Happy New Year, Rhode Island! Time to pick yourself up off the floor after yet another business report has trashed the state’s competitive position relative to the rest of the nation.
The temptation may be to brush off the recent State Competitiveness Report issued by the Beacon Hill Institute at Suffolk University in Boston as another meaningless academic exercise meant to pump up the home state. Did we mention that Massachusetts was No. 1 in the report for the second year in a row, while Rhode Island came in a lowly 41st? But that would be a shortsighted gesture. There are a number of things that the state’s leaders could learn from the report.
Beyond Cash Donations: How New Forms of Giving Are Transforming Not-for-Profit Accounting
Evolving Funding Landscape for Not-for-Profits Not-for-profit organizations are being asked to do more with less,…
Learn More
The researchers at Beacon Hill identified eight areas that measure business climate. And while you can quibble around the edges, the report does provide valuable insights regarding what should be changed and what should be enhanced.
Like many before them, the researchers scolded the state for its high tax burden.
But of greater interest was the low rankings for foreign investment and exports per capita.
For a seafaring state, these numbers must stand as a wake-up call. If we are not connected to the rest of the world, then we are, quite literally, missing the boat.
On the other hand, the report gave Rhode Island high marks for technology and an educated work force. If there is a path to future prosperity, it certainly must use these two as signposts.
So once the hair on the back of our collective necks has settled down, we should read the report and take its observations to heart. And then get back to work.
The logjam for marinas may be lifting soon
It’s called the Ocean State for a reason. Rhode Island’s defining feature, Narragansett Bay, is a multi-dimensional treasure, used (and sometimes abused) by bathers, industry, marine life fishermen and pleasure boaters.
It is encouraging news then that the state Coastal Resources Management Council has been circulating a development plan for the bay. While we applaud the aim of creating a road map for future use, we agree with Rep. Eileen Naughton, D-Warwick, that the council must make the document as visionary as it is detailed, especially with regard to marinas.
The demand for slips at some marinas is so great that waiting lists are impossibly long, and it is unlikely that demand will abate soon.
But the process of developing new facilities has been a complex and ultimately self-limiting one. The time is long past for the impediments to intelligent and environmentally sensitive development to be removed.
But it is just as important that new guidelines be clearheaded while remaining sensitive to the bay’s unique nature.
