Tag: Texas

Questions:

Where is the “core area” of the City of Paris?

When is illegal legal? And,

What is the total cost to the taxpayers for all the current incentives given to a few favored endeavors? (There’s always a cost, as nothing is free.)

The city says it “is incentivizing reinvestment in the core area of the city…”

But . . . where is “the core…”?

Surely, it’s not the Towne Center Shopping Center where the city is “giving” questionable incentives –incentivizing possibly even illegal retail sales tax rebates – to four retail businesses (that replace four businesses that closed); plus, tax abatement to the shopping center owner.

But what “low income” or “disadvantaged area” of Paris qualifies those four firms or the owner of the shopping center for incentives? (click for what qualifies)?

When did Texas’ Retail Sales Tax become a Special District tax? Isn’t the retail sales tax a public tax, which can only be used for public purposes? (When a tax law is only a mask to exact funds from the public when its true intent is to give undue benefit and advantage to a private enterprise, it will not satisfy the requirement of public purpose. Click to read more from Yale Law Journal.)

The city is subsidizing – incentivitizing – a few home builders and apartment developers; the city says, “At least four”.

WHY?

We’re “incentivizing” industry – even giving cash!

WHY?

We’re building a $7-million street for a private developer.

WHY

Taxpayers are subsidizing a motel on North Main Street.

WHY?

Government gets a bit too big for its britches when citizens elect too many to offices who allow administrative employees to tell them what to do – instead of overseeing the actions and the decisions of key employees who usually are seeking to build a portfolio to a better job.

A bureaucrat, a manager or an administrator in an organizations that has lost its way, are only role players. To keep their job, they must be a collaborative contributor to the overall concept of the organization. They are required to not only assume the values of the organization, but its personality as well.

Too often, those we elect end up listening to and carrying out recommendations of staff bureaucrats.

No act performed by a citizen, while in the city limits of Paris, Texas, shall be without a charge from the city. The rule is, “Everything costs.” There are no exceptions  –  unless it’s an incentive or an abatement given to one of the chosen few.

Wouldn’t it be interesting to know the total cost to taxpayers of all the incentives that our hired guns – looking for success stories – recommended, and were blindly approved by those we have elected?

 

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.

A fish at the end of the fisherman’s line may or may not know that it just had a bad idea. Not Paris taxpayers. When we grab a-hold of a bad idea, we think it’s wonderful. We must be the most gullible breed of taxpayer. On that point, we’re hooked on the idea that tax subsidy programs, cash economic incentives, and restrictive improvement rules and a closer incestuous relationship between the Three Mustyrears will spur community and economic growth.

We have such a mouthful of that bait, we can’t answer the simple question, “Where does government get its money?”

While we’re floundering around in the muddy water of government inspired inflation, higher taxes, and a disintegrating society, with the line getting shorter to the frying pan, we’re still believing that paying out cash in the form of grants and relinquishing revenue (thru’ tax abatement, fee waivers, and other subsidizes, such as a special tax for a special purpose – examples being the PEDC, the Visitor’s Tax, TIF Districts, a new ridiculous ‘5 for 5’ Program’ or the recently recommended PACE Program) – promotes growth in the private sector, and that higher taxes will make everything alright.

Studies show that hungry cities, like hungry fish, often do desperate and – usually – dumb things.

We forget that, at its core, every government program sold as a public purpose has a way to fleece the public.

Consider: After 2-years of government mandated mask wearing and shutdown of businesses, schools, and social gatherings, for this fiscal year the City of Paris hit taxpayers with a 3.5% tax increase; the highest allowed by law (without a vote). This, on top of a series of yearly rate increases on water and sewer bills that add millions to the budget annually.

The results? The City’s revenue budget for this fiscal year is $58.6-million, which includes an operational budget of $47.3 million (a $7.3 million increase).

We’ve done this after two decades has resulted in a loss of population inside the city limits, according to U. S. Census reports, while most of Texas has seen rapid growth.

Like most government programs the promotion is better than the product. Listen to government and everything sounds good. So does an artificial bait to a fish.

Instead of contributing or building a prosperous economy for all Paris families and promoting the creation of good jobs over the last 25-30 years, Paris has actually deepened the expenses of small businesses, created income inequalities for working families, encourage blight and decay in many neighborhoods, and increased the tax burden on every citizen. This is not good government.

But whose fault is it?

Good government can only be achieved by its citizens.

Based on the Paris Chamber’s knowledge of economic incentive programs, gained through years of community and economic development work, we believe that every citizen should be held accountable for the actions of their government. Good government is their responsibility.

It’s why we have a vote.

The development and implementation of policies that encourage private business investments in local families and neighborhoods, encourage business growth and innovation, and reward taxpayers are how communities are likely to achieve success.