Every now and then I'll be elevating particularly provocative comments from the "comments sections" to lead articles. Here's one that fits the bill:
This one is from Socrates:
"It makes me sad that there are people who can do nothing more with the beauty of the English Language, than rail, and cuss and spite and hate and criticize those who make and do. Someone needs to explain it on their level, so I'll try.
You see, Timmy, if the Mayor can get some of those well-heeled people that you hate, to come and spend some of their excess money in our town, then part of the sales taxes paid will come to Ogden. Eventually even commercial property taxes will be added to the city, of which 50% will go to schools and 25% to the city.
When the city gets this extra money, then the nice mayor can fix the potholes in your streets and improve the water system. Even if you could not afford to go to the "Wreck Center" yourself, don't you think it would be nice to have better streets, water and schools?
When the city voted to buy the mall, Timmy, the city didn't lose property taxes, because a previous mayor made it exempt to get it built. [Emphasis added - ed.] It was losing money for four successive owners, and the best tenants had moved out, because it was a local mall, without a "wreck center", and couldn't draw the people west of the freeway, north of second street or south of 36th street downtown.
Timmy, our nice mayor didn't want to make the same mistake again, and you wouldn't want him to, would you Timmy.
There, I hope that makes you feel better, it isn't good for you to go around hating people. If you make that angry face often enough, it will get stuck that way. You don't want that do you? Try to smile and be happy Timmy, not everyone is out to hurt you dear. "
-Socrates
----------------------------
Comments?
© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved
9 comments:
"When the city voted to buy the mall, Timmy, the city didn't lose property taxes, because a previous mayor made it exempt to get it built."
It would be interesting to hear more about this proposition. Are you saying that NO property taxes have been paid on the mall property since it was first built?
Please elaborate, Socrates
My source for the statement, was a member of the Ogden City School board. She said the school system never saw a cent from the previous mall. That could only happen if the property taxes were abated, because the school system gets half or the property taxes. I will try to look in to it further.
The current center will not suffer from the same problem, because the mall sites will be owned by individual owners. Even if Property tax incentives are used to prime the pump with the key players who start the dance, the rest of the players, or businesses will not receive the same incentive, because they did not take the same risk.
Thanks, Socrates.
Sounds logical enough. Anything further that you can provide would be helpful, I think.
I like your "dance" analogy, too.
It's evident that "Socrates" doesn't have a clue what he is talking about! His grasp, or lack thereof, of the financial methods and implications of the mall schemes discredits everything he wrote. Just more BS from the little lord mayor and his sycophants!
If I am a sycophant when I agree with the Mayor, what am I when I agree with W. Buffett?
Do you use name calling and stereotyping, as a substitution for information and reason? Do you have some valid reason for discrediting not only my information, but you charactor?
I think we need more light and less heat. I would welcome more dialogue with you, preferably with civility, as gentlemen.
I am well aware there are two sides to this coin. Let's hear your side of it.
Thank heavens for my invention that allows you people this cyberspace forum in which to aire your dirty laundry!
Well this so called "Socrates" sure made a fool of himself! His pedantic little lecture to the mythical "Timmy" showed his arrogance and stupidity in spades!! It appears that he considers all opponents of the little lord Mayor and his Privy council to be "Timmy" and he is the wise all knowing "professor" that is going to set us straight. With that I would like to respond. For starters I must give the "professor" failing grades in Comprehension, Humor, Economics and Philosophy - to wit:
COMPREHENSION:
The "professor" apparently hasn't been listening, doesn't want to hear, or doesn't comprehend that the opposition is not railing, cussing, spiteful, hating and criticizing those who make and do. They are for the most part bright, well read, well spoken and successful people who have a legitimate basis from which they are posing intelligent and well thought out objections to a very ill advised scheme to squander public money. They do not hate any one but they do, in certain instances, have disdain for arrogant patriarchal public officials. They certainly do not hate well-heeled people as some of them are very well heeled themselves. I know of at least a couple who could buy the little mayor and council with their spare change.
HUMOR:
The poor "professor" apparently is deficient in the humor department as he mistakes the wry humor proffered up by the Mayor's opponents as Hateful, spiteful, etc. His own attempt at humor vis-a-vis his little lecture to "Timmy" fell flat and violated some of the basic tenants of humor, it was condescending and boring and yes here is that word again - pedantic! (look it up "professor" and see yourself!)
