre park for distribution, industrial, office, and
retail. The development cost has cost $23.3 million thus far, but most of the buildings have not
yet been constructed. Various developers have received funding from the TIF in the form of
property tax reimbursements, totaling $1.5 million in FY2012.
TNT Logistics, who leases a 718,725 square foot warehouse to distribute Michelin tires, received
$4.6 million in TIF funds. An adjacent 431,600 square foot building remains vacant about 40
percent vacant. Aside from these 60 acres, the rest of the 412 -acre park primarily remains
undeveloped.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 78 Development Incentives
Source: Village of Monee TIF district reports, FY2010 and FY2012; Micah Maidenberg, "Developer
slammed with lawsuits on far suburban projects," ChicagoRealEstateDaily.com, February 6, 2013
Property tax abatements and incentive classes
Cook County
Cloverhill Bakeries, Town of Cicero
Cloverhill Bakery is located in Chicago, but decided to move distribution facilities from Chicago
to Cicero in 2010 in order to expand its distribution facility, which could not be expanded in the
Chicago location. When the distribution facility and its 40 employees moved to Cicero, the
company received an incentive Class 6, which over the first three years of the 12 -year incentive
period saved the company approximately $1.9 million in property taxes. Over the entire
incentive period (which could be renewed), savings could total $7.1 million.
Source: S.B. Friedman Development Advisors analysis of Cook County Assessor data; Sandra Anderson,
"Cloverhill Bakery moving distribution center to Cicero," The Mark News Online, October 19, 2010;
"Chicago business to expand in Cicero," Town of Cicero News Wire, October 12, 2010
Sahloul Plaza, City of Harvey
This 11,550 square foot shopping center was constructed in 2007. Several sites in this center
remain vacant. The Class 8 incentive was provided in 2007, and has saved the property owner
$358,300 thus far, and is estimated to save $780,613 over the 12 -year period.
Source: S.B. Friedman Development Advisors analysis of Cook County Assessor data
Robert James Sales, City of Oak Forest
The building was constructed in 2002 for a distribution center for Robert James Sales, a process
pipes distribution company that is headquartered in Buffalo, New York. This was an
undeveloped parcel primarily surrounded by other industrial and commercial buildings, with
undeveloped land to the south, where a shopping center was eventually constructed.
The company employs 12 in this location, and expanded its warehouse capacity in 2012. The
Class 8 incentive was provided starting with tax year 2004. Properties within Bremen
Township are eligible for Class 8 designation, which is for areas in need of revitalization,
because it is part of the South Suburban Tax Reactivation Program. Thus far, the value of the
incentive has totaled $667,729, and is estimated to reach $852,033 over the 12 -year period.
Source: S.B. Friedman Development Advisors analysis of Cook County Assessor data; rjsales.com
Grundy County (Aux Sable Township)
Clorox, Village of Minooka
On a site off of I-80 and Minooka Road, an industrial area has been developed since 2000. The
entire area was previously farmland, and mostly remains farmland. Other companies that have
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 79 Development Incentives
located warehouses here include Kellogg's, Alberto Culver, BMW, Electrolux, Macy's, and
Grainger. Many of these companies also received property tax abatements.
Clorox received a property tax abatement for building an 849,691 square foot warehouse on an
undeveloped site in 2006. The reason for providing incentives to Clorox was to encourage the
company to move to Minooka. Clorox was given a 75 -percent property tax abatement the first
year, the second year 50 percent, and the third year 25 percent from 2007 to 2009, totaling
$773,000. Abatements were provided by Grundy County, the Village of Minooka, Aux Sable
Township, Aux Sable Road and Bridge, Minooka Fire Protection District, Minooka High School,
Minooka Grade School and Joliet Junior College. Clorox was required to stay until 2012 or
forfeit the abatement.
