A Community-Based Survey on Economic Development of Buffalo

Waterfront Development on the Canal Side

A Community-Based Survey on Economic Development of Buffalo

February 10, 2010
by
M.S.W. Intern,
SUNY Buffalo
Coalition for Economic Justice

Goals of the Survey:
The survey was conducted to assess the community’s knowledge of the on-going planning of Waterfront Development at the Canal Side. The survey assessed residents’ knowledge by posing questions about the involved officials such as specific companies, corporations, and stakeholders involved in the project.
In addition to answering the questions, survey participants shared their views of the project’s progress and pros and cons associated with the progress.
Another goal of the survey was to assess residents’ own needs and expectations from the project. Respondents showed their support for application of certain standards in return for tax incentives provided to corporations.
The survey has 3 sections devoted to meeting its proposed goals:
1. A section asking residents about their knowledge about the construction companies, corporations, decision makers, and planners of the Waterfront Development. This section notes arguments for and against companies, corporations, decision makers, and planners involved in the project.
2. A section asking residents’ opinions and suggestions on specific outcome(s) on the standards they expect to be applied.
3. A section assessing the level of trust residents have of appointed officials responsible for the Waterfront Development and their general ideas about providing corporations tax breaks as an incentive for establishing business(es) in Buffalo.
Data & Methods:
· Survey of 159 residents in Buffalo
· Conducted in fall of 2009
· Areas targeted for collection:
o Elmwood Village
o Various areas of East Side Buffalo
o Downtown (Main Street)
o UB – North Campus
o West Side Area
o Buffalo Subway Line (Seneca Station, Lafayette Station, Church Station, Theatre Station, Utica Station)
· Resulting sample represents wide participation of residents in terms of age, race/ethnicity, and region.
Overview of Sample:
· Surveys were mostly conducted/collected during lunch time around noon till 3:00 pm. The residents were randomly approached and were asked questions from the survey. Some residents stopped curiously to participate when saw an exchange of dialogue between the collector and (other) participants. The conversation(s) generated from the surveys usually lasted 10 – 15 minutes, approximately. Some residents engaged in detailed conversation and expressed great concerns on the current economic conditions of Buffalo. Other residents expressed their ideas and suggested strategies to improve current economic conditions in the area.
*Note: Survey participants were approached randomly based on their openness to discuss and part-take in filling out the survey. The participants were diverse members of the community from different races and ages. Many refused to participate in the survey questionnaire and their decisions were respected.
*On various instances, survey participants engaged in detailed conversations about Buffalo’s economic conditions, however only the points pertaining to the survey questionnaire were documented.

Secondary gain: The survey was able to achieve its intended goal during the process of conducting surveys. It enabled participants to get engaged and get information about their community’s social and economic conditions. The interest was sparked through an exchange of dialogue. Most of the participants seemed unaware of the on-going development plans for the Waterfront. Some of the participants addressed the issue of the city’s poor planning strategies. Numerous residents acknowledged their lack of involvement and awareness about the subject matter and shared their desire to become involved, gain knowledge, and participate in Buffalo’s revitalization plan.
1). The following questions were asked to assess residents’ knowledge on the corporations, developers, planners involved in the Waterfront Development Project. The residents also provided us with their perception of developers, planners, and corporations and their overall sentiments on their involvement in the project.
a). Have you heard of Bass Pro?

b). Have you heard of Benderson Development?

In addition to answering the above question, respondents made the following remarks that are divided in following categories.
Positive remarks:
· They are good
· Fair company
Negative remarks:
· Not favorable, they are into politics
· Never trusted them, they do a lot of cheap buildings and shady deals.
· Control freak, anti-worker, all about them.
· Build empty buildings that stay unoccupied
· They are selfish and greedy, charge too high rent. A lot of empty store-fronts.
· Do a lot of large projects in the area. Rents too high for small businesses.

c). Have you heard of Erie Canal Harbor Development?

In addition to answering the survey question, respondents also gave their following remarks.
Positive Remarks:
· Appreciate the owners are willing to invest in Buffalo
· Instrumental in restoring historic area of waterfront
Negative Remarks:
· Trying to improve the harbor, they are not getting anything done.
· Controlled by local politicians
· Private developers should not have such massive control of what happens at our waterfront.
a). Should Bass Pro get tax breaks?

The following reasons were provided, in addition to answering the question.
Why Yes:
· Job providers
· To encourage them to come in
· Otherwise they will go to Ohio
· As long as they give it back to the city
· They will bring a lot of growth to the area
· Businesses that provide jobs should get tax breaks

Why Not:
· Taxpayers shouldn’t be paying for this
· Should give tax breaks to small businesses (3 respondents shared same remarks)
· They got enough money
· We need the money for other things
· Big companies should pay, they have enough resources
· Everyone should have to pay taxes
· “why are these big corporations getting big tax breaks”
· Absolutely not, its thriving $ 67 million
· They are big corporation, they don’t need it
· More help should go to tax payers
Other:
· A small one in return for breaks to the city’s businesses
· If necessary to bring them here
· Depends if they are doing inner-city hiring, local hiring
· If it helps the city then
· Depends how much break, some incentives should be given
· Small tax breaks, they are big corporations so they do not need a big break
· Conditional, in exchange for good paying jobs, with benefits, commitment to community
b). Is it fair to ask companies to meet certain community standards when they receive tax breaks?

The following community standards were recommended by the respondents in return for tax subsidies to corporations.

a). What would you like to see on the Waterfront?