Tag: Paris

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

The Great Art of selling baloney

BY Law, it’s the local Stooges – uh – property tax payers of Paris – who are responsible for all debts of the PEDC. They are the ones who are subsidizing industry in Lamar County, in addition to Paris. Families who can barely afford to feed their kids and pay the cost of city utilities are subsidizing some of the most profitable industries.

Consider that the Paris Economic Development Corporation (the PEDC) gave $350,000 to Blossom Aerospace, a firm in Blossom, Texas, which was recently purchase by an Oklahoma firm.

The PEDC’s President was reported that the gift “aligns with the PEDC’s priorities of business retention and expansion.”

The PEDC’s Executive Director was also quoted, saying that it “was a win for our community that will generate over $70 million in new payroll over the next seven years.”

The money being given away comes from the Paris retail sales tax, of course, not Blossom’s.

And the ability to tell the future – to the dollar – should earn one a multi-billion annual salary or, at least, an appointment as Secretary of the U. S. Department of the Treasury.

Even demented Joe could understand that kind of clarity.

It’s Great Art or a Sharpie drawing.

Every time you clean something, you just make something else dirty.

Regardless, its enough to make you wanta’ slap your Grandma . . .

Yes, we’re told that the local economy does not stop at the Paris city limits, as many of the employees, working in Paris, live in Lamar County and spend money in Paris.

So do some happy folks in Oklahoma, and in Red River, Delta and Fannin Counties.

Using that logic, will Paris subsidize industries in those areas, too?

Are Petty, Direct, Detroit, Roxton, Reno, and all the other Lamar County communities eligible?

For years, we’ve been told a lot of things. Most of it being Happy Talk and Half Truths; all tied together with a logic that defies understanding.

How much of this twisting in the wind help those who cannot afford to pay for salaries, retirement, office expenses, street repairs and water and sewer and property taxes inside the city limits?

Sadly, proponents of corporate welfare suffer from a false belief that they can best determine what technology has the best chance of success, which jobs and products best supply our needs, where best to expend scarce supplies of capital, and that the rest of us will believe just about everything.

For a lot of people, this kind of stuff ruins doing much for Paris.

And the excuse of “They’re creating jobs” ignores the fact that companies need someone in those jobs – people working to create or produce a product that can be sold for a profit. Without bodies, without someone in those jobs, there is no profit.

But the PEDC is swapping cash and other incentives for promises.

Some economically desperate towns will give anything that’s not nailed down to a new industry.

Not only will Paris do it, we’ll throw in some cash as well.

 

On Tuesday, May 10, 2022, the City of Paris council members voted to demand rental properties in the historical districts to pay “registration” fees. On all rental properties? Even above ground-floor apartments and condos being recommended as a way to have more people living in the downtown area?   

The city grants – gives – taxpayer’s dollars to downtown owners who will improve the appearance of their buildings, but charges regulation, restrictions and fees for others to improve their property. Why?

Think about the thinking: Creating more regulations, restrictions, and fees on rental properties is the way to (a) create more affordable housing and to improve Paris; or (b) hope higher rents will keep the (wink) undesirable “low income” folks out of the neighborhood?

Will increasing rental fees win the war against blight, decay, and rot in the area’s older neighborhoods?

Let’s face it: Large areas of Paris are a disgrace; ugly to the eye and an insult to humanity. Especially, when the city allowed the property to decline to a point where it needs repairs.

We’re not against equally applied standards – or fines – to prevent litter, junk in front yards, weeds, maintenance neglect, etc., but restrictions, regulations and fees to tell owners what they must do?

“…com’on, man!”

Three short weeks before, the Paris Texas Chamber had suggested the city be prohibited, by ordinance or Charter change, from adopting or enforcing regulations that requires an owner of a vacant residential or commercial property to obtain a permit to do repairs to their property, (a) if it is necessary to protect public safety; or (b) to prevent further damage to the building.

So the city’’s guiding hands did the very opposite of what needs doing.

The city has planners and other sellers of services who find regulations, restrictions and fees successful ways to use the taxpayer’s money. Somehow, those ways seem to benefit them, seldom the community. Everyone knows the examples:

  • Incentives to builders for 5 little-bitty $200,000 affordable homes (1150 to 1250 sq. ft.); a million dollar guarantee

  • Approving really tiny (750 to 800 sq. ft.) homes in established older neighborhoods or in retail and commercially zoned areas

  • giving incentives to apartment complex purchasers or builders; and

  • Using an estimated $7-million to build a street for a residential development with a small retail or commercial area thrown into the mix.

None of those things, nada, are doing anything to improve the older existing, ignored for years, city discriminated against neighborhoods.

But $7 to $8 million, not counting the other incentives, used wisely, could – the catch here, of course, is being “used wisely”.

Millions of dollars to builders and a few wealthy corporations, but Paris will not purchase in bulk-at-a-discount building fix-up, paint-up, and clean-up materials to provide families willing to use sweat equity to repair or improve their home in an older neighborhood?

Why not?

As the Paris Chamber previously stated: There are only two reasons to penalize the improvement of property: Greed for fees or stupidity.

Paris does both, often at the same time, and calls it progress.

 

                       return to  Paris Texas Chamber of Commerce