Tuesday’s Common Council meeting, embedded below, included a discussion of Whitewater’s calculation and charges for new construction permits. That discussion takes places from 21:50 to 31:20.

Of that discussion, there were two positive changes to Whitewater’s current policy: (1) that the city should calculate new-construction permit costs by square footage, and (2) that the rate the city charges should be that of our lowest neighboring city (Jefferson). The overwhelming majority of the Council saw the value in these changes. That’s encouraging.

Calculating Fees.

Commercial ordinances should follow business practices. If builders (and other communities) typically calculate by square footage, then fees should be assessed this way. Complicated municipal efforts to calculate fees by supposed value are as much guesswork as anything else. We’ve made the right decision to calculate in a simple way.

Much of the first part of the twentieth century involved an effort to craft commercial codes to reflect actual business practices. That makes sense: commercial ordinances should be written in the language, and address the daily behavior, of businesspeople.

Staying Competitive.

It was sensible to match, at the least, the lowest fee charged nearby. Matching a city of similar size wouldn’t achieve a competitive advantage; it would merely makes us less uncompetitive than presently. Matching the lowest rate charged elsewhere achieves a better competitive result.

Whitewater’s Goal.

Our goal should not be the status-quo goal of matching existing (or confusing) rates elsewhere. It should be that of offering a comparative advantage over rival cities. The way to do this is to match the lowest price elsewhere, and offer superior service through a welcoming approach and streamlined process. Something like this —

I’m not a slogan-maker, but one sees my point.

The alternative is unappealing, and will get us nowhere:

It’s a serious misunderstanding to think that the rate selected doesn’t make a difference. It does.

Trying to hold on to a certain number of cents per square foot misses a bigger goal: to show the world we strive, each day, for a more efficient and productive result — better service for less than rival places. That should be our goal, and we can only make that claim credibly if we establish a competitive price.

The low price is instrumental to something even more important: a deserved reputation in Wisconsin that no one will offer a better opportunity than Whitewater. That reputation doesn’t happen just by saying we’ll do better — it requires a concrete offer to businesses.

America’s Standard of Success.

We’re prosperous because we’re free, a freedom that offers this opportunity: that we can be productive, and make better products at lower costs. The resulting prosperity is part of the American Dream.

No one ever made a success of himself by saying ‘well, let’s not try harder, customers will pay what we charge, as they’ve no where else to go.’ America’s finest companies — leaders in all the world — are committed to making better products more cheaply and efficiently. Apple, Intel, and Ford offer people more today than last year, at lower costs.

Organizations that say costs don’t matter, value doesn’t matter, and that rates and quality should stay the same don’t succeed. Like GM, they declare bankruptcy, and beg federal taxpayers for bailouts.

Whitewater can do better than other cities, and when she does, and more people recognize the advantages we offer, they’ll join us, enriching all the community.

This was very good decision, in that direction.