Main Street Blog

This blog is intended to be informational and a source of new ideas. The opinions of the posters are not necessarily the views of the Michigan State Housing Development Authority.

By Joe Borgstrom, Director
Specialized Technical Assistance
& Revitalization Strategy Division
Michigan State Housing Development Authority

Whenever I introduce myself to a crowd, I typically tell folks I’ve spent my entire thirteen-year career in economic development: half in downtown redevelopment, half in “traditional” economic development (i.e. “smoke stack chasing”). I’m always conscious of calling downtown redevelopment “economic development,” because it is often considered “real” economic development’s little brother. It’s cute, it makes everyone feel good, but it is usually stuck at the kid’s table when it comes to serious economic policy. It shouldn’t be. Here’s why:

How Local Economies Work
I’ve had the good fortune to work with economist Bill Fruth twice in my career. Bill has one of the best analogies of how local economies work: In essence, local economies are like big buckets of water. In this example, water is obviously a representation for money. Every time you purchase something not made and sold within your community you create a leak in the bucket. If you buy something made from somewhere else from a locally based retailer, the hole in the bucket isn’t as big as if you bought the same item from a chain based outside your economy. Why? As groups like Local First point out, locally owned business owners tend to live locally, paying local taxes on their homes and hire other locally owned businesses for needs like legal or accounting, whereas national chains typically do those things in the community in which they are headquartered. What you buy and where you buy it from determines the size of the holes in the bucket. In all practical terms, it is impossible to have a bucket that doesn’t leak.
 
So if all this water leaves, why isn’t our bucket empty? Well, putting water back in the bucket is the traditional role of economic development efforts. What your community makes, and where it sells it to, determines whether you are adding water to your bucket or plugging holes. Any time you sell a good or service outside your community, your local bucket adds more water. If you get more water than you let leak out, your bucket expands and your local economy grows.
 
This “refilling” of the bucket has traditionally been done, especially in Michigan, by the manufacturing sector. At its very core, manufacturing is making things to be sold elsewhere. For roughly a century, Michigan made more automobiles than anyone. We shipped these vehicles all over the globe. People bought the cars and a good chunk of that money came back to the communities they were made in the form of wages and property taxes. A LOT of water was added to the bucket. As a result, economic development efforts were focused on the easiest way to refill the bucket…help manufacturers. Over time, manufacturing became synonymous with economic development. In actuality, economic development efforts should help any local business that sells its goods or services outside the local economy. Furthermore, economic development should also look not to just add more water to the bucket, but also look to plug the holes as well.
 
The Role of Downtown Retail
For the sake of clarification, I use the term “downtown retail” as a synonym for “locally-owned retail” because a vast majority of downtown businesses in Michigan are locally-owned (far more so than businesses in strip development.)
 
So how does this all tie into downtown retail? For years, downtown retail has been seen strictly as holes in the bucket. At its best, even in Fruth’s example, it is seen as a mixer of money- nothing more, nothing less. However, I submit that ignoring downtown retail as an economic development engine is short-sighted in two ways.
 
First, the old, easy way of doing economic development is not so easy anymore. A lot of economic development strategies have done well in looking to find the next manufacturing “thing.” Our state has had some tremendous success in the green technology and advanced battery sectors. However, these manufacturers are just harder to come by and thanks to efficiencies, not many are hiring in the thousands as in decades past. Meanwhile, technology and aggressive tourism have allowed downtown retailers to move from economic “mixers” to contributors. The proliferation of websites and online retailing allows downtown retailers to sell their goods anywhere in the world. Also, tourists who come to a community and purchase a good or service while there also contribute and downtown shopping is a prime activity of tourists in Michigan. Remembering the original reference that as any business that sells its goods or services outside its local economy it adds water to the bucket. Downtown retailers move from mixer to contributor.
 
Second, plugging the holes (or making them smaller) leads to more water staying in the bucket, thus also growing the local economy. Not doing so is like turning up the thermostat with all the windows and doors open. It won’t matter how much water you pour in the bucket if it all rushes out at the same rate. In a time when economic contributors are harder and harder to come by, making sure the windows and doors are closed can a have as significant and profound impact on the local economy as a major new contributor.
 
Thankfully, our state is learning its lesson. Our partners over at the Michigan Economic Development Corporation continue to do great work at diversifying our economy on a large scale beyond traditional manufacturing. Among other efforts, their Travel Michigan division has established a national award-winning tourism brand in “Pure Michigan” to compete for tourism dollars. Our friends over at the Michigan Small Business & Technology Development Centers continue their outstanding work helping would-be entrepreneurs start their own small businesses. While we here at the Michigan Main Street Center @ MSHDA continue to help communities equip their downtowns to be welcoming & fertile environments for these small businesses to be successful.
 
