costo viagra levitra generico precio cialis doping viagra securise para comprar cialis necesito receta medica levitra serve ricetta viagra online holland viagra zu verkaufen tadalafilo generico lilly cialis generico valencia super kamagra preisvergleich cialis 10 mg españa köp kamagra acquisto viagra svizzera viagra prescrizione
sildenafil citrate 25mg kamagra en jours apotheke viagra preis acquisto viagra online italia comprar cialis generico prezzo cialis originale comperare levitra generico in italia cialis comprar viagra cialis generico viagra svizzera senza ricetta comprar cialis portugal vente viagra cialis bestellen viagra online bestellen forum vardenafil kaufen levitra compresse medicamento cialis 20 mg viagra livraison cialis vendita libera prijzen cialis tadalafil ricetta cialis amsterdam cialis super acctive achat de viagra mg cialis portugal comprar expert clinique cialis viagra 25 mg kaufen viagra generique en belgique kamagra tabletter levitra genericos

On “Development” and Corruption

Last week another Maryland elected official, Prince George’s County Executive Jack Johnson, was arrested – along with his wife – on federal corruption charges. And once again, land development deals were the problem: a relatively inexperienced public official was lured by small profits gained by handing out development deals to a few cronies.

Shockingly, the press and the public feign surprise every time this happens. The Washington Post’s coverage of the Johnson arrest earnestly reports that the county seems to have developed a “pay to play” culture – and that you “don’t hear that about other jurisdictions.”

What about Baltimore city, where just nine short months ago former Mayor Sheila Dixon was convicted for accepting gifts and bribes from developers? Granted, Dixon was dealing in a few thousand dollars worth of gift cards and baubles while Johnson and his wife were flushing $100,000 checks and stuffing tens of thousands of dollars in their underwear. But one gets the impression that this may be a result of Dixon’s relative inexperience. Given more time, she would likely have learned to ask for more.

How did we get here? How is it that public-private development deals can be handed out to cronies and first-time “developers?”

First, too many people that seek public office expect to be financially enriched by it. There’s a reason it’s called public “service” – it is meant to be a sacrifice made in exchange for the opportunity to participate in private enterprise. When politicians go into office expecting that the power of public office should also include big money, they’ll be disappointed. Only crooked deals can fulfill those expectations.

Second, we have collectively lost sight of what “development” actually means. Today when people say “development,” they almost always mean turning an unsuspecting piece of land “into” something, whether it’s houses, a shopping mall, a hotel, or a stadium. And sometimes that fulfills a real need.

But too often, these are projects that we don’t truly need – but they do hold the potential to make a few people pretty wealthy. A small-time developer can double his wealth over a few years. But like a small-time addict, the beast must be fed: with new land, new projects, new deals. Because very often the gains are one-time hits. A housing project might make a five time return on investment. To keep the perpetual motion machine going, there must always be new deals.

This is where local elected officials come in. Mayors and county executives have just enough power to direct their agenda towards development projects that can enrich developers. Often, cronies of elected officials will become developers just to take advantage of their proximity to this fresh supply of new land deals. This seems to have been the case with Johnson. One of Johnson’s golf buddies had never developed anything, but was given a no-bid contract on a major project. This constitutes an illegal squandering of public funds.

Maybe it’s time to rethink what we mean when we use the word “development.” Do we really need to develop more strip malls, hotels, and suburban housing? In a place like central Maryland, we’re darn near out of land anyway. So this pyramid-scheme of land development has to stop. The corruption will only stop when local elected officials stop thinking that no-bid or restricted-bid contracts for major development deals actually move anything forward.

Instead, let’s start thinking about “development” in terms of “resource allocation.” How are we going to allocate scarce public resources to enrich our citizens through education, equal opportunity, and in repairing and maintaining the infrastructure and buildings we already have?

If the goal of “development” is to advance the economic opportunity and prosperity of the people of our state, maybe we should start by valuing our landscape. Instead of cluttering it up with mile after mile of pointless suburbia, let’s invest in places that mean something to the people that live there. Let’s make the places we have better. Let’s fix blight and make transportation systems that work. Let’s plant trees and make bike lanes.

Development should be about developing our people and making what we already have work more efficiently, not in building shoddy new projects that devalue existing assets and clutter our landscape.

And when contractors are required, let’s put the bidding online, require each bidder to go through the same qualification process, and let the lowest, most qualified bidders win.

When the public changes its perception of what development means, we will have fewer politicians who see elected office as a get-rich-quick scheme. Every time another politician is caught in these shenanigans, the public trust in government is undermined.

So a change in public perception about the nature of development can actually lead to a tangible restoration of public trust in government, and that can’t come too soon.

  • Plato Hieronimus

    Hear, hear. I’d add that we may be at a singular moment in American history in which we’ve generally lost trust not just in government but in all our major institutions: banking, sports franchises, religious institutions, media sources, etc. Building trust takes so much more time and effort than tearing it down. While I remain optimistic about our prospects, if we don’t do some collective acknowledgment we may be in for a rough ride.

  • Amy Robinson

    Good definition of “development,” Dave. When I saw this title on twitter I assumed you meant in reference to developing areas. Corruption combats caliber development all over the world.. We’re doing a development project in Western Aftica that consists of environmental data monitoring & education resource allocation – which is certainly an enhancement toward economic activity. Talk about corruption, though..the whole thing is under wraps because if major industry /government becomes aware, it’s shut down immediately for potential agitation. Need to get Peter Eigen on these tails!nnInteresting post! Hope you guys straighten out the kinks – I still like to think that the majority of politicians are well distanced from the corrupt outliers..nnAmynnSent from my iPhone

  • Andrea Vernot

    A call to action we can and must heed. Your insight and ideas continue to inspire; now we must operationalize intentions with tasks and time frames.

  • Blake

    Hi Dave, One of my favorite quotes is ” A developer is someone who wants to build a house in the woods and a preservationist is someone whoose house is already in the woods” There is no room for moral highground . Your point is well taken and I like the online bidding idea very much buthe lowest cost bidder is not alwys the best. Lets design a RFP processthat takes is some non bottom line criteria. Blake Goldsmith

  • Jayne2357

    Excellent observations with viable solutions to help restore the public’s trust in government. Jayne Matthews