I check Texas newspapers frequently, and almost daily, there are new companies bring 100's and 1,000's of jobs into Texas cities. When will we ever hear about stuff like that in Oklahoma? Maybe not that large (multiple hundreds seems doable), but you get the point. Does this state try to get those large tech and finance jobs, or solely manufacturing or distribution jobs?

When Oklahoma has a quality education system from K through University - especially in the tech/computer sciences. When Oklahoma has no income tax. When Oklahoma has an international airport. When Oklahoma's legislature stops trying to force people to live a conservative lifestyle and pass legislation that is simply laughable. When Oklahoma becomes a place people want to move. Probably a few more things people can add.

Texas has 5X the population of Oklahoma; it is 2nd only to California. Dallas and Houston are now the 4th and 5th largest metro areas in the country, respectively.

The Boeing coup was a huge one for the OKC area, with thousands of jobs, even more related jobs, and all of them high-paying.

But it's true, until we properly fund education in this state, we will never attract many high-paying jobs from elsewhere.

Aside from that, the Oklahoma City area has seen a flux of aerospace companies expanding here & bringing hundreds of jobs in the last few years. Valkyrie Systems Aerospace & Kratos comes to mind as of late both set to add over 300 jobs. These companies are high paying & will grow over time. Aerospace companies are our best bet right now for high paying jobs in the metro, yea they build large tract industrial spaces & not shiny new towers, but they are good jobs.

Speaking of ED developments... It has begun: https://freepressokc.com/hamon-challenges-oklahoma-city-incentives-to-defense-contractor/?fbclid=IwAR3tW5NVt-w-5xwzstlHVpUt7fU-jl-8Tc5zaL58AMgRLDyWC_wNy6fR-28

Speaking of ED developments... It has begun: https://freepressokc.com/hamon-challenges-oklahoma-city-incentives-to-defense-contractor/?fbclid=IwAR3tW5NVt-w-5xwzstlHVpUt7fU-jl-8Tc5zaL58AMgRLDyWC_wNy6fR-28

That's very interesting. Hamon, Cooper and Nice all voted against this relatively small incentive. In the past, only Shadid would have spoken or voted against something like this.

Battle lines are being drawn. And if they can get one more progressive member on the council in the next round of elections, almost everything could change, especially the flood of tax incentives.

That's very interesting. Hamon, Cooper and Nice all voted against this relatively small incentive. In the past, only Shadid would have spoken or voted against something like this.

Battle lines are being drawn. And if they can get one more progressive member on the council in the next round of elections, almost everything could change, especially the flood of tax incentives.

Which would almost cripple this city's ability to lure good jobs here. It would have to be at the state level.

Yeah.. I'm very anti-incentives idealistically, but in reality I think we should be careful before we all but abandon them. I hope that their progressivism doesn't end up being a barrier to actual progress. I'm interested to see how this plays out.

I would like hear more than “we could use that for the homeless”, it’s not like other cities and states have snapped their fingers allocated money and fixed it. California spends enormous amounts of money and has gotten no where.

If they wanna start a fight against incentives fine, but they need to argue more than 6 inches deep.

The incentives brought the jobs here. That’s a fact. And you can’t say, they would have come here anyway. That’s a hypothetical, you can’t prove that as fact

Yeah.. I'm very anti-incentives idealistically, but in reality I think we should be careful before we all but abandon them. I hope that their progressivism doesn't end up being a barrier to actual progress. I'm interested to see how this plays out.

Most incentives, I am with you. Until the human capital here in OKC increases, we need these incentives to offer to companies. We need to hold them accountable, yes. But if they live up to their end of the bargain, it helps OKC in the long run.

Oh and $250,000 is still $250,000. Companies that have a tendency to view it as a “drop in the bucket” have a tendency to end up broke. The smart companies always watch the pennies, it’s probably why they asked for it in the first place. They want those drops.

An unbelievably naive, flippant, and arrogant statement.

The incentives brought the jobs here. That’s a fact. And you can’t say, they would have come here anyway. That’s a hypothetical, you can’t prove that as fact

You have this completely backward IMO.

Tons of companies relocate here or expand without incentives.

When you are spending billions of taxpayer money, the burden of proof falls on you and there is no way they can prove someone wouldn't have done X without the incentives.

You have this completely backward IMO.

Tons of companies relocate here or expand without incentives.

