My good friend and colleague, TJ Andrews, makes an important point in her recent opinion about TIF 97 in the Record-Eagle: We shouldn’t make a major tax decision simply because we love downtown Traverse City. I agree. But I think her argument oversimplifies what we’re actually being asked to decide. A healthy community makes room for healthy debate, even between friends.
The question isn’t whether downtown is successful. It clearly is. The question is whether we want a reliable way to keep investing in the infrastructure that makes downtown work for the thousands of people from across our region who use it every day.
Andrews argues that TIF 97 was created to help a struggling downtown, that it worked, and that its job is done. I get that argument. But successful places don’t stop needing public investment just because they’ve become successful.
Our streets, sidewalks, bridges, stormwater systems, riverfront, trails and public spaces all need ongoing maintenance. Businesses depend on infrastructure that helps employees, customers, residents and visitors get around. These aren’t luxuries. They’re the basics of a functioning city. Maybe that’s why it’s more fun to argue about “handouts to developers,” a “slush fund for pet projects,” or the untruthful claim that all the DDA does is build hotels we don’t need.
Another problem with the argument against TIF is the suggestion that downtown property owners are still paying taxes based on what their properties were worth in 1997. That’s not how TIF works. The existing tax base continues to generate revenue for taxing jurisdictions, while TIF captures increases in taxable value within the district to fund eligible public improvements. Rising property values don’t mean TIF has failed. They’re part of what makes it work.
Ending TIF 97 won’t make our infrastructure needs disappear, and it doesn’t automatically mean the money currently going toward downtown improvements will be available for other priorities. Those streets, sidewalks and public spaces still need attention. As neighbors, we need to talk about how we’ll pay for that work.
And while the TIF district has defined boundaries, the people who benefit from downtown extend well beyond them. People from across county and the region work here, shop here, eat here, attend events and enjoy the trails, riverfront and public spaces. Plenty of people feel connected to Traverse City even if they live outside city limits. A healthy downtown benefits businesses and communities throughout our region.
So I don’t think the question is whether downtown has “done its job.” It’s whether the infrastructure that supports downtown, our regional economy and our quality of life still needs investment.
Of course it does.
We don’t stop maintaining a bridge because it’s served us well for 30 years. We don’t stop investing in a park because people actually use it. And rising property values don’t mean our public infrastructure will take care of itself.
TIF 97 helped transform downtown Traverse City. The proposed Infrastructure First plan gives us an opportunity to keep investing in the streets, sidewalks, riverfront, trails and public spaces that make downtown a place people want to be.
This isn’t about choosing downtown over the rest of the county. It’s about recognizing that a healthy downtown is part of a healthy region, and that taking care of what we’ve built requires ongoing investment.
Downtown isn’t finished – neither is the neighborly work of taking care of it.