Clorox moved into the facility 2007, but moved out in 2011 in favor of a new, 1.35 million square
foot distribution center in University Park. The stated reason for the move was that they
needed additional space. Clorox repaid the abated funds after moving because the agreement
required the company to stay until 2012. University Park approved the use of TIF funds for the
company after taxes are paid on the new building. Under this new agreement, 165 people
would be employed in the facility with a minimum of 20 percent being University Park
residents. Clorox employs 165 at the University Park facility.
Source: Todd J. Behme, "Clorox looks to build big warehouse in south suburbs,"
ChicagoRealEstateDaily.com, March 24, 2010; Kris Stadalsky, "Early exit from Minooka will cost Clorox,"
Joliet Herald News, March 5, 2011; CoStar
Lake County
Medline, Village of Libertyville
Medline, which is headquartered in Lake County, built a new distribution center in Libertyville
in 2007. Medline received property tax abatements from Lake County, Fremont School District
79, and Mundelein Consolidated High School District 120. Medline will receive a 50 -percent
abatement for 2011 through 2015, a 40 -percent abatement in 2016, 30 percent in 2017, 20 percent
in 2018, and 10 percent in 2019, at a maximum of $4 million as required by statute. In addition,
the company received Employer Training Investment Program grants totaling $140,775. The
reason provided by the local governments for offering the abatement was to create and retain
jobs. The property tax abatement required a minimum of 600,000 square feet and a minimum of
100 employees, with at least 50 employees being residents of Lake County. If Medline does not
employ at least 50 Lake County residents for the full term of the tax abatement within five years
of the initiation of the abatement term, Medline has to repay all abated taxes.
Source: Real Property Tax Abatement Agreement, Medline Industries, Inc., March 28, 2007; Illinois
Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 80 Development Incentives
McHenry County
Marengo Entertainment Center, City of Marengo
The Marengo Entertainment Center, which houses a bowling alley and restaurant, was built in
2010 at a cost of $4 million. The City of Marengo, the Marengo Rescue Squad, Marengo Park
District, Marengo -Union Library District, Marengo Fire District, Marengo Community High
School District 154, and Marengo -Union Elementary School District 165 all provided a 75
percent property tax abatement for 2011, a 50 percent abatement for 2012, and a 25 percent
abatement for 2013 on the taxes levied on the improvements to the property. This abatement
totaled $18,288 in tax year 2011 and approximately $13,000 in tax year 2012. In addition, the
City of Marengo provided a 10 percent sales tax rebate for three years estimated to total $600
and a 10 percent reduction in building permit fees expected to total $2,504.
Source: Marengo Economic Development Commission; Marengo City Council, Regular Meeting
Minutes, July 27, 2009; McHenry County 2011 Abatement Report; CMAP analysis of McHenry County
Treasurer data
Will County
Dollar Tree Distribution Center, City of Joliet
Figure 29. Dollar Tree Distribution Center
Source: CoStar
In 2004, Dollar Tree opened a 1.2 million square foot distribution center in Joliet on farmland
near the intersection of I-55 and I-80 and an intermodal transportation center in Elwood. The
$70 million distribution center replaced another in the Chicago area. The facility intended to
retain 150 employees from the original facility and add an additional 50 employees. The City of
Joliet, Will County, Joliet Township High School District 204, and Laraway Elementary School
District 70-C provided 50 percent property tax abatements for five years, 2005 through 2009.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 81 Development Incentives
The abatements totaled $2,472,740. In addition, the Illinois Department of Commerce and
Economic Opportunity provided a $1.5 million incentive package, including $500,000 for site
improvements, According to media reports, Dollar Tree issued a press release stating it was
choosing among sites in Illinois and northwest Indiana, and that that incentives from state and
local governments would be a factor in the decision.