When you are spending billions of taxpayer money, the burden of proof falls on you and there is no way they can prove someone wouldn't have done X without the incentives.

They would have gone to one of the cities we were competing against that offered incentives.

But that amazon building in NYC is really freaking sweeeeeeet, oh wait. No it isn’t.

There’s a mountain of examples of cities not playing ball, and companies/orgs/ a certain NBA team/ two pro teams in Oakland saying bye.

Burden is on the anti incentive side. Not the pro side.

They would have gone to one of the cities we were competing against that offered incentives.

You have no way of knowing that. Can you name one example of that happening here?

And BTW, the company at the center of this particular debate is already operating in OKC.

The incentives are for them adding jobs.

And in that same program, there are tons of companies like Chesapeake who were also given incentives and have since let go thousands of employees and that money was not returned.

You have no way of knowing that. Can you name one example of that happening here?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-cities-battle-each-other-for-jobs-with-45-billion-in-incentives-1489675343

https://www.wsj.com/articles/meet-the-fixers-pitting-states-against-each-other-to-win-tax-breaks-for-new-factories-11558152005

It’s pretty common knowledge how the incentive games work.

Okc has likely lost out on some things because they didn’t offer enough, imagine if we just quit playing altogether.

Nobody is advocating that we quit altogether.

But many of these incentives should absolutely be challenged or even voted down.


And I can tell you that 100% of these incentive packages have been approved once they reach city council. That is not responsible oversight.

1. Vote too many down and that affects perception. Okc is not friendly and difficult to work with. Perception is often reality in life .

2. Booz Allen Hamilton will just say ok cool principled stand okc, well just grow somewhere else. Plano, Colorado Springs, etc they’ll play ball. We’ll expand that office instead.

Short of a national ban on this sort of nonsense, okc doesn’t have much of a choice.

I wonder how many other cities vote down. DFW knows the long-term benefits outweigh a short-term cost. Companies know they offer a lot, so look there first. OKC needs to step up their game.

1. Vote too many down and that affects perception. Okc is not friendly and difficult to work with. Perception is often reality in life .

2. Booz Allen Hamilton will just say ok cool principled stand okc, well just grow somewhere else. Plano, Colorado Springs, etc they’ll play ball. We’ll expand that office instead.

Short of a national ban on this sort of nonsense, okc doesn’t have much of a choice.

We haven't voted down ANY, EVER. I guess all incentives in all forms and all amounts are always good.

We need discretion, debate and understanding, not just a rubber stamp from city council and a populace being scared into supporting things they don't begin to understand.

How many fall apart before they even reach that point?

Stage center comes to mind, they were gonna ask for $110 bazillion dollars or whatever and it quickly became clear that wasn’t gonna fly.

The ones that get killed get killed in back rooms. And there’s a reason for that. You don’t want to generate a headline that says “okc denies incentive for X company”.

Call it whatever you want, lack of transparency, good ol boy system, but these fights are better handled privately than publicly.

Then again I’ve always favored results > process.

We haven't voted down ANY, EVER. I guess all incentives in all forms and all amounts are always good.

We need discretion, debate and understanding, not just a rubber stamp from city council and a populace being scared into supporting things they don't begin to understand.

Not all, but to lure businesses or expansions, yes.

Instead of incentives to lure out of state concerns, how about using that money to cultivate and grow existing small businesses. Many on the conservative side advocate for the small business man when it comes to voting down minimum wage increases, paid leave, etc. Use that money to incentive small business to expand. Those owners are already committed to the local economy.

^

Or invest a big chunk of that money into education, which is a guaranteed economic development tool.

Instead of incentives to lure out of state concerns, how about using that money to cultivate and grow existing small businesses. Many on the conservative side advocate for the small business man when it comes to voting down minimum wage increases, paid leave, etc. Use that money to incentive small business to expand. Those owners are already committed to the local economy.

One reason is the relatively high fail-rate of small businesses. I would love for OKC small businesses to grow. They have the ability to apply for these incentives, but you rarely hear about it (even Pete said OKC has neved voted these down). Even with incentives, I think more than half fail in 5 years. Some, yeah. But I think investing in proven winners is a more sure thing. Especially when we have a small amount of money to work with. I am not bashing anyone, especially small businesses in OKC.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesfinancecouncil/2018/10/25/what-percentage-of-small-businesses-fail-and-how-can-you-avoid-being-one-of-them/#57d875743b5f

^

Or invest a big chunk of that money into education, which is a guaranteed economic development tool.

