In my last two columns I’ve recommended that voters ask candidates for city council where they want to cut government spending. After all, unless the economy perks up, then more spending cuts in current programs will be necessary to supply money to satisfy the desire of the council, and the public, to increase spending on new programs, especially those relating to “economic development,” in this era of “no new taxes.”
While nobody, as far as I know, is raising this question yet, other necessary questions are being raised about how to proceed with economic development, as well as the development of a new multipurpose center.
On the economic development front, both The Flash Today and the “newspaper” have reported that the city council must reconsider its decision to give tax breaks to the Hoffbrau Corporation’s prospective new restaurant here, thereby stirring some healthy debate on this newly opened subject. Not surprising are the objections raised by the owners of two local restaurants which don’t get tax breaks. According to The Flash Today, they’re advocating that “economic funds should be reserved for ‘large businesses that bring numerous jobs.’”
For what it’s worth, I have less of a problem with that than I have with giving tax breaks to some local businesses (such as restaurants) while withholding them from their competitors (such as other local restaurants). In fact, when I was on the council, I actually supported tax breaks and other forms of cooperation with FMC, St. Gobain and Tejas Tubular.
Contributing to this healthy debate are the remarks of the city council member whom you chose to replace me, and who was one of the most enthusiastic proponents of Prop 1 and the establishment of the SEDA. Yet the local “newspaper” recently said he wrote a letter to the editor wherein he said, in part, “I hope Hoffbrau comes to Stephenville, and operates in the old Fiddle Creek Steakhouse location. I believe Hoffbrau will be successful here, with or without a tax abatement.
“But after more thought, I believe it is not fair for the city to tilt the competitive scales in favor of a new restaurant in competition against restaurants already here and paying taxes, which may or may not cause existing restaurants to fail.”
Not only could I not agree with his sentiments more, but I could not possibly express them any better myself.
Also being subject to healthy questioning are the issues surrounding the proposed Multipurpose Center. As another council member told both the Flash Today and the “newspaper,” the prospective cost could be 26 million dollars, and there’s been discussion of a financing scheme by which a private developer would build it and lease it to the city in exchange for payments of about $770,000 a year. When I posted his comments on my blog, Crosswise on Politics, one of my shrewdest correspondents asked how the city could shoulder these payments, in addition to the $450,000 per year the council is supposed to set aside for “economic development” under Prop 1.
Actually, I have another question about financing this Multipurpose Center: Why not put it to a vote by the public? Let the city council determine how much it wants to spend on it, where it wants to put it, and what functions it will serve, and then ask the public for permission to borrow money by issuing bonds to cover its costs.
If the public says yes, the council goes ahead with the project, thereby granting the citizens both the benefits the center will confer, and the responsibility for paying back the money borrowed to pay for it. If the public says no, the council puts the project on the back burner, or the deep freeze, until the public changes its mind. Either way, the public will get what it wants. That’s democracy.
Councilman Harrison suggested that the proposed multi-purpose center be put on the ballot and the mayor responded he would be against putting it on the ballot. However, at the Nov. 30 meeting, the mayor appeared to agree to putting it on the ballot. So, it is unclear where the mayor stands on letting the voters decide.
A possible reason for not wanting to put it on the ballot may be fear that the voters will reject it. And they may well do so. All the talk about a new Multipurpose Center is coming from the Mayor and some of his allies on the council, and not from the public. But given its great expense, it should be put on the ballot, and a full explanation of all costs and benefits should be given the voters before they go to he polls.