Utah legislative news is splashed all over the Standard-Examiner this morning, with excellent bill agenda wrap-ups here and here.
We've had private conversations with several local legislators recently, and we think the Std-Ex gets it right with this Associated Press piece. Utah legislators have an extra $1.6 billion dollars burning a hole in their pockets this year. Dealing with the current budget surplus will be a major battle ground; and Utah's lawmakers are scrambling madly to dole it out.
For our own part, we're leaning toward Governor Huntman's proposal, which would yield the taxpayers a $100 million tax cut, and yet increase public education spending by $382 million. This plan would be fine with us, so far as education spending increases are specifically earmarked for teacher salaries and other specified needs, and not siphoned off and applied to our already top-heavy and redundant school administrate functions. We think this year would be a fine time also, for the legislature to look into consolidating local school-board authority. Throughout Utah we have cadres of highly paid administrators performing identical tasks in a variety of local school districts. The public school management system is horribly inefficient. Now may be the time, we think, to look into following the private corporate model, and to start consolidating the school district management function into a more centralized authority.
We note that the Std-Ex editors are still obsessing over Senator Greiner's Hatch Act "problem". We think they're making mountains out of molehills, and that they simply need to get used to the idea that Stuart Reid is NOT our new State Senator, despite their best efforts to install their neoCON Golden Boy into the Senate 18 seat. Case precendent has already been set in the Perkins Case. There can be no turning back for the Justice Office of Special Council, we think, regardless of their perceived need to micro-manage Utah government from Washington. We're 100% certain Greiner will prevail in court, if the need arises. So we think the Standard-Examiner should just get over it, and move on to more useful and worthy public crusades -- such as screeching for less secrecy in government.
We invite our readers to offer their own comments on any of the above, or simply regard this thread as open-topic.
© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved
35 comments:
I think that this is one of those times when the pot is calling the kettle black. Imagine Greiner complainig about the amount of time the committee is taking making up their minds and yet he fils to see he did the same thing to Matt Jones.
Nancy
Well, seems to me the fact [as opposed to anyone's particular preferences] regarding Chief Greiner's standing in re: the Hatch act is this: the Justice Department has not resolved the matter. It is therefor still in doubt. Which is what the SE reported. Clearly, from the article, Greiner thinks it's still in doubt and he's concerned about it. Having a story ignored simply because some are engaged in a crusade to pretend Greiner is not one of Mayor Godfrey's City Hall Republican Gang would not be sound news judgement on the part of the SE it seems to me. If and when the matter is finally resolved, however it is resolved, I'm sure the SE will report that too.
As for the matter having already been decided by precedent in another case which may or may not have involved the same circumstances as Greiner's... well, once again, that's the sort of question that the paper should not be deciding in making its news judgements. That's a matter for the Justice Department and, if it decides against Greiner and he elects to challenge the matter in court, for the courts to decide. It would again not be wise news judgement for the SE's news editors to decide it for all of us, and so decide not to report the fact that Greiner's case is still, at this point, a matter of concern for him and, evidently, for the Justice Department.
We really can't only have papers covering stuff we want them to cover and not covering other stuff we wish they wouldn't. Papers that do that don't get much respect from readers, and don't deserve what little they do get.
So we'll just have to see if Mayor Godfrey's Republican City Hall Gang ultimately succeded in getting Greiner into the Legislature to do the Mayor's bidding there while still providing "special" services to the Mayor when he is following a city empoloyee's spouse around downtown, or if, in the end, the gambit will fail.
There is a difference between the Perkins - Greiner situation.
Perkins as governor does not introduce and pass laws.
Greiner can and will be using all his influence to promote the Mayor's case.
Richard Perkins
Some good news for Ogden:
SE reports today that the American Can building has been sold to a developer for $3,000,000, clearing the way for Amer Sports' move to Ogden. Details in the story which is on page 2 of the Top of Utah section [B Section]. Sale was expected, so nothing surprising, but good news that the sale has been completed none the less. Let us hope the administration learns from this successful sale that attempting to sell city property to people who actually want to buy it is much the best way to proceed....
I have no problem with the sale of the American Can building to Jon Peddie of Steamboat Springs for $3 million.
