Did we get a peek at Laredo's economic development future in the San Antonio Express News Saturday when they published an article about HEB being embarrassed by the city for stating that HEB wanted to close a road for future development.
Here are some pieces of the article (full story at: http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/City-apologizes-to-H-E-B-over-premature-notice-1399502.php#ixzz1NkNdXwwS )
City officials Friday found themselves backpedaling and apologizing to one of San Antonio's biggest employers in the wake of a premature notice that H-E-B wanted to close part of Main Avenue to build a downtown grocery store.
The city has been courting H-E-B and badly wants a downtown grocery, but the grocer has not, in fact, requested a street closure nor definitively said it will build a downtown store.
“Let me first say, H-E-B has not made a request to close Main,” said Pat DiGiovanni, deputy city manager. “That canvassing sheet that was sent out to a number of entities was premature and unauthorized. We apologize to the company publicly that their name was put on that petition form. It was inappropriate and unsanctioned.”
“We are in discussions with H-E-B, and those discussions will remain private at this point,” DiGiovanni said. “We have not reached any agreements. It is exploratory, and we're each doing our part to advance this project.”
H-E-B spokeswoman Dya Campos said she was surprised when her office received inquiries about the canvassing note.
“We were not aware of any kind of paperwork being in the process at all,” she said.
King William Association president Dick Davis said he had received the survey, and had invited H-E-B to attend the association's meeting next week to share its plans for a store.
“And the answer we got was, ‘We really don't have anything to tell you,'” Davis said.
Davis said he still plans on broaching the topic at the association next meeting to gauge member support.
Again, these are cutouts from the article, and you need to read the whole thing for the flavor. But, this is what happens when cities try to do economic development.
Cities work under the expectation of "open government" and have processes in place that support that concept. This is exactly the opposite of the process that is required when in the beginning phases of economic development.
No, repeat, NO company wants their business discussed in the public forum until they are ready for that to happen. In this case, when and if HEB had decided it was feasible to move forward with the project, then that would have been the time to move forward with city processes for closing a street.
My friends, just imagine the City of Laredo handling a prospective move of a large manufacturing/distribution/retail/etc. company from the upper mid-west. Now imagine that a labor union is involved. Do you really think our mayor, city council, or city staffers will keep this prospective move quiet until the company decides whether to embark on its move venture? I don't think the city could keep it quiet?
And why does it need to remain quiet? For one there are specific "closing" laws that require companies to give notice within a specified amount of time of the actual closing. Companies keep moves close to the vest to keep the announcements within the minimum time frames required. And if the company is just "exploring" opportunities, then what happens if the employees and or suppliers find out? Would there be retaliation? Companies do not want to deal with those possibilites.
One big question is: "Do we want to give the city more power to suppress information from the public?" We want and expect our city to be open and transparent in it's business dealings. In fact, there are several laws that require the city operate in the light of day. How, when, and where do we draw the line between open government and keeping secrets? Who will be the one that determines what should be kept quiet?
Should information should leak to the press/public about a prospective move, what will be the consequences? I can give you a couple. One, the company will not move here and will tell everyone they know about the experience. Two, the word will get out amongst the consulting community that handles company relocation's, and that word will be that you cannot trust Laredo and that you would be best in avoiding the move there if there is any requirement of confidentiality.
What kind of pressure will the city be under by developers and businesses who file open records request/lawsuits wanting to know what prospective clients/competitors may be coming to town? Should the citizens have to pay for those defenses? Or should we continue with public/private funding that removes the potential for Laredo's future companies being embarrassed?
Do cities have a role in economic development?
Of course cities have a role in economic development. They are needed when negotiations are required for such things as tax abatement's, passing of ordinances for zoning, and other local regulation. But those come much later in the discussions with prospective clients, and usually occur after a very strong commitment is made by the client to locate in a city. So, the chances that information about the client becoming public are less likely to affect the move. In the case shown about the HEB above, if the information would have gone public after HEB had decided they did want to open the store, they would have expected the public involvement as that is the process.
What is the City of Laredo planning to do about economic development?
Talk is that the City of Laredo is getting ready to cut all funding to the Laredo Development Foundation, and that the city will take over economic development. Is this more than just talk? Listen to the city manager setting the table for cutting LDF funds when he talks of less revenue coming in. Listen to, and watch the actions of certain city councilmen who seem to have chips on their shoulders for the LDF. Look at the city hiring an LDF staffer who has experience in economic development. The script is there and is being executed.
My prediction; LDF will not receive any money from the city of Laredo in the FY2012 budget. The city will move forward with 4A-4B talks to allow the city to use the sports venue tax for economic development (I am for the 4A-4B plan, but not the city managing it). Whether or not 4A-4B does or does not pass a required vote of the public, the city will move forward with it's own agenda of economic development.
Those are my predictions, and they will come true unless we citizens stand up and say no to the city trying to manage economic development.
I love this post.
ReplyDelete