Previously we opined about a plan by representative Jeff Berger to lure the film industry to make movies in Connecticut (Dec 10 07). In his plan we found a grain of truth. An idea within the idea that has escaped the planners. According to reports the idea had worked with movie and TV production increasing and thereby adding tax revenues to Hartford from those industries.
The truth within the idea was that tax revenues gathered from a business could be reaped by lowering taxes. When taxes are lowered a government will yield more of the stuff they are trying to get more revenues from. This ought to offset the initial lowering of taxes because not only will revenue be collected from the company doing business it will also produce more tax payers. Why is it that politicians realize that the idea of tax abatement will help and build an industry but an across the board tax cut or the outright elimination of certain taxes won't do the same for all industries doing business in the state?
What is objectionable about abatement plans is that those who are doing business in the state for many years have to pay the same old high tax while a new guy gets rewarded because politicians favor their business over others. We commented that this smacks at the principle of equal protection of the law because after all, tax laws are laws and the new guy pays one rate while the veteran pays another.
But Connecticut politicians must know that taxes are the solution to economic development because whenever all the hearings and committees are done with their analysis and speeches the solution is always the same, tax abatement. They look at the terrain, find out why there is no activity, talk to business. Hey what do you know, their paying too much in taxes.
This is the state of affairs with downtown Waterbury. For months and years city officials and property owners, Chamber of Commerce and the Waterbury Development Corporation have been scratching their heads to come up with a plan to "revitalize" downtown. About 20 odd years ago one plan was to tear up Bank street and put in new sidewalks, trees and new pavement. Once the trees went from saplings to beautiful green canopy's it was time to do it all over again, ripping out the sidewalks, repave the streets and taking out all the trees. In between all this the Palace theater was renovated, a college was added, Magnet school, ramp garages and once the last brick and sidewalk was installed planners, politicians and property owners are still scratching their heads holding meetings because downtown needs a revitalization plan.
Just what is downtown suppose to look at like once it is revitalized? Isn't one of the complaints about downtown is that there isn't enough parking? Do those cars just make their way downtown without people driving them? Downtown is busy with traffic and people, businesses, restaurants, schools, banks and on and on. What is it that we are missing here?
After all the analysis the city has come to a conclusion. People in the downtown district are paying too much in taxes and so the tried and tested solution to it all is "tax abatement". Not only tax abatement but an extension of an existing enterprise zone. If a business is in an enterprise zone does that mean the area outside of it is adverse to enterprise? If what hinders businesses downtown is high taxes doesn't that stand to reason that it also affects growth outside downtown?
It is just remarkable that lawmakers will find an economic problem, study it and come up with the correct solution but confine that solution to the specific problem that they are studying. If enterprise and low taxes are the solution to downtown, doesn't it stand to reason that it could work uptown as well?
No comments:
Post a Comment