Ad Hoc Economic Development Committee
Regular MeetingNorthbrook, IL · January 17, 2012
Minutes
1 APPROVED
2 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
3 AD HOC ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
4 VILLAGE OF NORTHBROOK
5 COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS
6 January 17, 2012
7
8 The meeting was called to order in the Terrace Room of the Village Hall at 6:35 PM. On roll call, present
9 were: Chairman Heller, and Trustee Ciesla; also present: Trustee Israel. Ex Officio Members: Pat
10 Lederer Chairman of ICDC, Tensley Garris, Northbrook Chamber of Commerce; J. Kahan; School District
11 No. 27 Ed Representative Ed Feld; Finance Director of District 225 Hillarie Siena, Economic Development
12 Coordinator D. Schoon, Director of Development and Planning Service Tom Poupard and Village
13 Manager Nahrstadt.
14
15 Review and Approval of October 25, 2011 Ad Hoc Economic Development Committee Minutes
16 Trustee Heller moved, seconded by Trustee Ciesla to approve the minutes of October 25, 2011.
17 On voice vote all were in favor.
18
19 Hear from the Audience
20 No comments submitted.
21
22 Revised Class 6b Guidelines and Creation of an Alternative Property Tax Abatement Program.
23
24 Mr. Schoon stated the Ad Hoc Committee last met on October 25, 2011. At that meeting the
25 members concluded they would consider the use of other economic development financial assistance
26 tools in addition to the Class 6b, when appropriate. The Committee instructed staff to come back with
27 revisions to the Class 6b guidelines and one alternative property tax abatement program that would
28 have its own specific process similar to the Class 6b. Mr. Schoon then provided a PowerPoint
29 presentation which summarized the documents provided in the Committee’s packet.
30 Mr. Schoon reviewed issues that were of concern in the past. He stated one point of discussion
31 focused around granting the Class 6b incentive due to the building versus business, noting the different
32 opinions expressed and that the guidelines address a few. Mr. Schoon explained another point of
33 discussion is about whether to grant the tax abatement only on the added value or the existing value.
34 Requests for the incentive on the existing value leads to a lot of discussion. And the last point of
35 discussion is usually around granting the incentive for buildings that have been vacant for less than two
36 years.
37 Since the last meeting, Mr. Schoon stated that staff discussed coming up with more defined
38 guidelines; however, as they reviewed past projects, they found this task difficult to do. Staff went
39 through prior projects and provided relevant information, but did not see a pattern. Mr. Schoon briefly
40 discussed the circumstances relating to properties that were provided 6B’s in the past: Highland Baking,
41 Nestle, International Derivatives, MicroLink Devices, etc., noting they all had their own unique
42 characteristics. This made it difficult for staff to come up with more specific guidelines. Of the four,
43 only Nestle requested the property tax reduction on only the added value. The other three all asked for
44 reduction on the existing and added value. Mr. Schoon questioned how difficult it is to come up with a
45 definitive criteria when one building was vacant for a substantial length of time when another was only
46 vacant for 4 months.
47 Trustee Ciesla questioned if a 6b was ever granted to a vacant building without an identified
48 specific tenant. In response, Mr. Schoon responded yes, noting 3200 Arnold as an example. He stated
1
Minutes of the Ad Hoc Economic Development Committee
January 17, 2012
1 the Misner Group purchased it and he explained the details. Finance Director of District 225 Ms. Hillarie
2 Siena discussed how the property owner then sold the building with the 6B attached to it. ICDC
3 Representative Patrick Lederer stated that the benefits of the Class 6b only goes into effect once the
4 building is occupied. Mr. Schoon stated after that project, the Village adopted new guidelines that state
5 the Class 6b must be tied to a specific business. Trustee Ciesla questioned if other communities have
6 restrictions? If there was anything the Village could get back if they flip the ownership. Mr. Schoon
7 explained conditions could be written into a side agreement. The group discussed various options.
8 Mr. Schoon then discussed the purpose of the 6b. Mr. Lederer commented on how the four
9 properties that were previously noted by Mr. Schoon were very distinct and different examples of 6b’s
10 that are given and he explained the situations involved with each of them.
11 Trustee Heller noted he has always been against 6b’s and he cited why the 6b with the Nestles
12 building only highlighted his belief.
13 Mr. Jim Kahan stated every situation comes down to what will happen and when. He noted you
14 have to consider the risk you take not giving the 6b versus how long the building will remain vacant. The
15 committee then discussed how long a property has to remain vacant to receive a reduction in property
16 taxes. Mr. Lederer stated we need to determine the down side to the village. He explained of the four
17 examples, the Nestle site may have remained empty, or may have eventually been torn down and
18 rezoned residential for example.
19 Trustee Ciesla stated Nestles had a big incentive to get out of Kraft. If they would have stayed
20 longer, they would have had to pay a penalty. She stated they got a real deal, not only in the contract
21 but also with the 6b.
22 President of the Northbrook Chamber of Commerce Tensley Garris pointed out it is in the
23 applicant’s best interest to make an argument for why they should be granted the 6B. They then
24 reviewed the Nestle decision. Mr. Schoon reminded the members the applicant was converting the
25 building from one use to another, which significantly increased the value, in comparison to MicroLink
26 who was to invest a significant amount in the building but would not end up increasing the value of the
27 site. Granting the 6b on the added value for Nestle provided a significant tax savings benefit, but
28 would not have for MicroLink.
29 Class 6b Guidelines.
30 Mr. Schoon stated the passout includes ideas regarding changes to the Class 6b guidelines that
31 members discussed at the last meeting. An issue for discussion is the process along with the
32 consideration of the following three things. He explained a couple of years ago the Board incorporated
33 procedures for 6b reviews, which included a review by the Administration and Finance Committee. Mr.
34 Schoon noted the last two 6b applications were not reviewed by the Administration and Finance
35 Committee. He noted the difficulty of scheduling a meeting with the Committee in advance and he
36 questioned if this process should continue.
37 Trustee Heller stated he had suggestions. He stated he does not see a review by the
38 Administration and Finance Committee as a negative and he felt some other Board members liked it.
39 Trustee Heller did suggest that the language in the 6b procedures change the language from “shall” to
40 “may” review. He also suggested a timeline, noting for example if a meeting is not scheduled in a
41 determined period of time the 6b application would automatically go to the Board.
42 Mr. Schoon explained he has had businesses contact him stating they would not pursue a 6b
43 because of how long the process takes. Trustee Heller stated he felt a prescribed timeline would reduce
44 the timeline of the process. Trustee Ciesla commented she did not feel the Administration and Finance
45 Committee needs to vet the application prior to the Board. She explained the other involved entities
46 have the opportunity to attend the Board meeting, which they do, to speak and express their concerns.
47 Trustee Ciesla noted she likes to hear all of the other Trustees opinions. Trustee Heller stated the
Page 2 of 5
Minutes of the Ad Hoc Economic Development Committee
January 17, 2012
1 purpose of a committee is to be able to concentrate on one item, instead of a number of items that are
2 typically on an agenda.
3 Ms. Siena explained the school district also likes to vet 6b applications prior to their Board
4 meeting. She stated the Village would need to determine if the Administration and Finance Committee
5 review is beneficial or would it just be an unnecessary added step in the process.
6 Trustee Israel questioned if the Administration and Finance Committee acts as a buffer
7 sometimes? Trustee Ciesla discussed “chicken” issue that was in front of the Board and how all on the
8 committee members reviewing it are going to be in favor, while there are trustees not on that
9 committee opposed to the chicken issue. She questioned the value of the committee review under
10 these circumstances.
11 Trustee Heller questioned how staff feels and Mr. Schoon stated he does not feel a committee
12 review is necessary. Mr. Lederer noted in his experience Northbrook’s procedure is different. In
13 comparison to other communities, the process is much longer.
14 Trustee Ciesla questioned Northbrook’s timeline. In response Mr. Lederer noted not all
15 communities involve other taxing bodies in the review. Mr. Schoon stated the process takes
16 approximately 60 days in Northbrook. Trustee Heller explained how important it is for other taxing
17 bodies to chime in based on the percentage of taxes they have involved.
18 Ms. Garris stated it is particularly important in this economy to strike fast to get something
19 done. Trustee Heller asked the school representatives how they would feel if 6b applications were only
20 reviewed by the Board of Trustees. In response, both stated they would be offended, noting it is not the
21 way our village does it. Trustee Heller reiterated review solely by the Board would not fly. Trustee
22 Ciesla asked the school representatives if they felt there was another way that would work. Mr. Feld
23 stated maybe part of it is schools should be part of the process. The group discussed.
24 Mr. Schoon reviewed the discussion thus far. He noted prior review by the Administration and
25 Finance Committee may not be necessary. Trustee Heller suggested a Board review at the preliminary
26 level and referring it to the Administration and Finance Committee if necessary. Trustee Ciesla
27 questioned the benefits of the other entities attending the Administration and Finance Committee
28 meeting. Trustee Heller stated they always have that option. Mr. Feld noted the excellent job Mr.
29 Schoon does with working with other entities.
30 Mr. Lederer stated that because of the timeline there is only a handful of people who would
31 apply for a 6b. The group discussed different scenarios where the process may be speeded up. Trustee
32 Israel questioned if other villages have a fast track. Mr. Lederer stated Northbrook is known for being
33 difficult. Ms. Siena noted she also works with Glenview, noting the difference is Northbrook listens to
34 the schools. She noted the 225 Board would be upset if they were not considered in the process. Ms.
35 Siena stated the Village of Glenview goes through same process, and their timeline is similar. Trustee
36 Israel questioned if the timeline precludes negotiation? Mr. Lederer stated it depends on the building.
37 Trustee Heller questioned how long the process took with the Nestle’s 6b and in response Mr. Schoon
38 stated not quite 60 days. Mr. Lederer stated the Nestle’s 6b was a no brainer. Trustee Ciesla stated she
39 feels the residents believe the entities should vet the process. Mr. Kahan shared with the committee
40 historical Board of Trustee 6b discussions.
