Planners mull consolidating JCJDC with JCIDA

The Jefferson County Job Development Corp., which serves as the county’s marketing arm and offers education and work force development to local businesses, could be swallowed up by the Jefferson County Industrial Development Agency as a way to ax duplicate services and save money, a committee of planners and business representatives decided at a special meeting Wednesday.

Planners outlined several advantages for doing so. Creating one brand would avoid confusion in the business community about what services are offered by the two agencies, events such as educational programs, conferences and business awards would be streamlined and consolidation would save money because it would require fewer mandates, such as annual audits.

An argument against consolidation is the loss of $16,000 in membership fees now garnered by the JCJDC, but planners say that could be offset by savings. There is also a question whether the JCIDA would be legally authorized to receive the county’s annual allocation of $270,000 for JCJDC’s marketing efforts.

Peter J. Whitmore, Jreck Subs division president, said many local business owners are confused about what services the government entities offer. Consolidating the programs could make the program more attractive and easier to understand for business owners.

“I think there’s a challenge to explain what these agencies do,” he said. “My perception has been that these services are only for the big guys, and I think a lot of people think the same way.”

Tina Schneider, who sits on the JCJDC board, said the move would eliminate a layer of duplicate services that are done mostly by the same group of staff members. If the JCIDA completes those functions, the move would cut out a lot of regulatory fat.

“What I have a problem with is the whole duplication of regulations and compliance and having to do this stuff over and over again,” she said. “We have the IDA there, and to me it seems like it would be much more efficient to operate under a committee structure” targeted toward attracting and supporting businesses in the community. “This organization is doing a good job, but we’d be doing a better one without having to do the same things twice.”

The JCJDC was originally formed as a way for planners to participate in economic development, said Donald C. Alexander, the JCIDA’s chief executive officer.

But as the program evolved, it also became a source of revenue for economic development because of its ability to accept membership fees like a chamber of commerce, which the IDA can’t do.

Originally, “they wanted to have a vehicle by which everyone had a chance to participate in a director role, which is why the JCJDC was allowed to continue. It wasn’t because the IDA couldn’t do the marketing. It was the feeling that we wanted the outreach in the community.”

But JCIDA has the ability to lead marketing efforts for the county, he said, and it already performs a host of marketing activities.

“My gut tells me that the IDA would quickly assume a (marketing) role if that were what the JCJDC wanted us to do,” he said. “The main questions we have are would the money flow from the county to the IDA to do this, and how to coordinate the membership contributions we get from the local community.”

Theoretically, the JCIDA could simply set up a marketing committee to handle services now offered by the JCJDC, said Donald W. Rutherford, CEO of the Watertown Local Development Corp.

“The only change would be the funding you receive from the memberships and the members,” he pointed out, adding a separate organization could be formed to accept donations.

City Manager Mary M. Corriveau said that in spite of the membership loss, the organization wouldn’t lose support from its members by the move.

“Even if you wiped out the contributions, what you’re really looking for from the local community is a buy-in that what you’re offering has value to them, and that’s done through your efforts, not through the fees,” she said.

But while consolidating may sound simple, the committee will meet again to assess the legal and financial ramifications of doing so, Mr. Alexander said. If a consensus is reached after a cost-benefit analysis, the process could be approved in about three months.