Wheaton looks to increase oversight of downtown group
Wheaton City Council members say they will continue to develop performance-based benchmarks to measure the success of a group charged with promoting the downtown business district.
In addition, the council approved a seven-year agreement Monday that will allow the city to inspect and audit the financial records of the Downtown Wheaton Association with just 48-hour notice to the nonprofit corporation.
The agreement comes after the council voted 4-3 in December to create a new taxing district to provide funding for the association.
Property owners within the special service area are taxed 45 cents per $100 of equalized assessed value — less than half the $95 cents per $100 owners paid for a previous special service area that was set to expire April 30.
The 2012-2013 budget for the DWA — also approved in Monday’s agreement — estimates the city will allocate about $94,000 from the special service area for the group. The city also will direct an estimated $125,392 in tax increment financing money to the association.
The DWA sponsors events year-round designed to increase the profile of the city’s central business district, including a chili cook-off among downtown restaurants, a sidewalk sale and the Vintage Rides car show. The event committee’s costs are budgeted at $139,197 in the coming fiscal year.
The agreement does not set a firm timeline for the audit, but Councilman Phil Suess wants the review conducted this year. City Manager Don Rose said the council will determine at a planning session when to set the date and whether to hire an independent firm to conduct the audit.
“We are dealing with taxpayer money,” Suess said. “I think for the protection of the city we need to have audited financial statements.”
Before the approval Monday, a draft of the agreement made no mention of an audit. Suess’ suggestion to include the audit in the agreement raised questions among some association members about how much financial oversight the city should have over their organization.
Mary Dickson, an attorney for the DWA, pointed out Councilman Todd Scalzo and Jim Kozik, the city’s director of planning, serve as city representatives at DWA’s board meetings.
“You have two watchdogs watching it, every expenditure, every dime that’s going out,” Dixon said.
Jim Mathieson, a DWA board member, said he’s “not sure” he wants to be involved with an organization where there could be “criticism of a luncheon, for instance” after an analysis of financial documents.
“I think that’s not an effective use of money,” Mathieson said of the audit.
Meanwhile, the city will continue to iron out how to evaluate the DWA’s performance as part of an addendum to the agreement. Suess suggested the benchmarks could track foot traffic and building occupancy downtown and measure changes in sale tax over time.
“We need to define the terms of success,” Suess said.
The agreement passed in a 6-1 vote, with Councilwoman Jeanne Ives voting against it and continuing to resist the special service area. She opposed the taxing district in the December vote.
“At least going forward there is a better agreement,” Ives said.
The debate surrounding the special service area sparked a petition drive to block the tax and a federal lawsuit filed by two property owners in the district who claimed city officials wrongfully rejected petitions. The city then filed a motion to dismiss, calling the lawsuit “meritless” in a March city news release.
Rose said the lawsuit is still not resolved.