How much do you think increasing education funding will help OKC in landing a bigger fish than what we have?

I check Texas newspapers frequently, and almost daily, there are new companies bring 100's and 1,000's of jobs into Texas cities. When will we ever hear about stuff like that in Oklahoma? Maybe not that large (multiple hundreds seems doable), but you get the point. Does this state try to get those large tech and finance jobs, or solely manufacturing or distribution jobs?

My reply is not directed at you but rather those who always harp on and compare us to bigger cities.

My view is I love OKC and who we are as a city. I don’t want to be those larger cities else I would move there. Why can’t we be happy being OKC? What is so wrong with our city we spend a lifetime trying to copy others? Almost all of the bigger cities have major problems. Tents all over from homeless and more traffic and a lot of debt from trying to outdo others.

I am all for growth but done smartly. We need to enjoy what we have and our own uniqueness too. Striving to always be something we are not means ignoring/improving on what we have.

Cities like Dallas are like a Merry go round, and that massive growth can’t/won’t last forever. They have added mega costs to support the growth but as always the costs linger when the growth slows down. Its close to a ponzi scheme where they keep spending to support growth but once the Merry go round stops their costs don’t. Thats when big problems set in either much higher taxes or reduced/bad services or both. NY and LA/Cali are seeing outflux now.

I don’t want to be Dallas and we seem to spend a lot of time here trying to “catch up”. MAPS 1/2/3 did wonders and now we need to move ahead smartly. We do have business moving here and even started here. Unemployment is low. Cost of living is low. Quality of life is good. Not being snarky but who cares about Dallas its like being married and always wanting your neighbors wife while the one you have is great.

Does Enid want to always be OKC? Likely no because they have things their residents love. Does Okarche wanna be Enid? Likely no. And so on.

Why can’t we like who and where we are? Too fast of growth causes rash spending decisions and lots of waste lost in the Merry go round. Eventually the piper has to be paid.

The charm of being this close to Dallas is one can visit and not have to deal day to day with their problems. And I mean that Dallas residents don’t view them as problems. Same as Enid folks visiting OKC they likely enjoy coming yet likely enjoy going back to their way of life afterwards too.

The cities growing too fast will crash harder in next recession too.

My reply is not directed at you but rather those who always harp on and compare us to bigger cities.

My view is I love OKC and who we are as a city. I don’t want to be those larger cities else I would move there. Why can’t we be happy being OKC? What is so wrong with our city we spend a lifetime trying to copy others? Almost all of the bigger cities have major problems. Tents all over from homeless and more traffic and a lot of debt from trying to outdo others.

I am all for growth but done smartly. We need to enjoy what we have and our own uniqueness too. Striving to always be something we are not means ignoring/improving on what we have.

Cities like Dallas are like a Merry go round, and that massive growth can’t/won’t last forever. They have added mega costs to support the growth but as always the costs linger when the growth slows down. Its close to a ponzi scheme where they keep spending to support growth but once the Merry go round stops their costs don’t. Thats when big problems set in either much higher taxes or reduced/bad services or both. NY and LA/Cali are seeing outflux now.

I don’t want to be Dallas and we seem to spend a lot of time here trying to “catch up”. MAPS 1/2/3 did wonders and now we need to move ahead smartly. We do have business moving here and even started here. Unemployment is low. Cost of living is low. Quality of life is good. Not being snarky but who cares about Dallas its like being married and always wanting your neighbors wife while the one you have is great.

Does Enid want to always be OKC? Likely no because they have things their residents love. Does Okarche wanna be Enid? Likely no. And so on.

Why can’t we like who and where we are? Too fast of growth causes rash spending decisions and lots of waste lost in the Merry go round. Eventually the piper has to be paid.

The charm of being this close to Dallas is one can visit and not have to deal day to day with their problems. And I mean that Dallas residents don’t view them as problems. Same as Enid folks visiting OKC they likely enjoy coming yet likely enjoy going back to their way of life afterwards too.

The cities growing too fast will crash harder in next recession too.

I am one of those who always harp on OKCs lack of diversity in industry. Oklahoma does not seem to COMPETE for higher paying more stable industries. This kind of attitude is what keeps Oklahoma at the bottom of almost every economic category and stifles growth and prosperity. The notion that any of us least of all me thinks OKC can or will be Dallas is preposterous and not even in the realm of possibility, however, as was mentioned why can't this State use Dallas' success to bolster ours? why can't OKC be the backoffice location for those large Corporations that all DFW home. I agree with Jonny D

How much do you think increasing education funding will help OKC in landing a bigger fish than what we have?

