ADVERTISEMENT

First hearing on Janesville BID set for Monday

By BETH WHEELOCK   Thursday, August 14, 2008 - 4:38 a.m.
ADVERTISEMENT

From the WCLO newsroom:

The Janesville Plan Commission will soon hear from downtown property owners about a Business Improvement District (BID), a project that could dramatically change the city's downtown.

City Development Specialist Al Hulick says the BID is intended to begin the process of stabilizing downtown improvements, ensure those improvements continue and that there's a funding source. Part of the funding source is an assessment to downtown property owners within the district. Each assessable property owner within the BID is assessed $2.80 per $1,000 assessed value, with a $275 minimum and $3,500 maximum assessment.

Hulick says there are 82 existing BIDs within Wisconsin, with Beloit's district seeing success for nearly 20 years.

Hulick says the Janesville BID comes forward for City Council review on September 22nd. If the council chooses to adopt it, it would come into play on the tax rolls January 1, 2009.

The first public hearing is set for Monday's plan commission meeting.




reader COMMENTS
Click here to view reader comments
(15)
JohnDoe
Aug 14, 2008 at 11:06 p.m.
Suggest removal

To proartist...Although I do not live in the "downtown" area, I do frequent it quite regularly.
.
The problem here seems to be, not, the distribution of undesirable citizens, but rather the citizens (those residing in this particular area and those not) not receiving the the protection that we all pay for of the police to ensure the welfare and safety of the citizenry at all times.
.
This includes, but is not limited to, all of the aforementioned problems.
.
It is time for Chief Mahan to be held accountable to rectify these problems. No excuses.
.
"We" should not be of the mindset that our problems can be "solved" by merely "re-distributing" them.

proartist
Aug 14, 2008 at 10:05 p.m.
Suggest removal

Clarification to JohnDoe: "Perceived" crime in Janesville's downtown means equated to larger cities with very high violent crime rates as most people might imagine from their TV screens. Real Janesville downtown crime is bad enough. Does that mean we should let it continue and grow unabated and continue to try to concentrate things-most-people-don't-want-to-deal-with-and-would-rather-ignore downtown? Of course not. It is a fact that police chase suspects through downtown residential backyards, men urinate on private property, there have been multiple unpublicized overdose deaths in an unsupervised and unlicensed group home, drug sales in parking lots, gangs of people walking in the middle of the street refusing to move for traffic, men sleeping under private homeowner porches, residential break-ins, others panhandling in groups surrounding cars at a stop sign and asking for money, etc. Such "perceived" crime does not include semis blocking driveways, noise, litter, minor property damage, the dangers of speeding and jaywalking, and other nuisance problems. Safer in the outlying neighborhoods of Janesville? Maybe for now. Maybe not. Shall the city write off specific areas of town or should the community as a whole work together to remedy and revitalize for the benefit of all? Can all more equitably share the perils of living in a city as well as the benefits? When anything is concentrated in just one area of any city, when adequate zoning is not applied equally under uniformly enforced laws, or when some areas of any city decide they are "better" than another, all will eventually fail and the sense of real community is lost. Janesville has a historic and valuable downtown that is worth preserving, restoring and revitalizing. Hopefully enough of the citizenry have enough vision, commitment and caring to do the hard work toward those goals.

JohnDoe
Aug 14, 2008 at 8:13 p.m.
Suggest removal

janesvillean...it doesn't take a BID to have meetings and for the police to patrol and ensure public welfare and safety.
.
proartist...if it's only a "PERCIEVED" problem, then there is no need to disperse your despised group homes and faith based charities. You only need to change the PERCEPTION.

abcat51
Aug 14, 2008 at 4:37 p.m.
Suggest removal

In 1950 my uncle quit smoking because the government raised the tax on a pack of cigs a penny to pay for the Korean war. He said, "why should smokers pay for a war, and the non smokers not contribute anything"??? Why should property owners downtown be forced to pay more tax than any other taxpayer in this city???

janesvillean
Aug 14, 2008 at 2:39 p.m.
Suggest removal

You know, if there were a BID, they could have meetings with the police to discuss problems like panhandling and whether a 20-year-old anti-circuit ordinance is still needed.
.
(I'll have to go look at the downtown comprehensive plan to see if these were concerns voiced by the community during its development.)