41 Village Manager Nahrstadt entered.
42 Mr. Schoon reviewed the committee’s discussion. He stated the committee is recommending
43 that 6b applications will first be reviewed as a prelim, and if the Board then determines further review is
44 necessary at the Board level, they can then refer it to the Administration and Finance Committee for
45 review. Mr. Schoon then explained a question he often gets from real estate brokers is if the property is
46 vacant for less than two years, what is the chance of being granted a 6b? He explained the next section
47 for the committee to review is to articulate some standards as to when special circumstances should be
Page 3 of 5
Minutes of the Ad Hoc Economic Development Committee
January 17, 2012
1 considered. 1 – Difficult to reuse due to age, size, condition, or unique characteristics. 2-Significant
2 investment required for any business to reuse building. They discussed.
3 Mr. Kahan stated historically we have not wanted to grant incentives. The only time they were
4 considered was if there was a property tax factor, such as a business looking to locate a facility on one
5 side or other of Lake Cook Road. Mr. Kahan stated we cannot solve business issues. In many
6 circumstances, the 6b is to the benefit of the seller. They discussed potential factors and circumstances.
7 Mr. Kahan stated it is not our duty or responsibility to bail out a seller financially. Mr. Lederer noted the
8 other side of that is a building may sit vacant for a number of years. Ms. Siena questioned the special
9 circumstances and if the standards are too restrictive. Trustee Heller noted that if a building is only
10 vacant for three months we want to be restrictive. Mr. Lederer stated guidelines are great, but each site
11 is unique. Each building has unique qualities, e.g. MicroLink. He stated he felt they should be proactive.
12 He stated Northbrook’s present process for a 6b only deters applicants and encourages them to go
13 elsewhere to obtain the 6b.
14 Trustee Heller asked for data of how Northbrook compares to other similar communities with
15 giving 6B’s. Mr. Kahan stated it is important to also show the number of vacancies in those
16 communities. Ms. Siena noted the number of times it has been stated applicants will go to Lake County.
17 The committee discussed the criteria they would like to see. Mr. Feld questioned if they could find out
18 how many can potentially qualify for a 6b? Mr. Kahan stated any property is potential. Mr. Lederer
19 stated if a property is vacant for 6+ months it can potentially qualify. Mr. Schoon explained the difficulty
20 of obtaining some of this information. Mr. Feld stated it would be nice to know. Trustee Heller stated
21 he would not be in favor of identifying properties as “possible 6B properties” in writing. Mr. Feld
22 questioned when the 6b application was last reviewed. He stated he does not feel the questions asked
23 help to determine if a 6b is appropriate. Mr. Lederer stated he felt the $5,000 fee is high. He noted
24 Wheeling only charges $100. Mr. Schoon noted ours includes an escrow for our attorney fees. Trustee
25 Ciesla requested that staff find out how much other communities charge also. Ms. Siena noted it is an
26 escrow not a fee. Mr. Kahan stated historically the fee was set to discourage applicants who are just
27 shopping around.
28 Alternative Property Tax Abatement
29 Mr. Schoon noted the committee has discussed looking at establishing a local alternative
30 property tax abatement. He stated at the last review one issue raised was what tax savings are we
31 looking to provide and he gave examples. The Committee reviewed a chart that showed a lower
32 assessment level for a shorter period of time. Trustee Heller stated he was in favor of having this as
33 another weapon in our arsenal. He stated 12 years is a long time to reduce taxes. Trustee Heller stated
34 our village has not granted extensions on 6b’s. He explained that if we had a mechanism to grant for
35 example only six years the Board may then give an extension based on the circumstances. Trustee
36 Ciesla questioned if it would be limited and it was stated not necessarily. Ms. Siena stated she likes the
37 proposed structure, but was not necessarily in favor of an extension. She suggested a review of the
38 application if they vacate the property. Trustee Ciesla stated let’s say we have stringent rules for a 6b
39 and if the applicant does not qualify, meet the criteria, could we then use this alternative structure.
40 They discussed. It was noted other communities do not do anything like this. Ms. Garris questioned,
41 with this formula, is it enough. She noted we are competing in a difficult climate now. Will this be a
42 nightmare? Will the cost be too high? Trustee Heller stated we do have a model, e.g. Crate and Barrel.
43 It was stated that the set up of the alternative abatement would have a cost. Ms. Siena stated once
44 they are in place, they really are not cost ineffective. Mr. Feld questioned if there is a program to
45 customize these. Kahan stated who qualifies etc is standardized, but why they want the incentive is not.
46 Ms. Garris questioned how long the 6b for Crate and Barrel took. The group discussed. It was
47 noted that the 6b process for this took a long time mainly because it was never done before. In this
Page 4 of 5
Minutes of the Ad Hoc Economic Development Committee
January 17, 2012
1 case, the 6b was a tool to keep Crate and Barrel in Northbrook. Village Manager Nahrstadt stated in
2 reviewing the proposal, what drives us crazy is the applications that are not clear cut and state if they
3 don’t get a 6b they will leave. He stated generally the requests are not clean cut. He stated for example
4 in this structure, all are in favor, those should be considered for full 12 years. When you have a site, e.g.
5 Crate and Barrel, which are more complicated, this is going to be used for those incidents where we
6 want to keep that specific business in town. Village Manager Nahrstadt noted some felt MicroLink was a
7 great business to have in the community. Mr. Feld questioned what he meant by a great business.
8 Village Manager Nahrstadt explained it would increase business in town. He stated we need to
9 differentiate between a full blown 6b and this other standard.
10 Trustee Heller referenced Mr. Lederer’s comments that we need to review this now because we
11 are hurting. He stated that is not a good enough reason to him to consider a tax break for12 years,
12 when in two years from now the economy could change and explode. He stated that is a reason for him
13 to consider a five or six year 6b. Trustee Ciesla questioned what an alternative would be. Mr. Lederer
14 stated this is not a bad alternative. This is a decent tool, but the 6b has its place. In some incidents you
15 we have to give a discount.
16 Mr. Schoon asked when should a company request the 6b versus the alternative property tax
17 abatement? We have a process for 6b, but then what will the process be for the alternative. He noted
18 at last meeting the committee discussed creating a review board made up of the other taxing bodies.
19 They discussed the makeup of this board.
20 Ms. Garris stated they need to consider how to educate the boards of the other entities or even
21 if the other boards will want to partake. Mr. Kahan suggested creating a process with a smaller benefit.
22 Village Manager Nahrstadt stated that if the benefit is going to be smaller, an easier process to request
23 the alternative must be created to make it beneficial to the applicant. They discussed. Trustee Heller
24 explained how the legal rights of the other taxing bodies must be met whatever the process we come up
25 with. He then discussed the changes in the 6b process through the years and how the entities have
26 cooperated with the different applications.
27 Mr. Schoon stated each of the taxing districts would be considering their own issues. He stated
28 this alternative is an option that can be vetted, but it will take additional effort. Mr. Schoon stated
29 having sat through the other entities meetings at which Class 6b applications were considered, he stated
30 it may be a challenge to establish this alternative property tax abatement program. Village Manager
31 Nahrstadt stated Mr. Schoon and he will come back next time with additional ideas. Trustee Heller
32 noted this committee is an AD Hoc Economic Development Committee for the Village and the purpose it
33 to come up with guidelines for the vacant properties. Trustee Ciesla gave an example of vacant lot at
34 the corner of Dundee Road and Skokie Boulevard. She stated the President Frum had mentioned to her
35 that the Committee may want to come up with criteria in terms of what the Village would like to see
36 developed on that site. Mr. Kahan disagreed, stating that is not the duty of this Committee. Village
37 Manager Nahrstadt suggested talking to President Frum to better understand what she is looking for. It
38 was decided to meet again in April due to scheduling.
39 Trustee Ciesla made a motion, seconded by Trustee Heller that the meeting be adjourned. On
40 voice vote, the motion was approved. There being no further business to transact and the meeting was
41 adjourned at 8:36 PM.
42
43 Respectfully submitted,
44
45 /s/ Debra J. Ford
46 Village Clerk
47
Page 5 of 5
Agenda
AD HOC ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
NORTHBROOK VILLAGE HALL, 1225 CEDAR LANE
JANUARY 17, 2012, 6:30 P.M., TERRACE ROOM
The Ad Hoc Economic Development Committee of the Village of Northbrook Board of Trustees will
hold a meeting on Tuesday, January 17, 2012 at 6:30 p.m. in the Terrace Room of the Village Hall,
1225 Cedar Lane, Northbrook, Illinois. The following will be discussed.
MEETING AGENDA
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. REVIEW: Draft minutes of the October 25, 2011, Ad Hoc Economic Development Committee
3. HEAR FROM THE AUDIENCE
4. DISCUSSION: Revised Class 6b Guidelines and Creation of an Alternative Property Tax
Abatement Program.
5. ADJOURN
Todd Heller, Chair Please Note a “Light” Dinner will be
Ad Hoc Economic Development Committee served for Board Members, Ex Officio
Members, and staff attending
Members: Trustee Scolaro
Trustee Ciesla
Village of Northbrook
Cook County, Illinois
January 13, 2012
The Village of Northbrook is subject to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
Individuals with disabilities who plan to attend this meeting and who require certain accommodations in
order to allow them to observe and/or participate in this meeting, or who have questions regarding the
accessibility of this meeting or the facilities, are requested to contact Greg Van Dahm or Debbie Ford (847
664-4014 and 847 664-4013, respectively) promptly to allow the Village of Northbrook to make reasonable
accommodations for those persons. Hearing impaired individuals may call the TDD number, 564-8645, for
more information.
