Tag: PEDC

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

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.