Category: Government and Free Choice

It’s your choice

Most of the things that we brag about in Paris Texas are amenities, not essentials.  

The difference is important.

Most of the more recent things Paris brags about, such as the Eiffel Tower replica, the Red River Valley Veterans Memorial, the Maxey House, the Lamar County Historical Museum, The Valley of the Caddo Museum, and others, are the result of private efforts; started and carried out to completion by private individuals – while the city has wasted about 13-years and hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to restore the Grand Theater (which, if it ever gets fully restored, may be an amenity).

Even the Civic Center and both prized and re-purposed Depots are the results of large contributions from private funds. 

All these things are amenities. 

And, yes, they are worthwhile, and they contribute to the community.  Oh, sure, the city and other organizations in Paris supported the efforts (the city and the PEDC even giving, when they shouldn’t, tax dollars). But those efforts were started from scratch, led and supported by individuals who achieved the worthwhile results –

Of course, amenities are nice, but they’re not essential.

You can have a house full of amenities, modern or antique, but they are not part of the necessity for basic shelter.  Others may not like or appreciate your rooms of stuff, amenities, but you don’t expect or demand others to pay for them.

Local churches are considered community amenities, so if some of the local Baptists need a new church, should community tax dollars pay for it? 

Government supposedly is to provide for what is essential, not for amenities.

We vote to impose taxes on ourselves because infrastructure is essential to a community. In return, this creates an obligation on, and a responsibility for, the community to provide those things that are essential, such as police and fire protection, maintaining streets and traffic flows, providing water and sewer, trash collection and disposal, etc., and developing ordinances and zoning to help provide for an orderly, cohesive community; those things which benefit all the citizens.

Amenities are not used by all citizens.  As an example, not everyone goes to a Baptist Church, despite us Baptists thinking everyone should…(that’s a gentle bit of humor for those of other denominations. You know, like “where you find four Baptists, you’ll find a fifth.”)  Anyway….

….volunteer organizations, such as chambers of commerce, came into being to develop amenities of the community (and to be an independent business voice for a community); not to be parasites sucking up non-voluntary tax dollars.

 

If a project is worthwhile people will voluntarily fund it; if it isn’t, they won’t.

This is why good and sound and varied leadership is important.  As long as folks voluntarily use their money to pay for what they want, it’s not a big deal, which is not true when forced to pay for someone else’s pride and joy. 

Subsidizing amenities – giving tax-dollars to a favored few – deliberately and knowingly picking and choosing winners and losers – are things a city (or any government) should not do.  There is no fair or equal way to spend tax dollars on amenities. The Goosey-Gander principle will not work because of personal opinions. Neither will robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Paris didn’t get behind the economic eight ball because city government did its job: Over the years, city government let things slide – from neglecting certain areas and aging streets and increased traffic flows to letting favored landlords neglect property to allowing zoning changes that drained away the downtown business district. Plus, the city started giveaway programs of everyone’s tax dollars to a special few. In short, most of what is currently wrong in Paris is because the city didn’t do its’ job –   

Paris forgot that the basic job of government is to take care of the essentials.

 

IF a government can’t take care of what is the government’s business, how can it take care of what isn’t the government’s business?

Today, instead of doing those things – and only those things that are essential – that are their obligations and responsibilities, our local problems are compounded by the City of Paris acting as an “expert” in the development and the funding of community and economic amenities. 

But when was the City of Paris endowed with Emperor status?

Since the New Frontier and the Great Society programs of the early 60’s, government advocates have promised that their economic programs would eliminate poverty. They’ve spent trillions of tax-dollars trying to do it. But according to the government’s own statistics, there are more poor people today and fewer equal opportunities for economic advancement.  All those dollars and all those efforts only succeeded in creating wealth for fewer and fewer folks.

Government not only has lost the war on poverty, but also the war on drugs; it can’t even protect our border. So, it should be evident that government isn’t always the answer. 

Over the years, our trust in government has slowly eroded away.

To the Paris Chamber, it seems the city (like government everywhere) tries to do too many things which are not in their job description.  And as long as the city will do or fund those things which should be the responsibility of others, they will let the city do it.

And they’ll never fuss when the city does something wrong, especially if the city is also giving them other people’s tax money. Most importantly, how can the taxpayers trust the city, when the city is giving their tax dollars to a select few?

The question citizens need to ask:  If we can’t trust our local government, how can we trust our state and national legislative bodies?

We should remember that while common-sense is a hoped for amenity, it isn’t a qualifying essential to serve on a board or for holding public office or even to manage the affairs of an organization.

“In fact, if law were restricted to protecting all persons, all liberties, and all properties; if law were nothing more than the organized combination of the individual’s right to self-defense; if law were the obstacle, the check, the punisher of all oppression and plunder — is it likely that we citizens would then argue much about the extent of the franchise?” ― Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

   

                                                               return to     Paris Texas Chamber of Commerce

Residential Renewal or Stupidity?

