Writing in the North Idaho Business Journal, Coeur d’Alene Press editor Mike Patrick speculated that Twin Falls must have a “secret sauce” which has helped Twin Falls’ economy flourish.
Jan Rogers, Executive Director of the Southern Idaho Economic Development Organization (SIEDO), explained patiently to Patrick that, “It’s not about the organization of a single community or a single person. It’s everyone working together under one umbrella to present the best proposal for a project.” It’s teamwork, Rogers said.
Rogers went on to say that the Twin Falls team has three important assets: the College of Southern Idaho, urban renewal, and a group of legislators that speak with one voice for the economic benefit of the region.
But we here in north Idaho have a community college. We have urban renewal. We have legislators. What does Twin Falls have that we in Coeur d’Alene don’t? Does Twin Falls really have some secret?
No, Twin Falls has no secret, though what it does have is certainly missing in Coeur d’Alene. Twin Falls clearly has genuine leaders who have earned the trust of their citizens with the demonstrated honesty, commitment, and competence of their team. OpenCdA suspects that in Twin Falls, “team” is synonymous with “everyone in the communities,” whereas in Coeur d’Alene, “team” refers to a very narrowly defined and carefully selected group of “stakeholders” whose business interests are south of Sherman Avenue and between 1st and 7th Streets in Coeur d’Alene.
When the College of Southern Idaho trustees picked Dr. Jerry Beck to be the College’s president, they were choosing a proven leader with a strong commitment to achieving excellence and community responsiveness in the community college. They chose a leader, not someone who would retire in place doing an excellent imitation of a worn out rubber stamp.
In writing his NIBJ article, our local skewspaper editor used Coeur d’Alene Councilman Deanna Goodlander to deceptively proclaim that Representative Kathy Sims is “…unalterably opposed to our urban renewal district.” Goodlander is also one of the Commissioners on the Coeur d’Alene urban renewal agency, the Lake City Development Corporation (LCDC). Had Goodlander wanted to depart from her usual frothing rant and venture into fact (unknown territory for her), she would have correctly stated that Representative Sims and others have sought to systematically improve Idaho’s urban renewal laws by amending them to remove their vulnerability to the predatory exploitation demonstrated in Coeur d’Alene. Understandably, that revelation would not sit well with those in Coeur d’Alene who have found and exploited the laws’ vulnerabilities for their own personal enrichment.
What apparently has Goodlander and her handlers worried is that for years, Representative Sims and others in the community have been educating not only members of the Coeur d’Alene community but also other state legislators about the abuses of Idaho’s urban renewal laws by Coeur d’Alene’s LCDC. Here is the 2013 edition of LCDC – Urban Renewal Abuse in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho.
Near the end of the NIBJ article, both Twin Falls’ Jan Rogers and Post Falls Representative Frank Henderson were asked what was needed for northern Idaho to achieve the same level of success as Twin Falls did in southern Idaho. Both answered “teamwork.” Both of them were correct, but only partly.
To achieve the level of teamwork clearly present in Twin Falls, there must be a level of trust that has been earned. Earned trust is not the same as unquestioning obedience and obsequiousness commanded by cronyism and enforced by coercion. True team leaders are able to clearly and succinctly express their ideas, but they are also willing to modify those ideas for the good of the entire community, not just for the pecuniary benefit of their cronies, business associates, and family members. Team leaders are genuinely trusted, not feared.
It appears that Twin Falls has achieved that. The team leaders in Twin Falls have earned the trust of their community, their team. Twin Falls is deservedly reaping the benefits of that. Coeur d’Alene has a long way to go.
People are so easy to tear down, ideals are hard to build with integrity. Hoping we can get back to construction.
So–how bout those Mets?
Comment by Old Dog — January 8, 2014 @ 3:07 pm
Eric,
Great response in comment #49.
It seems to me that a first step the region needs to take is to objectively assess its existing strengths and weaknesses that would affect a balanced and stable economy. Once that assessment has been completed (and maybe it already has), then the region would have a good idea of what each community has to offer, what each community could contribute to the overall improvement. With each community’s assets and liabilities identified and cataloged, then a regional plan to overcome the liabilities and emphasize the assets would be more practical.
I’m a fan of regional cooperation, but my background is law enforcement administration, not commercial development. In 2006 and at the invitation of Doug Floyd at the Spokesman-Review, I prepared an op-ed piece proposing a bi-state criminal justice facility. I still feel that the concept has merit. My point is that regional cooperation benefits the greatest number of people and results in each community’s most effectively using its strengths to complement the other communities’ strengths.
Comment by Bill — January 8, 2014 @ 4:26 pm
Old Dog,
Mets? Mets? What? You gotta problem wit my Cubbies? (Trying to type in my most effective Lakeview dialect.)
