Recently, I received a letter from a constituent opposed to development of the properties on Arnold and Elm Street. He is opposed to using tax payer money for the development of the property. He also expressed his opinion that “Downtown Westfield as I knew it when I was young is over, and won’t be coming back.”
I thought I’d share my response with the rest of the community to help constituents understand my position regarding the development of this property and why I think the purchase of the lots is a wise use of tax payer dollars.
Dear Mr. ______,
Thanks for expressing your opinion regarding the development of the property on Arnold and Elm St. I understand your concern that taxpayer money be used wisely. I agree that development of these properties should minimize risk to tax payers.
Before I get to that, I’d like to point out that the concept drawing in your letter depicting the parking garage and a multi-story building is just that: a concept drawing. We will be putting the development of the property out to bid to a private developer. The plans the developer comes back with may be very different than the concept drawing. There may or may not be a parking garage and there may or may not be a multi-story building. What the final project looks like depends on what the private developers believe will be profitable for them. We do know there will be a transportation pavilion and work on that project is scheduled to begin this year. The pavilion is not being built with city money.
Regarding the expenditure of tax payer money, the point must be made absolutely clear that the development costs for any new structures will be paid for by the developer, not the city. Currently, the city needs to acquire a few parcels of land. Once acquired, the city will transfer ownership of the lot to the Westfield Redevelopment Authority (WRA), and then put the development out to bid to private developers. After the development is built, the city can begin collecting more tax revenue from the property than it currently generates. In addition, it’s hoped the new property will also spur further development of surrounding properties, increasing the commercial value of these other properties as well.
Though the city will be required to front the costs of acquiring the lots for the new development, that money will be made back over time from property taxes collected from the new development. Right now, the lots on Arnold and Elm St. is generating little tax revenue for the city, is a huge eyesore, and is an impediment to further economic growth. That’s why I view the development of that property not as a tax payer expense but as an investment that will save tax dollars in the long run. And that’s why I am in favor of having the city taking steps that will put that property to more productive use.
I think it’s also important to note that a huge amount of time and effort has gone into the renewal plan we are currently following. The plans we have before us are a result of years upon years of study and were arrived at after weighing many options. The city council has already approved the recommendation for the development of the property on Arnold and Elm. To pull the plug on the development of this property by not funding the purchase of these lots would throw decades of work away and leave us with no options for moving forward. Such a backward step would greatly hinder any potential for downtown development.
Regarding which, I’m afraid we will have to agree to disagree regarding Downtown Westfield’s economic prospects. I am extremely bullish that our downtown can fulfill it’s potential. Many pieces of the puzzle are coming into place, including the last leg of the rail trail which will bring visitors from near and far into downtown. The beautification of the new Gas Light district and the proposed esplanade along the riverfront will also entice people into our downtown. The development of the lots on Arnold and Elm is another key component to helping turn downtown around.
I also believe that the first step to moving things forward is to believe in ourselves and that change for the better is possible. That “can-do” spirit the attitude that built America into a great country and is what made a success possible. If we believe all hope is lost and nothing can be done, well, then failure becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. When I ran for office, I did not run on a “downtown development is hopeless” platform. Many people across the city have very high hopes for developing downtown into a vibrant commercial and cultural corridor and I see it as my obligation, as city councilor, to do what I can to help them fulfill that vision.
Finally, I should add that downtown development is also in the best interests of Westfield taxpayers. The more revenue we can bring in from new commercial development, the less money residents will be required to pay each year. Again, I look at the relatively small cost of getting this land developed as an investment, not an expense.
Again, thanks for taking the time to write. I hope you found this communication helpful and that it clarifies why I take the position I do with regard to development of the property on Arnold and Elm. If you have any further questions on this issue or others, please let me know. I’d be happy to hear your ideas and thoughts.
Sincerely,
Steve Dondley
City Councilor, At-Large
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this column are those of the author and not the staff, editor, or publisher of this publication.
