|
|
|
No Average Joe
Rebuilding a waterfront and downtown from the ground up, Ganim
gets Bridgeport on the move again
|
Business New Haven
4/20/1998
By: BNH
|
Barbara Kennelly no doubt breathed a deep sigh of relief last month when Bridgeport Mayor Joseph P. Ganim announced that he would forego a primary challenge to Kennelly for the Democratic nomination for governor. That's because Ganim is young, energetic and ambitious - and that's before you factor in that he's gotten the state's most distressed urban center on a path toward renewed prosperity through an ambitious plan for harbor development and downtown revitalization. BNH recently visited Ganim for an update on progress in the Park City.
In the early '90s, of all Connecticut's distressed cities, Bridgeport's problems seemed to be the most intractable. For instance, the city was in the most serious financial straits of any of the state's big cities. What were your priorities for change when you took office?
It was evident that there was a series of things that needed immediate attention. The first of these was of course a budget crisis that had almost placed the city of Bridgeport in federal receivership. When I took office our financial position included a $20 million budget deficit with a five-year accrued deficit of almost $300 million. This was a huge crisis, and the hemorrhaging had to be dealt with on both the expense and revenue sides. So, obviously, front and center was putting the city back on reasonable financial ground. To start, we put a lot of cost-cutting programs in place. Then we looked at programs to obtain new sources of financing, both one-year and ongoing. I'm proud that we were able to balance the budget that first year, and every year since, without a tax increase. In fact, the last three years we've had a tax cut.
What about quality-of-life issues?
We've emphasized clean and safe. We've added 150 new police officers, which has helped crime to drop to its lowest level since the 1970s. We began a “Clean & Green” beautification project for downtown and the neighborhoods. We started an aggressive marketing campaign [“Bridgeport Park City”]. Education - our dropout rate has decreased to 7.4 percent. That's the lowest of any major city in Connecticut. Also, the percentage of our students who go on to college is now just above 75 percent - that's above the state average. We're very proud of that. We've cleaned up brownfield sites. The point of all this was restoring public confidence that the city was still governable. Now we've created a business atmosphere that has generated almost a billion dollars in new investment. When we took over surveys showed that almost 90 percent of city residents thought the city was on the wrong track. That number has been almost reversed itself. Now almost 80 percent Bridgeport is on the right track. And the perception is still catching up to the reality.
In Hartford and New Haven, the momentum for redevelopment has definitely come from the top down - in Hartford from the state, which has committed $350 million to downtown, and in New Haven from the DeStefano administration. What has been your approach?
I think you need a combination. In Bridgeport we have a definite vision for the city, which I've been active in [formulating]. But you also need input from what I would call the grass roots, and also from the mid-level. Here we've created a real public-private partnership that has led to a credible plan to create jobs and tax-base growth chiefly through developing our harbor. I would add that I think Hartford's, New Haven's and Bridgeport's development plans all complement one another, and are getting the support from each other. And if they are allowed to succeed, they will change the face of Connecticut for a long time to come.
Much of your vision - from the new ballpark to the Harbour Place project - was an is dependent on major financial participation on the part of the state. In general, can major municipal projects be undertaken successfully these days without significant public involvement>
I don't think so. Things like this cannot take place without public participation. Even in Stamford, there's been a major public sector role in making deals like Swiss Bank and Zurich Re[insurance] happen. Those deals had significant public action to support them - and appropriately so.
Harbour Place developer Alex Conroy says he won't proceed without $200 million from the state and city. Is that justified, in your view, and what form might a public financing package take?
I think it certainly is justified, especially since his company is putting up more than $700 million, but also because the [public-sector] dollars here will go toward infrastructure improvement and site development. This project is a public priority because it has a greater public impact. The most attractive aspect of this [public financing] is that it's not a grant or a gift; it's a financing mechanism called tax-increment financing, which requires repayment over time. So I think it's a very suitable mechanism.
More than Hartford and New Haven, Bridgeport retains a strong manufacturing base. Why?
For one thing, we've always worked very hard at business retention - surveying businesses, reaching out... When I took office we had serious problems with five businesses - Chase Bank, United Illuminating, Remington, Casio and Lacey. The first three announced that they were leaving the city. They said their needs were not being addressed by the public sector. But over time, we were able to reach agreements with them, and satisfy those needs. It was very important to turn that tide around. With the other two...Lacey said they could not stay where they were under present conditions. Both of them were supported by us for relocation, renovation and expansions. So as a result we've created new jobs, and these companies are happy where they are. We also have a number of small and mid-sized manufacturers. So Bridgeport has had a very strong manufacturing base, and it has stayed in the city.
Have you been active in creating more of those small businesses?
We started a 'Grow Bridgeport' program. Originally, $3 million was applied to helping high-risk small businesses get going. We're not talking about big amounts of money - $50,000, $20,000, $75,000 - some went to start-ups for inventory, helping them just to open up. These were companies without bank statements that couldn't get conventional loans.
Were these loans, outright grants...
It's been a combination of mechanisms. But we set it up as a revolving fund. So as the money is paid back, we can make new loans.
Your marketing campaign for the city certainly attracted a lot of attention. One columnist wrote that the brochures 'made Bridgeport look like a village in Vermont.'
As part of our recruitment and marketing effort, it was very important to get out the powerful message about positive developments, and letting people know what's happening in the city. We've looked at statistical evidence from people moving in to town, and it simply would not have happened if not for the outreach that we've done.
One of your projects is an intermodal transportation center. Are services like the high-speed ferry service to Manhattan demand-driven, or is it hoped that commuters will be attracted to these options once they become available?
I would say both. There's certainly demand for a high-speed ferry, high-speed rail. We're so centrally located - like New Haven - that all these things come into play. You look at commuter demand along I-95 - Fairfield has a three- to four-year waiting list to park at the train station - so there's clearly a demand for these kinds of services. So we're creating a clean, safe place for the train and ferry and bus terminals .
Why did you see fit to take the lead in the school funding lawsuit filed last month, and what likely course will that lawsuit take?
The central focus is in improving the quality of education across the state - not just cities. A whole effort was made in the late 1970s and '80s to address aspects of funding public education. Then, there was a gross deviation from the standard of funding that had been set. The result of that negatively impacted the quality of education we can provide. According to the original formula, we've taken the biggest hit; we're under-funded by almost $58 million by the state. But this is not an urban-vs.-suburban issue; it's not Republican-vs.-Democrat. Everyone is affected. That's why [in our lawsuit] we have [as plaintiffs] big cities, small towns, Republican towns, Democratic towns, we've got representatives of all parts of the state...I think ultimately this will be successful and we'll be able to bring greater opportunity to all students in the state of Connecticut.
|
Go FirstGo PreviousGo
NextGo LastGo
to Index
|
|