A ton.

Look at Texas and the way they fund their public schools and universities.

Our economies should be closely aligned, due to oil and gas and many other factors. Yet, they are kicking our arses in every conceivable way, WITHOUT providing more economic incentives.


If you look where there has great growth, you will find great universities. Oklahoma does not have one, let alone many.

A ton.

Look at Texas and the way they fund their public schools and universities.

Our economies should be closely aligned, due to oil and gas and many other factors. Yet, they are kicking our arses in every conceivable way, WITHOUT providing more economic incentives.


If you look where there has great growth, you will find great universities. Oklahoma does not have one, let alone many.

OK and Texas are not near each other in terms of oil and gas. That's like saying the earth and Mars are close to each other. But yeah, education needs to be funded better. Thank goodness we are saving for the future....

A ton.

Look at Texas and the way they fund their public schools and universities.

Our economies should be closely aligned, due to oil and gas and many other factors. Yet, they are kicking our arses in every conceivable way, WITHOUT providing more economic incentives.


If you look where there has great growth, you will find great universities. Oklahoma does not have one, let alone many.

+1 NC has great growth and great Universities UNC, NCSU, Duke all highly ranked Nationally

OK and Texas are not near each other in terms of oil and gas. That's like saying the earth and Mars are close to each other. But yeah, education needs to be funded better. Thank goodness we are saving for the future....

Per capita, Oklahoma produces as much O&G as Texas.

You have this completely backward IMO.

Tons of companies relocate here or expand without incentives.

When you are spending billions of taxpayer money, the burden of proof falls on you and there is no way they can prove someone wouldn't have done X without the incentives.

If that were the case, Pete, then why does virtually every other sizeable city and state offer economic incentives to draw business? Texas and Texas cities offer incentives like M & M's and do so successfully - read: wins business from Oklahoma. Its undeniable. To do so is like being a climate denier or a flat earther. In a perfect world , there would be none but the world is far from perfect.

If that were the case, Pete, then why does virtually every other sizeable city and state offer economic incentives to draw business? Texas and Texas cities offer incentives like M & M's and do so successfully - read: wins business from Oklahoma. Its undeniable. To do so is like being a climate denier or a flat earther. In a perfect world , there would be none but the world is far from perfect.

Nobody is saying that we shouldn't offer them.

Grapevine Tx gave the Fleming corp of OKC $ 9 million dollars to relocate their HQ to Tx. Fleming did, and within a couple years they folder shop. Grapevine got zero in long time return. It doesn't always work giving out lump sums.

Incentives are an investment and investments are never a sure thing. You have to do your research. Note, the Globe Life move turned out pretty well for DFW.

in Texas, they pay incentives to, lol.

https://www.bizjournals.com/sanantonio/news/2019/04/25/booz-allen-hamilton-plans-to-expand-in-sa-adding.html

"The estimated economic development incentive fund grant from the city for the company is expected to be $250,000, according to the city’s meeting agenda."

A ton.

Look at Texas and the way they fund their public schools and universities.

Our economies should be closely aligned, due to oil and gas and many other factors. Yet, they are kicking our arses in every conceivable way, WITHOUT providing more economic incentives.


If you look where there has great growth, you will find great universities. Oklahoma does not have one, let alone many.

Half the students that attend OU are from Texas, the problem is, when they graduate, most of them move back to Texas & don't stay in Oklahoma.

Half the students that attend OU are from Texas, the problem is, when they graduate, most of them move back to Texas & don't stay in Oklahoma.

The question is WHY NOT? JOBS

^

Or invest a big chunk of that money into education, which is a guaranteed economic development tool.


I'll vote for investing billions on education in OK when it is accompanied by real reform. 500+ school districts is inefficient on many levels. To retain local control, mandate each county with a population of less than 100,000 have only one school district. Let them decide how to divide up their portion of the funding formula.

Too many separate colleges. Rather than have each as a separate entity, divide up the state into 4 regions (excluding the OKC and Tulsa metro areas). Let each region decide which campuses to have and which to close.

There are so many areas that can be reformed to save real money. Put the savings into teacher salaries. Don't let districts divert those funds into something else and call it "as good as an increase".

