Wells: When 'Opportunity' Replaces Planning: Why the Police Station Proposal Lacks A Real Growth Strategy

A modern police facility is a legitimate need, and no one disputes that the current station has deficiencies.

But it is essential to be honest about how this project emerged and what it represents. This was never part of any long-range capital plan. It appeared suddenly as an “opportunity” when a private property became available—not as the product of a strategic analysis, a community plan, or even a multi-year public safety roadmap.

A city cannot call something “long-term planning” simply because a large price tag is attached to it. Real planning requires sequencing, prioritization, cost modeling, and—most importantly—a tax-base strategy to sustain the obligations created by major projects. Concord has consistently failed on this front. The City Council has demonstrated repeatedly that it has no coherent plan to expand the tax base, attract significant private investment, or grow commercial activity at a pace that offsets rising costs. When growth does not happen, every major project, no matter how justified, falls squarely back onto homeowners and renters.

Yes, proponents argue that a new police station could signal future growth. But signaling is not the same as producing results. Concord has been “positioning itself for growth” for more than a decade without seeing meaningful expansion of the tax base. If anything, the evidence shows the opposite trend: new burdens placed on the same shrinking pool of residential taxpayers.

Moreover, calling this project a “strategic investment” presumes that the city has a strategy. It does not. There is no coordinated plan connecting this project to zoning reform, commercial recruitment, infrastructure prioritization, or economic incentives. There is no demonstrated link between this building and the thousands of units of housing the city says it wants. Without those connections, this project functions yet another isolated capital expense, not a lever for economic expansion.

The argument that delaying construction automatically costs more ignores another reality: the cost of moving forward without a sustainable revenue base is even higher. Concord is already struggling under the weight of rising taxes, escalating debt, and compounding capital obligations. Residents are not opposing growth or opposing safety. They are opposing strategic drift, a pattern of seizing ad-hoc “opportunities” without the fiscal roadmap to support them.

Concord must fix its planning failure before committing it to decades-long financial obligation. A police station should be built when it is part of a coordinated plan that aligns infrastructure, economic development, housing policy, and tax-base strategy, not when the city stumbles upon a property and retrofits the narrative after the fact.

Until Concord can demonstrate that it knows how to grow its economy rather than simply grow its debt, major projects like this will continue to fall back on the same overburdened taxpayers. That is not planning. That is improvisation at the public’s expense.

Jeff Wells lives in Concord.