NEW OR RECENT POST

Only in Paris Texas can Robin Hood be perverted into a public purpose.

The Supreme Court of the United States declared in Loan Association v. Topeka, 20 Wallace 655, that while it was not easy to decide what was a public purpose, and that the court was justified in interposing only when the case was clear, affirmed in most positive terms an inherent and essential general rule as to what the court recognized as a public purpose was recognized by the court in these words:

“In deciding whether, in the given of cash, the subject for which the taxes are assessed falls upon the one side or the other of this line, they must be governed mainly by the course and usage of the government, the objects for which taxes have been customarily and by long course of legislation levied, what objects or purposes have been considered necessary to the support and for the proper use of the government, whether State or municipal. Whatever lawfully pertains to this and is sanctioned by time and the acquiescence of the people may well be held to belong to the public use, and proper for the maintenance of good government, though this may not be the only criterion of rightful taxation.”

But it was said that, in the case at bar, no line could be drawn in favor of the manufacturer, which would not open the coffers of the public treasury to the opportunities of two-thirds of the business men of the city or town.

 

So is giving cash JUSTIFIABLE?

        “. . . legislative determination is not conclusive and is subject to judicial review.”

When it comes to government and corporations, most claims of acquiescence and compliance are symptoms of emotional insanity.

The PEDC, the City of Paris, and Lamar County – all governmental units – gave a 10-year tax abatement to a Limited Liability Corporation that has purchased the former Earth Grains, Sara Lee, J, Skinner building.

The PEDC proudly made sounds about a total investment $3.5 and $5.5 million over the next three to five years by the company, and an initial creation of 100 jobs – with a promised minimum of an annual $50,000 salary. The PEDC said that part of the incentives was “cash for jobs.”

That – and the abatement – was all the information released. Possibly, because the cash promised “for jobs” will come from some Paris families making much less then $50,000 a year.

Is that a “public purpose” in Paris?

Robbing the poor to give to the rich is more like insanity.

What is the time limit for the “initial creation” of the promised 100 jobs? Is it the same amount of time allowed for the 400 to 500 jobs promised by J. Skinner?

We get all the Happy Talk assumptions about industrial money-hunters coming to Paris, but we never hear or see a report about the industries that left Paris. But the lack of transparency in both instances are problems. (Shouldn’t a report on how much “cash money” taxpayers lost on J. Skinner be public, as well as all the incentives in all agreements? If not, how do taxpayers know the net gain to the community?)

Is the sin of commission greater than the sin of omission?

While the Paris Texas Chamber appreciates job creation and new investments – especially those that help hold the line on property taxes – we realize that what the Supreme Court of the United States declared in Loan Association v. Topeka, about the giving of cash, is correct, “…no line could be drawn in favor of the manufacturer, which would not open the coffers of the public treasury to the opportunities of two-thirds of the business men of the city or town.”

The PEDC is taking the widow’s mite to give to $50,000 wage-earners –

We can’t even get Robin Hood right . . . !

 

 

In 2017, the Paris Texas Chamber of Commerce urged development of the flood plain swamp ground areas at Lake Crook as a state and/or national Wetlands and Wildlife Area. This, we said, would drastically reduce the costs of a new sewer treatment plant, now and in the future, and be a visitor’s and educational draw for Paris.

We even published a survey of new treatment facilities of varying sizes and their costs in cities across Texas, and a few in other states.

Using the development of a Wetland project, projections showed a greatly reduced overall cost for a new plant, the cost coming in at a low of $30 million to a high of $35 million.

We warned, based on what other cities were doing, that the process being engaged in by the City of Paris for a treatment plant, with its estimated cost of $40 to $70-million, would likely end in an exorbitant cost, as bids were not being solicited.

Neither the City of Paris, nor its taxpayers, listened or seemed interested.

The city, the PEDC and the Lamar County Chamber reportedly claimed the Paris Chamber didn’t know what it was talking about –

So, here in 2023, Paris is facing a new sewer treatment plant cost of $100-million-or more. (with the highest 2017 cost under-estimated by $30-million?)

