On Sunday, the local rag had an interesting comparison of the pros and cons of Colorado and Wisconsin in their attempt to attract the headquarters of Miller/Coors.
You can read the op-ed piece supporting Milwaukee from Steve Marcus and Jill Morin, here and the piece from Ryan Horton, supporting Colorado, here.
In essence, Horton makes the case that Colorado (Denver) makes investments in the local area whereas Wisconsin is a big fan of subsidies and cutting a check to the business in for of subsidies. One thing that’s kind of curious is that Milwaukee can boast of a superior K-12 school system. If that’s referring to MPS, I’d hate to see what the problems are in Denver. Anyway, Horton sums up Denver’s case in the following manner.
At this stage, both regions will have similar approaches - bombard the subject with favorable data on educated workers and livability.
However, from this point forward, the strategies of Milwaukee’s M7 and Denver’s MDEDC could diverge in rather dramatic fashion.
Taxes: The M7, along with others in the community, will stoically downplay Milwaukee’s “reputation for high taxes” while highlighting Milwaukee’s cost of living.
Conversely, MDEDC may actually downplay Colorado’s low taxes. Such a contrarian strategy would instead highlight the Denver region’s recent history of large public investments. Such a move by the MDEDC would draw from an experience the organization had in November 2005 when their phone rang off the hook after a $3.7 billion “tax increase” passed in Colorado by referendum vote, 52% to 48%.
Who was calling? It was prospective businesses, and, no, they were not mad at the tax increase. They were interested in moving to Colorado because of the anticipated greater dollars that would flow to higher education and infrastructure.
In short, Milwaukee talks costs, Denver talks investment.
Incentives: The M7, along with Gov. Jim Doyle’s office, will follow through with a substantial incentives package aimed at “sealing the deal” with MillerCoors. Wisconsin plays the incentives game with gusto.
Conversely, MDEDC will offer only a modest incentives package for MillerCoors because Colorado has little in the way of incentives to offer.
Instead, recruiters will play up the Denver region’s recent history of public infrastructure investments. Investment examples that the MDEDC touts:
1) FasTracks: $4.7 billion commuter and light rail build out.
2) T-Rex: $1.7 billion freeway replacement project.
3) Denver International Airport: $5 billion international airport.
4) New baseball, football and hockey stadiums in downtown Denver.
Again, Milwaukee talks subsidies; Denver talks investment.
End game: All else being equal, what would you take?
Milwaukee, which downplays its high taxes but offers an attractive incentives package?
Or Denver, which plays up its recent investments but offers only a small incentives package?
On decision day, MDEDC will presumably lay it on thick to MillerCoors by saying exactly what an MDEDC representative told the crowd at a recent in Denver, “Incentives don’t make a bad deal good.”
Denver will claim that despite Milwaukee’s large incentives package, Milwaukee is actually the quintessential “bad deal” because of it’s inability (whether true or not) to make strategic investments that are important to the business community.
MDEDC will predictably hit on the same theme over and over and over: investment, not incentives.
If we lose MillerCoors, many will blame high taxes.
However, defeat could just as easily be blamed on an approach that views economic development as simply cutting checks (incentives) and cutting costs (taxes).
Economic development is also about investment.
Just ask Denver.
Marcus and Morin fall back into the old “cultural assets” “high quality of life” .
A key element in that decision-making process is the access to cultural opportunities and a high quality of life, which are especially important to the younger generation of professionals and to the creative class.
When we examine our region’s cultural assets, the good news is that our region has a wealth of artistic, cultural and recreational opportunities. Past generations have established tremendous resources that enhance our quality of life and provide economic and educational value for our community.
These assets are still serving us well today, as evidenced by institutions such as the Milwaukee Public Museum, Milwaukee Symphony Orchestra, Milwaukee Art Museum and Discovery World at Pier Wisconsin, which draw thousands of people every year.
The historic buildings and structures that house our cultural assets are the literal foundation of many of the arts and cultural offerings in our region.
Ensuring the longevity of these assets through continued support not only preserves their historical significance, but also demonstrates the pride our region has in its cultural assets and offerings and the high quality of life that can be enjoyed in the greater Milwaukee area.
We must work together to sustain and preserve our cultural assets, positioning the region as the ideal place to live, work and play and attracting talent and businesses to our region.
Notice that Marcus and Morin make NO MENTION of any economic reasons why it makes sense for Miller/Coors to have the HQ in Milwaukee. Here’s another thing. M&M make NO MENTION of the punative tax laws imposed on the people who would relocate to SE Wisconsin should the HQ be here.
My guess is that Miller/Coors will move to Colorado. On the face of it, it’s a better return for shareholders which M&M seem to have forgotten is one of the primary duties of management.