1 DRAFT
2 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
3 AD HOC ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
4 VILLAGE OF NORTHBROOK
5 COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS
6 October 25, 2011
7
8 The meeting was called to order in the Terrace Room of the Village Hall at 6:30 PM. On roll call, present
9 were: Chairman Heller, Trustee Scolaro and Trustee Ciesla; also present: President Frum, Trustee
10 Israel. Ex Officio Members: Tensley Garris, Northbrook Chamber of Commerce; J. Kahan; Ed Feld,
11 School District No. 27; Hillarie Siena, Finance Director of District 225; D. Schoon, Economic
12 Development Coordinator.
13
14 Hear from the Audience
15
16 No comments submitted.
17
18 Review of Economic Development Tools
19
20 Mr. Schoon, stated the Village Board formed the Ad Hoc Economic Development Committee after the
21 Board’s consideration of the MicroLink Devices request for a Class 6b property tax incentive for the
22 entire value of its property. During review, some of the taxing districts raised the question does the
23 Village have alternative tools available to provide financial incentives to industrial and commercial
24 businesses who would like to relocate to Northbrook. The taxing districts inquired if there was something
25 other than a Class 6b as they felt the relief requested by MicroLink was too significant. The Ad Hoc
26 Committee was formed to look at alternatives, to discuss how to use the 6b program and to study the
27 economic development incentives available to industrial and commercial businesses. He reminded the
28 Committee that the vision statement in the Village’s Strategic Plan for Economic Development states that
29 the Village will foster an attitude and processes that strives to maintain and enhance a diverse tax base of
30 retail, office and industrial businesses to ensure resources that will support a high quality of public
31 services for the community.
32
33 Mr. Schoon reviewed the Class 6b program, including the industrial/warehouse business tax savings
34 received under this Cook County program, the types of qualifying projects, and the definition of
35 abandoned property and the concept of “special circumstances”. Mr. Schoon stated that in addition to the
36 County’s criteria, the Village has additional guidelines when considering to support 6b applications,
37 which look at economic and fiscal impact of business on the community, conditions of existing building
38 and site and private financial contributions compared to public assistance, quality of jobs to be created
39 and environmental impact. He also noted that Northbrook has afforded the other taxing districts an
40 opportunity to review and comment on each Class 6b application.
41
42 Mr. Schoon noted there are six general areas by which a municipality can impact economic development
43 in the community:
44
45 Government attitude impacts what businesses and developers think of Northbrook as a place to conduct
46 business;
47
48 Regulations and review processes impact how easy it is to conduct business in the community. Recent
49 feedback from some businesses and developers has been that Northbrook is a challenging place to do
50 business and that the board lacks consistency on development issues
51
Minutes of the Ad Hoc Economic Development Committee
October 25, 2011
1 Trustee Ciesla inquired if that was the case because the Board is making economic changes. President
2 Frum stated she did not believe the Board has a good grasp of the economic situation and that the Board
3 does not understand how difficult it is to have projects come in and be developed during these times. The
4 Board should be consistent because people do not have an idea of how they are going to be presented to
5 the Board; they do not know how the Board is going to react, thus the developers question why they
6 should spend money in the Village.
7
8 During discussion, it was noted that the Board was very receptive to Caribou Coffee and Sherwin
9 Williams Paint Store. A question was raised as to why the Board welcomed similar types of businesses in
10 one location and not in another. Trustee Israel commented that he was surprised to hear the objections to
11 Dunkin Donuts which was a permitted use. He suggested that was another example of inconsistency on
12 behalf of the Board. Trustee Heller noted that the Board has always been extremely difficult on drive
13 through facilities and expressed the opinion that Northbrook has been consistent with drive throughs,
14 holding them to different standards. Ms. Garris expressed the opinion that the group should understand
15 that was not the perception. Mr. Kahan expressed the opinion that the perception is reality; developers
16 remember their experiences and may tell others about them. Trustee Heller commented that in some
17 ways the perception was 100% correct. In some ways, Northbrook does want to remain Northbrook and
18 it is tough when doing so. Mr. Schoon stated developers say it is okay to have tough rules, they just want
19 to know what they are so they have an idea of what to expect through the process.
20
21 Provision of adequate infrastructure – Business expect a certain minimum level of infrastructure such as
22 good roads, no flooding, reliable electricity, etc.
23
24 Targeted plans and programs can provide the business and development community a consistent idea of
25 the type of business and development activity the Village supports.
26
27 Marketing and outreach allows the Village to reach out to the business community to identify issues of
28 concern as well as promoting businesses such as through shop local programs.
29
30 Financial Incentives provide a financial tool to help make a business or development project happen that
31 benefits the community.
32
33
34 Review Financial Incentive Tools for Business Development
35
36 Mr. Schoon than reviewed the following financial tools available to municipalities to encourage business
37 development:
38
39 Cook County Property Tax Relief Programs – Class 6b (industrial), Class 7a & b (commercial), Class C
40 (for environmental remediation), and Class L (historic properties). It’s unlikely a property in Northbrook
41 could qualify for a 7a or 7b.
42
43 Tax Increment financing – the Village has one existing district at Dundee & Sanders and there had been
44 one established in the downtown that had been quickly repealed before tax increment financing was ever
45 used.
46
47 Property Tax Abatement – State law allows local taxing districts to abate property taxes for a project.
48 The tax abatement cannot exceed $4 million for all taxing districts, not to exceed 10 years and must be
49 approved by each taxing district desiring to participate. Crate and Barrel is the only example in
50 Northbrook
Minutes of the Ad Hoc Economic Development Committee
October 25, 2011
1
2 Sales Tax Rebate – Involves sharing of sales tax revenue between the Village and the business. There are
3 no specific eligibility criteria set by Illinois or the Village; it’s decided on a case by case basis. The
4 Village has one, which is with Foley Cadillac.
5
6 Business Districts Areas must be blighted as defined by State Code and would not be developed or
7 redeveloped without adoption of the business district plan. Improvements to be funded by imposing
8 additional sales tax or hotel tax on businesses within the designated area to pay for public infrastructure
9 improvements within the area. Redevelopment districts have been established in the downtown area and
10 along Skokie Boulevard, but without the business district funding mechanism.
11
12 Special Service Areas - allows a village to impose a ad valorem property tax on properties within a
13 designated area to pay for public improvements, marketing services and maintenance within the area. It
14 does not have to be blighted. Evanston and Highland Park have set up SSAs in their downtowns . Can
15 only be implemented if there is not a petition objecting to the creation of the SSA signed by 51% or more
16 of property owners or 51% or more of residents occupying the premises.
17
18 Other Forms of Assistance - include such items as grants and loans funded through municipal funding
19 sources may be used for infrastructure improvements including façade renovations, interior renovations ,
20 underwriting land costs, rent subsidies, roads, sewers and water mains and streetscape improvements and
21 expedited permit review.
22
23 Class 6b Program and Establishing An Alternative Property Tax Abatement Program
24
25 Having reviewed all of the tools available, Committee members expressed the opinion that the Village
26 should consider the use of any of the financial incentive tools when their use may be appropriate. The
27 Committee then focused its discussion on the Class 6b program and establishing an alternative property
28 tax abatement program.
29
30 Mr. Schoon noted that in 2008, a subcommittee was formed to consider establishing an alternative to the
31 Class 6b program. The EDC submitted a recommendation to the Board regarding an alternate program.
32 The Village attorney had a concern that the incentive, as drafted, was not appropriate under Illinois law.
33 He suggested some changes including that each taxing district would have to approve granting the
34 incentive. The EDC decided not to pursue the establishment of the alternative program as they felt that it
35 was the same as considering a special abatement on a case by case manner.
36
37 Chairman Heller commented the Class 6b program guidelines appear to be sufficient. President Frum
38 commented that the ad hoc committee was formed because the Board was willing to go back and look at
39 the way the Class 6b is implemented and if there should be any changes. She inquired if there were any
40 other models or ways of offering incentives incurred under 6b and not for 12 years. She added the
41 Board’s interpretation of 6b has been effective, however, she inquired if it could be improved.
42
43 Committee members then held a general discussion regarding when the Class 6b incentive or the
44 alternative should be made available. Is it because the specific business needs the incentive to locate in a
45 particular building or is it because a specific building needs an incentive in order to get any business to
46 locate on it? Using recent projects that have requested the Class 6b (Nestle, MicroLink Devices, etc.)
47 and others that haven’t (the proposed asphalt plan), the Committee members discussed the various public
48 benefits to the community of each project and when is it appropriate for government to use Class 6b or an
49 alternative to influence decisions in the market place. Or should the marketplace through adjustment of
50 the price of the building decides whether a business occupies a property.
Minutes of the Ad Hoc Economic Development Committee
October 25, 2011
1
2 Mr. Schoon stated there are a number of vacant buildings located on Holste and inquired if the Village
3 needs to provide an incentive to encourage occupancy of the buildings. Trustee Ciesla inquired if there
4 were tax issues and why the properties were vacant; she suggested that if there are other issues, incentives
5 may not resolve the issues.
6
7 The Committee concluded that staff should look at refining the Class 6b guidelines, by looking at how to
8 incorporate such items as (a) requiring structural improvements be made to a building, (b) the positive
9 and negative environmental impacts of a business, (c) impact on local government services (d) quality and
10 # of jobs, and (e) impact on housing stock. What is the community’s return on investment for granting
11 the property tax relief.
12
13 The Committee also discussed establishing a number of different alternatives to the Class 6b program in
14 terms of granting property tax abatements (e.g. shorter period of time, different assessment rates, etc.).
15 The Committee discussed the challenges of establishing alternative property tax abatement programs
16 given that for each project, each taxing district would have to negotiate and agree to the specific terms.
17 The Committee also discussed having a number of different alternatives could be challenging to
18 implement both from a business’ perspective as well as the taxing districts’ perspectives. The Committee
19 directed staff to come back with one alternative property tax abatement program that would have its own
20 specific process but eligibility guidelines similar to the Class 6b.
21
22 Trustee Ciesla made a motion, seconded by Trustee Heller that the meeting be adjourned. On voice vote,
23 the motion was approved. There being no further business to transact and the meeting was adjourned at
24 8:45 PM.
