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.
Different places have different rules, of course. But aren't most city council meetings open to the public, and isn't this were zoning and tax deferment issues are decided for prospective businesses?
My hometown in VT theoretically has public meetings/etc., but a lot, and trust me, a lot, goes on behind the scenes, including corruption. The current mayor there has been caught having secret negotiations with other towns, businesses, etc., and the police chief's wife (who's on the board) has voted for a pay raise for her husband while the city's finances were, shall we say, crashing. I suspect it's similar in other areas. Don't need any conspiracy theories, there are real conspiracies going on behind closed doors in local governments all the time.
Key words: If citizens wish it. Hardly any of these incentives are decided on by referendum, most are back room deals. If a community wants to invite in a WM or Target, or whatever, that's their choice....but they hardly ever have a choice.
In Melbourne the citizens are protesting a Walgreens coming in because they think it will kill the smaller businesses. I remember a few years ago when some place was protesting a SuperCenter I thought how stupid, who would go to a corner store when Wal-mart is right up the street the things we learn as we get older
Quote:
"Melbourne Beach is the type of community that when you go into a business you meet the owner," said Betten, a longtime resident and owner of a bait shop and laundry who felt comfortable enough to leave his businesses temporarily unattended this week while going to the supermarket.
I would just add to your post that similarly, it is NOT government's job to subsidize businesses by incenting them to stay in their cities by offering tax incentives and abatements. That's socialism. Too many companies bemoan government 'interference'...unless the government interferes by suspending their property taxes for 20 years.
I have tried in the past to get legislators here to introduce a "fair play" law that would bar the use of tax incentives or rebates, but no takers. If the tax incentives are eliminated, then (of course the campaign kick-backs are eliminated) you force cities and states to actually govern properly. Corporations would then look to other things, like who has an efficient mass transit system, the best schools, the lowest crime rate, the most green space, the fairest tax rates and best services and an infrastructure that's maintained in a high state of repair when looking for a place to relocate their corporate or world headquarters, or production facilities.
Different places have different rules, of course. But aren't most city council meetings open to the public, and isn't this were zoning and tax deferment issues are decided for prospective businesses?
Here in Austin, can't speak for the whole US, most of the work is done in committee, the final vote is in full meetings. I think most people are not knowledgeable about how their city government works...by design. Government is too big and just keeps getting bigger.
Then they get what they ask for. Don't want to get involved with your government? Then they deserve nothing but the consequences.
Agreed, but that doesn't take away from my point that government- on all levels- is TOO big. All it does is obfuscate the day to day corruption in our government. The kickbacks, the shady deals, the waste. This isn't a Democrat or Republican problem. It's a greed problem.
Of course I live in a tiny town, and one of the highlights of the month is attending the city planning meetings. I imagine that bigger cities do rely on committees much more, and that there are informal meetings where things are decided, but at least where I live, changes in codes, tax deferments, zoning changes must be voted on by the city's elected representatives, and those votes are done in public meetings. I wouldn't characterize myself as being "involved" in government, but when it comes to my home and property, I'm surely interested enough to attend a city council meeting every once in a while and even speak up (like when a developer was talking about building a "shopping center with connectivity" ---you mean a shopping strip?????) when the occasion warrants it. It's only a few hours a year, not a daily commitment.
Of course I live in a tiny town, and one of the highlights of the month is attending the city planning meetings. I imagine that bigger cities do rely on committees much more, and that there are informal meetings where things are decided, but at least where I live, changes in codes, tax deferments, zoning changes must be voted on by the city's elected representatives, and those votes are done in public meetings. I wouldn't characterize myself as being "involved" in government, but when it comes to my home and property, I'm surely interested enough to attend a city council meeting every once in a while and even speak up (like when a developer was talking about building a "shopping center with connectivity" ---you mean a shopping strip?????) when the occasion warrants it. It's only a few hours a year, not a daily commitment.
That's exactly how government SHOULD be. Even in big cities, this kind of access should be the norm. I wonder what the Austin zoning committee would do if someone actually showed up and wanted to 'listen in'?
Back to the thread: One reason a profitable chain would close an existing store is that it's met it's need to keep another competitor out, or the neighbourhood is changing and they're losing their target group. i.e. Starbucks, your example, controls two corners of Robson and Thurlow in Vancouver, B.C. diagonal to each other to keep other coffee shops out of the hot traffic area. (good Starbucks trivia answer, by the way)
Another reason is to use one store is as a bad employee dumping ground. Management "recruits" the employees they want to get rid of because they're "needed" at a particular store. You then close the store. "Bad'" employees gone!
Last edited by thedwightguy; 04-08-2013 at 04:03 PM..
Reason: syntax
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.
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.
the things we learn as we get older 