Has your community’s thoughts on economic development evolved to include helping downtown retail? It should. Please share your thoughts below.

 

Post Rating

Comments

Anonymous User
# Anonymous User
Tuesday, March 16, 2010 10:56 PM
Social comments and analytics for this post
Jeremey Newberg
# Jeremey Newberg
Wednesday, March 17, 2010 10:55 AM
Hello Joe:
We need to find a way to coordinate NSP1 and NSP2 with CDBG-R and related economic development funds so we can move closer to an integrated approach to neighborhood economic development. The artifical wall be tween housing and eocnomic development funding faisl to capture that neighborhoods are dynamic and need nimble sources of capital.
MSHDA's work with the 12 cities and 7 land banks in the NSP2 Consortium will provide motivation, funding and technical assistance for more coordinated planning that links housing stabilization with a "there" there. Nieghborhood anchors such as educational, health care and employment centers and even transit stops and/or related neighborhood amenties help define the "There."
It is vital that neighborhood retail and commercial services are developed within walking distance of the improved housing.
The improvements to quality of life when you can spend less time in your car and more time workings on big ideas and being with your family and friends all contribute to creating neighborhoods of choice.
Keep up the Good Work. The Bucket is half full and getting growing.
Jeremey Newberg
Robert Gibbs
Thursday, March 18, 2010 1:35 AM
Joe, Nice artile, but while it’s true that our downtown retailers are presently mostly locally owned (or nationally franchised by local owners) I am not sure that this is necessarily ideal. Historically this was not the case. Michigan towns at their pre war peak had a blend of local, regional and national retailers. As far as I can tell, about 20% national, 40% regional and 40% local, including major department stores such as JC Penney and Sears. Petoskey still has one of the last remaining downtown Penney’s.
Instead, I propose that local vs. regional or national retailers argument is misguided, as long as the vast majority of spending is occurring outside of the downtown in suburban shopping centers. People living or working in historic downtowns, but driving to suburban shopping centers is not sustainable or desirable. I see this pattern occurring across the country, and especially in many Michigan small towns. Just try shopping in our towns after 5:00 pm or on a Sunday. The sustainable goal should be for our small towns and cities to recapture the pre-war market share that they have lost.
I also challenge the premise that local retailers always result in a filling of the local economic bucket. Sure on a dollar to dollar basis this would be true. A small clothing local store selling $500,000 would be better for the local economy than a regional or national selling the same amount. However, on average, local retailers have sales of only 20%-30% of most nationals $80 sf/yr vs $250. sf/yr) . This is because of extended hours, strong marketing, branding, etc. 70% of all sales occurred last year after 5:30 pm and on Sundays when most independent retailers are closed. A 2,000 sf GAP may produce $500,000 -$600,000. In gross sales and employee 8-10 staff from the local community. A local apparel retailer earning a fraction of the GAP’s sales ($150,000) would employee fewer staff; pay less sales tax, etc. Both stores would pay similar property taxes.
On the other hand, the local retailers benefit from the pull of regional and national retailers. The decline of our downtown economics can be traced to their loss of department stores. Pontiac and Bay City for example went into a nosedive when they lost Sears. Petoskey’s Penney’s would have higher traffic and sales if the downtown had Kohl’s or Target, This would be especially true if the new retailers moved outside of the downtown.
I believe vibrant downtowns are necessary for sustainable communities. But this means that they must sell the goods and services (at the prices and times) that their residents seek and desire. Even if those are national brands. Our downtowns cannot be economically sustainable if they only sell unique brands at limited hours. This is not to say that we should turn our downtowns into malls. This would be a mistake. However, our villages, towns and cities should strive to have the malls sales and market share, as they historically achieved. I realize that this is counter to the Main Street generally accepted philosophy, but the concept needs to be discussed.
Robert Gibbs, ALSA CNU-A Gibbs Planning Group rgibbs@gibbsplanning.com
Joe Borgstrom
# Joe Borgstrom
Monday, March 22, 2010 2:29 PM
Thanks, Jeremey. Integration of economic and community development approaches will be key to the success of programs like the NSPs, even if HUD doesn't always want to acknowledge it. Give me a call soon and we can talk more about it offline. - Joe

Post Comment

Name (required)

Email (required)

Website

CAPTCHA image
Enter the code shown above in the box below