25
26 Respectfully submitted,
27
28 /s/ Teresa J. Moll
29 Recorder
30
VILLAGE OF NORTHBROOK MEMORANDUM
DEVELOPMENT & PLANNING SERVICES
TO: AD HOC ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
FROM: DAVID SCHOON, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR
DATE: JANUARY 13, 2012
SUBJECT: CLASS 6B GUIDELINES & ALTERNATIVE PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT PROGRAM
On January 17, 2012, the Ad Hoc Economic Development Committee will hold its second meeting in order to
(1) further discuss revisions to the Village’s Class 6b guidelines, and (2) to further consider the creation of
alternative property tax abatement program for industrial property.
OCTOBER MEETING
At the first Committee meeting on October 25, 2011, staff reviewed with the Committee tools available to
municipalities to encourage economic development activity, including financing incentives. After some
discussion, Committee members expressed the opinion that the Village should consider the use of any of the
financial incentive tools when their use may be appropriate. The Committee then focused its discussion on
the Class 6b program and establishing an alternative property tax abatement program. The Committee
directed staff to look at refining the current Village Class 6b guidelines, by incorporating such items as (a)
requiring structural improvements be made to a building, (b) the positive and negative environmental impacts
of a business, (c) impact on local government services (d) quality and number of jobs, and (e) impact on
housing stock. The Committee also asked staff to prepare a framework for an alternative property tax
abatement program.
CLASS 6B PROGRAM
Regarding refining the existing Class 6b guidelines, attached is a redlined version of the Village’s existing Class
6b guidelines incorporating suggested changes made at the last meeting (Refer to – Cook County Class 6b
Village of Northbrook Guidelines document). In addition to these changes, staff suggests that the Village
consider the establishment of specific standards for sites that have been vacant for less than 24 months. It
seems to staff that the request involving buildings vacant for a short period of time have been the most
problematic. Some suggested requirements can be found on page three of the above referenced document.
Staff had the Northwest Municipal Conference conduct a survey of Cook County members regarding any
guidelines or processes they may use to evaluate Class 6b applications. Attached is a copy of the results.
Eleven communities responded, of those only six had their own specific guidelines and procedures for
processing Class 6b applications. Our Class 6b procedures and guidelines appear to be the most
comprehensive of all of the communities, followed by those of the Village of Glenview, which recently
adopted guidelines and procedures based upon our model. No community provides an alternative property
tax abatement program.
AD HOC ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
OCTOBER 25, 2011
ALTERNATIVE PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT PROGRAM FOR INDUSTRIAL PROJECTS
As reported at the last meeting, over the years the Village and the other local taxing districts have explored
establishing an alternative property tax abatement program for industrial projects. The most recent effort
was in 2008 and a copy of where those efforts ended is attached (Refer to - Draft from 2008 – Industrial
Alternative Property Tax Abatement document). As we explore this issue again, staff suggests that we start
from where those efforts ended.
As staff explored establishing a framework for this alternative abatement program, it became clear we need
further direction from the Committee regarding the following four major components of such a program:
1. What is the amount of tax savings that a business would experience under the program?
a. Is it a set maximum amount? Either a maximum dollar amount or a maximum percentage,
such as estimated tax savings as a percentage of investment in the site and building. If so,
what is the amount? OR
b. Is it an assessment rate and period of time different than that provided under the Class 6b? If
so, what should be the assessment rate and for what period of time? This is the approach
that was considered in 2008.
2. When should a business apply for the Class 6b incentive rather than the alternative property tax
abatement?
a. Should the process be set up that a business submits the materials for a Class 6b application to
the Village, and then the Village Board decides whether the request should be forwarded to
the other taxing districts as a request for the Class 6b or for the alternative abatement? OR
b. Should specific criteria be established distinguishing between when a business applies for the
Class 6b or the alternative abatement? If so, what should those criteria be?
3. What should be the steps in the approval process for the alternative abatement?
a. Should the steps be similar to what was considered in 2008, which included the creation of a
review board that consisted of representatives from each of the affected taxing tax districts?
This board would review the request and then forward a recommendation to all of the taxing
districts? Each taxing district would independently decide what to grant the abatement. OR
b. Should the process be different than what was proposed in 2008?
4. What should be the guidelines to use to evaluate whether or not to grant the alternative
abatement?
a. Should they be the same as the Class 6b guidelines? OR
b. Should they be specific for alternative abatement program? If so, what should they be to
make them different?
At the January 17 meeting, we would like to walk through these issues with the Committee to identify what
the alternative property tax abatement program for industrial properties would look like. Attached for the
Committee’s consideration are some documents summarizing one potential way of structuring such an
incentive ( Refer to – Draft as of January 13, 2012 – Industrial Alternative Property Tax Abatement document)
as well as a table summarizing all of the previous Class 6b applications and their major characteristics (Refer to
– Northbrook Class 6b Projects document. This table is provided to help the Committee think of what may be
some guideline thresholds to use when establishing the alternative abatement.
2
AD HOC ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
OCTOBER 25, 2011
ALTERNATIVE PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES
In 2008, when the Village and the other taxing districts explored establishing an alternative property tax
abatement program, it included a component that allowed commercial properties to qualify for the
alternative abatement. If the Committee decides to continue to pursue the alternative abatement concept,
it may also want to decide whether or not to include a component that would allow commercial properties to
qualify.
SUMMARY
At the January 17 meeting, the Committee will want to focus on the following three questions:
1. What are the appropriate changes to the Village’s Class 6b eligibility guidelines?
2. How should an alternative property tax abatement program for industrial properties be structured?
3. Should an alternative property tax abatement program for commercial properties also be established?
3
Draft as of January 13, 2012
Industrial Alternative Property Tax Abatement
(APTA)
The following tables compares the standard assessment rate for industrial property with that for
industrial property under the Class 6b classification as well as a potential alternative property
tax abatement (APTA) schedule.
Industrial Property Tax Assessment Schedules
Standard, Class 6b, and APTA
Year Standard Class 6b Alternative
Assessment Assessment Property Tax
Rate Rates Abatement
Assessment
Rates
Year 1 25% 10% 10%
Year 2 25% 10% 10%
Year 3 25% 10% 10%
Year 4 25% 10% 10%
Year 5 25% 10% 10%
Year 6 25% 10% 25%
Year 7 25% 10% 25%
Year 8 25% 10% 25%
Year 9 25% 10% 25%
Year 10 25% 10% 25%
Year 11 25% 15% 25%
Year 12 25% 20% 25%
Year 13 &
25% 25% 25%
Beyond
Over the 12-year life of the Class 6b schedule, a business’ taxes would be reduced by 55% if it
received the Class 6b incentive compared to if it occupied a building and did not receive the
Class 6b. Over the 12-year life of the above proposed alternative property tax abatement, a
business’ taxes would be reduced by only 20% due to the difference in the assessment
schedule as well as the tax rates that would apply to the abatement (see next section).
1
Draft as of January 13, 2012
Tax Rates. Under the Class 6 program, all taxing districts’ property tax rates are included in the
calculations of the benefit. Under the alternative property tax abatement schedule, only tax
rates of the local districts (Village, Park District, Library, and school districts) would be part of
the equation, which is approximately 80-85% of the total tax rate. The rates for the County,
MWRD, Oakton Community College, the Township, and Forest Preserve would not be included
under the alternative schedule. These taxing districts would be not included due to the
difficulties and complexities of including them in the agreement negotiation process.
Effort and Time. The alternative property tax abatement is actually a negotiated agreement
between the Village, the other local taxing districts, and the property owner/business to abate a
portion of the property taxes for a period of time. Given the number of parties involved in the
agreement, negotiating each tax abatement can take a considerable amount of effort and time.
The benefit of the alternative tax abatement for local taxing districts, however, is that period of
time of the abatement schedule could be considerably less than what is provided under the
Class 6b program.
2
Draft as of January 13, 2012
Process to Determine Either Class 6b or Alternative
Property Tax Abatement (APTA)
Step 1
Applicant submits Application
for Village Staff Review
Board determines if there is
Step 2 a public benefit, if so,
should the project be
Review by Village considered for the Class 6b
Board of Trustees or the APTA
Class 6b Process Alternative Property Tax
(See page 2) Abatement Process
(See page 3)
3
Draft as of January 13, 2012
Class 6b Review Process
Step 3
Preliminary Review by
Board of Trustees
Village transmits application
materials to applicable local
school and park districts, as
well as ICDC & EDC.
Minimum
45-day public review
and comment period.
School & park districts,
as well as ICDC & EDC,
forward recommendations to
Step 4 Village Board
Board of Trustees Final
Action on Resolution
Step 5 (if approved)
Applicant Files
Formal Application with
County Assessor
4
Draft as of January 13, 2012
Alternative Property Tax Abatement (APTA)
Process
Step 2 Board determines if there is
a public benefit, if so,
Review by Village referred to Review Board
Board of Trustees
Consists of one representative Step 3
from Village, Park District, Favorable report requires
Library, School District 225, & support from three taxing
Impacted Elementary School Review Board reviews & districts. Report can include
District makes recommendation. minority opinion(s).
Step 4
Corporate Authorities from Each
Tax District Make Its Final Decision
Elementary District 225 Park District Village Library
District
(47%*) (33%*) (8%*) (7%*) (5%*)
*Taxing district’s approximate % of total alternative abatement
5
Northbrook Class 6b Projects
Nestle USA Panek Precision International
Business MicroLink Devices Granite America
(lessee) Products Derivatives
Property Address 300 Wainwright 885 Sunset Ridge 3200 Arnold 455 Academy 2300 Carlson
Year 2011 2010 2007 2006 2006
Class 6b Incentive
Existing and Added
Requested Incentive Existing and Added Existing and Existing and Added
Value (Applicant did Added Value Only
Would Apply on… Value Added Value Value
not proceed)
Request Approved or Approved only on
Approved Approved Approved Approved
Denied by Village Added Value
Yes - 225; Not
School/Park/Library Opposed - Library; Yes - 225, Library, Comments Not Yes - 225; No - Yes - 225, 30; Not
Districts Support Only Added Value - Park, 28; No - None Requested Park, 27 Opposed - Park
Park; No - 27
Projected Property Tax
Savings for Applicant
$ 811,600 $ 1,914,000 $ 1,314,000 $ 1,135,400 $ 712,000
(Comparing w/ 6b to
w/out 6b)
Building Features
Length of Vacancy of
Building (in <4 <10 37+ 13 > 24
months)
Purchase Price of Real
Property (Building & $ 2,070,000 $ 4,073,541 $ 3,412,500 $ 2,950,000 $ 1,850,000
Land)
Building Floor Area
41,453 74,626 84,600 106,000 16,283
(Existing Sq.Ft..)
