July 23, 2014 at 2:10 p.m.
Stop and think before razing building (05/16/06)
Letter to the Editor
To the editor:
Those who are elected to public office often have to make decisions that they believe are in the best interest of their constituents. When public policy and public money are both at stake, these decisions are most likely debatable.
I have been in this circumstance myself, weighing the short term budgetary benefits of cutting corners and/or sweeping something under the rug for the next person (thus satisfying short-term budgetary concerns) or doing what I believe is in the best long term interest of my community and taxpayers.
Often is the case that we all want the same thing in the end — a vital and prosperous community where the tax burden upon our citizens is lessened due to growth. We just may disagree about how to get there. Unfortunately, we are in competition with many other similar communities that share the same goals. Typically, these goals will only be met with long term investment of our limited resources.
This investment must be weighed against perceived short term needs. How vital these short term needs are compared to the necessity for investment for long term benefit is where the debate typically lies. It’s a vision thing, if you will, and it calls for delay of gratification — something with which we as humans and politicians struggle.
This is the case with the decision of the Jay County Commissioners to acquire and destroy a historic building front on our town square for a parking lot for courthouse employees.
I admit that my vision of Portland as a potentially attractive residence for entrepreneurs freed by technology to locate where they wish may not be shared by everyone. However, I think it is beyond debate that we are in a war for benefits of the next wave of urban and, I believe, suburban flight.
Attracting decision makers, entrepreneurs and educated/skilled employees is key to our future. Today, jobs follow people; no longer do people follow jobs. This being true, if we are to have a real chance of creating prosperity and growth (which leads to a higher assessed valuation and lower tax rates) we must be willing to invest in building a community that will be attractive for relocation of our target market.
We are fortunate that many of those pieces are in place. Portland is a great small town and Jay County is a great community. One of the few missing pieces is a vital historic downtown Portland. It is one of the things that make us different and attractive. Our courthouse square is a major piece of this puzzle.
With vision, our commissioners have an opportunity for leadership in spurring this revitalization. This is my vision of growth which will not be shared by all, but let’s look at the short-term practical issues.
The case for the need for a parking lot across from our courthouse is weak, at best. Further, I believe it to be incredibly questionable fiscally.
Since this issue has been publicized, I have taken four opportunities to test the need.
During different days during the week and during different times, I have walked the perimeter of the courthouse and counted open spaces. While it’s true that curb-side spots are often limited, I have never counted less than 100 empty spots within two blocks of the courthouse.
This, to me, demonstrates a clear lack of need. Further, after doing some personal investigation into the cost of this project, I estimate that the parking spots in question will cost the taxpayer north of $3,000 per spot.
The purpose of this letter is not to criticize the Commissioners. I have the highest respect for them and anyone who serves the public. It often is not a very rewarding task. They have shown leadership in seeking to take care of a problem building. However, this, in my opinion, is a clear statement of intent.
Have we learned from our mistakes of making short term decisions that may appear to solve a current need and/or seem more efficient in the moment or are we willing, as a community, to invest in the future prosperity of our community?
It’s a vision thing. Many may share my view and many may not, but this debate and the policy going forward is important to our future.
Bryan Alexander
Portland[[In-content Ad]]
Those who are elected to public office often have to make decisions that they believe are in the best interest of their constituents. When public policy and public money are both at stake, these decisions are most likely debatable.
I have been in this circumstance myself, weighing the short term budgetary benefits of cutting corners and/or sweeping something under the rug for the next person (thus satisfying short-term budgetary concerns) or doing what I believe is in the best long term interest of my community and taxpayers.
Often is the case that we all want the same thing in the end — a vital and prosperous community where the tax burden upon our citizens is lessened due to growth. We just may disagree about how to get there. Unfortunately, we are in competition with many other similar communities that share the same goals. Typically, these goals will only be met with long term investment of our limited resources.
This investment must be weighed against perceived short term needs. How vital these short term needs are compared to the necessity for investment for long term benefit is where the debate typically lies. It’s a vision thing, if you will, and it calls for delay of gratification — something with which we as humans and politicians struggle.
This is the case with the decision of the Jay County Commissioners to acquire and destroy a historic building front on our town square for a parking lot for courthouse employees.
I admit that my vision of Portland as a potentially attractive residence for entrepreneurs freed by technology to locate where they wish may not be shared by everyone. However, I think it is beyond debate that we are in a war for benefits of the next wave of urban and, I believe, suburban flight.
Attracting decision makers, entrepreneurs and educated/skilled employees is key to our future. Today, jobs follow people; no longer do people follow jobs. This being true, if we are to have a real chance of creating prosperity and growth (which leads to a higher assessed valuation and lower tax rates) we must be willing to invest in building a community that will be attractive for relocation of our target market.
We are fortunate that many of those pieces are in place. Portland is a great small town and Jay County is a great community. One of the few missing pieces is a vital historic downtown Portland. It is one of the things that make us different and attractive. Our courthouse square is a major piece of this puzzle.
With vision, our commissioners have an opportunity for leadership in spurring this revitalization. This is my vision of growth which will not be shared by all, but let’s look at the short-term practical issues.
The case for the need for a parking lot across from our courthouse is weak, at best. Further, I believe it to be incredibly questionable fiscally.
Since this issue has been publicized, I have taken four opportunities to test the need.
During different days during the week and during different times, I have walked the perimeter of the courthouse and counted open spaces. While it’s true that curb-side spots are often limited, I have never counted less than 100 empty spots within two blocks of the courthouse.
This, to me, demonstrates a clear lack of need. Further, after doing some personal investigation into the cost of this project, I estimate that the parking spots in question will cost the taxpayer north of $3,000 per spot.
The purpose of this letter is not to criticize the Commissioners. I have the highest respect for them and anyone who serves the public. It often is not a very rewarding task. They have shown leadership in seeking to take care of a problem building. However, this, in my opinion, is a clear statement of intent.
Have we learned from our mistakes of making short term decisions that may appear to solve a current need and/or seem more efficient in the moment or are we willing, as a community, to invest in the future prosperity of our community?
It’s a vision thing. Many may share my view and many may not, but this debate and the policy going forward is important to our future.
Bryan Alexander
Portland[[In-content Ad]]
Top Stories
9/11 NEVER FORGET Mobile Exhibit
Chartwells marketing
September 17, 2024 7:36 a.m.
Events
250 X 250 AD