What I do have a problem with is the Governor's Office of Economic Development authorizing tax rebate incentives over the next 10 years in the amount of "about $7.9 million" to this developer on 205,000 sq. feet.
I think it is time to focus attention on the Governor's Office of Economic Development (GOED) and their lavish hand with giveaways that they say are to promote jobs.
In 2006 just in our area of Utah I remember reading about tax incentives from the GOED to Kemp
Development of plus or minus $2 million.
Also Brigham gave Nucor $2 to 4 million local tax incentive and the GOED gave them a much larger amount which could be $7 million. This is one of the wealthiest companies in the world.
Ogden gave Fresenius tax incentives twice last year which amounted to $ 2 million or more and the GOED gave Fresenius even more tax rebate incentives.
Fresenius is a German-owned company also very wealthy and publicly traded.
What happened to the long-established concept that privately owned smaller business creates the bulk of jobs in this country?
Taxpayer funds should not be used to create higher paying jobs for a few hundred people.
DL:
There is much criticism nationwide about this practice, especially since in some states the firms "attracted" decamped as soon as the tax-suspensions ended. [I don't know how Utah structures such tax-exemptions and incentives or what Utah's experience has been with how companies so attracted behave once the exemptions run out.]
It is however a bidder's market out there, with states and communities doing the bidding for companies. The argument is, if we don't bid, others certainly will [true enough] and so businesses that might have come here will go elsewhere instead.
It would be interesting to know if anyone has done a long term study on the economic impact of luring companies to relocate by means of grants/tax exemptions. Have companies in Utah over, say, the past twenty years generated more for the state than the state paid out in incentives and rebates? That would be difficult to determine, I imagine, since a simple dollar figure wouldn't cover all the benefits. [E.G. even if a company moved here to get a state subsidy and ten year tax exemption and then moved out, you'd have to figure in and quantify the "benefit" of having employed X people over the ten years, etc.] And if the study concluded the state had gained, you'd have to consider as well the opportunity costs involved... e.g. the potential for growth that might have been achieved had the subsidy and tax suspension monies been "invested" in differenty ways. Still, difficult though it might be to conduct well, such a study might prove valuable.
I wonder if the Governor's Office of Economic Development has done such a study or knows of one. Or if one is under way.
Dorothy Littrell is asking the pertinent questons.
The GOED does need scrutiny. Dian Woodhouse asked more than once why SMALL businesses were not being courted and given tax incentives to buy property and open their stores and businesses here?
So Dorothy pointing out that two publicly traded and very wealthy companies are receiving MILLIONS of tax incentives should make all of us sit up and take notice!
Observer:
Well, I think the city has a small-business grants/assistance program to help them open their doors in Ogden. Whether the state does, I don't know. And the state, and I think private fund raisers also provide assistance to start-ups via "business incubator" programs and sites as do some of Utah's universities. Whether all this adds up to a program comprable to [proportionately speaking] the mega-grants to large employers to come in, I don't know. But some incentives programs for small businesses are in place. I have no idea if they have been successful or not or how extensive they are.
Good morning. Regarding the assistance given to businesses in Ogden. Small businesses can, and do, receive assistance in Ogden through the B.I.C. They have a very good reputation and track record in the number of people and businesses they have assisted (their record is open to anyone who wants to see it). Loan assistance, business consulting, and other things are offered. Obviously, the state does not have the same incentive programs offered to every size of business. The breaks being offered to Fresenius are real. However, the amount of jobs and tax base offered by Fresenius far out-weighs the tax breaks being offered. Do we not offer the tax break and not bring them to Ogden?
I have said many times that Ogden is competing with the world when it comes to jobs, businesses and tax base. In would be absurd to not act competitively.
Small businesses make up most of the jobs out there---that is very true. So what does a small business need to survive? Low taxes, low crime, "reasonable" regulations, attractive areas for the business to locate in, good schools for their families, and a population surrounding them with cash to spend at the business. Ogden City must be working to have these attributes for the businesses--small and large.
What up-front financial incentives, besides tax breaks, does Utah have to offer prospective employers? Can we really afford to throw away the opportunity to bring the businesses in? Can our schools afford it?
