My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2007-095-RES-Accepting and approving the Paris Economic Development Corporation Budget for the Fiscal year October 1, 2007; to September 30, 2008
City-of-Paris
>
City Clerk
>
Resolutions
>
1889-2010
>
2007
>
2007-095-RES-Accepting and approving the Paris Economic Development Corporation Budget for the Fiscal year October 1, 2007; to September 30, 2008
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/21/2012 11:05:27 AM
Creation date
9/11/2007 10:27:53 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
Doc Name
2007-095-RES
Doc Type
Resolution
CITY CLERK - Date
8/27/2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
66
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Lamar County — Paris Economic Development Plan <br />Guiding Principle 8: Economic Development is Best Pursued on a Local Labor Market Scale. <br />The labor market benefits of job growth or wage increases in one local community occur across <br />the entire local labor market. Because a community's policies will not fully reflect these spillover <br />benefits, individual communities may sometimes be insufficiently oriented towards economic <br />development policies that create jobs and enhance wages. <br />The fiscal effects of development in one community also spillover to the entire local labor <br />market. In many cases these fiscal effects on nearby communities will be negative. The community <br />advising the new business development will receive additional business property taxes, whereas the roads <br />and schools needed by workers in the new jobs may be paid for by other communities. Uncoordinated <br />policies pursued by many small units of government will be excessively competitive for business real <br />estate development. <br />Thus, the fragmented structure of most metropolitan areas, with many competing jurisdictions <br />and little coordination, may distort how economic development is approached. This fragmented structure <br />explains why economic development is often seen as a series of real estate deals rather than as a way of <br />improving labor market opportunities. Local governments may end up subsidizing real estate <br />development more than they subsidize human capital development. <br />The local labor market is also the level at which the key resources for achieving economic <br />development must be pulled together. Labor is the most important business input. Labor costs and quality <br />available to a business are largely determined by the metropolitan area, not the business's neighborhood <br />or community. To alter labor costs or quality, economic development programs must target the overall <br />local labor market. Local suppliers to an export-base firm will also be located throughout the metropolitan <br />area, not just in the community in which the export firm is located. Policies to improve supplier <br />competitiveness must target the entire local labor market area. <br />METHODS <br />Guiding Principle 9: Marketing, Streamlining Regulations and Business Problem - Solving <br />Can Often Be Cheap Ways of Making Development Happen. <br />The "sales" and "business development" activities that dominate the time of local economic <br />developers are plausibly cost - effective. Because such interactions with firms are idiosyncratic, there is <br />little research on their effectiveness. But sales and business development activities focused on information <br />and problem - solving, not financial subsidies, are relatively cheap, and government intervention in this <br />area has some rationale. <br />These activities involve providing information on the local community to business prospects, and <br />helping resolve problems that businesses have with local government regulations, taxes, and services. <br />Providing basic information to businesses requires relatively modest expenditures on economic <br />development staff. Providing information, particularly information on government regulations, services, <br />and taxes, is a legitimate public activity. Private information markets are imperfect, and public or quasi - <br />public agencies have some comparative advantages in obtaining and providing such information. Trying <br />to resolve problems that "customers," including business customers, have with government activities, <br />without compromising public goals, is one way of making government more effective and responsive. <br />"Business development" becomes more questionable when it turns into public real estate <br />development: government using zoning and condemnation to redevelop land. Absent a public subsidy, <br />such government -based proceedings can be seen as one way of overcoming the problem of the "holdout <br />landowner ": the one landowner in an area who refuses to go along, at a reasonable price, with an overall <br />area plan. Unfortunately, many government- sponsored redevelopment projects use large public <br />Paris Economic Development Corporation Page 48 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.