That's a darn good argument that we really ought to be doing a lot more for startups, or (perish the thought) protecting and growing existing small businesses that don't usually qualify for the fancy incentives we hand out like candy to every new gas station.BellaVilla wrote: ↑Apr 23, 2021More evidence that elephant hunting is generally a bad economic development policy. Investing in small businesses and entrepreneurs yields a far greater ROI. I mentioned this is another thread, but its bears repeating here. In 10 years, Arch Grants has provided $9M in grants to 173 startups. Those startups have generated more than $400M in revenue, raised more than $300M in new funding, and have created more than 2K jobs. How much would it cost in Tax Incentives to lure an existing company that offered $2K jobs? Like the 10s of millions if not more.
- 6,155
The trick is keeping the small businesses here, rather than watching them moving to greener pastures for any number of reasons.
- 6,155
^That's what I was trying to drive at by suggesting protecting and growing existing small business. COSTCO can get a TIFF just by glancing at a municipality, but what does that do for places like Olive Street Market? The tax breaks strike me as particularly galling when they go to the rich new guy instead of the loyal local business. Historic redevelopment credits can be the difference between rehab and demo, but I think we all know now that we need stabilization money as well. Particularly at times like this some kind of local or state business stabilization credit could be a useful tool.