Sarasota Herald-Tribune: Sarasota County’s growth report, the KKK and Stephen Colbert
media mentionBy Tom Lyons
Published: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 at 5:08 p.m.
Last Modified: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 at 5:08 p.m.
Ironic is the kindest description I can think of for the way Sarasota County Commissioner Joe Barbetta is blaming Randall Reid for a consultant’s report all agree was an embarrassing waste of time and money.
After all, Barbetta previously led the successful charge to fire Reid from his position as county administrator, and cited no reason more clearly than this:
Over Barbetta’s clearly signalled objections, Reid dared suggest a different consultant. Reid had in mind a professor with strong credentials to analyze the way the county computes the required fiscal neutrality of proposed developments.
Barbetta said that Florida State University expert was too academic and too likely to delay Barbetta’s plan, which is to make changes that major developers are wanting to cut their costs. Barbetta’s critics say that would mean existing taxpayers will pay for road and school costs that the developers are supposed to cover.
After Reid’s FSU guy was rejected, but before Reid was fired for suggesting him, Reid had to pick from a list of three consultants the commissioners chose. But a county spokesman, Curt Preisser, just told me that two of the three could not do the job in the time required.
That left Laffer Associates. Barbetta had no problem with that.
But look up their history and you will see why the report Laffer just did should only be a moderate surprise. They are regularly criticized for studies totally guided by ideology.
Laffer’s namesake has been called, usually by critics, the patron saint of tax cuts. After a job in Oklahoma, the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy concluded that “flaws in Laffer’s analysis of Oklahoma tax rates and its economy are so fundamental that its findings cannot be taken seriously nor generalized.
If you want an objective study of methods used to determine the potential costs of development to taxpayers, hiring Laffer is like asking a KKK Grand Dragon to study the county’s handling of racial discrimination complaints. It is like paying Larry Flynt to analyze the rules governing strip clubs.
Even so, the draft report LafferLand delivered, $45,000 later, went far beyond the expected one showing the county has been too liberal when estimating a new development’s traffic impacts and future school costs and such.
The report delivered reads as if Laffer was asked to create talking points for asserting that no developer should ever be impaired from doing whatever the heck he wants to do, because what’s good for them is good for everyone. You know how liberal comedian Stephen Colbert spoofs righties by pretending to be one, only ridiculously so? Colbert could have written this to spoof Barbetta and fellow Commissioner Christine Robinson’s desire to make developers happy.
Robinson said it best when she noted that the county had paid the consultant “to go on an intellectual vacation.” It’s that embarrassing to get so much more than they were hoping for.
No wonder they looked for someone to blame for this over-the-top support for removal of almost all land-use restrictions. But Reid?
It is Reid’s fault, Robinson and Barbetta agree. Yes, Reid, who irked them and developers by wanting some FSU guy instead of the consultant who botched it. Reid somehow botched the contract with Laffer and didn’t ask for the right stuff, you see.
Please. Even Thomas Harmer, Reid’s more developer-friendly replacement, says Laffer paid little attention to the contract’s requirements. Several specific written requirements were not met, Harmer said.
But, at commission instruction, Harmer had to go back and ask the Lafferites if they wanted a crack at a do-over, for no extra pay, and attempt an objective report. And this time really focus on the accuracy of methods used to calculate a development’s likely costs to the county. And then shut up.
Could LafferWorld be objective and focus on the task they were wanted for?
Harmer said he told the commission that, given the first report from Laffer, “there will be concern about whether they can be objective.”
Ya think?
Still, he asked Lafferville if they could and would do an objective analytic study.
“I can only tell you that I asked the consultants and they indicated that they can,” Harmer told me.
Well, how much more assured could we be than that?
The County Commission didn’t smirk and bail. It quickly approved giving Laffer another chance. And an extra month.
Reid won’t be blameable this time, but no problem. This time, Barbetta and Robinson should get exactly the conclusion they want.
And seriously, does anyone think there is the slightest chance that the new, totally objective report could show that developers are getting a fair shake on infrastructure costs already, and perhaps should even pay more? Anyone?