IBJNews

Locals focus on real jobs

March 22, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
IBJ Letters To The Editor

As a site consultant for over eight years, I worked for those “footloose businesses that could locate anywhere” Michael Hicks talks about in his [March 17] column “Focus on real job creation.” We helped these companies choose the best states and communities for their expansion projects.

Hicks’ suggestion that at the local level there is an incentive to “over-predict” job creation to secure tax abatement or infrastructure through tax-increment financing is wrong, based on my experience.

He suggests the state is doing things right while the communities are doing things wrong. When it comes to economic incentives—and who is right or wrong—I would suggest starting with the basis for the incentives programs and the related policies used to administer the programs.

On the occasion that Cassidy Turley did a project in Indiana, we recommended to our clients that they be very conservative with the numbers associated with tax abatement or TIF. The basis for tax abatement is capital investment in buildings and equipment. In this case the primary measure is: Did they live up to their investment commitment?

Let’s say a company in its abatement application proposes a $50 million investment in plant and equipment. If the company, for whatever reason, ends up only investing $25 million, the abatement applies only to the amount it invested. This would appear to be a pay-for-performance program much like the state level Hicks is not worried about.

Infrastructure is another matter because it requires a community to make an upfront investment before the company makes a capital investment. In most cases, a community’s financial advisor—if prudent—recommends a borrowing level that takes into account a potential shortfall in private capital investment.

On the other hand, Cassidy Turley did find that because of policies related to the state-level incentives there is an advantage to “over-predict.” State incentives require a company to predict future job growth, but once the company states a number—such as 200 jobs—the state incentives are capped at the corresponding amount.

Other states do not cap jobs and corresponding incentives. This gives the company an incentive to stretch beyond the predicted 200 jobs used in this example in order to claim more incentives.

While I agree with Hicks’ premise that “the success and failure of our economic development efforts should be measured simply by how much better our economy [state or local] becomes,” to suggest that locals don’t weigh other factors is absurd.

He is not giving credit to county and municipal leadership.

Tim Monger

president, Hamilton County Economic Development Corp.; former site consultant, Cassidy Turley; former executive director, Indiana Department of Commerce
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. A Tilted Kilt at a water park themed hotel? Who planned that one? I guess the Dad's need something to do while the kids are on the water slides.

  2. Don't come down on the fair for offering drinks. This is a craft and certainly one that belongs in agriculture due to ingredients. And for those worrying about how much you can drink. I'm sure it's more to do with liability than anything else. They don't want people suing for being over served. If you want a buzz, do a little pre-drinking before you go.

  3. I don't drink but go into this "controlled area" so my friend can drink. They have their 3 drink limit and then I give my friend my 3 drink limit. How is the fair going to control this very likely situation????

  4. I feel the conditions of the alcohol sales are a bit heavy handed, but you need to realize this is the first year in quite some time that beer & wine will be sold at the fair. They're starting off slowly to get a gauge on how it will perform this year - I would assume if everything goes fine that they relax some of the limits in the next year or couple of years. That said, I think requiring the consumption of alcohol to only occur in the beer tent is a bit much. That is going to be an awkward situation for those with minors - "Honey, I'm getting a beer... Ok, sure go ahead... Alright see you in just a min- half an hour."

  5. This might be an effort on the part of the State Fair Board to manage the risk until they get a better feel for it. However, the blanket notion that alcohol should not be served at "family oriented" events is perhaps an oversimplification. and not too realistic. For 15 years, I was a volunteer at the Indianapolis Air Show, which was as family oriented an event as it gets. We sold beer donated by Monarch Beverage Company and served by licensed and trained employees of United Package Liquors who were unpaid volunteers. And where did that money go? To central Indiana children's charities, including Riley Hospital for Children! It's all about managing the risk.

ADVERTISEMENT