Jul 18 2008
How Much Should Taxpayers Pay For Urban Revival
The saga over the Wayne Theater has got me thinking: How Much Should Taxpayers Pay For Urban Revival? And how do you decide when to invest? It seems reasonable that if the projected growth in tax revenue is sufficient (who sets the hurdle rate?) a project should move forward. If an enterprise has a reasonable certainty of succeeding, why isn’t there private money to make things happen? It seems to me that the reason public funds are needed are:
- the project is too risky for banks to undertake
- the project provides some benefit to the community that is non-monetary (intangible ROI) such as removing an eyesore, providing new entertainment options)
I question whether Waynesboro in this case should be pursuing this if the problem with private funding is risk. If the project is going forward because of the intangibles, it sure seems like the citizens ought to be more involved than they’ve been. People have griped about rising assessments for years (not so much this one 
and I’ve not talked to anyone who seems very excited about this. At what point are sunk costs seen as such and the city decides to not throw good money after bad.
I do think, interestingly, that Waynesboro would be a better place to live with a Wayne Theater and the bustling few shops and restaurants that would pop up around it. I’m not enough of a believer in the viability of the plan to put my money into it. The city council though, has decided to do so on my behalf though, with my tax money. That’s what I don’t like.