Source: Dollar Tree, "Dollar Tree Stores, Inc. To Break Ground for Two New Distribution Centers," May
12, 2003; Karen Mellen, "Dollar store seeks Joliet deal," Chicago Tribune, February 4, 2003; Ken O'Brien,
"Retailer picks Joliet for $75 million warehouse," Chicago Tribune, April 12, 2003; Will County Clerk
Panduit, Village of Tinley Park
Figure 30. Panduit
Source: Village of Tinley Park
The Panduit Corporation has been located in Tinley Park since its founding in 1966. The
company produces industrial plastic and electronic components. It has several offices and
manufacturing facilities in the Will County area. Sales sourced at the headquarters location
totals approximately $40 million annually, resulting in sales tax revenues to the Village.
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 82 Development Incentives
The company completed a new 500,000 square foot corporate headquarters in 2010 on
undeveloped land in the Will County section of Tinley Park. The company had 500 employees
in its corporate office, but built the new campus to accommodate 1,200. Approximately 1,000
employees work at the new headquarters. It is unclear whether any of these employees were
transferred from other facilities within the region. The former office and manufacturing facility
in Tinley Park continues some activities, but Panduit indicated that these activities will be
relocated. Panduit is considering options for how to utilize this facility.
The stated purpose of providing incentives was to encourage the company to retain its
headquarters location in Tinley Park. Incentives included a sales tax rebate from the Village of
Tinley Park, and property tax abatements from Will County, Summit Hill School District,
Lincoln -way High School District, and the Village. These incentives totaled $417,748 in 2011.
The incentives offered by the Village included a 50 percent sales tax rebate for ten years with no
maximum and an abatement of a portion of property taxes in excess of $26,000 with a maximum
of $2.2 million over 20 years. Will County abated 50 percent of property taxes for five years,
and the school districts also provided a property tax abatement for five years. In addition, state
incentives totaling $350,000 were received through the Large Business Development Program
and Employer Training Investment Program.
Source: Will County; Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity; Village of Tinley
Park, Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, FY2012; Telephone communication with Village of Tinley
Park, February 11, 2013; Will County Board Meeting Minutes, March 20, 2008; Tinley Park, Illinois
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Fiscal Year Ended April 30, 2012
Dow Chemical Company, City of Wilmington
This industrial site is surrounded by farmland and residential areas and had been vacant since
1999. It was previously occupied by Johnson & Johnson, which employed 412 workers. That
plant had opened in 1960, and was Wilmington's largest employer. Johnson & Johnson had
been offered tax incentives to stay, but merged its operations with a plant in Montreal.
In 2003, Dow Chemical moved its facility in Crest Hill to this Wilmington site, and also merged
its operations with two Canadian plants. The plant has a staff of 100. The company received
property tax abatements for 10 years, totaling $511,136 thus far. The abatement is on the
increase in tax revenue generated from the base year. The percentage abated is 100 percent of
the increase for the first five years, and this percentage decreases annually for the second half of
the ten-year period. Districts providing the abatement include the Island Park District,
Wilmington Library District, City of Wilmington, and Unit School District 209.
Source: Will County; City of Wilmington Ordinance No. 1509, An Ordinance Approving an
Intergovernmental Agreement between the City of Wilmington and the Dow Chemical Company; Stanley
Ziemba, "Johnson & Johnson, 412 Jobs to Leave City," Chicago Tribune, January 13, 1999,
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1999-01-13/news/9901130206_1_wilmington-plant-new-jobs-personal-
products; Pat Harper, "Dow Chemical to move to Wilmington," The Herald News, November 20, 2002
EChicago Metropolitan Local Economic
Agency for Planning Page 83 Development Incentives
The Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) is the
region's official comprehensive planning organization. Its GO TO
2040 planning campaign is helping the region's seven counties
and 284 communities to implement strategies that address
transportation, housing, economic development, open space, the
environment, and other quality of life issues.
Chicago Metropolitan
Agency for Planning
233 South Wacker Drive, Suite 800
Chicago, I L 60606
312.454 0400
info(&cmap.illinois.gov
www.cmap.illinois.gov
FY14-0009