|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
08/26/2007On public subsidies and downtown TCTraverse City Mayor pro tem Scott Hardy recently penned a "primer” on local government and regional economy for the local chamber of commerce's newsletter. Hardy's premise leaves one thankful that while some Traverse City voters may have been born at night, it wasn't last night. Hardy bemoans the city's loss of $1.8 million in state revenue sharing over the past seven years, money that's not been "replaced,” other than through state brownfield funds and business tax credits doled out for specific projects here. Now there's a self-serving mix of apples and oranges to advance Hardy's political agenda. The loss of state revenue sharing is a punch-in-the-gut to the city's general fund, while taxpayer millions dedicated for brownfields and business tax credits are reserved solely for wealthy landowners and project developers; that money hasn't translated to a dime for the city's shrinking general fund. To suggest otherwise misleads the public, or worse, shows little understanding of how city finances actually work. Most of all, Hardy's penned piece for the chamber shows he's among the city "leaders” who still don't get it. They may wail about how some folks are "anti-business” or "anti-downtown,” but it's clear to many outside the Hardy circle that local taxpayers have greatly extended themselves to subsidize the downtown. Subsidies like tax increment financing (TIF) indeed have paid some dividends; the downtown bustles and area property values have accelerated accordingly, even with the recent housing slump. But policies that primarily benefit a select few are beginning to cut the other way. General fund concerns prompted officials to raise taxes (a one percent administrative fee) and trim services throughout the city. Meanwhile, downtown-specific coffers are filled with millions in public funds that officials have to figure out how to spend. One bright idea: spend tens of thousands of dollars on a downtown public relations campaign! The Haves vs. Have Nots disparity will only grow as the city chases more TIF districts projects. How much more must city residents give in response to unspoken threats that some businesses might pull up stakes and leave their multimillion-dollar buildings downtown without more public subsidies? The area is witnessing first-hand plenty of impact from the "growth” thirsted for by so many of our officials: more beach closings, cut-through traffic in neighborhoods, and growing stretches of roads that resemble Anytown, U.S.A. It's hard to swallow a mantra from city and business types about the need to "trigger” more growth when they seem so overwhelmed by development that's already here. Instead of playing favorites among downtown interests, why not offer a platform the entire city can get behind? Make it a top priority of both the city's civic and business sectors to improve the quality of life for the people who already live and work here. It's been demonstrated time and again that communities that are great places to live have no trouble attracting top-end business and development, and on the community's terms, rather than terms dictated by developers. Hardy also contended that Traverse City is not, nor has it been for years, a "small town.” That also rings a little hollow, since some officials typically offer up the "small town” argument when they angle for government jobs or no-bid contracts because the community isn't big enough to find others who can do the work. As a bonus, Hardy, who operates his business in neighboring Garfield Township, offered lots of advice on what residents should look for when evaluating candidates in the upcoming city election. Oh, by the way, he's one of those on the ballot. Here's something else voters might want to mull: How about considering candidates who say they'll look out for the entire city, rather than those who always appear ready to pit one part against another?
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
By Bill O'Brien
Printer Friendly Version
Email Page to a Friend
Subscribe