Just a few suggestions

I'll vote for investing billions on education in OK when it is accompanied by real reform. 500+ school districts is inefficient on many levels. To retain local control, mandate each county with a population of less than 100,000 have only one school district. Let them decide how to divide up their portion of the funding formula.

Too many separate colleges. Rather than have each as a separate entity, divide up the state into 4 regions (excluding the OKC and Tulsa metro areas). Let each region decide which campuses to have and which to close.

There are so many areas that can be reformed to save real money. Put the savings into teacher salaries. Don't let districts divert those funds into something else and call it "as good as an increase".

Just a few suggestions
I agree. The number of school districts in Oklahoma is absurd and there needs to be real consolidation. But I also know the superintendents don't want to give up their salaries and towns don't want to lose their identities as the schools are basically all that some of these places have left. However, it's unsustainable and needs to be addressed. And there are way too many universities in this state. Support OU and OSU fully and then we can worry about Directional State. Perhaps they can become branch campuses with shared administrative services? Or maybe they're just not sustainable either. It will be painful, but there needs to be some real reform in this area.

Investing in higher education is a bigger priority IMO and all we do is cut, cut, cut.

Investing in higher education is a bigger priority IMO and all we do is cut, cut, cut.

Until this year, you are right. They added more funds for it this year. But elementary and secondary ed keep throwing too big of a fit about any money going anywhere but to them (though they do need more funding, as well).

Reading the Journal Record version makes it sound like JoBeth was against the one for Booz Allen because the Industrial Military Complex leads to homelessness. No issue with almost the same amount of incentive for Heartland Payments. I know more money could be used for the homeless but let's not throw a $116M economic impact under the bus for posturing. Very disappointed with the new members vote on this.

I'm not a homeless or economic impact specialist, a Republican, a Democrat or a harmonica player - Just a normal person who hates to see our city miss out on what it deserves for the sake of making a point. I know a lot of people are homeless for no fault of their own, some because they made really poor decisions a few times in a row. - They all need help and deserve compassion and you know what won't fix any of that? Less high, tax paying jobs. If the council wants to vote for more homeless resources take it out of lifestyle budgets, not livelihoods.


OKLAHOMA CITY – The city’s business incentives policy needs to be reexamined, JoBeth Hamon told her City Council colleagues Tuesday.

Hamon ultimately voted against paying $250,000 to Booz Allen Hamilton Inc. for the creation of 130 new jobs downtown, as did council members James Cooper and Nikki Nice. The vote passed 6-3.

BAH is an international management and technology consulting company with diverse services in business, government and military sectors. The Virginia-based company has about 25,300 employees worldwide, of whom 90 work in Oklahoma City.

The Greater Oklahoma City Chamber has been working with City Hall officials for more than a year to finalize the incentive package in exchange for local office expansion. According to City Manager Craig Freeman’s staff, the total estimated economic impact of the project is $116.7 million over the first seven years of operation, a figure that includes BAH capital investment, wages, state and local taxes. The estimated local sales tax and property tax revenue is expected to be $509,414 over the first five years of operation.

BAH told officials the company is expecting the average annual wages of the new jobs to be $85,000 in the first year. The overall payroll boost of $1.5 million in Oklahoma City will ramp up to $11 million after six years.

However, supporting the billion-dollar corporate giant sends the wrong message, Hamon said.

“Coming from a social services background, whenever I think about economic impact, I tend to think beyond a basic spreadsheet,” she said, referring to her experience as an education coordinator at Mental Health Association Oklahoma. “Booz Allen Hamilton is a military contractor and is one of five military intelligence contractors that hold 80 percent of our private contract work with the federal government.”

Although efficiencies of scale in company expansion could be beneficial to government expenditures, she said, the military complex leaves a lot of veterans with life-changing injuries and facing homelessness. When the city financially supports such a company, she said, “I think we’re losing in the long term.”

None of the other council members spoke to the issue before the vote.

In a related City Council agenda item, Heartland Payments Systems LLC was approved for $1 million in incentives for the creation of 345 jobs over five years. The issue passed unanimously 9-0.

Geeze... seriously? I mean, be opposed to incentives in general. Sure. I might agree or disagree with that stance, but at least it makes sense. This trying to build a moral high ground out of opposing the military industrial complex, in Oklahoma? That's a major part of our economy. And it's a lot of nose cutting.

