At one time, it seemed unthinkable that the Genesee County Legislature would cut or eliminate funding for the Genesee County Economic Development Center.
At a budget discussion Wednesday, Legislator Ray Cianfrini raised the topic and found at least some level of support from Frank Ferrando, Marianne Clattenburg and Annie Lawrence.
No action was taken, but the legislators agreed to discuss the topic further.
There is a budget hearing -- where the public will comment, but not legislators -- at 7 p.m., Thursday, at the Senior Center, as the county moves toward wrapping up its 2013 budget process.
"I want to go on the record that I am opposed to funding GCEDC to the tune of $215,000," Cianfrini said. "It's no secret, and I'm told, that they are planning bonuses again this year, or salary adjustments, or whatever they're going to call them. I'm vehemently opposed to this and I'm not even sure it's legal."
Ferrando said he agrees with Cianfrini's overall position, but wonders if a compromise position can be found.
Steve Hyde, CEO of GCEDC, has said the county share of funding is critical to meeting operational expenses for the industrial development agency.
Mary Pat Hancock expressed concern that a cut in funding might send the wrong message to potential businesses looking to set up shop in Genesee County, that it might signal that Genesee County doesn't want the business.
County Manager Jay Gsell said he knows businesses are sensitive to any perception that the county isn't committed to meeting their needs. He said when Pepsi and Alpina got wind of possible restraints on infrastructure spending, executives from those companies expressed concern.
So Ferrando's idea is that if the funding is truly essential to the GCEDC, set it aside in the budget, but don't give it to the agency until staff members come before the Ways and Means Committee and makes a case for specific expenditures.
Ferrando acknowledges that setting the money aside would mean it gets neither reallocated to other programs nor returned to taxpayers, at least for a year, but at least it mutes the perception that the legislature is funding bonuses for GCEDC executives.
"Right now, they are very successful in many ways," Ferrando said. "I'm very appreciative of what they're doing for our county, but if they don't need the money, we do need it now. That's the only point I'm trying to make. If there is some process where we can determine that they need it, then we give it to them. If they don't need it, we sure as heck do."
Clattenberg leaned more toward just ending the subsidy, Lawrence seemed to lean toward Ferrando's idea of having GCEDC make a case for funding when they need it.
After discussing another matter, the topic came up again and Hancock expressed reservations about cutting funding to the agency.
"Certainly, I see your concern, but to wash it right from under them and say no, I'm not so sure that would be a helpful message (to the business community)," Hancock said.
Legislator Robert Bausch noted that for 30 years the IDA existed and there was no controversy over bonuses to staff. It's only something that has come up in the past few years.
That's because, he said, for 30 years the IDA didn't do anything. Now it does. Now it is making things happen.
"They did nothing and you didn't incentivize them to do anything," Bausch said. "The first issue you have to address is that now they have incentives and they're doing something."
Hancock's advice to legislators when faced with constituents who complain about the bonuses and the county's funding share is to tell them that for every dollar the county puts into GCEDC, $16 is returned.
Lawrence noted that when the legislature met with the GCEDC board over the summer and expressed concern about how staff was compensated, the concerns largely fell of deaf ears.
"Yes, they're doing great things for our county and project a growing work force, but they have to come to a realize that here are the facts," Lawrence said. "It's dollars and taxes."
Legislator Shelly Stein, who now represents the legislature on the GCEDC board, said the county's issue with bonuses and funding hasn't fallen on deaf ears. Employment contracts are being renegotiated and she said she doesn't believe that next year bonuses will be paid. However, any bonuses that might be announced in early 2013 are for 2011 successes.
While Cianfrini said he supports GCEDC, the work they do and believes Hyde and team are doing a great job, he thinks cuts to their funding may need to come sooner rather than later.
"My recommendation is that we reduce their contribution by the amount that they pay out in bonuses or salary adjustments," Cianfrini said. "If they feel the necessity to pay out then they really don't need our money and the money can be allocated to other programs that need funding, or we adjust our tax rate."