Comment by Bill — January 8, 2014 @ 4:31 pm
Yes, I would care to account for my words. My words were about an elected city council person, who told the North Idaho Business Journal that Representative Kathy Sims is “…unalterably opposed to our urban renewal district.” (excerpt from Bill’s post above) If you go on to read Bill’s post, he explains that Kathy has gone to great lengths, for many years, trying to get common sense reforms to the urban renewal laws. Reforms that will better represent taxpayers and small businesses.
Deanna was a city council member, until last evening, but also is still a member of LCDC urban renewal. She has a long history of voting for the pet projects of her campaign donors, and even voted for a project involving her brother and then wondered out loud if she should have recused herself! I will stand by my criticisms of elected people acting improperly in their official capacities.
Comment by mary — January 8, 2014 @ 4:36 pm
Bill,
Awesome reply. You said in a nut shell what is actually important and that regional is best for the greatest number of people.
Perfect, devoid of ego or anything like that. In the end the region becomes one as far as opportunity and progress.
Freakin well done man. Well done.
Old Dog, OK here goes. If you didn’t like me before you are sure to not like me now. Go YANKEES!!
I like tghe Cubs though if not sypathetically< I mean it's the National League. 😛
Mary, well done as well. Your comment #54 is what you do best, embrace it.
Kathy Simms, I've never met her but I do agree in some opposition to urban renewal, at least how it stands here in CDA.
Not quite sure why I have this feeling but, I don't believe she will be be a representative after the next election IF anyone runs against her. Again I haven't met or talked to her as it is just a gut feeling. Actually would like to meet here.
Also I think we agree that Mrs. Goodlander was not the best of representatives of the community at large but she is gone now so I'm moving on.
Interesting that we agree, in opinion, that Mrs Goodlander was unsuited to serve in a civic leadership role so much so that she is called a liar in a public forum and it's acceptable but, we differ in opinion whether or not you may be best suited for civic leadership and I get called out for personal attack of that opinion. Granted, like i mentioned before you are indeed entitled and, to complicated things more I agree with you that the actions of Mrs Goodlander are odd. I'm just not ready to call her a liar as the word is defined.
Comment by Eric — January 8, 2014 @ 8:10 pm
I have read with interest the “secret sauce” article concerning the differing economic development models of Twin Falls, Coeur d’ Alene and Post Falls. I have some observations.
The personalities of these three cities gets to the heart of their visions and approaches to economic development. Post Falls and Twin Falls cannot claim the fame of Coeur d’ Alene as bright and shiny, glass and brass, a place for the known and renown to dip their toes in magic waters. They remain for now working towns with lots of ordinary hard working leaders who plow the ground then shower up to sit at the council table.
Coeur d’ Alene was like that throughout its history and until recently, was a big overalls kind of community. It was about jobs, good jobs, jobs that gave a worker a future, a positive pathway for his or her family. Logs, lumber and mills were king, farm fields of bluegrass set the world market on the prairie. The best job wasn’t in an office or selling cars, it was the head saw filler at the lumber mill. Yes, we had tourism but those were mostly dead end jobs to say the least.
So, as it has happened in many towns, the good jobs went away and the mills collapsed or were burned down. The money bet was then on a Coeur d’ Alene future as this kind of Pollyanna bubble town, Pleasantville, black and white, blinded by the reality of meager jobs and low wages. “Quality of Life” was redefined by the decision makers, the big egos. It was not to be a quest for a town with good jobs but the purchase of little shiny baubles for happiness, feel good stuff for the rest of us poor bastards.
This new “quality of life” works great for those who hold title on the first three streets near Sherman Avenue and the travel routes in and out of the city but not so much for everyone else. In Coeur d’ Alene, life is now about survival for many, the future out there are the meager wages of a fast food joint or folding clothes in Wal-Mart. Sure, those construction workers do pretty well, but they come and go. That is not the future where other smart cities choose to hang their hat.
Post Falls and Twin Falls checked any ego they had at the door and went after good jobs that would last. They took stock of their assets and built on those assets. They tried hard to stay away from shoveling dollars to developers who were a one trick pony, leaving nothing on their trail but a lot of horse shit, a fat personal checkbook and a bunch of workers who were shooed away after the last brick was set. It seems that the work of Twin Falls is building and sustaining good jobs.
So what does this lesson of the “secret sauce” mean for the decision makers of Coeur d’ Alene. Do they shrug it all off by sniping that it is all about cows. Or do they now make an all out effort to build a lasting quality of life for their community?
steve badraun
Comment by Steve Badraun — January 9, 2014 @ 8:24 am
Steve
Excellent!
