Editor, The Smithfield Times:

Before anything else I want to say that our town’s treasurer, Laura Ross, knows far, far more about municipal finance than I will ever know. We are very blessed to have her expertise on the town staff. Anything here that might seem to impugn her knowledge, experience and goodwill is completely unintended.  

That said, she was quoted in the Sept. 4 issue of the Times as saying that if the town were to spread out its use of Luter’s $6 million over a period of years, the town’s match would “eventually pay for itself.”  I would respectfully suggest that anytime I hear “pay for itself” when discussing public monies my Bravo Sierra shields instantly deploy. It’s something that is incessantly and self-servingly asserted by the real estate/developer crowd and, unfortunately, their allies in local government as well.

In this case, two things: 

• One, the interest that has accrued and is accruing to Mr. Luter’s $6 million we have in our bank is Mr. Luter’s interest money, not ours. To be honest, we should be remunerating this money to Mr. Luter in a timely, current fashion.  
• Secondly, I would like to see the math that proves that the assertion “pays for itself” is valid. I spent most of my adult life having to use a lot of math, including much more than just the simple logarithms and exponents that come into play in this, so I’m ready to see the argument.  

Logically, in order for any public expenditure to “pay for itself,” it must generate a return sufficient for the public to be at least made whole for its expenditure. Where and how will that return be created? As I pointed out previously the brick wall, sidewalk and streetscape on the edge of the Grange are not a revenue-generating profit center, and there is no way that Smithfield’s investment in the Virginia Investment Pool, at 5.42%, can earn $6 million in a time span at all acceptable to Mr. Luter. It would take 10.7 years for the $7.7 million VIP investment to return $6 million for the Grange match. 

Bottom line: If the town accepts the Grange matching obligation, Smithfield taxpayers will be paying for it out of hide, one way or another.

 

Dave Goodridge

Smithfield