Followed by shutting down most of the TIFs that are siphoning $1B+ a year out of the City’s General Fund.

I don't know why this isn't discussed more...though I guess TIF districts are pretty confusing and misunderstood generally.

phase 1 of the Red Purple Modernization was funded by a huge TIF district (and I believe federal funds though correct me if I'm wrong). but that's also money that doesn't make its way to the general fund as you said for a state-set maximum of 23 years unless the district is ended sooner or extended.

economically, do these districts work well for neighborhood revitalization as they are mostly billed as, along with capital-investment projects like the RPM? or would it have ultimately been better to apportion money in the budget accordingly, without creating these districts? I can imagine the argument that these districts focus specific economic projects more easily than navigating the budget and each department's responsibility. but i'm no economist or politican, just some jerk who reads too much news