14-Years ago, in 2008, Paris (Texas) City Council members were talking residential renewal or stupidity; talking about creating a “residential tax abatement” for new housing and/or new residential improvements, but had never said where. What the council was talking about doing meant that Enterprise Zones (later later called Redevelopment or “Opportunity” Zones) would require approval before an abatement could legally be given.

Even back then, the Paris Texas Chamber of Commerce knew that a Paris Imperative existed to forget about the intent of a law and, instead, figure out how it can be used to not do the right thing. Despite that knowledge, we urged the City of Paris to start an urban homestead program in the Enterprise Zone, which state law allowed.  Instead of giving tax relief to areas that don’t qualify and encouraging abandonment of some intercity areas and neighborhoods, we suggested that Paris do the right thing: Use the existing Enterprise Zone as a test program – to see if it does or doesn’t work.

If the test program works, then consider creating zones all over Paris – or ask the Paris Chamber how to do community development.

We also said that following the history on how things are normally done, is it likely – until the Paris Matrix can figure out how far out north or east this can be done – a decision on where will never be made.  And none were, except to forget the effort . . .

WHY, we wondered, back in 2008, will Paris not create opportunities for individuals to use their sweat equity in exchange for the opportunity to own their own homes under an urban renewal program? Not all older couples are that interested in cooling, heating, cleaning, and maintaining 3,000 to 5,000 square feet of floor space. Not when they can fix up and add a few special touches to create an modern, smaller luxury home for less money than it would take to build a new one. And many young couples, starting a life together, have the energy and know-how to improve a starter home and use what they would pay as rent to do it, given an opportunity to acquire one.

Even in 2008, we knew the residential imperative should be to get homes improved and back on the tax rolls; not subsidizing developers to build for-profit homes and income rental properties.

Some citizens (and council members) argued that an urban renewal program wouldn’t work in Paris. How they knew this, as one had (and has) never been tried in Paris, is beyond our understanding (then and now)…

Of course, it could be they didn’t want it tried in the Enterprise Zone, in the “west side”. For instance, some wanted it tried in areas that didn’t quality for tax abatement. But they were successful in getting the distressed area designation spread to over most of the town.

Today, over half of the land area inside the Paris city limits is in a designated “distressed area” – and the leadership calls it progress.

Since 1996, over the last 26 or 27-odd years (in Paris, they’re all odd), millions of tax dollars have been spent on consultant fees and for big salaries to solve our problems. Most of it has been – and is – wasted on people who talk a good game and report well, but can’t produce; and Paris has continued to deteriorate.

Now, all Paris is doing is giving property tax abatement to developers who know how to sell sugar to those who love sweet talk, but don’t know crap about actual community development.

So far, we see very little indication that the right thing is being or will be done in the right way.

But the Paris Chamber doesn’t have a thing to do with the way things are done . . . or how Paris looks.

Regretfully.

Or Thankfully.

 

 2nd Posting (2009): Investing in People 

The City of Paris owns or could/should own a lot of houses on which taxes have not been paid for years.  And there are numerous vacant, substandard houses on which huge tax bills are owed that the city will likely end up owning, also. 

Why not fix the problem by investing in people?

So now, the Paris Texas Chamber of Commerce is going to try it once more:  A city that owns housing in an Enterprise Zone can establish an urban homestead program, through which the city sells a house it owns to a private citizen for an amount not to exceed $100.

The individual buying the property must agree to live in the house for at least seven years and to renovate or remodel the residence to meet the level of maintenance stated in a written agreement between the individual and the city.  After the individual lives in the house for the seven years and satisfies the agreed upon improvements, the city deeds the house to the individual (or assigns it to a bank that may be financing the improvements for the individual).

True, not all the folks hopping on an urban homestead program will follow thru…and the city or program administrator will have to reclaim the property.  But many will follow thru, improving their lives (and the City of Paris). 

Any homes that are returned can be offered to others who will complete the terms of the homestead agreement. There will never be enough homes . . .

Last year,in 2008, the Paris Texas Chamber of Commerce has tried to point city officials to the fact that there are many individuals with the energy and strength of character who could and would use their sweat equity for an opportunity to own their own home under such a program. 

Yes, we understand that many local movers and shakers, who have no more idea of community and economic development than Oak Wilt fungus, see the Paris Chamber as an irritant to their schemes or beliefs; but they should know that business is business and a good idea is a good idea – no matter where it comes from. 

Paris talks about improving Paris.  Paris talks about the need to improve and beautify. Paris talks about substandard homes with unpaid taxes, and talks about what to do with them. But not utilizing available programs to improve a large part of Paris because it is on the west or – as many of the more ignorant state it – the wrong side of town is inexcusable! 

Sure, we understand why some want to deny incentives for businesses and new home construction in the Enterprise Zone, even if such action violates warranties that had to be made in the Contract to get the Zone approved. We find such actions wrong, ethically repulsive, and don’t agree with it, but, considering the parties involved, we understand it. 

But to deny younger couples or retirees and others who have the energy and/or resources to own their homes – while eliminating eyesores – and improving Paris – is mind-boggling!  And that we don’t understand.

Why wouldn’t we invest in our people? 

