HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-27-15 Brandt, Murphy Public CommentHello,
I grew up in Bozeman and have been very concerned (as have most of the rest of my friends who
grew up there) about developers who have so little regard for the essence and nature of what was
once a small town surrounded by places where we could hike, fish, and explore as kids without
the need for a car. All we needed was a bicycle and we could be “in the woods” where we could
spend time learning about and growing to appreciate nature. Bozeman has certainly benefited
from the vision and guidance of people who have seen the value of this for the community as a
whole, and who have had the support of the rest of the community is setting aside bike trails and
walking trails through places like Pete’s Hill (where we all used to sled) and the trail network
through Bozeman.
I have lived on both coasts of the US (New York City, Seattle, San Francisco, and Palo Alto,
(where I worked with over 100 venture-capital-financed high-tech startups), and one of the
things that sets the best of those places apart has been the foresight and vision of people who
valued the “wild areas” within close proximity to the centers of population. New York City, in
many ways, is defined by Central Park. San Francisco is the city it is because of Golden Gate
Park and the number of other places where green space has been set aside. Seattle has a wealth
of public space and parks, and within a 10 minute drive of down-town Palo Alto, you can hike
hundreds of miles of trails in areas where there are still wild deer and mountain lions.
The desirability of the places I mention above as places to live (and the subsequent economic
benefits that accrue to them because of that desirability) are well studied and accepted. Bozeman
gets voted one of the most desirable places to live, and companies like Gibson, high tech
startups, and others start to bring their headquarters and their workers here so they can retain
people who want to live (and for a lot of them, more importantly, play) in an area like Bozeman,
or Seattle, or Palo Alto, or other places where it’s actually the quality of life that is a very
important component of the economic engine of the location.
Professional people who are drawn to areas like Bozeman typically bring with them business
acumen, financial backing that might not be readily available locally, and the ability to start
companies with a technical (clean) footprint that pay above-average salaries and benefits, and
operate at higher profit margins than merchants, big box stores, and other general businesses
enjoy. Economists have long calculated that the economic multiplier from there kinds of
businesses is between 3 and 4 (which means that for every dollar a high-tech or specialized
company like Gibson generates, the direct economic value to the community in economic flow-
through is 3 to 4 times that amount).
Developers often, by the time they get special tax advantages, create need for additional
infrastructure, and take potential recreational land out of public access) often have a direct
negative multiplier on the economy, which of course, is off-set longer term by the tax base, but
once the land is “gone” and the developer has moved on, that land is “gone” as “magnet land”
for public access and strategic draw for high-tech and other high-margin companies.
Developers have a very narrow and short-term focus. That’s how they succeed and make
money. It’s their business model to try to gain advantage through land acquisition, manipulating
the governing bodies, asking for special treatment or dispensation, and any other manner they
can muster to make money. If they are highly sensitive and ethical, as some are, then they do
have a longer-range vision. But most are just focused project by project (because they are
financially leveraged) , and on the money they will make from that project. Bozeman has
already demonstrated more vision and what I contend is a more strategic economic direction by
continuing to look at the green space surrounding the community as a marketing asset for high-
multiplier economic growth, instead of viewing all of it as development potential.
Eminent domain abuse have become such an alarming trend with developers nationwide that the
recently passed U.S. House Bill 1944 has provisions to cut off all Federal economic aid to
communities that have shown alacrity in its use. So to have a developer use eminent domain (a
dangerous and slippery slope if you look at other communities where that has been abused) to
push forward a project that is not desirable in terms of inherent and strategic value to the
community as a whole, is a precedent that in this case is not only unjustified, but is not a
direction that serves the greater interests of the community – from both a green-space point of
view, and from a strategic economic point of view as well, when you consider that the companies
that are likely to bring the most economic benefit to Bozeman are coming here precisely because
of the recreational and green-space characteristics of the city.
Brian Brandt
430 North Tracy,
Bozeman, MT. 59715