I'm confused...

[Jim O'Bryan]

I am confused.

In today's Plain Dealer they mention a plan where if one company with a value of over $500,000 moves to another city, the taxes are shared. But no where does it mention the burden is shared as well. So if we get a company to finally move into Lakewood, there is no real benefit?

When people claim they do not want to compete it is usually because they feel they cannot win. I for one think Lakewood can win and be better. That is until we begin regionalization, which is what this is, and tie ourselves to East Cleveland and Cleveland. then the party is over. The day we tie ourselves to losing suburbs will be the day our wealthy neighbors flee to Westlake, Solon and other cities that are not afraid to compete because they offer something different.

The cities that are "stealing" or attracting businesses like Westlake and Solon said no thanks. Meaning, we still believe in our city and what we can accomplish. This is like Lakewood going no smoking while no other city does. It places us, a city with a bright future at a disadvantage. Even if a business wanted to move out of crime ridden East Cleveland to Lakewood, instead of a boom to the schools and tax base, East Cleveland would get a share of the taxes, and have free land to attract another business they would not have to share taxes with us on. Seems like a rush to bottom, or as one Cleveland State student put it at a recent Observer meeting, and on the board, "They are merely teaching us to manage the decline of cities."

While the water rates agreement made sense, this new part of the deal makes very little sense. It is the kind of thing city management would come up with if they worked in Lakewood and lived elsewhere like Cleveland.

Also if voteres vote on tax raises whouldn't we vote on sharing taxes with other cities?

I pray that this is not the first step in becoming West Cleveland.

FWIW


.