University of Cincinnati

U UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI Date: March 9, 2009 I, Sarah Wilson , hereby submit this original work as part of the requirements for the degree of: Master of Community Planning in School of Planning It is entitled: "Joint Economic Development Districts: Evaluation of a Third Wave Strategy" Sarah Wilson Student Signature: This work and its defense approved by: Michael Romanos, Ph.D Committee Chair: Carla Chifos, Ph.D Gary Powell Albert Kanters Approval of the electronic document: I have reviewed the Thesis/Dissertation in its final electronic format and certify that it is an accurate copy of the document reviewed and approved by the committee. Committee Chair signature: Michael Romanos, Ph.D Joint Economic Development Districts: Evaluation of a Third Wave Strategy A thesis submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Planning in the School of Planning of the College of Design, Architecture, Art and Planning by Sarah Wilson B.A. Youngstown State University June 2009 Committee Chair: Michael Romanos, Ph.D ABSTRACT As a relatively new economic development tool, Joint Economic Development Districts, or JEDDs, have been on the rise over the past decade. Little information exists detailing why JEDDs are becoming more frequently utilized. The information that exists only documents the history of their creation. With little to no information, the question was raised: Are JEDDs effective in achieving their goals? Through the creation and use of a Goals-Achievement Matrix, an evaluation took place on three JEDDs, each of which was created at different times. Analysis shows that JEDDs are effective in achieving the identified goals but at varying degrees of success. Likewise, JEDDs enable participating communities to achieve their goals while maintaining jurisdictional independence. This analysis is the first of its kind and provides some insight as to why JEDDs are growing in use. iii iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to extend a sincere thank you to my committee members, Dr. Carla Chifos, Gary Powell, Esq. and Albert Kanters, MBA, MCP for their guidance and assistance in every step of the process. I am truly grateful to have had Dr. Michael Romanos sit as my committee chair. His expertise, guidance and persistence helped mold this thesis topic from an idea into reality. I am indebted to my family and friends for their love and support throughout the entire process. But most importantly, I owe my deepest gratitude to my husband for his unconditional love, support, and encouragement; without him, I would not have been able to make this thesis possible. v CONTENTS ABSTRACT . ..iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . iv LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES . vii CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION . 1 Purpose 2. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TOOLS AND THE ADVANTAGES OF JEDDs. 4 Economic Development Tools Ohio Economic Development Toolkit Comparable Techniques 3. METHODOLOGY . .17 Methodological Steps The Need for Evaluation 4. ANALYSIS OF PARTICIPATING JEDDs. 27 Hamilton-Indian Springs JEDD Copley-Akron JEDD Harrison-Harrison Township JEDD 5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . .48 Reflections Recommendations BIBLIOGRAPHY . .52 APPENDIX A: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS. 56 APPENDIX B: MATRICES . .66 vi LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES FIGURE 3.1 Hill‟s Goals-Achievement Matrix 1968 . 26 4.1 Map of Hamilton – Indian Springs JEDD 2009 . 37 4.2 Map of Copley – Akron JEDD 2009 . .44 4.3 Map of Harrison – Harrison Township JEDD 2009 . .51 TABLE 1. Waves and Types of Economic Development Strategies . .10 2. Existing and Proposed JEDDs in Ohio . .16 vii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Over the past decade the undulating United States economy has wreaked havoc not only on citizens but on the communities in which they live. The rising cost of goods and transportation has put a strain on the incomes and livelihoods of Americans. The housing crisis has resulted in an unprecedented rise of bankruptcies and foreclosures. The outsourcing of jobs has caused numerous manufacturing plants to close, leaving many unemployed. All of these factors and more have forced cities to rethink the way they do business. While some areas are better situated than others, countless US cities struggle to reestablish stability and generate new growth in the hopes of strengthening their local economy. In the past, cities relied upon annexation to solve their economic problems, and many still do. Cities found that by annexing the surrounding suburbs and townships they could boost their economic base while acquiring land for future development (Facer 2006, 297; Edwards 2008, 121-122). While this measure worked for the cities, the suburbs and townships felt that the annexation threatened their independence. Neither party benefited in the decline of the other; therefore, it became necessary for the two to work together. This practice is now known as regionalization. Although regionalization is slowly becoming more