AndersonJohn. 1990. Tax increment financing: Municipal adoption and growth. National Tax Journal43: 155–63.
2.
BerryChristopher. 2007. Piling on: The fiscal effects of jurisdictional overlap. Working paper. Harris School of Public Policy Studies, University of Chicago.
3.
BlankenauWilliam F.SkidmoreMark L.. 2004. School finance litigation, tax expenditure limitations, and educational spending. Contemporary Economic Policy22:127–43.
4.
BrennanGeoffreyBuchananJamesThe logic of tax limits: Alternative constitutional constraints on the power to tax. National Tax Journal32:11–22.
5.
DownesThomasDyeRichardMcGuireTherese1998. Do limits matter? Evidence on the effects of tax limitations on student performance. Journal of Urban Economics43:401–17.
6.
DuncombeWilliamYingerJohn1997. Why is it so hard to help central city schools?Journal of Policy Analysis and Management16:85–113.
7.
DuncombeWilliamYingerJohn. 2000. Financing higher student performance standards: The case of New York state. Economics of Education Review19:363–86.
8.
DyeRichardMerrimanDavid2000. Does tax increment financing discourage economic development?Journal of Urban Economics47:306–28.
9.
DyeRichardMcGuireThereseMerrimanDavid2001. The impact of property taxes and property tax classification on business activity in the Chicago metropolitan area. Journal of Regional Science41: 757–77.
10.
FeiockRichard C. ed. 2004. Metropolitan governance: Conflict, competition, and cooperationWashington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
11.
HuddlestonJack. 1986. Distribution of development costs under tax increment financing. Journal of the American Planning Association52:194–98.
12.
KroheJames. 2007. At the tipping point: Has tax increment financing become too much of a good thing?Planning Magazine (March): 20–25.
13.
LehnenRobertJohnsonCraig2001. The impact of tax increment financing on school districts: An Indiana case study. In Tax increment financing and economic development: Uses, structures, and impact, ed.JohnsonCraigManJoyce. Albany: SUNY Press.
14.
ManJoyceRosentraubMark1998. Tax increment financing: Municipal adoption and effects on property tax growth. Public Finance Review26:523–47.
15.
MullinsDaniel R.2004. Tax and expenditure limitations and the fiscal response of local government: Asymmetric intra-local fiscal effects. Public Budgeting and Finance24:111–47.
16.
MurphyH. Lee. 2003. School board fighting TIF for big Lisle project. Crains Chicago Business, January 6, 7.
17.
National Education Association and Good Jobs First.2003. Protecting public education from tax giveaways to corporations. NEA research working paper. www.good-jobsfirst.org/pdf/edu.pdf. Accessed January 6, 2006.
18.
OakersonRonald J.1999. Governing local public economies: Creating the civic metropolis. Oakland, CA: ICS Press.
19.
RedfieldKent. 1995. Tax increment financing in Illinois: A legislative issue. Springfield, IL: Taxpayers Federation of Illinois.
20.
ReschovskyAndrew. 2004. The impact of state government fiscal crises on local governments and schools. State and Local Government Review36:86–102.
21.
SteinackerAnnette. 2004. Game theoretic models of metropolitan cooperation. In Metropolitan governance: Conflict, competition, and cooperation, ed.FeiockR., 46–66. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
22.
TieboutCharles. 1956. A pure theory of local public expenditures. Journal of Political Economy64:416–24.
23.
TsouderosTrineYednakCrystal2004. TIF payoffs recede for schools; towns seek more time on tax deals. Chicago Tribune (Metro Section), May 24, 1.
24.
WeberRachel. 2003. Equity and entrepreneurialism: The impact of tax increment financing on school finance. Urban Affairs Review38:619–44.
25.
WeberRachelMerrimanDavidDev BhattaSaurav. 2003. Does tax increment financing increase the value of urban industrial property?Urban Studies40:2001–21.