(UPDATE: City of Dayton responds: In a comment on a newly developed Facebook page about the controversy, the City of Dayton Office of Economic Development responds in a comment )
In September 2010, the City of Fort Wayne, Indiana hired a PR firm from Chicago, paying them $72000 to teach city employees about Social Media. The local, and very active Social Media community there was outraged. With all of the local talent, why spend taxpayer money out of town? The city said they needed the specialized talents of Carolyn Grisko & Associates, who had worked with other city governments. Fair enough. Still, was there really no individual or company who was up to the task (and might have taken a shade less than $72000?). I would at least, think so.
Apparently this is widespread. The Dayton Daily News reported on Friday, April 20, that the City of Dayton Office of Economic Development had contracted Atlas Advertising, LLC from Denver to create an economic development website that promotes the city to businesses. Atlas beat 15 other bids, including 5 local companies.
What’s wrong with this picture? Dayton has been hit especially hard by the recession, the closure of auto and auto-related plants, moves of companies that were once local institutions like NCR, which moved to Atlanta; and a talent exodus as people move to find other opportunities. Dayton is undergoing a rebirth as more technical companies move in, and the city would like to attract more companies and talent. That’s what the Office of Economic Development is all about.
What does it say about a city when businesses who are thinking about locating there don’t have enough confidence in their local companies to spend taxpayer money with them? Are the needs so specialized that only this Denver company can provide them? Yes, there is a difference between a one-person shop operating in a basement and a large company that can provide sophisticated back-end and database services, but there are several companies in Dayton that can do that. Did the Economic Development commission even bother asking the members of New Media Dayton for recommendations?
The Cities of Fort Wayne, Dayton, Indianapolis, Knoxville or even Denver have every right to do business with whoever they want. Likewise, firms, including in Dayton, can and do solicit business from around the country and world. Still, if you’re the taxpayer entity that wants to tell the world how great your city is as a place to locate your business, why give your local providers a black eye?
When a city preaches about shopping local, but doesn’t do that when it buys city services, it rings a little hollow.
Your thoughts are welcome!
April 20, 2012
Brad Lovett
5 responses to “Shop Local? City Governments Should Practice What they Preach”
Steve Brack
April 20th, 2012 at 18:19
As a City of Dayton resident & taxpayer, I would rather see the City spend $90,000 locally than $45,000 in a distant city, as they intend to do. Here’s why: Any injection of cash into the local economy has a multiplier effect and itself spurs economic development, both up front because of the added economic effect and long-term through broadening the skill set & experience base of local firms.
We cannot afford to deploy our city’s economic resorces in such a careless & reckless manner. The people of Dayton deserve better than a narrow focus on penny-pinching over acting in the overall economic best interest of the community.
Brad Lovett
April 21st, 2012 at 10:06
It would be hard for me to justify spending double for half of the capacity that they need, if in fact Atlas is the only company they found that meets that criteria in working in the economic development field. It would be a boost to the local economy and showcase local skills, as I stated above. Now on the other hand, if local companies are lacking those skills and capacity, it might be time for them to improve their processes.
ssbohio
April 22nd, 2012 at 11:00
The argument about “spending double for half of the capacity” is entirely specious. The City’s RFP establishes the scope of work. There is no option of getting “half of the capacity.” Further, it entirely ignores the money multiplier effect of local spending versus spending in a distant city. That would have to be addressed as well for the argument to have legs.
This contract isn’t a question of arcane knowledge or esoteric expertise. It’s a contract to build a website, and every approved bidder is, by definition capable of doing the work. The only difference the City identified was a difference of degrees of prior experience, not a difference of “can” versus “cannot.”
Steve Brack
May 7th, 2012 at 14:32
Brad, nowhere in their response did the city say that Atlas was the only company meeting the criteria, nor did they say Atlas was the lowest bidder. So, there’s no evidence of either of those claims being true.
Brad Lovett
May 7th, 2012 at 21:42
Atlas had done work for the city before, they likely had their mind made up and the bidding process was a formality