Tag: PEDC

One of the reasons why the Paris Texas Chamber of Commerce distrusts so many government bureaucrats (not workers, bureaucrats):

After years of community and economic wrong-doing by several large and small Texas’ cities, legislators gave them a sly wink that a ‘safe haven” now exist in the Chapter 380 law for any of their past, on-going or currently contemplated sins. Under the new Chapter 380 Program, anything legal or semi-legal can be economic development.

It is such a bad law that state legislators declined to determine specifically which incentives, when offered singularly or in combination, constitute a “program … to promote state or local economic development.” 

There are no rules governing community and economic development anymore, except for civil injury or death.

Economic development is now anything a city council says that it is – Whether an incentive is requested or not, it gives a city control over all development efforts.

Government takes care of government; government grows government.

Taxpayers have raised such a ruckus over wasted tax-dollars that lawmakers had to do something to bail-out their brethren.

Therefore, 380 agreements serve to only memorialize economic development projects that cities create. It gives a city council the rights of management and control over anything that it designates as a 380 project, thereby setting aside the Constitutional rights of private property ownership.

If government can control it, it – or their friends or supporters or the bureaucrat administrators – can reap the rewards while you pay the taxes, which government also puts into its pockets.

IF someone can control and manage your property, in ways that they determine, what good is your ownership of it?

Logic is not a government strong point.

The Chapter 380 law requires that a “claw-back” or “recapture” provision be in every 380-agreement. It’s a way for cities to claim that taxpayers can get the total cost of incentives and grant or loan money back – IF their economic development partner does not meet or deliver on the agreed performance.

Cities and economic development corporations now have an excuse: A guarantee that no incentive will be wasted – as every and all are recoverable.

Whoopee!

The cockroach in the coffee is that cities have always been free to have “claw back” provisions from failed goals set forth under agreement terms. Its why we’ve had agreements and contracts since 1215 (the Magna Carta signing). But moving on:

The problem for taxpayers – who pay for all incentives – is that under Section 380.001(b), the governing body may: (1) administer a 380 program by the use of municipal personnel; (2) contract with the federal government, the state, a political subdivision of the state, a nonprofit organization, or any other entity for the administration of a program.

That is a cronyism loophole large enough for the 138,600,000 supporters of the current administration to do the Boot Scootin’ Boogie in . . . (That’s the 42% that polls are reporting of the nation’s 330-million population, if you’re wondering.) Recently, over a cup of coffee, one of our Paris Chamber’s supporters said he was “missing the cheap gas prices and mean tweets.”

Chapter 380 is to protect government, while taking care of government’s friends and insiders.

It certainly is not about achieving results, as not all projects are “economic development programs.”

An improvement or a restoration of a building, allowing new instant slums in a neighborhood, some guy cleaning up junk in his yard, some crew selling “pot” on the streets, some gal painting her navel at the Culbertson Fountain, anything that can be claimed to have a potential for “community development” or to improve Paris’ appearance, can now become “economic” in the eyes of the city or when used by the PEDC (when they want it to be).

A 380 designation gives the city total administrative control and management of an entire project – which are the basic rights of private property ownership. And don’t be fooled: Control and management far exceeds the government right of ‘reasonable’ regulation.

Paris is now trying to treat community development as a need for a Chapter 380 economic development agreement; even if no loan or grant or incentive has been made by the city.

Forget any understanding of what, why, and how a project should be done.

 

In our community ignorance, some refer to the PEDC as the “economic engine” of Paris. They’re off-track. It’s a twisted concept that does harm: Economic development corporations were never intended to be the driving force – in charge – of solicitation, decision-making on awarding incentives, and financing.

An ethical conflict exist in doing all three.

Describing the PEDC as the local “economic engine” is a personal editorial. It misses their purpose: EDCs were to serve as the community’s bankers.

EDCs were to be responsible for doing due diligence for the community on every prospect: Determining credit-worthiness, assets, products, market acceptance of products, etc., of an endeavor – before recommending incentives or arranging financing. This was to protect the taxpayer’s – and their money – and later doing verification; making sure that the terms of the agreement are met to protect the taxpayer’s money.

Even though there are positive models to follow, Paris insists on pursuing programs that have failed to build the community. Examples include

  • keeping ordinances in effect that the city does not enforce equally;
  • establishing re-investment zones in areas where no investment has been made (except the land cost), while ignoring numerous substandard neighborhoods
  • diverting tax dollars from the public base to subsidize private businesses
  • giving tax relief to a few, while forcing others to pay more
  • giving, in cash, tax dollars as incentives; etc.

Not one of those activities can pass the “equal treatment” test.

But until enough potential voters grow tired of their ox being gored, Paris will continue to elect (and appoint) those who act to take money from a lot of pockets and put it in a few selected pockets.

It isn’t charges of corruption that exist so much as it is the costs of notorious and appalling duplicated ‘improvement efforts’ that end up opaque or wasted. For instance, the city, the PEDC, and what used to be the Chamber of Commerce of Lamar County, all three, claim to do “economic” development.

Yet, they seem to never see the wasted efforts, time and money, or understand that “too many cooks spoil the broth.”

No wonder so little is actually accomplished that economically improves the lives of all our citizens.

There is order in all things.

The “economic engine” is the community – which is made up of a lot of working parts: The PEDC is just one of many.

Without the community, the PEDC would not even exist.

Jointly, currently, the City of Paris, the Paris Economic Development Corporation (PEDC), and the Lamar County Chamber of Commerce are paying a Florida firm (Florida?) to develop a Branding/Identity – a common new tagline – which they can use to try and sell a perception of the three being one united group.

As all three have lived off the taxpayers, like parasites over the last 30 to 50-years, when have they not been united?

Yes, even the Lamar County Chamber, supposedly, a “voluntary” organization, has had their hand in the local Occupancy Tax till, which is generating over $700,000 annually.

Voters have forgotten or don’t care that for years, the city leased the Depot building on Bonham Street to the Lamar County Chamber for one lousy dollar, annually. Then, after the chamber moved out, the PEDC still gave the bunch around $60,000 of the taxpayer’s money annually for “office space” – or some such silly excuse. It was an insider’s game at the taxpayer’s expense. All three organizations knew full well what they were doing and were okay with it – until the Paris Chamber exposed the unethical (and possibly an illegal action) that was going on.

After we pulled the plug, the three closed the funneling of tax dollars (in that manner) down, while griping about the Paris Chamber, which is the second best thing they do well.

Let’s face it: The three already walk and talk in-step. They seldom fuss, only brag about who has the power. They never dissent about issues, only power. And if that ain’t loving one another, then God didn’t make little green apples and it don’t rain in Indianapolis…

Branding, in the final analysis, only promotes or sells an identity. What they want to change is not how they do things, but the perception that people have of them.

But if you’re going to brand something, shouldn’t the first objective be that it is legitimate, functional, compelling, attractive, and different?

For years, they’ve believed their process is more important than Paris’ progress, and what we see them doing is just another process to make themselves look good.

For a decade the Paris Texas Chamber of Commerce has repeatedly said that Paris needs to restructure its community and economic development organizations, and given our reasons for the restructuring need: Property owners and tax-payers need a program that sells people on Paris, not on the existing organizations or on a series of some annual one-time event being held in Paris.

Branding failures are the state or condition of not meeting the intended objective or the expectations of people. It can also be viewed as a failure of the product.

The three organizations are only trying to brand a hope that people in the local marketplace will see them as hot stuff, the saviors of Paris.

But behind the perception they’re hoping for is a reality that these three have ridden Paris downhill for the last 50-years. Fix that, and the perception will fix itself.