The fallacious notion, that Urban Renewal offers any good, needs to be addressed. In a free market capitalist system using the term economic tool and government in the same sentence is oxymoronic. Promoting economic development with tax-increment financing is outside the proper role of government in America. In fact, tax-increment financing allows cities to steal funds that taxpayers think they have dedicated to services, in order to subsidize favored developers, increase municipal budgets, and socially engineer the way we live. This would be the equivalent of the economic component of fascism. This is not good, and has no place in our society.

Urban Renewal Law subverts the will of the people by circumventing the Constitution. Article 8, Section 3 of the Idaho constitution provides a method for funding long term capital expenditures, outside of a municipality's fiscal year budget. It is called a vote of the people. Altering the constitution by statute is not acceptable in my book. State law now requires that for a new URD to be established it has to be voted on. Even this is not good as the agency created is unelected, thus creating taxation without representation.

Citing Post Falls as a city that does it right is a stretch. One restriction on the creation of new urban-renewal districts is that the base value of land in districts in a municipality cannot be more than 10 percent of the total assessed value of all property in the municipality. But, Post Falls has put almost 40 percent of its land in its several districts. The incremental value of the property in these districts is more than three times greater than the base value, so the Post Falls Urban Renewal Agency receives over one tenth of all property taxes paid. Post Falls property taxes are some of the highest in the state. This is not good.

Urban renewal also creates moral hazard. As evidenced most recently by the Curt Schilling debacle, Rhode Island taxpayers are now on the hook for around $90 million. Make no mistake about it, if the subsidized business fails the taxpayers are on the hook for it. This is not good.

While Urban Renewal proponents have long touted that URD'S have no negative impact on taxpayers or other taxing entities, one has to look no further than Dover, to see this is not the case.

Since 2005, the year the Dover Urban Renewal Agency formed, levy rates in the city of Dover have risen 12.7 percent, in spite of property values increasing over 300 percent. The need for the increase is for services in conjunction with urban renewal projects. This is not good.

The use of Urban Renewal has provided no justifiable benefits, at best it has done little more than shuffle the deck; at worst, it actually slows economic growth by placing an extra burden on taxpayers and discouraging businesses that do not want to compete with those subsidized by tax increment financing. This is not good.

There is nothing good about the contemporary version of Urban Renewal, the law needs to be repealed. No offense to my friends Ron Nilson and Jim Doty, as I have a tremendous amount of respect for both men.

Steve Adams is a member of the Coeur d'Alene City Council.

Steve Adams

My Turn

OPINION