proartist
Aug 14, 2008 at 11:55 a.m.
Suggest removal

If people of Janesville don't want the downtown to be the area where there are panhandlers and a PERCEIVED (not always realistic) higher-crime rate, then perhaps they should share the burden of all the group homes (licensed and unlicensed/ supervised and not), the faith-based charities, rotating homeless shelters, and reduced-rent residences that most prefer to let proliferate and concentrate downtown. When this "burden" is SHARED more equitably throughout a community, ALL have a better quality of life - including businesses. You may feel "safer" in a NE suburb going downtown only to use it as a thoroughfare speedway but you also diminish Janesville's historic heritage and sense of community which is a resource that, once gone, will never, ever again realize the limitless potential and opportunities for tourism, culture, and consumer growth.

MOC0428
Aug 14, 2008 at 11:12 a.m.
Suggest removal

Rosewood: Did you forget your meds today????

Pwrtrp: What? You are blaming all of this because the city put a limit on the amount of times a car can drive down a street in an hour? Give me a break, stopping teenagers from driving downtown did not shut it down!

To both of you "Drugs are bad".

gilmoregal
Aug 14, 2008 at 11:10 a.m.
Suggest removal

Yes, there are panhandlers downtown. I've been approached a few times myself - in Walgreens parking lot. Luckily, both times I was right outside the front door & just ran inside, didn't give the guy anything. I know several people who work downtown & park in the big parking lot behind Old Towne Mall - they get approached all the time. They've also had their cars broken into, etc.

sannio
Aug 14, 2008 at 10:32 a.m.
Suggest removal

Rosewood - Panhandlers? Really? I haven't walked the downtown area for awhile, but I've lived here over 45 years, and was never approached, even when I lived in the downtown area for many years. People have mentioned there were panhandlers back in the '60s, but I've never seen them. How do you know they will rob you? Have you been robbed by a panhandler? If this is true, then we should be carrying guns when we walk downtown. I really don't want to spend the money at this time, however.

rosewood
Aug 14, 2008 at 8:14 a.m.
Suggest removal

If you want more people to come downtown, the JPD need to contol the panhandlers-I get approach all the time and I don't like it, they act if you don't give them money, they will just rob you. Its a big problem and we need to get this under contol for safety reasons.

janesvillecomments
Aug 14, 2008 at 7:55 a.m.
Suggest removal

It would be fairer if the affected property owners had a chance to vote on whether to have a BID or not.
.
As for not owning downtown property, I'm thinking with all the bars where alcohol is served downtown, perhaps it's time for a non-alcoholic alternative. Maybe a place with a gimmick to draw more traffic downtown, like say - topless dancers!!!
.
Yeah, that's the ticket!

abcat51
Aug 14, 2008 at 7:12 a.m.
Suggest removal

The downtown property district just got devlaued. I would never buy property that I would have to pay extra taxes on, when other citizens of Janesville get a pass.

Before you post a comment, consider this:

Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy Agreement
  • Keep it clean. Comments that are obscene, vulgar or sexually oriented will be removed. Creative spelling of such terms or implied use of such language is banned, also.
  • Don't threaten to hurt or kill anyone.
  • Be nice. No racism, sexism or any other sort of -ism that degrades another person.
  • Harassing comments. If you are the subject of a harassing comment or personal attack by another user, do not respond in-kind.  Hit the "Suggest Removal" button on offensive comments.
  • Share what you know. Give us your eyewitness accounts, background, observations and history.
  • Do not libel anyone. Libel is writing something false about someone that damages that person's reputation.
  • Ask questions. What more do you want to know about the story?
  • Stay focused. Keep on the story's topic.
  • Help us get it right. If you spot a factual error or misspelling, email newsroom@gazettextra.com or call 1-800-362-6712.
  • Remember, this is our site. We set the rules, and we reserve the right to remove any comments that we deem inappropriate.

Post Comment

Commenting requires registration.

Username:
Password: (Forgotten your password?)

Comment:

ADVERTISEMENT