COMMENTARY
Bruce Andriatch: $1.3 million question: Too high a price?
Consumers generally fall into one of these categories: those who buy something and don’t really consider what it costs; those who buy something and are sure they’re getting a deal; and those who consider buying something but then choose not to because of the cost.
Town of Tonawanda officials want residents to believe they are the second type. Yes, they want to spend up to $1.3 million to construct a new building for the town’s Parks and Recreation Department in Lincoln Park, but that pales in comparison to the money they would spend to continue to rent space in a Sheridan Drive office building.
Voters could have a chance to decide whether to allow this project to move forward. If that happens, you can bet they will ask themselves the question that all consumers should ask — and, with the economy in an epic nose dive, are asking — before making a major purchase: Do we really need this? And can we really afford this now?
Dan Crangle says the answer to both questions is an emphatic yes.
Crangle, a member of the Town Board and chairman of the board’s Recreation Committee, said the town is facing the prospect of a 30 percent rent increase at the department’s current home. That site has been used since the mid-1990s after fire destroyed the town’s Highway Department garage and recreation offices.
Crangle said the cost to taxpayers would be far less than $1.3 million, thanks to a $500,000 state grant secured by Assemblyman Robin Schimminger, D-Kenmore. So the local tab would be no more than $800,000.
The town also considered using existing office space, buying and renovating a building or continuing to pay rent. Ultimately, building something from scratch made the most sense. “I’m looking at the money we’re saving,” Crangle said.
If the town follows the path it is on, the building could be ready for occupancy in October. One of the only things that could stop it would be a public vote known as a permissive referendum, but residents would have to gather enough petition signatures to force one.
Supervisor Anthony Caruana said he can’t think of a reason for that to happen. The town will be saving nearly $100,000 a year on rent, adding a new building to a park without taking away any substantial recreational space, paying off the bond in five years, using town workers to maintain the property and creating construction jobs.
“Even with the economy the way it is, it’s still a win-win for the town,” he said.
He may be right. But the flip side of the argument is that this just isn’t a good time for government to be spending even more of our money.
Think of it in nongovernment terms. Maybe you rent an apartment for $600 per month and the rent is going up. You could buy a house and get a mortgage for $800 a month and enjoy all the benefits that go along with property ownership.
But you don’t do it because, even though there are lots of reasons to buy, you can’t afford to pay more right now.
Voters routinely accuse their government of being out of touch with such financial reality. Proposing this project now looks like Exhibit A.
Crangle said he understands that. He has heard from residents who can’t fathom why the town would consider spending more than a million bucks for a new building. His answer is that in the long run, spending now will save later.
“It comes down to this: What do you prefer?” he said.
In the Town of Tonawanda, that’s the $1.3 million question.
Log into MyBuffalo to post a comment
MyBuffalo is the new social network from Buffalo.com. Your MyBuffalo account lets you comment on and rate stories at buffalonews.com. You can also head over to mybuffalo.com to share your blog posts, stories, photos, and videos with the community. Join now or learn more.
Reader comments