Projected Value of
Improvements to $ 3,000,000 $ 15,000,000 $ 600,000 $ 1,400,000 $ 1,000,000
Existing Building(1)
Ratio of Value of
Building Improvements 3.70 7.84 0.46 1.23 1.40
to Property Tax Savings
Ratio of Value of
Building Improvements
1.45 3.68 0.18 0.47 0.54
to Purchase Price of
Real Property
Job Features
Projected Number of
75 168 11 135 20
Full-Time Jobs
Average Hourly Wage
$65,000 to $70,000 $ 110,000 $14,40 to $48.00 $ 14.20
or Annual Salary*
Estimated Total Annual
$ 4,500,000 $ 18,480,000 $ 3,987,360
Payroll
Projected Class 6b
$ 10,821 $ 11,393 $ 119,455 $ 8,410 $ 35,600
Relief per Job
Other Features
Required Village to
Invest in Public No No No No No
Infrastructure
Challenging Building
No Yes No No No
To Reuse
Highly Visible Site No Yes No No No
Yellow Highlight - Signifies that feature is on the more positve end of the scale.
NA - Not applicable
1 of 8.
Northbrook Class 6b Projects
Speculative
Genesis Diversified Metal
Business Highland Baking Wittek Golf Supply Building (The
Technologies Products
Misner Group)
Property Address 2942 MacArthur 2301 Shermer 2205 Carlson 3865 Commercial 3200 Arnold
Year 2006 2006 2006 2006 2005
Class 6b Incentive
Requested Incentive Existing and Added Existing and
Renewal Existing Value Existing Value
Would Apply on… Value Added Value
Request Approved or
Approved Approved Denied Denied Approved
Denied by Village
School/Park/Library Yes - 225; No - 27, Yes - 225, 30, Yes - None; No - Yes - None; No - Yes - None; No -
Districts Support Park Park; No - None 225, 30, Park 225, 27, Park 225, Park
Projected Property Tax
Savings for Applicant
$ 1,129,000 $ 4,500,000 $ 680,000 $ 520,000
(Comparing w/ 6b to
w/out 6b)
Building Features
Length of Vacancy of
Building (in 20 0 NA - Renewal 6 25
months)
Purchase Price of Real
Property (Building & $ 2,934,000 $ 8,000,000 NA $ 1,800,000 $ 2,725,000
Land)
Building Floor Area
49,700 250,000 26,000 36,000 84,600
(Existing Sq.Ft..)
Projected Value of
Improvements to $ 1,600,000 $ 7,000,000 NA $ 1,100,000
Existing Building(1)
Ratio of Value of
Building Improvements 1.42 1.56 NA 2.12
to Property Tax Savings
Ratio of Value of
Building Improvements
0.55 0.88 NA - 0.40
to Purchase Price of
Real Property
Job Features
Projected Number of
65 360 17 40 NA
Full-Time Jobs
Average Hourly Wage
$ 49,000 $ 16.00 $ 16.00 NA
or Annual Salary*
Estimated Total Annual
$ 3,185,000 $ 11,980,800 $ 1,331,200 NA
Payroll
Projected Class 6b
$ 17,369 $ 12,500 NA $ 17,000 NA
Relief per Job
Other Features
Required Village to
Invest in Public No No No No No
Infrastructure
Challenging Building
No Yes NA No No
To Reuse
Highly Visible Site No Yes No No No
Yellow Highlight - Signifies that feature is on the more positve end of the scale.
NA - Not applicable
2 of 8.
Northbrook Class 6b Projects
Nestle Waters Revell- Bernhard
Business Bell Flavors Pylon Tools
North America Monogram Woodwork
310 Huehl (31,400
Property Address 725 Landwehr 500 Academy 1855 Holste 3670 Woodhead
of 71,000 sq.ft.)
Year 2004 2003 1998 1998 1997
Class 6b Incentive
Requested Incentive Existing and
Added Value Only Added Value Added Value Added Value
Would Apply on… Added Value
Request Approved or
Approved Approved Approved Tabled by Applicant Approved
Denied by Village
School/Park/Library No comments
Not available No - 27 Not available Not available
Districts Support received
Projected Property Tax
Savings for Applicant
$ 545,000 $ 3,360,000
(Comparing w/ 6b to
w/out 6b)
Building Features
Length of Vacancy of
Building (in > 24 20 NA NA NA
months)
Purchase Price of Real
Property (Building & Lease $ 8,000,000 NA NA NA
Land)
Building Floor Area
31,400 166,000
(Existing Sq.Ft..)
Projected Value of
Improvements to $ 1,300,000
Existing Building(1)
Ratio of Value of
Building Improvements 2.39
to Property Tax Savings
Ratio of Value of
Building Improvements
NA
to Purchase Price of
Real Property
Job Features
Projected Number of
45 160
Full-Time Jobs
Average Hourly Wage
$ 21.75
or Annual Salary*
Estimated Total Annual
$ 2,035,800 $ -
Payroll
Projected Class 6b
$ 12,111 $ 21,000
Relief per Job
Other Features
Required Village to
Invest in Public No No No No No
Infrastructure
Challenging Building
NA Yes NA NA NA
To Reuse
Highly Visible Site No No No No No
Yellow Highlight - Signifies that feature is on the more positve end of the scale.
NA - Not applicable
3 of 8.
Northbrook Class 6b Projects
Diversified Metal Institutional
Business Gold Realty Rose Group
Products Foods Packaging
Property Address 1000 Sunset Ridge 2205 Carlson 2900 Shermer 3411 Commercial
Year 1997 1996 1995 1995
Class 6b Incentive
Refurbish an
Existing Building.
Requested Incentive Application denied Refurbish an
New Building New Building
Would Apply on… by County because Existing Building
not all PINS were
industrial.
Request Approved or
Approved Approved Approved Withdrawn
Denied by Village
School/Park/Library
Not available Not available Not available Not available
Districts Support
Projected Property Tax
Savings for Applicant
(Comparing w/ 6b to
w/out 6b)
Building Features
Length of Vacancy of
Building (in NA - New building NA - New building
months)
Purchase Price of Real
Property (Building & NA NA
Land)
Building Floor Area
26,000
(Existing Sq.Ft..)
Projected Value of
Improvements to
Existing Building(1)
Ratio of Value of
Building Improvements
to Property Tax Savings
Ratio of Value of
Building Improvements
to Purchase Price of
Real Property
Job Features
Projected Number of
Full-Time Jobs
Average Hourly Wage
or Annual Salary*
Estimated Total Annual
Payroll
Projected Class 6b
Relief per Job
Other Features
Required Village to
Invest in Public No No No No
Infrastructure
Challenging Building
Yes NA NA ???
To Reuse
Highly Visible Site Yes No Yes No
Yellow Highlight - Signifies that feature is on the more positve end of the scale.
NA - Not applicable
4 of 8.
Cook County Class 6b Classification Survey January 2012
Does your municipality have any When reviewing a Class 6b
guidelines/criteria, in addition the request, does your Does your municipality
criteria outlined by Cook County, municipality provide a offer any sort of alternative
that it uses to determine whether or process by which other to the Class 6b incentive in
not to support the Class 6b local taxing districts have terms of property tax
Classification for an industrial an opportunity to comment abatement for industrial
property? If yes, please provide a on the request? If yes, properties? If yes, please
copy of your municipalities please describe that describe and/or attach a
Municipality guidelines/criteria. process. description of the incentive.
Yes. The local taxing districts
are notified of the application
and when City Council will
review it. 6b requests are put
under the Committee of the
Whole portion of the meeting
where public comment is
Des Plaines Yes. See attached. always allowed. No.
Evanston No. Yes at City Council. No.
Glenview Yes. See attached. Yes. See attached No.
Northbrook Yes. See attached. Yes. See attached No.
Palatine No. No. No.
Park Ridge No. No. No.
Yes. We write a letter to the
school districts which are
affected of the date, time and
place that the 6b will be
Rolling Meadows Yes. See attached. discussed. No.
Schaumburg Yes. See attached. No. No.
Yes. Skokie generally
informs the affected local
school district and invites
them to the Board of Trustees
meeting when the 6b will be
Skokie Yes. See attached. considered. No.
Streamwood No. No. No.
Wilmette No.
PROCEDURES AND APPLICATION
FOR CITY OF DES PLAINES CONSIDERATION
OF COOK COUNTY REAL ESTATE CLASSIFICATION 6b
Community and Economic Development Department
1420 Miner Street
Des Plaines IL 60016-4498
(847) 391-5306
Procedures for City of Des Plaines Review of Cook County Class 6b
Property Tax Abatement Incentive
1. Please review the latest Cook County Assessor’s Office “Class 6b Eligibility Bulletin”
before completing the City of Des Plaines’ application. The Eligibility Bulletin can be
found by visiting: http://cookcountyassessor.com and will help you determine if you
qualify for the abatement incentive.
2. A completed copy of the Cook County Assessor’s Office “Class 6b Eligibility Application”
and attached “City of Des Plaines Application for Cook County Real Estate Classification
6b” with supporting documents must be submitted to:
City of Des Plaines
Community and Economic Development Department (CED)
1420 Miner Street
Des Plaines IL 60016-4498
Note: You should contact the Cook County Assessor’s office at (312) 443-7550 for any
other information they may require for the incentive.
3. A $750 non-refundable application fee must be submitted with the application. This fee
covers the City’s administrative costs. Additional fees may be required if an
extraordinary independent analysis of your application is required.
