Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission narrowly backs $35,000 contribution to Pittsburg State economic profile after debate
Summary
After questions about frequency and local utility, the Pittsburg City Commission approved a one-year $35,000 city contribution to Pittsburg State University’s economic profile; commissioners debated printing frequency and value to local license-holders.
The Pittsburg City Commission approved a staff and Economic Development Advisory Committee recommendation on June 9 to contribute $35,000 for one year to Pittsburg State University’s economic profile and distribution — a quarterly publication produced by the university’s researchers — after extended debate about cost, frequency and value to existing local businesses.
Dr. Davidson, the researcher tied to the project, told commissioners the profile serves two purposes: marketing the community to prospective businesses and providing local firms with consolidated economic data. "It really had a dual purpose. One was ... to be used as marketing materials for prospective businesses ... but it was also to inform our existing businesses," Dr. Davidson said.
Several commissioners questioned whether the city should continue paying for a quarterly printed distribution when many local businesses said they do not use the paper copies. Commissioners proposed alternatives including a biannual or annual schedule and asked staff to collect further feedback from business owners. Staff and supporters said the publication has aided recruitment efforts and grant applications and that the city does not pay the full cost: the university covers part of the production.
A motion to approve the EDAC recommendation was carried by roll call at the meeting. The transcript records the roll call as: "Brooks — yes; Hike — yes; Montel — no; Perry — no; Sly — yes." The commission directed staff to continue oversight, and several commissioners asked staff to follow up with Dr. Davidson and with local businesses to explore a reduced schedule or other cost-saving measures.
Supporters argued the $35,000 allocation comes from the city’s economic development fund and produces measurable returns; skeptics urged fiscal caution and more community feedback before committing to longer-term funding.
The item was approved; staff will report back if the commission elects to adopt a biannual or annual production schedule or adjusts the city’s contribution in future budget cycles.