Comment by concernedcitizen — January 9, 2014 @ 9:08 am
Steve Badraun,
Thank you! I think your analysis succinctly identifies a challenge the newly elected Mayor and Council face. But they don’t face it alone, nor should they be expected to. The best the Mayor and Council can do is provide the field on which everyone is given an equal opportunity to be on the team.
Notice I didn’t say “compete” to be on the team, because that implies that the team should be limited in size by some arbitrary selector. In the past, the arbitrary selectors appeared to be fealty, unquestioning obedience, or $50,000 donations to the Mayor’s favorite public projects. Thankfully, most of those who promoted that are gone from the Mayor and Council positions. Unfortunately, some of them remain on commissions and committees.
I think the new Mayor needs to carefully examine the qualifications of each of the members of every city commission and committee. But first, he needs to work with Council and City staff to determine what the meaningful qualifications for those positions are. The City’s website lists 18 committees and commissions. He may even ask of all of them are really necessary. Are they mandated or merely permitted by statute or ordinance? If permitted but not mandated, is the function they perform essential or is it an unnecessary impediment toward improvement of the community?
City commissions and committees are a very good way for citizens to volunteer their time and effort to participate in local government, and participation in those commissions and committees can help participants determine if they are suitable and qualified for other public offices. However, it is an abuse of the commission and committee to place unqualified and uncommitted people on them for the sole purpose of giving those people “face time” to “groom” them for other public offices. The new Mayor needs to encourage all people who want to serve to volunteer, and he and Council need to consider the applicants for the knowledge, skills, and abilities they would bring to the position, not for their political loyalty or their ability to deliver donors.
I also think that the Coeur d’Alene Chamber of Commerce needs to decide what it wants to be when it grows up. The Mayor and Council and City staff can provide and maintain the field for the games, but the Chamber of Commerce and the remainder of the City’s residents need to define what the games will be. In my view, the Coeur d’Alene Chamber of Commerce has decided it will defer to the Mayor and City Council to define the games. That’s not the government’s job any more than it’s the government’s job to pick the game’s winners and losers! They need to communicate, but they need to have an arm’s length professional relationship which will and should occasionally be professionally adversarial.
Comment by Bill — January 9, 2014 @ 9:19 am
Steve, what a wonderfully written comment, both enlightening and endearing. I’ve been hearing that Coeur d’Alene is earmarked as a retirement enclave for the rich and very well-connected from all over the country. Judging from the actions of the previous administration, that could indeed have been their goal. But, as you point out so well, it leaves the regular citizens to simply pay up and shut up.
Bill’s teamwork ideas for the city’s committees and commissions should be seriously considered by the new Mayor and Council, if they want to refocus this town back to the “good of the people”. Time will tell.
Comment by mary — January 9, 2014 @ 9:59 am
I first started reading OpenCDA because I liked getting the different points of view that were put forth in a simple and factual manner.
I have noticed that lately the postings have become more and more negative and injected with unsubstantiated innuendo. I just considered it was frustration over the overwhelming defeat in the city election and hoped that it would run it’s course and the Blog would become informative again.
Now comes this posting, and Ms. Souza announces she is back in her first sentence and jumps into attack mode in her second sentence. Then with the aid of Old Dog and Concerned citizen adding to the feeding frenzy the entire discussion heads downhill from there.
It has become clear at least to me, that instead of being an informative and open discussion center where ideas such as Eric’s can be tossed around… oh well I can’t help what you think I’m inferring.
Comment by Mike Teague — January 9, 2014 @ 12:19 pm
I was thinking about “job creation” for this area and I mean real – long lasting jobs and what we could do besides offering menial tourist and retail employment and I could not come up with anything. Then, I thought about the possibility of some jobs that might come with a factory or two and determined that expansion for more “real jobs” are just not here – one needs to rely on Post Falls or Spokane for employment. Then, I determined that is probably how some of our leaders might think and there is no real push to bring in satisfying employment, folks can just travel out for work. It is rare to find a decent full time job in this area with benefits. Seriously, anyone have ideas for bringing in jobs and what kind and where?
Comment by Stebbijo — January 10, 2014 @ 7:28 am
Stebbijo,
All good observations and questions.
In general, creating and attracting new jobs locally is usually the responsibility of private businesses and organizations such as local Chamber of Commerce. That seems to have been reinforced by US Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Tom Donohue in his The State of American Business 2014 remarks.
Objectively assessing their communities’ capabilities and limitations and providing those assessments to private businesses and organizations is reasonable for local and state governments, but it is not a good idea for government officials to try and take the lead in creating or attracting job-creating or sustaining businesses to their area. That can easily result in the government officials creating exclusive or inclusive conditions which de facto determine that specific businesses will succeed while others will fail. It is not the job of government to unfairly advantage or disadvantage business and industry.