4. The CED Department will review the proposed applicant for any outstanding interoffice
issues before reviewing the request. If none are found, and all necessary information
has been submitted, an evaluation of your request will be reviewed, prepared and
submitted to the Economic Development Commission (EDC). EDC meetings occur
every 2nd Wednesday per month at 7:30 am in room 101 of City Hall. You must be
present at the EDC meeting when your proposal is on the EDC agenda.
The EDC will give a recommendation to the City Council regarding its support or denial
of the application. A written staff recommendation will also be prepared prior to the City
Council meeting in which the application will be considered.
5. The taxing jurisdictions that may be financially affected by the incentive are alerted via
written correspondence when scheduled for City Council.
6. At the City Council meeting in which the application will be considered, you must be
prepared to make a brief presentation and answer any questions that may arise.
7. If the City Council approves your application, a certified copy of the resolution
accompanying the application is forwarded to you. You will need to forward that certified
copy to the Cook County Assessor’s office.
8. The application should be used as a guide for providing adequate information to the City
regarding your request. If supplemental information is required, the City will contact you,
should City Staff deem it necessary.
CITY OF DES PLAINES APPLICATION FOR
COOK COUNTY REAL ESTATE CLASSIFICATION 6b
This original, signed application and all supporting documents must be
completed to be considered for City approval. Please attach the application fee
to the original submittal. Please type or print.
APPLICANT INFORMATION:
NAME OF APPLICANT: ______________________________________________
CIRCLE APPLICABLE ENTITY:
CORPORATION LLC PARTNERSHIP NON-PROFIT
DATE OF INCORPORATION:___________________________________________
STATE OF INCORPORATION:__________________________________________
PHONE: ( )_________________ E-MAIL: ___________________
ADDRESS: _________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
NAME OF AGENT/REPRESENTATIVE (if applicable):
NAME: ________________________________________________________
PHONE: ( )______________ E-MAIL: ________________________
ADDRESS: _______________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY:
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
STREET ADDRESS: ______________________________________________
______________________________________________
PERMANENT REAL ESTATE INDEX NUMBER(S):
ATTACH THE FOLLOWING:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (EXHIBIT A)
SITE DIMENSION & SQUARE FOOTAGE/PLAT OF SURVEY (EXHIBIT
B)
BUILDING DIMENSIONS/SITE PLAN (EXHIBIT C)
CITY OF DES PLAINES ECONOMIC DISCLOSURE FORM (EXHIBIT D)
COMPLETE LIST OF ALL OWNERS, DEVELOPERS, OCCUPANTS,
AND OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES (INCLUDING ALL BENEFICIAL
OWNER OF A CORPORATION AND/OR LAND TRUST) IDENTIFIED BY
NAMES AND ADDRESSES HAVING AN INTEREST IN THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY AND THE PROPOSED USER AND THE NATURE AND
EXTENT OF THIS INTEREST (EXHIBIT E)
DESCRIPTION OF PRECISE NATURE AND EXTENT OF THE
INDUSTRIAL USE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. SPECIFY, WHERE
APPLICABLE, THE AMOUNT/PERCENTAGE OF FLOOR AREA
DEVOTED TO MANUFACTURING, WAREHOUSE/DISTRIBUTION,
OTHER INDUSTRIAL, AND NON-INDUSTRIAL USES (EXHIBIT F)
CURRENT ZONING OF PROPERTY: _____________________________________
IF ZONING AMENDMENTS, VARIATIONS, OR OTHER ZONING RELIEF WILL BE
REQUIRED, SPECIFY PROPOSED CHANGES:
__________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________
ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF NEW EQUALIZED ASSESSED VALUATION (EAV)
GENERATED BY THE NEW DEVELOPMENT: ____________________
ANALYSIS OF TAXES GENERATED BY THE NEW DEVELOPMENT WITH AND
WITHOUT THE ABATEMENT INCENTIVE (EXHIBIT H):
ESTIMATED NUMBER OF FULL-TIME AND PART-TIME JOBS ON PREMISES AS
RESULT OF THE NEW DEVELOPMENT: FULL-TIME______ PART-TIME_____
SIGNATURE: ________________________________________________
DATE: ________________________________________________
VILLAGE OF GLENVIEW PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING
COOK COUNTY 6(B) TAX INCENTIVE REQUESTS
STEP 1
Applicant Files Formal Application with
Start Cook County Assessor
STEP 2 Preliminary Meeting with the Economic Development
Division
Explanation of Glenview’s eligibility guidelines and procedural requirements prior
to requesting Glenview’s support for Class 6b.
Contact Ellen Dean at 847-904-4477 to schedule a meeting.
STEP 3
Submittal of 6b Request
The applicant fills out the Cook County application, a preliminary tax impact table
and a narrative detailing how the applicant has substantially complied with the
Village’s eligibility guidelines (see guidelines). The above information is submitted
to the Village of Glenview, and by separate cover letter to the Superintendent of the
affected School District(s) and the Executive Director of the Glenview Park District.
STEP 4 Minimum 45-day Public Review & Comment Period
During this time the School District(s) and Park District reply to the Village of
Glenview with specific comments.
STEP 5 Board of Trustees Consideration of a Resolution
Finish The Board of Trustees will consider a Resolution upon reviewing the advisory
comments submitted by the Village Staff, School District(s), and Park District and
the applicant’s submittal information. Glenview’s support of the application is
dependant on the applicant’s ability to demonstrate compliance with the eligibility
guidelines and shall be tied to the specific business occupying the subject property.
Glenview’s Cook County Class 6b Eligibility Guidelines
Consideration
Economic & Fiscal Impacts of Business on the Community:
The burden is on the applicant to make a case the incentive is necessary for the project to move
forward.
Evaluation of tax impact to Village based on a vacant parcel/building without the 6b incentive versus
an occupied parcel/building with the 6b incentive.
Comparison of tax impact to a business in Cook County versus Lake County.
Potential for future growth of industry.
Businesses that build on the resources, materials, and workforce of the local community.
A greater increase in the assessed value of the property through the construction of building additions
or making other significant improvements to the site.
Projects not requiring new public capital improvements. If public infrastructure improvements are
necessary, a greater contribution by the developer for public infrastructure improvements. 50%
A greater amount of sales tax base expansion.
Start-up companies and expansions of existing local operations.
Existing Building/Site Conditions & Private Financial Contribution Compared to Relief Sought:
A property owner demonstrating that reasonable efforts have been made to market the property over
time.
Sites that are difficult to lease or sell due to age, size, condition, or unique characteristics of the 45%
building.
Sites for which the purchase price of the property is market rate and is not the reason for needing a 6b
incentive and for which deferred maintenance issues are not the reasons for needing the 6b incentive.
A greater ratio of investment by the assisted business compared to amount of Class 6b relief.
A greater ratio of value of improvements to existing building to purchase price of real property.
For extensions - demonstration of how business conditions have not become more favorable
Buildings that have been vacant for two years or more.
Sites for which prior to applying for a Class 6b exemption, a vacancy appeal for the site has been
granted by Cook County.
Quality Jobs to be Created: 5%
Higher wage rates.
Full-time; long-term, non-seasonal positions.
100%
Consideration
Environmental Impact: 5%
The more environmentally sound the company’s operation, including but not limited to:
o Comprehensive energy and resource efficiency programs, including green buildings (e.g. LEED
certification, binding energy efficiency commitments, etc.) B
o Comprehensive waste reduction, waste exchange, and recycling programs. o
The more environmentally sound the company’s products/services, including but not limited to: n
o Products/services that expand markets for recycled materials. u
o Development of renewable energy resources or products that conserve energy. s
EXHIBIT A
VILLAGE OF NORTHBROOK
CLASS 6B ELIGIBILITY GUIDELINES
Economic & Fiscal Impacts of Business on the Community (50% consideration)
Higher consideration to be given for:
• Potential for future growth of the business and of the industry the business is in.
• Businesses that build on the resources, materials, and workforce of the local community.
• A greater increase in the assessed value of the property through the construction of building additions or making
other significant improvements to the site.
• Projects not requiring new public capital improvements. If public infrastructure improves are necessary, a
greater contribution by the developer for public infrastructure improvements.
• A greater amount of sales tax base expansion.
• Businesses that have a history of contributing to their communities through volunteer work, financial
contributions or other means. If a new start-up business, the business demonstrates its commitment to becoming
involved in the community.
• Start-up companies and expansions of existing local operations.
Conditions of Existing Building /Site and Private Financial Contribution Compared to Public Assistance
(30% consideration)
Higher consideration to be given for:
• Buildings that have been vacant for two years or more.
• Sites for which prior to applying for a Class 6b exemption, a vacancy appeal for the site has been granted by
Cook County.
• A property owner demonstrating that reasonable efforts have been made to market the property over time.
• Sites that are difficult to lease or sell due to age, size, condition, or unique characteristics of the building.
• Sites for which the purchase price of the property is market rate and is not the reason for needing a 6b incentive
and for which deferred maintenance issues are not the reasons for needing the 6b incentive.
• A greater ratio of investment by the assisted business compared to amount of Class 6b relief.
• A lower ratio of Class 6b relief compared to total annual payroll
• A greater ratio of value of improvements to existing the building to purchase price of the real property.
• Quality of the case being made that the Class 6b is necessary for the project to move forward.
Quality Jobs to be Created (20% consideration)
Higher consideration to be given for:
• Higher wage rates.
• Full-time; long-term, non-seasonal positions.
OVERALL CONSIDERATION – 100%
Environmental Impact (Bonus Consideration of up to 5%)
Higher consideration to be given for:
• The more environmentally sound the company’s operation, including but not limited to:
o Comprehensive energy and resource efficiency programs, including green buildings (e.g. LEED
certification, binding energy efficiency commitments, etc.)
o Comprehensive waste reduction, waste exchange, and recycling programs.
• The more environmentally sound the company’s products/services, including but not limited to:
o Products/services that expand markets for recycled materials.
o Development of renewable energy resources or products that conserve energy.