Talk about creating opportunities – 

The Paris Chamber’s recommendations are on record, and the City has a considerable payroll for key employees to keep up with such programs, so they cannot plead ignorance. 

The money the city has wasted (and is wasting) on know-little consultants would have more than paid for the Paris Chamber’s recommendations for improving residential areas all over Paris, through which clean-up, fix-up, paint-up materials would be exchanged for “sweat equity” labor and. . .  Oh, well.

How much longer can Paris afford to wait? 

                                                                                                     return to  The Paris Texas Chamber of Commerce

TRASH PICK-UP . . .

 

Back in July, 2022, the Paris Texas Chamber of Commerce warned, “Privatization of trash collection is coming. It will be interesting to read the fine print.”

Evidently, we said, privatized trash pickup is more efficient and less costly. (And added, “than by government? Gasp!”) 

Sure enough, in February 2024, trash pickup by a private firm begins, and the base rate increases to $18.08 a month for residential pickup. This is good until September 2024 – which is a scary thought or a reason to rejoice, depending on whether you’re paying or receiving the money from the new rate.  The way the City of Paris keeps book, this is a $1.49 monthly increase.

CARDS, the private firm will receive $10.29 of the $18.08 fee to pickup and deliver the trash to the landfill.  The rest of the fee goes to the city for “bill administration, liaison between the two, and monitoring the city-owned landfill.”  Included in this rate-game-playing, $1.79 is ear-marked for “city street usage and maintenance.”

As CARDS picks up and delivers the trash for 10.29 per month, isn’t that the trash pickup rate? So, when such city categories as “administration, liaison, monitoring, and city street usage” estimated costs are increased, WHY aren’t such costs included as a rate increase? 

After the addition of two new assistant city managers, since 2022,  surely “administration” charges have increased?

 

The city budget HAS not increased by diffusion.

Back in 2022, when explaining why there was no corresponding reduction in rates when trash pickup frequency was reduced, the city manager offered that the reduction of trash collection is related to the volume of waste collected, not its frequency of collection.  He also claimed that the last rate increase was 12-years ago, and that he would not recommend adjusting rates “at this time”.

The Paris Texas Chamber observed that IF the reduced trash collection was related to the volume produced, Paris was either producing less trash or littering the streets with it – and it was hard to tell which . . .

Our Chamber also said If we were not losing population, it would be as clear as Buttermilk.

The Paris Chamber stated that “It’s difficult to believe there hasn’t been a rate increase on everything over the past 10-years. And there has been – check a few past water and sewer bills.”  And we still stand by that . . .

 Every time an “adjustment” is made on “administrative, liaison or management cost” relating to city services, a rate increase is soon to follow. Money is swept from services – based on an estimated cost the city assigns for those items – and added to the general budget. That process allows the city to keep crying about how sad it is that rates for a service must be increased to cover the increased expenses of the selected service.

Its all a financial game or a way to fleece the rate-payers.   

Worse, what should be a criminal act of deliberate lies, citizens are told that trash pickup rates have “not been adjusted in more then 10-years.” It’s the chattering of weasels.

In 2017-18, the city added an estimated $7.60 monthly to the local sewer rates (around $100 a year MORE than we were paying) to “help pay for a new sewer treatment plant.” Then, in 2020, water and sewer rates were again increased another $$7.65 a month for 5,000 gallons. This we were told, again, was needed to help the sale of bonds to “finance construction of a new wastewater plant.”

And if the income from rate increases isn’t in an established, ear-marked fund for a new plant, as was promised, where did the money go? If the money isn’t there, where is the accountability? For that matter, where is the accountability for the jiggery-pokery with estimated “related? costs and deducting it from a services’ rate income?

 

Priorities lack structure.

Even published legal notices in Paris lack transparency; you seldom know what’s where – addresses are hidden behind legal descriptions of who did the surveys and unknown large block numbers.

Transparency, despite any claims to the contrary, does not exist in Paris, nor in government, local or otherwise. Government is very good at snow jobs, and coming up with schemes whereby it can fleece money from the taxpayers.  Supposedly, its the reason why we elect people to oversee those in government positions: To protect the rest of us, the citizen taxpayers, who provide the money.

But what do you do when they do wrong? Or even when they never ask, “Is it needed; is it worthwhile; and can we afford it?” or even more importantly, “Why would we waste the taxpayer’s money on that…?”

Paris has a history of using tax dollars to pay a few too much and too many too little.

There are not twelve people in Paris who knows to a dollar the total amount of incentives, in cash and kind,  given to a few large firms or insiders over the last two years – or the net value (if any) Paris has received in turn?

It’s doubtful, if even twelve people know the actual costs of trash pick-up in Paris. But looking at voting results in city elections, there are not 599 who care . . .

Occasionally, however, taxpayers are rewarded with a small Dr. Pepper, as those who close the door on full transparency know, man cannot live by the bread of chicanery alone.

                        return to    Paris Texas Chamber of Commerce

 

links:  On Organizational Innovation

         Local Government

       A Free Press . . .