ECONOMICS:
Here is where the "professor" really showed his ineptness. He obviously doesn't understand the concept of Incremental tax financing. Under these scheme's the city and the schools do not get their share of the property taxes for 20 to 30 years. In fact there has never been a case to date where the city or schools got any property taxes from RDA's in Utah. Therefore under this plan the city will have to wait at least 20 + years before the "nice mayor" gets this extra money to fix the potholes, streets and water system. If the city administration spent a tenth of their time on these infrastructure problems as they do on being big time developers these potholes, streets and water system would get fixed now and we wouldn't have to wait 20 years. After all, the voters put these people in office to take care of the basic needs of the city, not to be business geniuses which of course none of them are.
The "professors" statement that a member of the school board told him that the schools never saw a cent from the previous mall proves the point that these RDA's never benefit the citizens in any tangible way. His own statements disprove his theory of the schools and city benefiting from these scams. The truth is that only developers and empire building bureaucrats ever get any real benefit from them. He further demonstrate his lack of understanding of the way it works with his statement that a previous mayor made the old mall exempt. Mayors, then and now, do not have the power to make tax exemptions. The old mall was partially funded by an RDA. Those funds went straight to the bottom line of the developer instead of to the city and schools just like this new deal will do. The new mall will in fact suffer from the same problem. Every thing that gets build will have an RDA incentive attached to it other wise nothing will get built. The old mall did pay taxes although at the old rate that existed before it was built. Since the city bought it that tax revenue was lost to all the entities that was recieving it. The incremental portion was also lost to the RDA - which is the city and it's citizens.
Incidentally the RDA concept was not meant as incentives for developers or to mitigate risk. They were meant to eliminate blight. It is only in the hands of these Neo-Con politicians that they have been perverted into a give away of public money to developers. RDA's when used for retail development do not create wealth, they only redistribute it. Retail does not create wealth, it follows it. People do not spend more money when new stores are build, they just spend less at the old ones.
Also the old mall didn't fail for lack of a "wreck center", it failed because down town wasn't safe and the parking structure was particularly problematic, with vandalism, rapes, assaults, etc. The "nice mayor" with all his business genius tore the mall down and saved the parking structure which was a big part of the problem to begin with! Do you really want to trust the future of down town to some one with that level of incompetence? Do you really want to trust anything to someone who thinks it is right and moral to use their power to take people's home's away from them so they can sell those homes for a large profit to the richest company in the world? Does this administration have any sense of decency? Do you?
If this high tech wreck center was a viable idea it would be financed on it's own merits. It is not economicaly feasible and no financial institution would touch it by itself. Instead the city is going to pledge not only the property and facility but all the revenue from all of the other ten RDA's in the city. Thus if the wreck in fact crashes like most thinking people suspect then the citizens of Ogden will never realize any benifit from any of the RDA's schemes of the past. Every penny from every one of them will go to pay the bonds for this monument to the mayor's ego.
So "professor" you are right on at least one thing - We don't want the "nice mayor" to make the same mistake again, that's why we are opposing him on this doomed to fail plan. And "professor" if you make that smug self rightous face often enough, it will get stuck that way. You don't want that do you?
PHILOSOPHY
I saved the best for last "professor". The use of the name "Socrates" is silly and superficial for someone like yourself who is a defender and sycophant of the establishment and those in power. Any one with a minimum understanding of the ancient philosophers knows that the real Socrates was a rebel against authority of any kind. He challenged the politicians who ruled and in fact was executed for his opposition to them. Cup of Hemlock "professor"?
But perchance you identify yourself with Socrates because he reputably was a big drinker, married to a shrew, homosexual lover to the famous warrior Alcibiacles and was a corrupter of youth? Is that it "Socrates"?
To close I would like to offer the wanna be intellectual - philosopher "Socrates" similar advice that we give to children "Don't go in the deep end of the swimming pool until you can swim" in his case - "Don't go in the deep end of the think tank until you can think"...
For my money, I'll take Newton, the gravity guy. So far, that's about the only thing that has made any sense, the old apple out of the tree smacking him topside of his head. All you clowns ought to find that tree, sit under it for awhile and pray for an apple to fall and whack you on the head because, just maybe, that'll knock some sense into you.