2
CLASS 6B GENERAL REQUIREMENTS & STANDARDS
1. The proposal must satisfy all applicable Cook County criteria for the approval of a Class 6b incentive;
2. The proposal must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Strategic Plan for Economic Development
3. The applicant shall agree to develop, operate, and maintain the Subject Property in compliance with all codes and
ordinances of the Village of Northbrook;
4. The Village shall not renew a Class 6b incentive after the initial 12-year Class 6b assessment time period has
expired.
5. The Village’s support of a particular Class 6b request shall be tied to a specific business(es) that will occupy the
subject property and benefit from the Class 6b property classification.
6. During the life of the Class 6b schedule, the applicant shall agree not to seek a property tax protest that would result
in a property value less than the fair market value set by the Cook County Assessor’s Office during the first year of
the Class 6b schedule.
7. The Village shall require an agreement with the applicant setting the terms and conditions for Class 6b approval.
CLASS 6B REVIEW PROCESS
Prior to the Board of Trustees’ preliminary review of a Class 6b request, the Village Board Administration and Finance
Committee shall review the request and make its recommendation to the full Village Board. At the preliminary review
stage, the Village Board shall decide whether or not the application merits forwarding it to the other taxing districts,
EDC, and ICDC for review and comment. If the Village Board should determine the application has merits, School
District 225, the Park District, and the impacted elementary school district shall be given 45-days to review and make a
formal recommendation to the Village Board regarding a Class 6b request. Also during that 45-day time period, the
Industrial and Commercial Development Commission and Economic Development Committee shall review and forward
a recommendation to the Village Board.
REIMBURSEMENT OF VILLAGE EXPENSES
An applicant requesting the Class 6b Classification shall be responsible for the actual expenses incurred by the Village in
processing an application. Such costs shall include, but not be limited to, the following direct and indirect expenses: (1)
administrative and document preparation and review by Village staff, (2) professional and technical consultant services,
(3) legal review, consultation, and document preparation, and (4) copy reproduction, document recordation, postage, and
other miscellaneous expenses necessary to process the request.
APPLICATION FEE AND ESCROW DEPOSIT
A$5,000 application fee and escrow deposit shall be submitted with each Class 6b request to reimburse the Village for
expenses associated with processing the application. If these expenses exceed the amount of the initial application fee
and escrow deposit, the applicant is responsible for reimbursing the Village for the additional expenses. If the Village
does not approve the request and the actual expenses are less than the amount of the fee and escrow deposit, the applicant
will be issued a refund of the surplus funds by the Village. If the Village approves the request and the actual expenses
are less than the amount of the fee and escrow deposit, the Village will retain all surplus funds.
3
DRAFT FROM 2008
THE NORTHBROOK COMMUNITY PROPERTY TAX REBATE (PTR) INCENTIVE PROGRAM
GENERAL ELIGIBILITY
Any real property classified as industrial or commercial property by the Cook County Real Property Assessment
Classification Ordinance, as amended, is eligible to request property tax relief under the Northbrook Community
Property Tax Rebate (PTR) Incentive Program.
The applicant of an industrial property must first apply for the Class 6b incentive. If Village Board determines that
the Class 6b incentive is not appropriate, the applicant may then request the PTR incentive.
Mixed use projects are eligible as long as the residential dwelling units shall not occupy more than thirty percent
(30%) of the planned development’s gross floor area and all of the dwelling units are “affordable” as defined by the
Village of Northbrook’s Affordable Housing Plan. The PTR shall only apply to the non-residential portion of the
mixed use development and the full property tax obligation shall be paid on the residential portion of the
development.
GENERAL BENEFIT
A qualifying applicant may receive an annual property tax rebate from each of the following local taxing districts: the
Village of Northbrook, the Northbrook Park District, the Northbrook Public Library District, High School District No.
225, and the impacted elementary school district.
The total amount of the rebate from all of the taxing districts shall be determined as follows: :
o The industrial portion of a property is eligible for a property tax rebate no greater than an amount equal to
what an industrial property would receive for the first five years of the Class 6b Classification incentive.
o The commercial portion of a property is eligible for a property tax rebate no greater than an amount equal to
what an industrial property would receive under the twelve years of the Class 6b Classification incentive.
The applicant must provide a payback rationale supporting why the desired incentive is in the public interest.
PROPERTY TAX REBATE (PTR) INCENTIVE REVIEW BOARD
The PTR Incentive Reivew Board (“Review Board”) is a five-member review body comprised of one representative each
from the Village of Northbrook, the Northbrook Park District, the Northbrook Public Library District, High School
District No. 225, and the impacted elementary school district.
The Review Board is established pursuant to an intergovernmental agreement and has the responsibility to examine each
application for a PTR, including the following tasks:
Review each application for completeness.
Thoroughly research, verify, and analyze the contents of each calculation.
Conduct any appropriate impact study and calculations necessary to quantify the benefits and costs proposed by
the application,
Examine the economic viability of the applicant,
Make a collective judgment on the merits of each application – including, whether a rebate would result in a
“financial benefit” to the taxing bodies, and
Write a thoughtful report about each application to the corporate authorities setting forth the Review Board’s
findings and making a recommendation on each application. In its report, the Review Board should set forth the
vote of the members on the Review Board’s recommendation and may include minority positions on the
application at issue.
1
DRAFT FROM 2008
THE NORTHBROOK COMMUNITY PROPERTY TAX REBATE (PTR) INCENTIVE PROGRAM
PROPERTY TAX REBATE (PTR) INCENTIVE REVIEW PROCESS
1. The applicant submits application materials to the Village staff, which reviews the materials for completeness.
2. The Northbrook Board of Trustees reviews the application to determine if offering an incentive as proposed in the
application may create a “public benefit,” using guidelines similar to the Village’s Class 6b Classification guidelines.
If the Board of Trustees determines that there may be a public benefit, the application is forwarded to the Review
Board.
3. Review Board analyzes the application and writes a report with findings and recommendations on the application. If
there are not three members of the Review Board in support of the application, then the Review Board’s report will
include a recommendation of denial of the application.
4. The Review Board’s report is distributed to the staffs and corporate authorizes of each member.
5. The corporate authorities of each member make a final decision on the application, based upon the report of the
review board.
REIMBURSEMENT OF VILLAGE EXPENSES
An applicant requesting the Property Tax Rebate (PTR) incentive shall be responsible for the actual expenses incurred by
the Village and the other members of the Review Board in processing an application. Such expenses shall include, but not
be limited to, the following direct and indirect expenses: (1) administrative, document preparation, and review by Village
and other impacted taxing district staff, (2) professional and technical consultant services, (3) legal review, consultation,
and document preparation, and (4) copy reproduction, document recordation, postage, and other miscellaneous expenses
necessary to process the request.
APPLICATION FEE AND ESCROW DEPOSIT
Each applicant must submit a $5,000 application fee along with its PTR application, which fee will be held in escrow and
drawn upon to reimburse the Village and the other members of the Review Board for expenses associated with processing
the application. If these expenses exceed the amount of the initial application fee, then the applicant is responsible for
reimbursing the Village for the additional expenses.
If an application is not approved and the actual expenses are less than the amount of fee, then the remaining amount in the
escrow will be refunded to the applicant. If the application is approved, then no amount of the fee will be refunded.
PROPERTY TAX REBATE (PTR) INCENTIVE GENERAL REQUIREMENTS & STANDARDS
1. The proposal must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Strategic Plan for Economic Development
2. The applicant shall agree to develop, operate, and maintain the Subject Property in compliance with all codes and
ordinances of the Village of Northbrook;
3. The Village shall not renew a PTR incentive after the initial time period has expired.
4. The Village’s support of a particular PTR incentive shall be tied to a specific business(es) that will occupy the subject
property and benefit from the PTR incentive . If during the life of the PTR incentive, those business(es) cease to
operate on the subject property, the applicant shall refund all of the property taxes rebated to it to the taxing districts.
5. During the life of the PTR incentive, the applicant shall agree not to seek a property tax protest that would result in a
property value less than the fair market value set by the Cook County Assessor’s Office during the first year of the
PTR incentive.
6. An agreement between the applicant and all of the participating taxing districts shall be required setting the terms and
conditions for the PTR incentive approval.
2
DRAFT FROM 2008
THE NORTHBROOK COMMUNITY PROPERTY TAX REBATE (PTR) INCENTIVE PROGRAM
PROPERTY TAX REBATE (PTR) INCENTIVE PROGRAM ELIGIBILITY GUIDELINES
Economic & Fiscal Impacts of Business on the Community (50% consideration)
Higher consideration to be given for:
Potential for future growth of the business and of the industry the business is in.
Businesses that build on the resources, materials, and workforce of the local community.
A greater increase in the assessed value of the property through the construction of building additions or making
other significant improvements to the site.
Projects not requiring new public capital improvements. If public infrastructure improves are necessary, a greater
contribution by the developer for public infrastructure improvements.
A greater amount of sales tax base expansion.
Businesses that have a history of contributing to their communities through volunteer work, financial
contributions or other means. If a new start-up business, the business demonstrates its commitment to becoming
involved in the community.
Start-up companies and expansions of existing local operations.
Conditions of Existing Building /Site and Private Financial Contribution Compared to Public Assistance
(30% consideration)
Higher consideration to be given for:
Buildings that have been vacant for two years or more.
Sites for which prior to applying for the PTR incentive , a vacancy appeal for the site has been granted by Cook
County.
A property owner demonstrating that reasonable efforts have been made to market the property over time.
Sites that are difficult to lease or sell due to age, size, condition, or unique characteristics of the building.
Sites for which the purchase price of the property is market rate and is not the reason for needing the PTR
incentive and for which deferred maintenance issues are not the reasons for needing the incentive.
A greater ratio of investment by the assisted business compared to amount of PTR incentive relief.
A lower ratio of PTR incentive 6b relief compared to total annual payroll
A greater ratio of value of improvements to the existing building to purchase price of the real property.
