To the editor:
My wife and I are relatively new and very happy members of the Cazenovia community. We have built two houses here, one of which was done totally by local labor. Including our volunteer services, we consider using local talent as a community benefit without cost.
I believe in the value of cost-benefit analyses in most decisions I make. That is, a quantified (and qualified) consideration of every benefit against the cost of implementing that benefit. The eastern gateway falls under that same approach.
Certainly eliminating the blight along Route 20 is a qualified benefit with only limited cost.
The addition of $8 million in new jobs and increased tax base might be a benefit, if the community knew how that number was derived.
New business comes at what the market will bear and new jobs are a benefit. However … construction employment by outside talent offers no community benefit. Consider the new businesses — Aldi, Rite Aid and AmeriCU. They offer no service that the community does not already use. New employees come at the cost of the nearly equivalent number of jobs lost. Tops loses from competition across the street. Rite Aid and AmeriCU are merely transferring locations. Current facilities will be boarded up and add to the blight we’re trying to remove.
An increased tax base is a benefit that also comes at a cost. There are village maintenance and infrastructure costs associated with the new structures. New taxes come at the expense of taxes lost by the closing or devaluation of current businesses; taxes will also be lost by the devaluation of high end homes along Route 20 and those bordering the Lucas properties.
Point is: It’s legal and proper to buy property and enhance new business; it’s not proper if “improvement” comes at an unreasonable cost to the current environment. When does better become the enemy of good enough? Major decisions should be made by measuring benefits versus costs, then sharing that methodology and results with the community. Consensus is good; arbitrary decisions are bad.
Cazenovia