The result for simply not looking at all possible options is that a newly-born baby in Paris will owe another estimated $4,000 dollars of the costs of this one item – as will every man, woman, and child inside the city limits – in addition to the $2600 each already owe in fees and taxes to cover the annual city budget.

While its true that worlds of knowledge exist that we personally know little-to-nothing about, we do know that wasteful spending and higher taxes is no way to run a railroad.

Or a city.

Those in charge of our local community and economic development shouldn’t be talking about anyone not knowing what to do when Paris has lost population for over a quarter of a century.

For decades, not a city council has looked after the taxpayer’s actual interest.

For instance, for over over 25-years Paris has known a new plant was needed. A period of time when city council after city council increased water, sewer and trash pickup fees; money which has generally disappeared into the general budget – and to pay for costly studies. How much of such funds were set aside to meet the future costs?

How were bids requested? Where? When?

City leaders have again contracted for another $300,000-plus study of the problem, which is more waste of money.

It’s worse than gambling: A Paris is always beaten by a flush . . .

return to The Paris Texas Chamber

city utility rates are assessed by local monopolies          

 

Our local utility rates for energy, gas, AT&T, Suddenlink/Optimum/Altice (whatever the TV cable company is) are local monopolies and each pays a Franchise Fee to the City of Paris to operate here.  Usually, the franchise fee is based on a percentages of the rates the company charges consumers.

Of course, the City of Paris has a local monopoly on water and sewer utilities, and trash pickup (at least, until it’s privatized). And just as with the city’s utilities, council members have the responsibility to approve or disapprove every rate increase requested by these Franchisees. 

(Over the years that the Paris Chamber of Commerce has existed never, to our knowledge, has there ever been a request for a rate decrease.)

This means that every time a rate goes up, so does the income to the city from the franchise fee.  It is a hidden tax sort of thing.

This doesn’t get a lot of publicity.  Perhaps, because local media receives “advertising revenue” from these local monopolies and those who benefit from what the monopolies do or don’t do.  The news then gets colored by local government representatives, who report to the media what they’re doing (or not doing), until you don’t know what or who to believe. 

These factors mean that what you read and hear about local rates – or even how things may work locally – will not usually be found in columns about the need for open public information and full public disclosure. It is how Freedom of the Commercial Business Press works today. 

Anyway, we brag about our “low cost of living” when compared with other Texas’ cities. 

Yeah.  Chicka-boom-boom! 

Our “low cost of living” is because we have hundreds – thousands – of buildings older than oak, and they sell c-h-e-a-p! 

Look at the houses, neighborhood after neighborhood, block after block, and you understand why housing costs are so low.  You will also understand why retirees aren’t flocking to Paris like English Sparrows looking for a nesting site.

What you will not understand is why we brag about it.

While there is a reason for our low housing costs, there are no reasons why our city utility rates and costs should be among the highest in Texas.  (Along with our tax rates, with the sales tax requiring $8.25 cents on every $100 we spend.) 

We should be striving to hold down franchise fees, which include utilities:  Electricity, gas, cable, as well as City of Paris water, sewer, and trash pickup.

Every time the City allows a utility rate increase the less fortunate are penalized; requiring more of the widow’s mite. 

Of course, Paris is not alone in doing this.  It is the way politics generally works.  The least powerful individuals among us are the ones who most feel every increase in utility rates, gas prices, and taxes that dig deeper and deeper into their income. 

Cities, like Paris, raise city utility rates – not because it is the right thing to do – but because their citizens all need or must have what the utility monopolies are selling. And they are far easier to approve than an increase in property taxes.  Plus, people tend to blame the utility company when they get the bill, not the ones who approved the rate increases.

If Paris ever gets really serious about being the kind of city you want to live in, we’ll stop rubber-stamping every request for another rate increase. As we lose population, we should be reducing or – at least – holding the line on spending.

In the meantime, other companies would likely be happy to offer a lower rate for the same or similar utilities, if we invited them.  It might, at least, improve service.

Is there a law that says we can’t at least get bids?    

                

return to    Paris Texas Chamber of Commerce