mainstream, its common goal of improving the economic welfare remains in both cities and suburbs (Mohamed 2008, 2785, Reynolds 2007). This is evident with the notable city-county mergers in Indianapolis, IN; Louisville, KY; and Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN (Savitch and Vogel 2004; Segedy and Lyons 2001). Unfortunately, there is no universal method of achieving the shared goal. Due to the wide array of options, each region, city or community must cater its approach to its needs. A common 1 method is the use of economic development tools, such as financial incentives, tax policies, and nonfinancial assistance (Kovens and Lyons 2003, 27). While many of these methods are adequate when used alone, the combination of multiple tools is more effective. Many of these tools have been used for decades, but some are more frequently used than others. One that is growing in popularity is Ohio's Joint Economic Development District, also known as JEDD. JEDDs developed in the late 1980s in response to suburban fears of annexation. The city of Akron answered the question "is there a way that the city could stop annexation yet still expand its economic base and share the tax benefits of that growth?" (Plusquellic 2002, 191). The city would stop annexation in return for collecting income taxes in the designated business district zones as well as provide water and sewer services at its expense in those zones. Coupled with many other attractive requirements, Akron created a number of successful JEDDs. Temporary legislation in 1990 that allowed JEDDs only to be established in Summit County led to the authorization of JEDDs in the Ohio Revised Code a few years later. Over a decade later, over thirty JEDDs have been formed in Ohio. As an alternative economic development tool, JEDDs continue to grow in popularity; many struggling cities and townships continue to look at JEDDs as a way to redevelop. Despite the fact that the number of JEDDs is increasing, there is no formal evaluation tool to determine its success. Thus if a city inquiring into the use of a JEDD looks at existing agreements as an example, there is no set criteria identifying the key issues or indicators of success. Such a tool is necessary to help guide cities in deciding whether a JEDD is the most viable economic development tool for them. 2 Purpose The purpose of this thesis is to create an evaluation tool that can be used to determine the success of a JEDD. Often times, when municipalities consider their options for a method or tool, they look at examples of areas that have utilized that same method or tool in question, yet there is no set criteria to conclude that the tool was successful. Although JEDDs are still a relatively new economic development tool, they are growing in popularity; the major question is why? Unfortunately, no such evaluation tool exists to answer the question: How successful are JEDDS in achieving the stated goals while still preserving jurisdictional independence? The availability of such information could alleviate any confusion during the decision-making process. It is the goal of this thesis to determine the commonalities of the most referenced JEDDs and then develop a matrix from the characteristics. Once completed, potential JEDD partners can examine the matrix and decide whether this type of economic development tool is best suited for them. In Chapter Two, I will discuss in-depth economic development tools and the known advantages of JEDDs. Chapter Three will explain the need for evaluating policies and programs and provide the methodology utilized throughout this project. Chapter Four discusses the three JEDDs selected for evaluation and analysis of research conducted. The final chapter, Chapter Five, reflects on the research project and offers suggestions for future research on JEDDs. 3 CHAPTER 2 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TOOLS AND THE ADVANTAGES OF JEDDs Every community needs assistance in some shape or form. The undulating economy and changes in dominate sectors have caused both hardships and prosperity in many cities across the United States. As the manufacturing industry declined, the country saw the rise of the technology industry. Areas that embraced and capitalized on those sectors prospered, while those who relied on manufacturing suffered. There are numerous other factors, such as suburban sprawl and globalization, that have led to the decline of many cities and municipalities (Carruthers and Ulfasson 2002, 314-315; Reynolds 2007, 483). As much of the population went farther out from the center city, many businesses tended to go out even farther and vice versa. The popularity of suburban life caused many thriving cities to suffer and forced them to compete with the successful communities (Blakely 2000, 283-285). In order for these cities to survive and potentially grow, economic development and its tools have been crucial. While the techniques have proved successful for many, Clarke and Gaile showed in their study that globalization has forced local governments and organizations to rethink their development efforts and techniques used in those attempts (1998).

Load more