Defining economic development
The letter from former Marion resident James Meier which appeared in last week's Marion County Record was a thorough and sometimes scathing analysis of Marion's economic development director position.
The letter made several insightful points, most important among them the need to evaluate the return on investment for the tax dollars being spent on the position and its activities.
Clearly, the position must, at some point, be directly responsible for generating significantly more revenues than it costs.
But Meier missed the mark in his narrow definition of what he believes economic development is, and in particular with what he chose to exclude.
Economic development must include activities to create an environment favorable for businesses to form and operate profitably. This necessarily means addressing serious infrastructure issues that stand in the way of business development.
Take the issue of child care, for example.
Corporate giants such as IBM, McDonalds, Allstate Insurance, and Hewlett-Packard started providing various levels of child care assistance to their employees in the mid — 1980s, ranging from assistance in finding care all the way to establishing on-site child care centers.
None of them have done this out of the goodness of their hearts. Businesses are in business to make money. They've done it because it has been proven time and time again that it makes them more profitable.
Having sufficient child care options in a community increases the available labor pool, allowing for expansion of services. Stable child care arrangements cut down on employee absenteeism and turnover, and improve productivity. All of these things impact profitability.
Companies benefit economically when their employees have access to stable, quality child care. When they improve bottom line profitability, tax revenues increase, and Meier's definition is met.
If lack of child care options is a significant barrier to business success in Marion, then it should be targeted, and a variety of options should be explored as how to best eliminate that barrier.
Consider also Meier's objection to relocation of businesses to the highway as an economic development activity.
Moving just for the sake of moving makes no sense. But if relocation of a particular business can improve their access to customers and increase profitability, then finding cost-effective ways to help facilitate that is certainly an economic development activity.
If creating a greater business presence along the highway gives people reasons to stop in Marion rather than zooming on by, then there's economic benefit to that. If it presents an image to passers-by that Marion is a progressive town on the move, there's potential economic benefit there, too.
There's no question the scope of work of any position, including economic development director, should be clearly defined.
But that definition shouldn't come from a textbook. It should spring from the unique needs of a community striving to create the infrastructure and environment in which businesses can succeed, and the community can prosper.
Once those needs are defined, the community has every right to demand thoughtful, expert analysis of options, timely, responsible, effective, and ethical implementation of programs, and a financial return greater than its investment. The public deserves no less from its tax dollars.
— DAVID COLBURN
