A libertarian political advocacy group submitted a petition to the Arlington Heights Village Board Tuesday that might bar the village from providing taxpayer-funded monetary incentives to the Chicago Bears soccer workforce — which is seeking to purchase the Arlington Park International Racecourse for $197 million — in addition to another enterprise that may open within the space.
Brian Costin, deputy state director of Americans for Prosperity Illinois, led the petition effort and stated the group submitted 663 signatures to the board at it’s assembly Tuesday evening.
The petition, which originated from a piece of the Arlington Heights municipal code that permits for resident-generated referendums, requires the Village Board to think about an ordinance that may forestall the village from extending any type of monetary help to any company looking for to open within the village.
Village officers say such an ordinance could be disastrous for the village, whereas organizers from the Koch brothers-backed Americans for Prosperity name it an “anti-corporate welfare ordinance.”
In presenting the signatures to the Village Board in the course of the public remark portion of the assembly, Costin famous that Americans for Prosperity lately ran a ballot that discovered 72% of respondents supported the Bears’ transfer to the village however that 68% opposed using public cash to carry them to Arlington Heights.
“We’ve seen stadium bills and corporate welfare projects turn sour for taxpayers across Illinois,” Costin stated, citing examples within the cities of Bridgeview and Hoffman Estates.
Arlington Heights officers stated passing such a measure would put the village at a significant monetary drawback to its neighbors.
Mayor Tom Hayes was absent from the board assembly final evening, telling Pioneer Press in an e mail that he was in Canada “on a non-refundable vacation” he’d booked a 12 months in the past. But Hayes beforehand expressed his disapproval for the ordinance API is pushing.
“We don’t think it’s something that’s in the best interest of the village,” Hayes beforehand stated. “If something like this is enacted, then all those businesses are going elsewhere, and how will that benefit our residents?”
Hayes beforehand advised Pioneer Press that he would do “everything in my power to see (such an ordinance) stopped.”
Village Manager Randy Recklaus was current on the assembly Tuesday evening and blasted the thought of the ordinance.
“This is a very extreme proposition,” Recklaus stated. “It would literally cripple the village’s ability to engage in any economic development throughout our entire community.”
Recklaus added that main swathes of the village, like its downtown space, had been redeveloped by public financing incentives like tax increment financing districts.
In truth, the Village Board thought-about a TIF district-related request on the assembly Tuesday for the Southpoint Shopping Center at 600 East Rand Road. The developer sought cash from the TIF to assist assemble two business buildings: one for a Chipotle restaurant and the opposite for an AT&T retail retailer.
Resident Martin Bauer advised Arlington Heights trustees he was against using public cash on Bears-related building.
Bauer stated he was not with Americans for Prosperity, however stated he may become involved with that group or the same one if the village continued transferring ahead with the mission.
“No public money is needed to develop this particular site,” he stated in regards to the former racecourse property. “We’re not talking about a brownfield. We’re not talking about an eyesore that’s been sitting vacant for decades.”
Bauer stated Hayes and a few members of the Village Board had change into “googly eyed” over the prospect of bringing the soccer workforce to the village.
“He indicated that he will do anything to make sure that the Bears come to Arlington Heights,” Bauer stated of Hayes.
Recklaus responded to Bauer’s remark, within the mayor’s absence.
“I do not recall Mayor Hayes ever saying he would do anything to bring the Bears here,” Recklaus stated.
The petition wanted 546 signatures, or 1% of the voting inhabitants of the village, to be submitted to the Village Board as a possible ordinance. If the board then rejects that proposed ordinance, then the petition organizers could attempt to get 12% of the village’s voting inhabitants to signal on and pressure a referendum on the poll at an upcoming election.
()
Source: www.bostonherald.com