The termination of Disney's special district by the Florida legislature and Governor Ron DeSantis illuminates one of the (few) down sides of our federalist system.
When it comes to local governments tossing in to attract a business, I'm ambivalent - not pro or con. I'd say "it depends". The local government has to stand for elections regularly among the local people - so hopefully the taxpayer largesse they throw around is "worth it". If it's not, throw the bums out. Unlike the federal government, locals need to balance their books annually.
My personal perspective: I have JUST gone through the three year process of witnessing the construction of one of the largest automotive plants in the world - less than a mile from my house. Mazda-Toyota Manufacturing is making 300,000 new cars a year at this plant. But three years ago, it was cornfield. A massive power plant was built, some 50 miles of railroad track laid down, water treatment, sewer treatment, an interstate spur, road widenings - and now some 30 subdivisions (by my count) within several miles of the plant, with more coming. Soon there will be a new middle school (or is it elementary?) and a new HS is rumored. My property value has soared, needless to say. Everybody's has. We're all "rich"! Plus there's 4,000 direct jobs on site, as well some 7,000 additional jobs in supply chain and secondary support. Great paying jobs.
The "sauce" the local government tossed in was to help with permitting rights of way and building the spurs and electrical system upgrades needed - and a 20-year, $107M tax abatement. In return, Toyota bought up all the surrounding land (about 800 acres) and deeded it to the Forever Wild Land Trust - it can't be developed - ever. The "rest" of TMTs requirement already existed: extremely favorable tax climate, good schools, a place people want to move to and raise families.
But I personally hate it. I liked the cornfield and I bought my land out there for the peace and quiet. Whatever, I'm told it's "progress". :rolleyes
It's a bug/feature/fundamental outcome of the system, given the extent to which government has grown. Like or hate is academic at that level - it's going to happen.
I lament it but accept the reality. It'd be nicer if they laid down a set of rules and let those rules be the attractant, but any business with enough economic clout will invariably ask for more from many suitors.
There's more hope at the state level - some states make the climate good for all, and therefore don't have to do quite so much individual grifting. The others - grift is in their DNA, so....
I can see your POV from the perspective of states/local governments that punish their existing businesses, only to turn around and grift to new business. That's sordid. I guess my local experience in AL is - we're very good for business all around. We shouldn't have to grift - but we do.
When it comes to local governments tossing in to attract a business, I'm ambivalent - not pro or con. I'd say "it depends". The local government has to stand for elections regularly among the local people - so hopefully the taxpayer largesse they throw around is "worth it". If it's not, throw the bums out. Unlike the federal government, locals need to balance their books annually.
My personal perspective: I have JUST gone through the three year process of witnessing the construction of one of the largest automotive plants in the world - less than a mile from my house. Mazda-Toyota Manufacturing is making 300,000 new cars a year at this plant. But three years ago, it was cornfield. A massive power plant was built, some 50 miles of railroad track laid down, water treatment, sewer treatment, an interstate spur, road widenings - and now some 30 subdivisions (by my count) within several miles of the plant, with more coming. Soon there will be a new middle school (or is it elementary?) and a new HS is rumored. My property value has soared, needless to say. Everybody's has. We're all "rich"! Plus there's 4,000 direct jobs on site, as well some 7,000 additional jobs in supply chain and secondary support. Great paying jobs.
The "sauce" the local government tossed in was to help with permitting rights of way and building the spurs and electrical system upgrades needed - and a 20-year, $107M tax abatement. In return, Toyota bought up all the surrounding land (about 800 acres) and deeded it to the Forever Wild Land Trust - it can't be developed - ever. The "rest" of TMTs requirement already existed: extremely favorable tax climate, good schools, a place people want to move to and raise families.
But I personally hate it. I liked the cornfield and I bought my land out there for the peace and quiet. Whatever, I'm told it's "progress". :rolleyes
It's a bug/feature/fundamental outcome of the system, given the extent to which government has grown. Like or hate is academic at that level - it's going to happen.
I lament it but accept the reality. It'd be nicer if they laid down a set of rules and let those rules be the attractant, but any business with enough economic clout will invariably ask for more from many suitors.
There's more hope at the state level - some states make the climate good for all, and therefore don't have to do quite so much individual grifting. The others - grift is in their DNA, so....
I can see your POV from the perspective of states/local governments that punish their existing businesses, only to turn around and grift to new business. That's sordid. I guess my local experience in AL is - we're very good for business all around. We shouldn't have to grift - but we do.
States like Florida are also good. NY, on the other hand - hands in every pocket and behind every back.