Pet Project OR Progressive Leadership?

By: Jim Moss

Can you think of one significant community project resulting in improved quality of life — that did not require foresight and strategic planning?  Do you recall any major municipal improvement that came without a price tag, or without controversy?
So it shall be with a recent Globe City Council decision to move toward a revitalization of our Public Library.
Is the Council’s majority decision to purchase the real estate on both sides of the existing Library (as a first step toward revitalization) — an example of visionary leadership OR irresponsible city governance?
Change — especially change that carries a price tag is an easy target. Maintaining the status-quo is usually the safe bet.  No guts required of an elected official to ‘just say no’ to a major expenditure that may not seem absolutely necessary.  Bold leadership is always a risky proposition in the present tense.  Naysayers will surely raise persuasive, logical objections. Such as —

• Cost. The price tag does not justify the benefit.

• Need. The proposed change does not meet the highest priority needs threshold.

• Planning.  The decision to act now is premature — careful analysis was not undertaken.

• Timing.  The project may be worthwhile, but this is not the right time.

Seriously, are not these objections entirely appropriate and logical? Yes, indeed!  However, such objections can also represent the predictable mantra to resist change and progress.  Simply put — it is almost always easier and safer to stand in opposition.  Inaction appears to be cost effective and risk averse.  Citizens and their elected leaders can rest complacently if things are just kept the same as ‘they’ve always been’.  Just postpone the tough decisions for the next City Council, perhaps the next generation.
One person’s ‘pet project’ is another person’s ‘sign of progress’.  The kicker is how to discern the difference!  So, which is it?  Was the majority decision by the Globe City Council to commit public funds toward a major library revitalization project (in these tough economic times) an act of wasteful, reckless spending for a ‘pet project’ — or a shining example of visionary leadership?

A few observations by yours truly, reveals my inclination to support this decision by the Council.  First, I see no evidence that a revitalized Public Library represents a ‘pet project’ of any Council Member — meaning that any Council Member is going to benefit, financially or otherwise, more than any other member of the community.  Secondly, it appears fairly obvious that a real need does exist to develop a first-rate library complex that all citizens can utilize and be proud of. (Yes, community pride is immeasurably valuable, although not so easily $ quantifiable.)  Third, if the cost does not justify the benefit — it certainly will not be due to the fact that both adjacent properties were purchased at substantially depressed market prices.  Finally, regarding ‘timing’ — IF the current location of Globe’s Library is the preferred location, then capitalizing on the two adjacent properties while they were for sale — at attractive prices — sounds like pretty good timing.
We Globe-ites can choose to maintain the status-quo (of the past several decades), and allow aspects (& assets) of our City’s infrastructure, especially Historic Downtown, to decay and disappear — OR, we can choose to INVEST WISELY NOW in projects that improve the quality of life for everyone in our community, and move us toward a more prosperous future with a greater sense of community pride.
I, for one, commend the Globe City Council for taking this ‘forward-looking’ action to revitalize our Public Library.

Reflective Note:   I fully recognize, and it should be stated, that conversely it can also take real guts to stand firm in opposition to ‘popular’ but wasteful spending.  Of course, the trick is to know when to ‘hold’ vs. when to be ‘bold’!  In this case — I say, ‘BE BOLD’!