U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Alabama > Birmingham area
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-03-2019, 10:20 AM
 
10,179 posts, read 5,871,282 times
Reputation: 31175

Advertisements

https://www.bizjournals.com/birmingh...UxRTYifQ%3D%3D


Mayors from around JeffCo have signed a No Poaching Act, keeping companies from playing one municipality against another in terms of recruiting and retaining companies. The cities signing the act are:

Argo, Bessemer, Birmingham, Brighton, Center Point, Clay, Fairfield, Graysville, Homewood, Hoover, Lipscomb, Midfield, Mountain Brook, Mulga, Pleasant Grove, Sylvan Springs, Tarrant, Trafford, Trussville, Vestavia Hills, Warrior and West Jefferson.


Missing are municipalities such as Gardendale, Irondale, and Leeds.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-03-2019, 10:37 AM
 
Location: Atlanta, Birmingham, Charlotte, and Raleigh
2,580 posts, read 2,231,709 times
Reputation: 1604
Quote:
Originally Posted by MinivanDriver View Post
https://www.bizjournals.com/birmingh...UxRTYifQ%3D%3D


Mayors from around JeffCo have signed a No Poaching Act, keeping companies from playing one municipality against another in terms of recruiting and retaining companies. The cities signing the act are:

Argo, Bessemer, Birmingham, Brighton, Center Point, Clay, Fairfield, Graysville, Homewood, Hoover, Lipscomb, Midfield, Mountain Brook, Mulga, Pleasant Grove, Sylvan Springs, Tarrant, Trafford, Trussville, Vestavia Hills, Warrior and West Jefferson.


Missing are municipalities such as Gardendale, Irondale, and Leeds.
I don't know why Irondale nor Gardendale think that mentality is going to help them. If you are trying to further induce massive population and economic growth regionally then they should reevaluate their self-destructive and short-sighted stance on possibly poaching economic development. At this point of the game, intergovernmental and regional partnerships are the way to go.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2019, 05:47 AM
 
364 posts, read 279,249 times
Reputation: 225
Wow! just wow! We've been alluding to and speaking about this for a few months now, we are now officially seeing regional cooperation take shape in the Greater Birmingham area. It was very good to see that the local leaders have been listening and learning about regional cooperation and how it has helped successful metros attain success. This should have gotten much more attention but as far as I'm concerned this is the story of the week probably even the month. Awesome!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2019, 08:26 AM
 
3,217 posts, read 3,359,111 times
Reputation: 4379
Quote:
Originally Posted by jero23 View Post
I don't know why Irondale nor Gardendale think that mentality is going to help them. If you are trying to further induce massive population and economic growth regionally then they should reevaluate their self-destructive and short-sighted stance on possibly poaching economic development. At this point of the game, intergovernmental and regional partnerships are the way to go.
I don't really see how it is going to help them right this second, but I also don't really see how it is going to hurt them.

As someone who lives in Hoover, I would prefer to not have my mayor sign such a "pledge". To be quite frank, I'd be annoyed if my elected representatives have an opportunity to do something which would increase economic activity and home values in my area and they don't do it because it would have an adverse effect on Brighton, or Trussville, or Mountain Brook, or anywhere else. I want my elected representatives to look out for me. I don't think that's asking too much.

Also, I didn't read the article behind the paywall. I am assuming it is nothing more than a pledge. How is Birmingham going to be punished if they do end up poaching a business from Vestavia? Draw ire from the other mayors? Okay. Cool. If that's all this is, then it seems like much ado about nothing. What kind of real power does this agreement have? Are there multimillion dollar fines? If so, that would be an actual deterrent... and it would be another reason I wouldn't want my mayor signing up for it.

Also, spare me from a lecture about missing the big picture, yada yada yada... Regional governments were free to work together before this pledge, and they will be free to work together after this pledge.