How would you have brought Fresenius into Ogden without the tax breaks? What would you have done to replace their tax base and job creation in this community? We must have a good answer for these questions if we are not to offer financial incentives.
Hey Rick and all you republicans, your Robin Hood in reverse. Take from the poor and give to the rich.
Its a good thing your all so educated and noble. "Because we need a tax base".
GIVE ME A BREAK
Give me a break, you nailed it. The Republicans like to use that arguement of a tax base, because they can use your hard earned tax money to give to their rich buddies to squeeze the honest businesses out of business; and funnel your tax money into their never ending campaigns.
100 million dollar budget per-year isn't enough money for Rick and Mayor Godfrey to hand out to their buddies.
Stop picking on them!
Councilman Safsten:
Thanks for the info on small business incentive programs in Ogden via the B.I.C. One query: what is the B.I.C.? Not familiar with the abbreviation.
To your list of things small businesses need to survive [and to find a community an attrictive one in which to open, relocate or stay], I'd add one element: strong public schools. A well-educated workforce [at all levels] generally drives the economy up via higher earnings [and so more money to spend]. Strong public schools also work as a draw for larger companies. I know from experience in another state [I've seen the correspondence] of a much-desired high-tec firm that was actively recruited to move in, the management had indicated they intended to move in, then backed out because, their letter said "our skill people will not move to XXX because of the low quality of the schools there. And if our skill people won't make the move, neither can the company."
I wish [not just in Ogden, but in Utah overall] public officials understood much better than they seem to the connection between strong public schools, quality education at every level, and economic prosperity.
Thanks again for the posting, Mr. Safsten and the information about small business incentives in Ogden.
Business information center
Anon: TY
In response...
I did mention "strong schools" in my list of things needed to keep small (and large businesses). I would be more than willing to amend that to "strong PUBLIC schools."
I don't understand people scoffing at the importance of a "strong tax base." Strong tax bases mean people have jobs, have good public schools, pay their police/fire departments, etc...
Why would you want a weak tax base? Please explain that to me.
The B.I.C. is the Business Information Center. It is a partnership between Ogden City and HUD (Housing Urban Development). Don't take my word about its success in working with small businesses in Ogden. Somebody take a look at its very open books and look at the numbers. It is doing a good job.
Councilman Safsten:
OK. My bad. I read over "good schools" in the list. I should have gone back and re-read the post ebefore responding. The wages of haste is error. Happy though that you'd not object to making it "strong public schools." Now I wish we could, somehow, get our state legislators to embrace the same idea [strong public schools foster economic prosperity] when they actually take their seats and vote instead of only on the campaign trail....
Curm,
With the massive building and infrastructure needs, let alone low wages, textbooks, etc..at the public schools, I am dissappointed at the short-sightedness of our legislature regarding the budget proposals I have seen thus far.
Mr Safsten,
Please enumerate some of those small businesses that you mention. Also, you are correct that business NEED a low crime atmosphere.
What is this administration and police dept doing to ensure that we citizens can move about safely in Ogden?
Please be specific. I don't think we look at tax incentives and a large work force as an 'either/or' proposition...and this certainly should not be painted as a pro republican issue. Nonsense.
To "Observers,"
I cannot gives the names of the specific small businesses or people assisted at the B.I.C, but please don't take that as a dodge to your question. The council hears budget reports from the BIC regarding the numbers and $$$ amounts of business loans taken. Our reports show the numbers of people coming through their doors to receive consulting for their businesses. I have heard the names of some of the businesses, but only anecdotally in the course of receiving the reports.
The specific things that have been done to reduce crime implemented by the city include:
#1) Increasing the number of police officers.
#2) The "Weed & Seed" program is a program in Central Ogden to both fight the incidence of crime through neighborhood involvement and also to reduce future potential crime by attacking some of the root problems in those neighborhoods.
#3) Community Police Officers have been effective to make contact with the neighborhoods.
#4) The Police have new equipment including GIS and High Tech Fingerprinting machines which are very valuable in helping them do their work.
There is too much crime in Ogden, obviously, but the statistics have shown general reductions in criminal activity for several years.