Well, ozboy, you did have something to say after all. If I was condecending and pedantic, it was meant to draw you into real dialogue, and away from shallow name calling. I have read and reread your amazing response, and found great interest in it.
As I said elsewhere, there is always another side of the coin, but you weren't illuminating it. Now there is merit in many of your arguments, sufficient to correct some of my, occasionally, false information; and I appreciate that. It is the purpose of a forum and an open discussion to get us to see both sides of the coin.
As to the origional charge, of excessive name calling, I remain unsatisfied. Although your response contained 1225 words, filled with many concepts, ideas, facts and figures, you cannot seem satisfied with them. You must call me foolish, pedantic, boring, inept, self righteous, smug, silly, superficial and sycophantic.
You must call our elected officials, "Lord Mayor:, "Privy Council", arrogant, patriarchal, Neo-Con Polititions, incompetetant and question their very decency.
All this while you assign yourselves the terms bright, well read, successful and as posing intellegent, well thought out objections. I leave it to the reader to decide if this is true or not.
But 90% of the people who read this forum do not comment in it. Perhaps all this name calling and vilifying drives them into silence. If it is true, then you are great bullys. Socrates railed against all manor of subjection of the human mind, not just the unjust use of authority. Bullying is the first resort of those who are frustrated by their lack of authority.
I am reluctant to ascribe to Socrates, all of the ills you attribute to him. I am more or less ignorant of the sins of my neighbors, much less certain am I, about the misdeeds of someone who lived more that 2000 years ago, and thousands of miles away at that. Anyway, this is a forum. I refuse to intimidated, let's have some real dialogue.
Real Dialogue:
The Recreation Center: While the funding of the Recreation Center is involved in Tax Increment Financing, the piece of property just approved for sale to the developer of retail and condo use is NOT. That property will develop property taxes from the get-go. Any retail sales on the main floor will also go into the general fund.
Why can't people see, that the Recreation Center was necessary to bring the theatre complex. The Theatre Complex, the Recreation Center and The Children's Playhouse are the key elements in making the mall a regional draw.
The Boyer Company CEO said, point blank, no Recreation Center, no Theatre complex, no Theatre complex no mall. It doesn't seem to matter what anyone in position to know says, because the opposition will just call them all liars and a few other names and keep on repeating their claims like a broken record.
There will be many developments on the mall site, and each of them will be separately owned, and most if not all of them will pay property taxes and generate sales tax revenue. Once the mall site is fully developed, if the Rec Center should fail, the building will be repossessed by the bank and be sold to someone else who can make other use of it. And Yes, a bank underwrites the bond financing.
The parking garage: A million dollars is being spent to renovate it with better lighting, gated entry, elevators and a tremendous facelift. For an undertaking the size of the mall, there must be parking, and no one guessed that the demolition of what was taken down would cost so much. So which is better, spend a fortune to tear it down and dispose of it, then spend another fortune to build new parking, or renovate the one we have, until all of the complaints against it are gone.
Spend it on infrastructure or citizen needs: So great are the city's needs for revenue, that it was only able to budget for 5% of the Capital Improvement Projects, urgently needed by the city. If we divert the money being invested in the mall, that may bring us up to 8% or 9%, but would do nothing for the problem next year. On top of that our maintainance of our infrastructure is nearly double that of newer cities, because because some of it needs replacing. So what will help our citizens most in the long term? Shall we pour all our income down a never ending rathole, that we will never have the money to fix? Or shall we spend some of our money bringing new revenue sources into our city?
Feasibility studies and self funding developments: For five and one half years developers have been doing feasibilities and they all came to the same conclusion, nothing significant is feasible down town, because feasibility studies are built on demographics and median income. We don't have the population or the median income to support any much. If you could get people to come in from outlying areas, to do the things they can't do in Harrisville, Riverdale and Layton, then it might be feasible, but noone can do an effectual feasibility study on who would go where if... And we have tenants for the Rec Center, so the bank will need to accept their feasibility study. It's been five and a half years, for crying out loud, how much longer shall we wait for more studies, when we have tenants in place?
Those are my views, let's here from others.
New comments are not allowed.