This thread reminds me a little of the announcement a year (or two?) ago where Birmingham paid some fee to become designated a "world city" or something along those lines. Was supposed to somehow put Birmingham at the top of the list for new businesses or something. I remember pressing for details and nobody could offer any.

Last edited by steveklein; 04-04-2019 at 08:42 AM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2019, 08:39 AM
 
Location: Jack-town, Sip by way of TN, AL and FL
1,655 posts, read 1,603,392 times
Reputation: 2849
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveklein View Post
I don't really see how it is going to help them right this second, but I also don't really see how it is going to hurt them.

As someone who lives in Hoover, I would prefer to not have my mayor sign such a "pledge". To be quite frank, I'd be annoyed if my elected representatives have an opportunity to do something which would increase economic activity and home values in my area and they don't do it because it would have an adverse effect on Brighton, or Trussville, or Mountain Brook, or anywhere else. I want my elected representatives to look out for me. I don't think that's asking too much.

Also, I didn't read the article behind the paywall. I am assuming it is nothing more than a pledge. How is Birmingham going to be punished if they do end up poaching a business from Vestavia? Draw ire from the other mayors? Okay. Cool. If that's all this is, then it seems like much to do about nothing. What kind of real power does this agreement have? Are there multimillion dollar fines? If so, that would be an actual deterrent... and it would be another reason I wouldn't want my mayor signing up for it.

Also, spare me from a lecture about missing the big picture, yada yada yada... Regional governments were free to work together before this pledge, and they will be free to work together after this pledge.

This thread reminds me a little of the announcement a year (or two?) ago where Birmingham paid some fee to become designated a "world city" or something along those lines. Was supposed to somehow put Birmingham at the top of the list for new businesses or something. I remember pressing for details and nobody could offer any.
In my opinion, they could have done this in secrecy, and it would have been better. This is nothing but a public announcement that says they are going to work together. Now, a company might reconsider locating anywhere in B'ham, but honestly a company that's trying to play municipalities against each other is going to be local and probably not the greatest company anyway.

So yeah, much ado about nothing.

In this day and age, all cities have a bunch of suburbs and such. Doesn't seem to hurt Atlanta. Yeah there's some poaching like the Braves stadium, but it matters little to the overall scene. 20 years from now the Braves will be back downtown.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2019, 09:14 AM
 
81 posts, read 59,421 times
Reputation: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveklein View Post
I don't really see how it is going to help them right this second, but I also don't really see how it is going to hurt them.

As someone who lives in Hoover, I would prefer to not have my mayor sign such a "pledge". To be quite frank, I'd be annoyed if my elected representatives have an opportunity to do something which would increase economic activity and home values in my area and they don't do it because it would have an adverse effect on Brighton, or Trussville, or Mountain Brook, or anywhere else. I want my elected representatives to look out for me. I don't think that's asking too much.

Also, I didn't read the article behind the paywall. I am assuming it is nothing more than a pledge. How is Birmingham going to be punished if they do end up poaching a business from Vestavia? Draw ire from the other mayors? Okay. Cool. If that's all this is, then it seems like much ado about nothing. What kind of real power does this agreement have? Are there multimillion dollar fines? If so, that would be an actual deterrent... and it would be another reason I wouldn't want my mayor signing up for it.

Also, spare me from a lecture about missing the big picture, yada yada yada... Regional governments were free to work together before this pledge, and they will be free to work together after this pledge.