It would help if the state would stop creating more and more halfway houses in Ogden (ironically, they are usually clustered near each other in order to generate maximum criminal interface capability) dumping criminals into our city creating that much more oversight responsibility for our police force. There are other problems too, but that is one that comes to mind this morning.
It is unfortunate if tax incentives for businesses are viewed as an "either/or" proposition, but what would you suggest as incentives to the German company, for example, to have them come to Ogden instead of China or North Carolina? I don't mean my comment to be cynical--it is a very real question we must deal with.
None of the things I am talking about are partisan issues. One of the beauties of city government is that partisanship really has no place--it is irrelevant. I honestly know very little about the political party affiliation of the other members of the council and it is sort of nice that way. We can address the issues and not worry too much about political party politics.
City Council Legislative Priorities:
Front page story in the SE this morning, here on the City Council's legislative priorities [i.e. instructions to the city lobbiest in SLC.] Some seem good ideas to me, some not, and some I don't know enough about [yet] to have a strong opinion one way or the other.
Good: insuring increased funding for transportation, including a downtown Ogden interchange on I-15, and prohibiting "predatory" lending by pay-day loan businesses. Not good: restoring some eminent domain authority to cities wanting to assemble land packages for private development. Not sure about: opposing elimination of the remainder of food tax because it could/would seriously damage the city's operating revenues; asking for subsidy to move the St. Anne's Center to a 12th Street location away from downtown.
I notice that so far, as the legislators descend on SLC in a feeding frenzy to spend out every last penny of the huge surplus this year, that nobody is proposing shunting a significant portion of it into a "rainy day fund." Many state legislatures establish these in good times because they understand that the good times do not always roll, that the business cycle is... well, cyclical... and that down the road when the economy dips, state revues will dip, creating a huge problem of maintaining funding for state services. Money banked [at interest] during boom times in a "rainy day fund" can then be drawn on when the ecnomy dips to maintain funding and public services at existing levels. Including schools. It eliminate the endless cycle of boom/bust in state revenues, or at leat mitigates it. All these legislators who like, on the campaign trail, to talk about fiscal responsibility, and about how the government should run its finances like every family should... paying its bills, not spending more than it has, etc.... somehow often leave saving for a rainy day out of the equation when it comes to spending state revenues in boom times.
Has anyone heard any of our legislative leaders, those paragons of fiscal responsibility, talk about saving some of the huge surplus against the eventual, and inevitable economic downturn and inevitable drop in state revenues? I haven't. I'd be happy to be corrected on this if I'm wrong about it.
Mr. Safsten
Why does my aunt and uncle who live in Reno have to come to Ogden to get their new land lord license for my grandmother's house in Ogden that they now rent out?
They are not on the internet and that seems to be the only option they have other than driving over 800 miles round trip to pay the city the licence fee.
It is my understanding that all business licences are the same. If you are not on the internet then you have to come in person to renew. Why can't the city just send them a renewal notice like every other city and county does?
Do you call this small business friendly? I certainly don't.
Dear Anonymous,
Any person would have access to the internet at any public library. There are other places that have the internet available to the public.
Most people are on the internet now. The city would get complaints about not being business-friendly if we did not have license renewal available on the internet.
The city made a decision to go with the future and use the internet. To have both methods (paper and internet) would be more expensive than just one or the other.
Even if you come into the city offices, you still must renew via the internet. The people at the office simply have you go to a computer in the office area to renew.
Your aunt and uncle would definately not have to come to Ogden to renew their business license. However, they may need to come for the Good Landlord classes. I think that is what you are referring to.
Mr Safsten,
Please give us your honest and candid assessment of the mayor's purging of our city of undesirables.
His latest plan to move St Ann's out by the BDO is simply a ploy to rid our streets of rabble and unwashed masses.
Do you or any other Council member have the guts to tell this little king to fall off his throne?
Outraged,
I believe a homeless person doesn't care where the basic services are provided, as long as they are accessible. Providing the very basics is most important, but having a facility provide ways to stop being homeless is even better.
If the Union Station is the anchor for our downtown and if 25th Street is the unique attraction to draw people to Ogden, why would we want to have a homeless shelter next to those facilities? Who is benefited by that? IF the basic services for the homeless are provided somewhere else, why not do that?
