First of all, a hat tip to Thomas Westgard for obtaining and posting this information. We have the results of the pre-eligibility study and Joe Moore's statement regarding the RIF.
I read the study, and then I read Moore's letter. I have to say I agree with Moore's reasoning. I never thought I'd ever say that!
I must note that although I was a party in the Alderman's Affordable Housing Task Force, I never got a notice about the Northside meeting that is referenced in Moore's letter. I have no idea what happened. I certainly don't understand why Northside, with all their chest beating about the TIF, would not make the effort to reach out to the Task Force members and invite us. That I am sure did not happen, since they had our email addresses and Deb Paton made use of them earlier. I found out about the meeting, after it occurred, via a comment at my Facebook page.
I will also say that whatever spurred Moore's decision, it was not arrived at via a formal process with the Task Force. We met twice, and left asking for more information, which I never saw until now. So I don't know specifically how he came to his conclusion.
The TIF/RIF process, however well intentioned it may be, has suffered, in my view, from a failure on the part of its supporters to face reality. The consultant's report certainly throws cold water on the notion that TIFing the entire ward is a good idea, and suggests that more work needs to be done to ensure that the suggested alternative meets the state's criteria. On top of that, the consultant's estimation of what the TIF may actually generate in the 'increment' is not nearly as rosy as the proponents'. They make the same argument I did, but with far better specifics than I had.
From what I can determine, Northside and A Just Harvest are headed back to the drawing board to develop an alternative. I wish them the best.