SOME THOUGHTS ON CITY GOVERNMENT.

1. ECONOMIC DIRECTION: The choices involve realignment of the city's economic boundaries: new business frontiers or reliance on established industries.

A. To what extent should the city's economy be oriented: toward long term growth an the provision of quality jobs OR to short-term growth through the, provision of a quantity of job opportunities?

B. To what extent should the overall direction of the city's economy be: the capitalize the economic base through reliance on its traditionally strong features and roles through the development of new roles and functions?

2. ECONOMIC PURPOSE: Goal-oriented issues concerning personal in- come and area economic product.

A. To what extent should the city government attempt to: maximize gross area product OR personal income through the provision of employment? To what extent should the city's economic base be directed: toward maximizing city tax revenues OR toward maximizing personal income through employment?

3. LOCATION PERSPECTIVE: View will affect inter-structural decisions.

A. To what extent should the city's economy and economic development be viewed as: complimentary to OR competitive with the rest of the region's economy? To what extent should the city focus economic development on: the central business district OR on sub-regional retail commercial centers in the outer areas

4. CLIENT PERSPECTIVE: Orientation will determine types of people in need of manpower development, education or special assistance.

A. To what extent should economic development strategy be oriented to: those persons who are marginal labor force participants and in the greatest need OR toward those persons who contribute most to the city's economic viability?

5. EMPLOYMENT AND WORKFORCE PREPARATION: Limited job opportunities and training resources present tough choices: to fight brush fires in saving existing jobs in individual firms, or encourage expansion in incubating industries; training programs for what population sectors; school curriculums more directly defined by employers.

A. Sectors

1. Should the city take an economy-wide sector or individual 'firm' approach to dealing with the employment related problems of our economy?

2. To what extent should the city's job development efforts be directed to attracting new industries and blue-collar jobs to the city as opposed to retaining marginal or declining industries through supportive efforts?

3. To what extent should the city concentrate on the manufacturing sector because of its capacity to absorb persons of differential skill levels or rely on remedial measures and the growth potential of non-manufacturing sectors to reduce the decline in jobs.

4. Should the city promote the growth of locally oriented, regionally oriented Vs nationally oriented firms?

5. To what extent should job development efforts be aimed incubator-infant firms and industries as opposed to older, established industries?

6. Should the education sector be viewed as a source of employment/jobs for the currently unemployed?

B. Work Skills

1. Should the city's basic approach to upgrading labor skills be to rely on public education, special manpower services for the unemployed or on-the-job training programs?

2. To what extent, and how should, Davenport pursue a 'full employment' strategy; acquisition of basic skills, work orientation through public education vs. manpower services - special job training?

3. How much input should the business community have in defining the curriculum of primary, secondary, vocational and higher educational programs?

4. Should the Davenport's City administration encourage a more manpower-oriented view of basic role of education in Davenport or continue to view education as primarily a means of socialization cognitive development?

5 Should Davenport shift the manpower education emphasis away from secondary vocational education to the out-of-school population through continuing adult education programs?

C. Access

1. What combination of jobs that are low skill/slow mobility/ low wage vs. higher skill/faster mobility/higher wage should the city promote?

2. Should the city undertake to directly improve the wage rate of marginal jobs (i.e., unionization) or supplement workers' income through transfer payments

3. How should the City's job development program to the currently "unemployable" segment be handled: through incentives for employment or through supplemental payments to achieve a minimum income level:

6. CITY GOVERNMENT ROLE: These issues determine what leverage points ought to be emphasized in affecting a strategy and will determine relations with private sector.

A. Intervention Roles

1. How much emphasis should the city place on economy-wide effort. i.e.,
rehabilitating infrastructure vs. intervening in the economics of individual firms or types of firms?

2. Should the city support uneconomical private jobs and be an employer of last resort?

3. Should the city resist the trend toward the privatization of public functions a assume responsibility for private functions, especially where they may be uneconomical?

4. Should the city's own hiring policies be geared to fluctuations in the local economy to hire surplus labor in periods of high employment locally?

B. REGIONAL

1. Should the city use the location of public facilities as an agent of sub-regional economic development?

2. Should the city encourage the decentralization of economic activities out side the central core through incentives?

C. Use of City Resources

1. To what extent should the city management of bonds, equities, pension fund, be guided by the needs of Davenport?

2. To what extend should the city invest money in already constructed but vacant capital facilities as opposed the constructing its own?

3. What should the city's posture as a primary purchaser of goods and services be in relation to the small business community here in Davenport--should they receive preference in bidding, should it extend more liberal credit policies, should it provide a faster payment of obligations to local businesses?

7. INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS: These issues were considered because the sizes and types of requirements selected are key to city capital investment decisions.

A. Transportation

1. Should the primary orientation of the mass transit system be maintained and reinforced (to serve the residential areas and service functions) or should future investments in mass transit be concentrated on the links between residential areas and sub-centers of economic activity outside of the Central City District?

2. How should transportation policy relate to job creation? Should it stimulate job development in certain areas by improving the service before the jobs are created or should it follow the creation of jobs?

3. Should improvements in the system be geared towards the movement of people or the movement of goods?

4. Should the transportation system facilitate access to jobs outside the city?

B. Space

1. What should be done about mixed residential-industrial areas? Should they be maintained or should the balance be changed? If so, should housing get the priority or should industrial expansion get it?

2. Should new industrial areas be created or should old ones be expanded?

3. Should the city decentralize the location of public facilities?

4. In terms of space for expansion of businesses, should the city concentrate on an individual firm or group of firms approach or should broader interventions be considered?

5. Should the city facilitate the acquisition of space (through zoning, tax abatements and other incentives) or should it get involved more in direct assembly and purchasing of land?

6. Should job-producing activities take precedence over other functions such as residential uses in the allocation of newly available land.

8. TAXATION:

Note: There are issues involving the impact of the structure of economic activity on tax revenues, i.e., has the change in economic activity in Davenport resulted in a revenue loss? Someone has said: "The service revolution has debilitated the City's property tax base." The Scott Commission report shows that if the 1970 structure were the same as the 1960 structure, Davenport would have received more income from its taxes, although one table shows the difference would only have been of the order of $17 million.

Tax Policy and Economic Development: Only an extreme exercise of local tax policy can prevent those normal processes of birth, growth and decay. While a minor source of irritation, tax policy might, at the same time, be an instrument which could be used to assist the orderly transition to a new condition.

A.Should the city shift to taxes more responsive to economic growth? (Income and sales taxes as opposed to business and property taxes) OR Should the city slow the decline in manufacturing and wholesale trade because those sectors tend to yield more tax revenues per employee or should it increase assessment and tax rates for the other sectors?

B. Taxation Mechanisms

1. To what extent should tax policy be viewed as an economic development tool, i.e., should tax policy be viewed only as revenue-generating mechanism or also as a development tool?

2. Should the tax rate or the tax structure be modified?

3. Should tax abatement policies be firm and/or industry specific or area specific?

4. Are other business incentives (various type of subsidies) preferable to tax abatements?

5. Should tax policy attract new industries or favor existing ones? Should tax policy help declining firms and/or industries or concentrate on those with possibilities of expansion?

6. Should revenues from taxes be used primarily to provide services to businesses or to give various financial incentives? Should the city push for greater uniformity in tax burdens across the metropolitan area?

7. Should the city push for greater uniformity in the tax burdens across the metropolitan area?