The city was right to take a harder look at the tax breaks given to developers. Now it should pay attention to the findings.

A consultant hired in October determined, according to a draft report obtained by The Dispatch, that the city is giving more breaks than necessary to the booming Short North and not enough to other areas that have potential but are struggling.

Attorney Jeff Rich, whom school districts hire to ensure they get their fair share of property taxes, calls abatements “welfare for the rich” and says they’re too easy to get in Columbus: “If I’m representing a developer today and I don’t get a 100 percent tax abatement, I’m committing malpractice.”

Indeed, tax breaks are a fond pursuit for developers in many cities and towns. And developers, of course, gravitate to areas where they anticipate success, such as Columbus' Short North.

But that’s the point: The Short North is in demand. Tax abatements in the past 25 years or so have done their job. Now, such incentives should be focused on areas that don’t have developers knocking down the door. That’s the most obvious purpose of tax abatements.

The study, by HR&A Advisors, notes that one type of Short North project — High Street developments with parking garages — still require an abatement to make them financially feasible, but they don’t require as big a break as the city typically gives.

Meanwhile, other promising areas still need the boost that a tax incentive can provide. The study showed that the Near East Side, Linden and the Hilltop still struggle to attract development.

In some cases in those areas, the study found that a full property-tax abatement of 50 years could be required, because rents in those areas are low. The city’s typical tax abatement is for 10 years.

Whether the city should consider such a long-term break, or some additional form of enticement for developers willing to be pioneers, is a matter for council members to decide, with plenty of public discussion.

Tax relief long has been an effective way to spur improvement in blighted areas. But it also has been misused, favoring savvy developers even where no incentive is needed.

Even when an abatement works as designed to encourage investment, it has costs. School districts collect about three-fourths of property taxes paid in Ohio, so they stand to lose the most when a city grants a property-tax abatement. Meanwhile, cities gain jobs — increasing income tax revenues that enrich city coffers. Even when a city makes a deal with a school district to share income taxes from a development, city residents lose out on city services or improvements that the diverted taxes could have afforded.

Columbus is lucky enough to have plenty of neighborhoods ripe for reinvestment.

On Parsons Avenue, new restaurants and other businesses, an aeroponic-gardening project, a book-publishing business and other ventures are evidence of creative energy at work. Two apartment projects are in the works nearby.

Franklinton, with hip craft breweries and creative businesses, now is home to the sort of artists who populated the Short North before it became unaffordably posh.

But these areas, along with Linden, the Hilltop and others, still have plenty of challenges along with potential. Streetscapes aren’t yet as attractive as High Street in the Short North and dilapidated properties abound. These areas are why tax abatements could still be justified.