If you were interested in politics in the late 90s you may well be familiar with this statement: &8220;It depends on what the meaning of the word &8216;is&8217; is.&8221;

Some say it was a defining moment in the Clinton presidency that proved how slick Willie really was all along.

For me, it was a defining moment in politics that demonstrated to what degree our leaders would twist words to evade an honest answer.

This week, we heard similar words coming from the Natchez mayor and board of aldermen.

In the case of our city leaders, it depends on what &8220;economically beneficial to the City of Natchez&8221; means.

Tuesday, the mayor and board suddenly decided to amend the city ordinance to waive building permit fees for non-profit organizations and projects that are determined to be economically beneficial to the city.

The city collects close to $72,000 each year in permit fees.

Not originally on the agenda, the issue was discussed briefly by the aldermen and passed without objection.

With one quick vote the city leaders erased more than $20,000 in revenue that would have been paid in building permit fees for the new convention center hotel.

Of course, there is no disagreement with the fact that a multi-million dollar hotel that has the potential to bring jobs and tourists to the city is economically beneficial to the area.

The hotel and any future riverfront development could definitely give a boost to downtown Natchez.

What is the big deal you might ask?

It depends on what the meaning of the phrase &8220;economically beneficial&8221; is, doesn&8217;t it?

At first glance, the policy set forth Tuesday presupposes that big-time developers with deep pockets are more beneficial to the city than the many small renovation projects that business and homeowners do each year.

In the end, such small projects do not create jobs and do not increase the tax base, some might say.

But what about the hundreds and thousands of dollars that are spent each year buying materials in local stores and hiring local contractors who, in turn, hire local workers?

Don&8217;t they keep people working and keep money in the local economy?

Sure they do. But a small $10,000 renovation may not be as beneficial as a $10 million hotel.

The real question is where do you draw the line?

Suddenly city leaders will be forced to decide.

Is a small business that creates five jobs more or less advantageous than a business that has the potential to create 100 jobs?

What about other hotels in town that may want to upgrade their properties to attract tax dollars to the city? They may not create jobs but may attract more tourism dollars. Is that not economically beneficial to the area?

A millionaire developer is economically beneficial to the city but his employees, who may build new houses in the area are not?

In fact, isn&8217;t any new construction in the city of benefit to the city?

Alderman Ricky Gray said that if someone wants a tax break because they are tired of paying taxes, that wouldn&8217;t be considered beneficial.

But isn&8217;t that the very reason developer Tom Bauer asked to have his building permit fees waived &8212; because he didn&8217;t want to pay them?

In recent years, city leaders have discussed how to make the city friendlier to businesses.

Tuesday night&8217;s change to the city ordinance may be one step in the right direction.

But is it one step in the right direction for only those with a lot of money in the bank, or is it a step in the right direction for all?

It depends on what the meaning of the phrase &8220;economically beneficial&8221; is.

Ben Hillyer

is visual editor The Natchez Democrat. He can be reached by e-mail at

ben.hillyer@natchezdemocrat.com