This thread reminds me a little of the announcement a year (or two?) ago where Birmingham paid some fee to become designated a "world city" or something along those lines. Was supposed to somehow put Birmingham at the top of the list for new businesses or something. I remember pressing for details and nobody could offer any.
Obviously you say you don't want a lecture about missing the big picture... but you are missing the big picture. If Hoover is mainly focused on stealing businesses from neighboring areas then it will just end up hurting everyone in the end. This is a first small step towards the whole region marketing / broadcasting itself as one area. You can try to only be concerned about Hoover, but things that happen in neighboring cities will impact Hoover. If the city of Birmingham was to suddenly disappear, half of Hoover would as well.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2019, 09:59 AM
 
3,217 posts, read 3,359,111 times
Reputation: 4379
Quote:
Originally Posted by buildbirmingham View Post
Obviously you say you don't want a lecture about missing the big picture... but you are missing the big picture. If Hoover is mainly focused on stealing businesses from neighboring areas then it will just end up hurting everyone in the end.
That is probably mostly true (though the depending on the circumstances, it could absolutely benefit Hoover residents). But more importantly, it looks like the beginning of a strawman because nobody said that should be Hoover's priority.


Quote:
This is a first small step towards the whole region marketing / broadcasting itself as one area. You can try to only be concerned about Hoover, but things that happen in neighboring cities will impact Hoover. If the city of Birmingham was to suddenly disappear, half of Hoover would as well.
First of all, I concern myself with myself and my family first. Every tier of government/authority above that impacts me less and less per dollar spent... starting with a neighborhood block, then a neighborhood wide HOA, then a town, then possibly a regional government, and then state, federal, various international organizations, etc

And this is how the vast majority of people (and the animal kingdom in general) act. They look out for themselves first, and those closest to them next.

I may be able to "try" but I would argue that the mayor and city council should without question only be focused on Hoover. Sure, if their actions caused the other municipalities to collapse and property values region wide plummeted, that would hurt Hoover in the long run. And therefore, those actions would be bad for Hoover's residents. But at the end of the day, I would oppose those actions not because the residents of Graysville or Moody took a hit, but because *I* as a resident of Hoover took a hit. The mayor of Hoover is accountable to the residents of Hoover, not the residents of Moody.

Shall we take a real world example, not of poaching business necessarily, but just to show that peoples' interests differ and it is unreasonable to expect people to vote against their interests? Highway 280. If you live along the corridor southeast of I-459, or know someone who does, you know it's not a fun drive. And you also know that if elevated, limited-access express lanes were built between, say 119 and the Red Mtn Expressway, you could be in the city in 15 minutes instead of an hour. Mountain Brook residents know this too. But they don't want an elevated highway that allows people to bypass the town's gas stations, restaurants, and shops which are a key piece of the city's revenue. Furthermore, if I owned a $1 million dollar home in Mountain Brook, I know some of the value in that comes from its proximity to downtown. If all of a sudden 3,000 new super nice Mountain Brook quality homes in Brook Highland, Greystone, Highland Lakes, etc. become much "closer" to downtown, then guess what happens to the value of the million dollar home in Mountain Brook? So it makes perfect sense why Mountain Brook residents want no part of the elevated road. Most would agree it would be good for the region. Even most Mountain Brook homeowners wouldn't fight you on that. But if you think the city's residents are going to willingly sacrifice $50k, $100k, or more dollars of value on their property so people who only had $600k to spend on a mansion instead of $900k don't have to spend as much time in traffic, well, you are crazy.


I would say you have missed the big picture in the sense that this "pledge" has no backing. At all. Might not even be worth the piece of paper it is written on.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2019, 10:16 AM
 
81 posts, read 59,421 times
Reputation: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveklein View Post
That is probably mostly true (though the depending on the circumstances, it could absolutely benefit Hoover residents). But more importantly, it looks like the beginning of a strawman because nobody said that should be Hoover's priority.




First of all, I concern myself with myself and my family first. Every tier of government/authority above that impacts me less and less per dollar spent... starting with a neighborhood block, then a neighborhood wide HOA, then a town, then possibly a regional government, and then state, federal, various international organizations, etc

And this is how the vast majority of people (and the animal kingdom in general) act. They look out for themselves first, and those closest to them next.

