It didn’t take Lawrence city commissioners long to second-guess their new tax abatement policy.

Bringing predictability to the city’s tax abatement policy appears to continue to be a work in progress.

In discussion Tuesday night, Lawrence city commissioners expressed reservations about the policy that had been adopted as part of the commission’s consent agenda only about an hour earlier. Commissioners said they understood the need for the policy not to provide a “moving target” for companies wanting to do business in Lawrence, but they appeared to be uncomfortable with some aspects of the new policy.

One concern is that the commission might not have adequate latitude to require a company to provide additional information on its tax abatement request. Mayor David Dunfield made the important point that whatever information companies must provide and whatever requirements they must meet should be clearly spelled out in the policy. And the company should be able to expect that, barring unusual circumstances, if its application meet all the requirements, the tax abatement will be approved.

Companies wanting to locate or expand in Lawrence should be able to look at the city’s tax abatement policy and decide whether they want to try to meet the requirements. It is their decision, then, whether to work with Lawrence or look elsewhere for their project.

Another facet of the policy that was brought back to the City Commission table Tuesday night was what the city refers to as the “but for” clause that existed in the previous tax abatement policy but is not included in the current one. This clause wants a company to show to city officials that it could not locate or expand in Lawrence “but for” the tax abatement it requests.

Some commissioners apparently still want some kind of assurance from companies seeking a tax abatement that they could not go forward with their project without a tax abatement. Such a determination would be close to impossible to make (any company officials seeking a tax abatement are going to say they couldn’t do the project without it) and it really isn’t the basis on which tax abatements should be granted or denied.

The abatements should be considered on the basis of a cost-benefit analysis for the city. Does the tax abatement meet our requirements for salaries and jobs? Is it a good investment for local taxpayers?

Having a policy on tax abatements doesn’t take away the commission’s power to consider overriding factors not addressed in the policy, but those exceptions should be very limited. The point of having a policy is to make the process of applying for and obtaining tax abatements both predictable and fair.

As commissioners noted, a policy that changes with each application really isn’t a policy at all; it’s a guessing game that feeds uncertainty and hampers economic development efforts in Lawrence.