Then there are taxes: not state taxes that provide a broad benefit to many people but local taxes that benefit only a few people. KW, KI, CP and other parks have had their differences over amusement and parking taxes that only benefit residents and other landowners in the communities where they are located.
2022 Trips: WDW, Sea World San Diego & Orlando, CP, KI, BGW, Bay Beach, Canobie Lake, Universal Orlando
I could care less about my elected officials being "nice" to any business. I just want them to do what's right for my community. Most of the time, they get it right.
And frankly, I'm not convinced that changing housing density is good for the CLP neighborhood. As for Bell's, he should've sued because there was clearly something improper going on there.
Great Lakes Brewery Patron...
Jeff said:I could care less about my elected officials being "nice" to any business. I just want them to do what's right for my community. Most of the time, they get it right.
I'll support that TO A DEGREE.
But I also think, as often as not, local officials do what their biggest contributors *tell/ask* them to do. Granted they need to avoid ticking off the *majority* of their constituents...but as we discussed in "that thread", the najority isn't ALWAYS the best measure of what's good for the community in the longer run.
When a new tax comes along that threatens only ONE business (the taxing gigs on parking in Sandusky, Mason, and Sesame Place come immediately to mind), most everyone not *directly* involved with that business seems to believe it's a great idea. "Better them than me."
But amusmement parks are also fill a very special niche. Locals hotels and restaurants reap *enormous* benefits. They're "clean", environmentally. They employ locals. And they bring "outsider" dollars into the LOCAL economy.
Economically-speaking, there's a *multiplier effect* on the economy when money gets spent. That's the nature of that whole "Where's George" experiment. My belief (sans data, again) is that money spent on the SERVICE sector - like parks and hotels - has a higher multiplier...thereby making the income generated by parks an even BIGGER benefit to the locals. (My theory is based on the assumption that service-industry workers, due to lower incomes, turn their money over FASTER than people who have "better jobs".)
Want to see how your town would do WITHOUT their amusement park? Ask a town that's lost one...
Pittsburgh would be a less enjoyable place without Kennywood but that isn't going to happen. The park has good patronage and nobody wants to build condos or a mall in that location.
The Waterfront was the former site of the US Steel Homestead Works. Now it has become a mulituse complex with shopping and entertainment as well as residences.
Add to this the fact that many local officials are budding tyrants who get off on the power they have over their few square miles of real estate. You end with something right out of a Simpsons' episode with Mayor Quimby and his off the wall taxes.
Every nickel local officials can get from businesses is a nickel less they have to squeeze from the residents who will vote when they're up for re-election.
You must be logged in to post