This is disturbing. Auditors raise a number of very serious questions about just how well the PDC is being run and whether there is proper oversight. I happen to believe in the general idea of an agency that coordinates the city's development efforts and targets funding, but stories like this only serve to reinforce the public's skepticism about public agencies handling of public money.
California recently abruptly stopped all tax increment financing redevelopment agencies as a way to address budget problems and return money to schools. In this environment it is essential that agencies like PDC are absolutely squeaky clean and create public trust that their money is being well spent.
2 comments:
Even if it were appropriate for city government to pick winners and losers in the economy (which I don't believe it is), PDC officials would suffer from what most such public bodies suffer from; investing other people's money less effectively that they invest their own money.
They have no skin in the game; get paid whether their investments pay off or not, and tend to favor the politically connected rather than those with good business plans but no friends in high places.
Even if it were appropriate for city government to pick winners and losers in the economy (which I don't believe it is), PDC officials would suffer from what most such public bodies suffer from; investing other people's money less effectively that they invest their own money.
They have no skin in the game; get paid whether their investments pay off or not, and tend to favor the politically connected rather than those with good business plans but no friends in high places.
Post a Comment