The only argument to me that makes sense to have the shelter downtown is because there are service providers downtown and because of the intermodal hub (transportation). I am interested how these services will be provided to those in the proposed homeless shelter on 12th Street. We will ask questions about this. Interestingly, we heard comment last night from a Mrs. Reza (sp?) who works with the homeless who gave support to the relocation, noting that those homeless she worked with came from areas in Ogden actually closer to 12th St. than downtown.
I am personally supportive of the change based on 2 premises. First, the existing shelter is too small, is rundown, and cannot provide the additional services needed by the homeless. Secondly, we have been told and have read in the newspaper that the St. Anne's Board would like a new location and they support the 12th Street location.
If the St. Anne's Board wants to move and if they support the 12th Street location---great. If the shelter is moved away from downtown attractions without sacrificing basic and even intermediate services to the homeless, so much the better.
Councilman Safsten:
Thanks for providing the info that the St. Anne's board favors the move. I don't think [could be wrong... working from memory] that information was in the news lately. And good [in my view] that you acknowledge that the presumed inappropriateness [aka lack of "fit"] between a downtown homeless shelter and planned downtown development is one of the factors involved. [The spokesman for the administration quoted in the paper implied the sole motive was altruism --- better services, etc.]
Given what you wrote above, I'd be curious to know [and this is not a question directed to you but more broadly] who is opposed to the move if the St. Anne's oversight board is not and if at least some of those who work with the homeless support the move on grounds that the new location would be a better one?
Thanks for replying here to questions others have raised. I'd be curious now to see the SE do something on the proposed move, something that spoke to/reflected the opinions of stakeholders on all sides of the issue.
Could you, Mr Safsten, tell us the issue of the SE in which the STE Anne's board is quoted as preferring the 12th St location? I missed that. Also, just where does Ms Reza work that most of her 'homeless' clients are nearer to 12th St....We surely do see alot of these folks walking around in the downtown area and near Ste Anne's. You haven't addressed by what means the folks who are NOT near 12th St will access a warm bed and meal. Thank you.
Outraged:
Several points. I imagine one [but only one] reason we see so many homeless in the downtown area is that that is where St. Anne's center is providing services to them. As to your question, where will the homeless not near 12th Street access services if the center is moved there, I suppose the reply would be "where do the homeless not downtown access services?"
If there is to be one major provider of homeless services [warm meal, beds, other assistance] in Ogden, and I haven't seen anyone suggesting more than one like St. Anne's, then no matter where you put it, homeless men "from" other parts of the city will have to travel to access its services.
I suppose one question we need to consider... and its sounds kind of silly on the the face of it... is this: where to Ogden's homeless "live" [cluster, hang out, spend time... use whatever term seems best to fit]. And how much of that is determined by the nearness of a center like St. Anne's and how much is determined by other factors? [I don't know the answers to those questions. Just questions now that we've started talking about this that have me wondering.]
Being as ignorant as I am about this topic, have to say I would probably tend to be swayed considerably by the opinions of the St. Anne's board and the opinions of other who work with/for Ogden's homeless community. Really is time, I think, for a good chewy SE piece on the proposed move, pros, cons, opinions of stakeholders in all this. I wonder too what Ogden writers who have discussed the homeless or I guess "drifter" population downtown might be another way to put it think about the proposed move. People like, for example, Charlie Trentelman. And a few others.
Do the 'homeless' people work by day?
When I lived in another state, the Employment Office had a group of men/women who were day laborers waiting for a job to do. Ranchers/ builders, others would come by early in the morning and hire.
Do some of these people work like that? I've noticed many inebriated persons staggering around and ALL seem to smoke. They're getting their money for those items soemwhere.
Dear Outraged,
I can only relate what Mrs. Reza (sp?) talked about at our Council Meeting last Tuesday night. We see her quite often and she is obviously very actively involved in Ogden based on the other comments she has made in the past.
And, I am sorry but I cannot tell you exactly which day the article was in the paper quoting the director of St. Anne's. We have been told that the leadership of St. Anne's is in support of the move. However, to get this from the horses mouth, the City Council has requested that the administration get a letter from the Board or Director of St. Anne's positively giving their support for the concept of the move to 12th St. That way we are not dealing in hearsay or relying on newspaper quotes.
