Arts centre support requires different approach

We can all agree, as do the authors of a recent letter titled “Defying logic and council’s mandate” (Cape Breton Post, Dec. 11), that a Centre for Arts, Culture and Innovation would be a wonderful venue for our community. Opposing anything with such an inviting title and charming ambiance would be irrational.

The issue, however, is not one of opposition to a concept that is in all respects a fitting and proper one. Rather, it is whether municipal government is properly fulfilling its legislative mandate in helping pay for this project?

The authors make the assumption that because it is a good idea and one supported by the two other levels of government our municipality should necessarily support it financially. Such support would come from a direct capital contribution together with a property tax abatement. They say that refusal to provide such assistance may jeopardize the project and “is tantamount to recklessness and a total disregard of the community’s wellbeing.”

They also accompany their submission with the non sequitur that if we have spent money elsewhere, the port, for example, why not spend it here as well? That is much like saying: “Well, if you lavished it there, why not here?” Clearly that does not provide any logical basis for supporting their position. It does, though, provide a revealing glimpse into the thought processes of our elected officials.

What their thesis reveals goes much deeper than this issue. It touches on how we approach matters as a municipality, particularly, what is the role of municipal government and, more tangibly perhaps, how best to finance the attainment of policies and projects in furtherance of that role/?

For these authors on this matter it is limited to spend money and give tax breaks. This runs counter to the most successful tactics now being employed by municipalities which are transforming and reinvigorating their urban cores. They are doing so with innovative tax policies and imaginative planning. Our fixed and short-term thinking obdurately banishes these concepts as foreign and unwelcome.

Here is a suggestion for this proposed new center that would involve neither a capital contribution nor a tax break. It would involve what is known as the application of a TIF or Tax Incremental Financing option. Yes, this would take provincial cooperation and, yes, that may constitute a short-term impediment in this instance.

That said, one variant of a TIF would work as follows. The tax monies generated from the new structure would be devoted to infrastructure at and near it. Not only would this help the new project but it would also encourage like facilities and businesses to locate in the area. In terms of capital, no forgivable contributions from the tax payer. A loan perhaps, but no more.

We don’t need more giveaway approaches. Instead, we deserve to see adopted actions of the sort that develop infrastructure and a positive tax and less burdensome regulatory climate for development. If you do that they may come. The old nostrums simply aren’t working.