Hypocrisy
or something nicer?
I am not going to call it hypocrisy.
That word carries a connotation of malevolent intent and effectively
snuffs out conversation about an issue. If you want to really get
someone's back up just accuse them of this fault. There are other
words though. One may call it being disingenuous, one may call it a
lack of understanding or just simply being unwilling to look at
issues with an eye to the causes and effects of some action. I
suppose one could sometimes call it selfishness but that is getting
pretty close to hypocrisy.
I have been paying pretty close
attention to the Centrepointe development in downtown Lexington that
the Webb Brothers have been trying to take somewhere for quite a few
years now. It seems to me that they knowingly misled the city
administration and cajoled them into allowing the destruction of a
historically and architecturally significant block of buildings just
to create a bare space that would somehow encourage the city to
eagerly accept anything to fill up the spot. They said they had
financing in place for an expansive project and it was only after the
destruction of those properties that they admitted the financing had
evaporated. To be sure, the Great Recession intervened but there are
a lot of questions of intent that have never been answered. Now they
are asking the city to issue $30 million in bonds to underwrite the
construction of a three story parking garage under the development.
First the city asked the state to issue the bonds but it declined.
Now, the city is looking at hooking itself for the bond issue and the
developers wait with bated breath assuring everyone that the project
will continue even if the bond issue is not approved. Hmmmm!
But, I do not come here to talk about
Lexington's downtown project but it serves as a fine example of
something that quite a few people are beginning to talk about.
Something that we, here in Somerset-Pulaski County, have had some
experience with and could experience more in the future. What I am
referring to is the creation of special taxing districts that would
procure Tax Increment Financing for projects using the taxes
generated by the project to pay the costs.
All that to get here. I read Mike
Whitaker's letter in the newspaper the other day and I have to say
that I agree with his point. We should do all that we can to present
our community in the best possible light when it comes to making an
attractive place for people to do business. I would not limit that
effort to just being presentable to our visitors but also to other
businesses that might locate here. The city has done a pretty good
job of that but a lot of the local business district is still served
by county government. I wrote a column a couple of weeks ago about
perhaps planting medians with native wildflowers but that may not
work as well along US 27 in the business district. In addition to
mowing and not impeding traffic with construction we could also give
more attention to better code enforcement and planning and zoning.
There are stretches of US 27 that are now beginning to look like
someone may have given some thought to development and it has only
taken fifty years to get here. Things like that show that there are
governmental structures in place that not only care what the area
looks like but are sensitive to property values and advancements that
would enhance commerce. One of the things that could indicate a
progressive community is a public wi-fi system that would offer
speeds only dreamed of with the current providers. The internet has
now invaded every aspect of business and should be considered a
utility rather than just entertainment. If private enterprise is
unwilling to take on the task then governmental entities should
shoulder the load.
One of the critical issues in this
years County Judge Executive race is how the county will usher in an
attitude that we are a community that wants businesses to locate
here. This is not simply the old saw of getting out of the way and
letting business do what it will. It also includes various
intangible benefits that offer the employees of those businesses
reason to believe they are not looking at an artistic and
entertainment desert. Government must present itself as capable and
knowledgeable and not just a pushover. Preparation of the population
to supply the needs of modern industry has to be developed and made
visible. Since tourism is a major industry here there should be
attractions that offer plenty to do while not on the lake.
Public/private partnerships can be useful here.
Both the city and the county have
development districts that have the power to offer tax abatements to
induce business to locate here and have done that quite a few times,
some with success and some not. We must be diligent to insure that
the taxpayer is receiving good benefit from the forgiveness of taxes.
Here is where the TIF financing comes in. There is a certain logic
for the use of tax increment financing but those who argue that it
has no cost to the taxpayer are just wrong. They argue that the
financing is paid for from taxes that would not have been generated
otherwise and to a degree that is true. But not totally. If a
government is expected to provide services then there must be
revenues to support it and that has to come from somewhere. I would
like to see a summary of how tax forgiveness has paid off for our
area. It seems that we have been able to attract low wage jobs that
are gone soon after the period of abatement is done. That only
results in empty factories that present a poor picture to new
business. What we must NOT do is be seen as a provincial town and
county that does not want anything to change and we have been guilty
of that in the past.
But if we are going to do that then
government will have to be part of the solution. When we do that
will there be howls of “SOCIALISM” or does that just apply when
government tries to help citizens rather than businesses? Is it OK
to provide benefits to businesses to the exclusion of helping the men
and women in the trenches? That's not hypocrisy is it?
My Take? Let's make the candidates
talk about specifics.