Reading from the comments from others, I think it is important to think about the different "types" of homeless there are out there. There is a category of folks that choose to be homeless. They don't want to settle down. There is not much that can be done about this. There are the mentally ill, alchoholics, or drug addicts which have their own set of issues. There is the category of the single male as opposed to the single mother, or mother with children. There are drifters. There are people that simply need a temporary place to live for only a few days. The "Homeless Shelters" must deal with all of these categories. Hopefully, the efforts and programs in place will be able to house all but those that simply choose to be homeless. I hope and believe that is what the proposed 12th St. location will be able to provide better than the current building at St. Anne's.
There is a lead editorial in the SE this morning on the proposed move of the St. Anne's Center to 12th Street. It can be found here. It's pretty compelling, I think.
It raises an issue I hadn't thought of before: that there are now clustered in the general downtown area a variety of service providers used by the homeless [state health department, Rescue Mission, etc], and it asks how services to the homeless would or could be "improved" by moving the St. Anne's center away from the clustered services now provided near where the center already exists. Good questions, seems to me. It asks if the center is to be moved, if it wouldn't make a lot more sense to move it to another location within reasonable proximity [which means I guess easy walking distance] of the service cluster already in place. [And it takes the Administration to task for trying to tap dance around, and flat out deny, that getting the homeless, the winos, the panhandlers, the derelicts [pick your favorite] out of the hoped-for up-scale downtown development area.] As I said, interesting editorial, well worth a read.
Mr. Safsten's point about there being many different kinds of homeless, with a significant variety of problems and needs, is a good one as well. And he offers substantial corroboration for the fact that the St. Anne's management supports the move. Taken together, Mr. Safsten's information and the SE editorial suggest to me that the administration [and Council?] has not thought this out as much as the matter requires, that the planning has not been done as thoroughly as it ought to have been [see the SE editorial comments on the "hope" that moving the center will "draw" private medical services practices out to 12th Street to service the homeless, etc.]
Seems the planned move is just not ready for prime time. Not yet. More needs to be looked at, considered, explained and planned for, seems to me at this point.
Well, not to throw yet another log on this particular fire, the NY Times today has an article about a shopkeeper of a "high-end East side store" in NYC who is suing homeless folk who gather outside his shop because they are, he says, driving away business. Link here.
Perhaps these 'homeless' need to be rounded up...some evaluated for the mental hosp/services...others to the employment office specifically for 'day' jobs or the kind of work business owners/others may need some temp workers to fill.
I think some of these lost souls can be redeemed thru work, and something positive to DO...Welfare offices should have a dr there to give a physical for those coming in for their checks. Healthy???? 'get a job...this check is your last...so get busy'.
Too many cities make it easy for the 'homeless and mentally ill and just plain 'bums' to get off the freight train and stay while. When the services aren't fulfilling every void in their lives, many will move one.
I would hope Ste Anne's will have real help for these people: HOW to fill out an application, HOW to dress, How to conduct oneself in an interview....HOW to give an employer a day's work.
The YCC has donations of clothing for women to dress for success...perhaps Ste Anne's does now? Or Could! Also, no booze and smoking around there should be the first requirement.(KEEP the MONEY in their pockets)
I'm very familiar with the good work the Salvation Army does in Portland, OR.
They run a facility in which men live...taking care of their space...work sorting clothes, etc in the SA's clothing outlet (rather like Desert IND, but larger)...cook, janitorial, etc. Each resident is required to be in attendance at a short non-denominational religious service each morning....and on Sundays, each resident comes to the dining table with a shirt AND tie and clean pants.
The men can receive counseling and they are required to attend AA and/or NA daily.
I've seen lives changed.
Each of us needs a purpose in life...to feel and BE useful. I'd like to see as many people as are now wandering the streets without purpose be given the opportunity to participate in such a program.
Local dentists could donate their time and skills. Giving a nice smile to these men/women will help them as they pursue a different lifestyle. Barbershops and beauty shops could be solicited to help out. A community effort.
New comments are not allowed.