To the editor:

New commercial development translates into profit for the landowners but maybe not enough new tax generation for the taxpayer. It would be a good idea for a city government to implement policies that could answer such questions.

It is definitely the business of a governing body to:

1. Determine whether or not its decision is creating economic development or economic displacement.

2. Implement market-capacity studies and economic-impact studies to assist in answering item No. 1 and to avoid retail saturation.

3. Decide whether an application is efficient use of land

4. Review decisions of a previous commission (this is not a new idea).

There are two very large commercial vacancies at the 31st and Iowa area that are costing taxpayers money. Any new large department store at Sixth and Wakarusa is going to draw business away from that area, thus translating into lost jobs and revenue.

We need more new jobs and more new revenue, not just to move existing jobs and revenue from one side of town to another. How much more do you want to pay in tax dollars for convenience?

Bottom line:

1. Growth not only increases the tax base, but also increases the city’s cost base.

2. Residential growth has a higher cost base than revenue (tax) base, and is therefore a predictable money loser.

3. As Larry Kipp (a resident who follows development issues closely) has said, a city’s financial integrity depends on wisely applied commercial and industrial growth to produce the revenues to cover those residential costs.

Richard Heckler,

Lawrence