Comment by Bill — January 10, 2014 @ 8:01 am
Bill, you’re right that government doesn’t, or shouldn’t, be responsible to create jobs, but government can set up an environment conducive to certain kinds of businesses that bring particular levels of jobs. Taxes make a big impact on a business’ decision to move to a city: Taxes, fees, permits, ordinances, the difficulty of the city’s approval process, along with the quality of the workforce and schools schools, cost of housing, and the satisfaction quotient the citizens have with their government.
Natural beauty of the region helps too–I think we have that one nailed. We need to work on many of the others.
Comment by mary — January 10, 2014 @ 8:17 am
Mary,
Agreed.
But the government has to be very careful not to use its lawful authority unlawfully to favor one business over another. For example, zoning and other regulatory ordinances must not be selectively enforced or ignored to promote one business over another. Neither should zoning or regulatory ordinances be tailored to intentionally benefit one specific business while imposing unreasonable and insurmountable obstacles for a similar business. It is not government’s business to give unfair competitive advantage or impose unfair disadvantage.
Comment by Bill — January 10, 2014 @ 8:32 am
Bill,
I agree in theory about government officials taking the lead for the reasons you point out. I say in theory because when a community is in flux with job creation, incentive, or whatever they follow the easy path. It seems in our case that the private sector of job creation and this is not just here, follows the money and if the money is tourist, service, or other less that sustaining jobs then that is what will follow naturally and by osmosis that is what we become.
I fully understand the complications of gov officials creating exclusive or inclusive conditions. That said, it doesn’t hold true when trying to lure industry or business to an area when pitted against another area willing to, perhaps, make an initial hit in order to jump start or make a fundamental change in attractiveness to an area, be that city, county, or state.
The follow the easy money type of services that we find will benefit from a more sustainable solid community that has confidence in spending on daily services and the ancillary joys of living.
We have in place, for better or worse thru LCDC, attractive features of a quality of life utopia, so to speak. I’m relatively certain that that is the, where and why for, in justifying the projects and accomplishments that we have to date. Again we can moan and groan about how it all got here but it’s here and it’s done so, lets use it. The quality of life aspect is a good tool to have in ones box when courting but, in the end it comes down to the money. We may have put the cart before the horse and instead got jobs before life style but this is where we are.
Other places use incentives to lure and we have lost. If we parlay our quality of life with incentives then our incentives might not have to be as, uhmm, dangerous to the business climate.
Again, I understand the caution in gov involvement I really do but, what advantages in our service tourist economy would be at a disadvantage if, and I only use this as an example, if we make it attractive for a good company to set up camp. Like a 3M, BioTech, GE, etc.
We would have to be somewhat selective, I mean we wouldn’t want to incentivize another McDonalds, or another small service business as that would fall into place with your concerns and rightfully so.
Look at areas that have business Mecca’s, San Jose “Silicon Forest” New England “BioTech Forest”. Those places didn’t start overnight, something started it and it grew from there.
Listen, I know my examples can be nitpicked and that’s fine they are just example to facilitate dialog flow. The point is all things return to leadership and cooperation. I think we agree that it should be regional if it has to. I personally don’t care if its Post falls, Hayden, CDA, Spokane Valley, or Athol for goodness sake because once the ball rolls it will benefit the most people.
Comment by Eric — January 10, 2014 @ 9:36 am
I have always been open to offering LCDC incentives for businesses bringing good jobs, but the plans must clear and specific with timelines, progress markers and reasonable end dates. And all incentive-funded items must remain publicly owned, such as steets, sidewalks, streetlights, sewer, water, etc. That is a more appropriate use of LCDC money than beautifying an existing public park to the tune of $20 million,($15 mil. from LCDC), without a public vote, especially when unemployment remains a significant problem and the jobs “created” after the park construction is done will be mainly entry level hospitality jobs, and probably seasonal as well.
Comment by mary — January 10, 2014 @ 10:40 am
I agree with all of you concerning job creation. I don’t like government in the mix of it all either and I can see how unfair zoning practices could hinder or promote business . The Kroc Center is not and should not be counted as a reliable long term job source, they do not even offer unemployment if your position should bite the dust. They are a non profit. Also, I think Eric is right,any bigger business that might consider locating in Valley, Hayden, Rathdrum ect. benefits us all. However, it is nice not to have the drive. I also agree with Mary in that we are becoming a “bedroom community” for the more rural areas that have the ability to grow, while we become a ‘hub’ of sorts focusing on downtown and tourism. Sad, but true. I have always wondered why someone rich who does not have much else to do but make money, has not invested in a bottled water company. I think we are perfect for it, if not right here, I sure know some places in North Idaho that offer pristine water quality and I would not mind living there, either. 🙂
Comment by Stebbijo — January 10, 2014 @ 6:26 pm