Quality of the case being made that the PTR incentive is necessary for the project to move forward.
Quality Jobs to be Created (20% consideration)
Higher consideration to be given for:
Higher wage rates.
Full-time; long-term, non-seasonal positions.
OVERALL CONSIDERATION – 100%
Environmental Impact (Bonus Consideration of up to 5%)
Higher consideration to be given for:
The more environmentally sound the company’s operation, including but not limited to:
o Comprehensive energy and resource efficiency programs, including green buildings (e.g. LEED
certification, binding energy efficiency commitments, etc.)
o Comprehensive waste reduction, waste exchange, and recycling programs.
The more environmentally sound the company’s products/services, including but not limited to:
o Products/services that expand markets for recycled materials.
o Development of renewable energy resources or products that conserve energy.
3
COOK COUNTY ASSESSOR’S OFFICE
COOK COUNTY ASSESSOR 118 NORTH CLARK STREET, CHICAGO, IL 60602
PHONE: 312.443.7550 FAX: 312.603.3352
JOSEPH BERRIOS WWW.COOKCOUNTYASSESSOR.COM
CLASS 6B
ELIGIBILITY BULLETIN
Cook County Living Wage Ordinance
Please be advised that every applicant for this incentive will be required to provide an affidavit
to the Assessor’s Office to confirm compliance with the Cook County Living Wage Ordinance.
The Cook County Assessor will not grant any request for incentive classification until it
receives the required affidavit.
Incentive Benefits
The Class 6b classification is designed to encourage industrial development throughout Cook
County by offering a real estate tax incentive for the development of new industrial facilities, the
rehabilitation of existing industrial structures, and the industrial reutilization of abandoned
buildings. The goal of Class 6b is to attract new industry, stimulate expansion and retention of
existing industry and increase employment opportunities.
Under the incentive provided by Class 6b, qualifying industrial real estate would be eligible for the
Class 6b level of assessment from the date that new construction or substantial rehabilitation is
completed and initially assessed or, in the case of abandoned property, from the date of
substantial re-occupancy. Properties receiving Class 6b will be assessed at 10% of market value
for the first 10 years, 15% in the 11th year and 20% in the 12th year. This constitutes a
substantial reduction in the level of assessment and results in significant tax savings. In the
absence of this incentive, industrial real estate would normally be assessed at 25% of its market
value.
Where buildings or other structures qualify for the incentive as new construction or as abandoned
property as defined below, the reduced level of assessment under Class 6b will apply to those
structures in their entirety as well as to the land upon which they are situated. Where there is
substantial rehabilitation of an existing structure which has not been abandoned, the reduced
incentive level of assessment is applicable to the additional market value attributable to the
rehabilitation, including qualified land related to the rehabilitation. (Please note that the
additional value attributable to the rehabilitation for assessment purposes is likely to be
lower than the actual amount spent on the rehabilitation.) Land qualifies when the
rehabilitation adds vertical or horizontal square footage to the improvements. The amount of land
eligible for the incentive shall be in such proportion as the square footage added by the
rehabilitation bears to the total square footage of the improvements on the parcel.
1 of 4 1/25/2011
Eligibility Requirements
Real estate is eligible for Class 6b status under the following conditions:
1. The real estate is used primarily for "industrial purposes".
2. There is either (a) new construction, (b) substantial rehabilitation, or (c) substantial re-
occupancy of "abandoned" property.
3. An Eligibility Application and supporting documents have been timely filed with the Office
of the Assessor according to deadlines as set forth in the "What Must Be Filed" and "Time
for Filing" sections of this Bulletin.
4. The municipality in which such real estate is located (or the County Board, if the real
estate is located in an unincorporated area) must, by lawful resolution or ordinance,
expressly state that it supports and consents to the filing of a Class 6b Application and that
it finds Class 6b necessary for development to occur on the subject property.
The following definitions, as set forth in the Cook County Real Property Assessment
Classification Ordinance, pertain to the Class 6b incentive provision:
Industrial purposes: "Any real estate used primarily in manufacturing ... or in the extraction
or processing of raw materials unserviceable in their natural state to create new physical
products or materials, or in the processing of materials for recycling, or in the transportation or
storage of raw materials or finished or partially finished physical goods in the wholesale
distribution of such materials or goods for sale or leasing."
Manufacturing: "The material staging and production of goods used in procedures
commonly regarded as manufacturing, processing, fabrication, or assembling which changes
existing material into new shapes, new qualities, or new combinations and including research
and development associated with the production of goods."
Abandoned property: "Buildings and other structures that, after having been vacant and
unused for at least 24 continuous months, are purchased for value by a purchaser in whom
the seller has no direct financial interest." An exception to this definition shall be, “if the
municipality or the Board of Commissioners, as the case may be, finds that special
circumstances justify finding that the property is ‘abandoned’ for the purpose of Class 6b.”
The finding of abandonment, along with the specification of the special circumstances, shall
be included in the resolution or ordinance supporting and consenting to the incentive
application. Not withstanding the foregoing, special circumstances may not be determined
to justify finding that a property is deemed “abandoned” where:
A. There has been a purchase for value and the buildings and other structures have not
been vacant and unused prior to such purchase; or
B. There has been no purchase for value and the buildings and other structures have
been vacant and unused for less than 24 continuous months.
If the ordinance or resolution containing a finding of “special circumstances” is that of a
municipality, the approval of the County Board of Commissioners is required to validate
such a finding that the property is deemed “abandoned” for purposes of the incentive, and a
resolution to that effect shall be included with the eligibility application.
2 of 4 1/25/2011
What Must Be Filed
An applicant seeking the reclassification of real estate to Class 6b is required to file a "Class 6b
Eligibility Application" with the Office of the Assessor. At the time of filing the application, a filing
fee of $500.00 must be paid. In addition, an applicant may submit, at the same time, a certified
copy of an ordinance or resolution adopted by the municipality in which the real estate is located
(or the County Board, if the real estate is located in an unincorporated area) expressly stating that
it supports and consents to the filing of a Class 6b Application and that it finds Class 6b
necessary for development to occur on the subject property. If the resolution is not filed at the
time the Eligibility Application is submitted to the Assessor, the applicant must file, at that time, a
letter from the municipality or the County Board confirming that a resolution or ordinance
supporting the incentive has been requested. If the applicant is seeking to apply based on the
reoccupation of abandoned property and will be seeking a finding of “special circumstances”
from the municipality, in addition to obtaining a letter from the municipality confirming that a
resolution or ordinance supporting the incentive has been requested, the applicant must also
file a letter from the County Board confirming that a resolution validating a municipal finding of
special circumstances has been requested.
Should the municipality or the County Board, at a later date, deny the applicant’s request for a
resolution or ordinance, whether or not construction or re-occupancy has begun, the applicant will
be deemed ineligible for reclassification to Class 6b. Any information that is not known or any
supporting documents that are not available at the time of the initial filing must be submitted as a
supplement to the Application.
After the construction or re-occupancy has taken place, an applicant must also file an "Incentives
Appeal Form" requesting that the real estate be reclassified to Class 6b. At the time of filing the
appeal, an appeal fee of $100.00 must be paid. If a resolution from the municipality where the
property is located, or the Cook County Board of Commissioners if located in an unincorporated
area, was not filed with the Eligibility Application, the applicant must file a certified copy of the
resolution or ordinance supporting the incentive at this time. No final action on a request for
reclassification to Class 6b will be taken until an Appeal and an Eligibility Application, along with
the required documentation as described therein, are completed and filed with the Office of the
Assessor.
In addition, during the term of the incentive, the Class 6b recipient must file a triennial affidavit
attesting to the use of the property and the number of workers employed at the Class 6b site.
The Assessor will mail Class 6b recipients the affidavit forms at the time of their triennial
reassessments. The affidavit must be signed, notarized and returned to the Assessor within
three weeks. Failure to file the triennial affidavits within that time will result in the loss of the
incentive.
Time for Filing
The Eligibility Application along with the appropriate resolution or letter confirming that a
resolution has been requested must be filed with the Assessor prior to, but no earlier than one
year before, commencement of new construction (excluding demolition, if any) or substantial
rehabilitation. With respect to abandoned property, the eligibility application must be made to
the Assessor prior to the commencement of the reoccupation of the vacant and unused
property.
3 of 4 1/25/2011
Where reoccupation of "abandoned" property and subsequent substantial rehabilitation is
planned, a single Eligibility Application and resolution, ordinance, or letter confirming that a
resolution has been requested, may be filed for both situations, provided that the Application is
filed prior to the commencement of reoccupation and such rehabilitation.
To finalize the classification change, a "Real Estate Assessed Valuation Appeal" must be filed
after the construction or re-occupancy has taken place. In instances where a certified copy of an
ordinance or resolution expressly stating that the municipality or County Board supports and
consents to filing of a Class 6b Application has not yet been filed, it must be filed at this time. For
the purpose of certifying final assessments on a timely basis to the Board of Appeals, deadlines
for filing Appeals are established on a township basis. Check with the Office of the Assessor to
determine when the deadline occurs for a particular township.
The 6b classification may be renewed during the last year in which a property is entitled to a
10% assessment level or when the incentive is still applied at the 15% or 20% assessment
level, by filing a renewal application and a certified copy of a resolution or ordinance adopted
by the municipality in which the real estate is located, or by the County Board, if located in an
unincorporated area of Cook County, expressly stating that it supports and consents to the
renewal of the Class 6b incentive and that it has determined that the industrial use of the
property is necessary and beneficial to the local economy. The notice of intent to request
renewal will be forwarded by the Assessor’s Office to the Cook County Board. The owners
must notify the Assessor’s Office of their intent to request renewal at the time they request a
resolution or ordinance agreeing to the renewal from the municipality or County Board. The
number of renewal period requests is not limited.
Questions regarding Class 6b may be directed to the Development Incentives
Department of the Office of the Cook County Assessor, Room 301, 118 North Clark
Street, Chicago, Illinois 60602, (312) 603-7529.
4 of 4 1/25/2011