I may be able to "try" but I would argue that the mayor and city council should without question only be focused on Hoover. Sure, if their actions caused the other municipalities to collapse and property values region wide plummeted, that would hurt Hoover in the long run. And therefore, those actions would be bad for Hoover's residents. But at the end of the day, I would oppose those actions not because the residents of Graysville or Moody took a hit, but because *I* as a resident of Hoover took a hit. The mayor of Hoover is accountable to the residents of Hoover, not the residents of Moody.

Shall we take a real world example, not of poaching business necessarily, but just to show that peoples' interests differ and it is unreasonable to expect people to vote against their interests? Highway 280. If you live along the corridor southeast of I-459, or know someone who does, you know it's not a fun drive. And you also know that if elevated, limited-access express lanes were built between, say 119 and the Red Mtn Expressway, you could be in the city in 15 minutes instead of an hour. Mountain Brook residents know this too. But they don't want an elevated highway that allows people to bypass the town's gas stations, restaurants, and shops which are a key piece of the city's revenue. Furthermore, if I owned a $1 million dollar home in Mountain Brook, I know some of the value in that comes from its proximity to downtown. If all of a sudden 3,000 new super nice Mountain Brook quality homes in Brook Highland, Greystone, Highland Lakes, etc. become much "closer" to downtown, then guess what happens to the value of the million dollar home in Mountain Brook? So it makes perfect sense why Mountain Brook residents want no part of the elevated road. Most would agree it would be good for the region. Even most Mountain Brook homeowners wouldn't fight you on that. But if you think the city's residents are going to willingly sacrifice $50k, $100k, or more dollars of value on their property so people who only had $600k to spend on a mansion instead of $900k don't have to spend as much time in traffic, well, you are crazy.


I would say you have missed the big picture in the sense that this "pledge" has no backing. At all. Might not even be worth the piece of paper it is written on.
You used a lot of words to basically say you care about your tiny box and area and nothing else. That's fine if you want to live that way. I and many others will be busy trying to build a better Birmingham region for all.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2019, 10:45 AM
 
606 posts, read 391,526 times
Reputation: 477
Quote:
Originally Posted by buildbirmingham View Post
You used a lot of words to basically say you care about your tiny box and area and nothing else. That's fine if you want to live that way. I and many others will be busy trying to build a better Birmingham region for all.
He said he cares about his immediate tiny box (family) first, then less and less as the dollar is stretched further. No one here is any different.

*Unpopular opinion alert * This regional effort crap is a facade for incompetence. I posted about it before and understood some of the arguments but NONE of them had good merit or answers. Regional cooperation IS needed and important but it doesn't come from an agreement. It occurs organically as an area grows and matures.

1. I actually think Bham already has regional cooperation as in every suburb wants to see the Birmingham metro thrive. Whether it's the Barons, Uptown, Parkside, Avondale etc. No one in Hoover is upset those areas are doing awesome. Didn't Bham poach the Barons? Was that a bad idea?

2. Can someone name a list of companies that have been poached that have had an "material" economic impact? Anything in the last 10 years? Is this realllllyyyy a problem or a theory?

3 Could NOT poaching actually hurt the region? Let's say there's a company in DT BHM that wants to move to the burbs... But the region has made it darn near impossible to poach or move inner-regionally, guess what they might do? Move out of state.

4. I would argue that everyone is better when a business(s) is better. If Vestavia lands a Fortune 500 company, everyone benefits! If Vulcan moves its HQ from Liberty Park to Riverchase, sucks for LP, but it's great for Riverchase and it's going to be best for Vulcan. Everyone wins even with poaching.

I think the big bad negative ugly side that everyone brings up has just not fleshed itself out and been a huge problem.

I bring you back to PLENTY of other metros with very segmented metros that have thrived. So CLEARLY this is NOT the area the regions needs to be focusing on as it's issue/problem.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2019, 10:49 AM
 
3,217 posts, read 3,359,111 times
Reputation: 4379
A lot of posters give you what you want, bfmx gives you what you need.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Alabama > Birmingham area

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2023, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top