Geeze... seriously? I mean, be opposed to incentives in general. Sure. I might agree or disagree with that stance, but at least it makes sense. This trying to build a moral high ground out of opposing the military industrial complex, in Oklahoma? That's a major part of our economy. And it's a lot of nose cutting.

I'm guessing part of her reasoning is also that BAH is a *huge* company, already has 90 jobs here, and doesn't need the incentives and those jobs might have been created anyway (but then voting for the exact same thing for Heartland that's 4 times as much of an incentive is hypocritical). Having said that, $250K is pretty small change compared to some of the other incentives we've given out (and lost the gamble on). So yeah, she needs to get things straight and figure out a consistent philosophy for how she thinks about incentives.

Lost in all of this is the $1M to Heartland that was also approved.

They are already well under construction on their building so this is a prime example of city council's approval being a foregone conclusion even though it didn't even appear on their docket until last Friday. So, how are they providing any meaningful oversight over billions of tax dollars being spent in the name of economic development?

I don't see any harm in a protest vote when they know it is going to pass anyway. Politicians have been doing it forever. I'm thinking JoBeth and the others are pretty savvy.

Lost in all of this is the $1M to Heartland that was also approved.

They are already well under construction on their building so this is a prime example of city council's approval being a foregone conclusion even though it didn't even appear on their docket until last Friday. So, how are they providing any meaningful oversight over billions of tax dollars being spent in the name of economic development?

Billions is a VERY strong number. OKC barely has a billion dollar budget, and maybe $10-$20 million tops in incentives for job creation is spent per year. Billions isn't spent on anything in this city. In total, yes. In part, no.

There will be a billion dispensed in just TIF.

I'm not talking per year; in total.

There will be a billion dispensed in just TIF.

I'm not talking per year; in total.

Don't have a dog in this fight, but would like to understand this last point. My understanding of TIFs are pretty limited, but I didn't think TIF funds were a city budget line item where the city writes actual checks for the funds. I thought the idea was diverting future increased tax revenue as a result of development (ideally development that may not occur without the TIF). Do you think TIFs should be accounted for and treated the same way as "dispensing" actual money from the city bank account?

Lost in all of this is the $1M to Heartland that was also approved.

They are already well under construction on their building so this is a prime example of city council's approval being a foregone conclusion even though it didn't even appear on their docket until last Friday. So, how are they providing any meaningful oversight over billions of tax dollars being spent in the name of economic development?

because the council has known about and been informed about that incentive for a long long time .. and in fact already approved this amount at council in sept 2018 before construction started ..

Don't have a dog in this fight, but would like to understand this last point. My understanding of TIFs are pretty limited, but I didn't think TIF funds were a city budget line item where the city writes actual checks for the funds. I thought the idea was diverting future increased tax revenue as a result of development (ideally development that may not occur without the TIF). Do you think TIFs should be accounted for and treated the same way as "dispensing" actual money from the city bank account?

it works like MAPS. They collect the tax money in a separate fund then there has to be approved projects, budgets, and ultimately city council has final say to approval of allocating the funds.

It's "actual" money in the same way as any other tax revenue.

because the council has known about and been informed about that incentive for a long long time .. and in fact already approved this amount at council in sept 2018 before construction started ..

Half the city council has changed since then and it couldn't have been completely done in September otherwise they wouldn't have voted on it yesterday.

Half the city council has changed since then and it couldn't have been completely done in September otherwise they wouldn't have voted on it yesterday.

there are always multi votes before actual payment is given ..

but the 1,00,000 dollars allocation was approved on sept 11, 2018 before they started construction ..

not approving it yesterday would absolutly be in bad faith and basicly destroy any ability for the city to make any deals in the future ..

^

Then that would also explain why JoBeth the others didn't vote against that allocation while making an issue of the $250K to Booz Allen.

And it also seems to signal that they will provide much more scrutiny -- necessary, IMO -- on the new economic development incentives put in front of them.

^

Then that would also explain why JoBeth the others didn't vote against that allocation while making an issue of the $250K to Booz Allen.

And it also seems to signal that the will provide much more scrutiny -- necessary, IMO -- on the new economic development incentives put in front of them.

that seems fair .. and will be an insteresting thing to follow going forward ..

I recently came across an interesting article that describes the importance of the beauty of a city with its ability to attract business development.


A study finds that the more beautiful a city is, the more successful it is at attracting jobs and new residents, including highly educated and affluent ones.

https://www.citylab.com/life/2019/05/beautiful-cities-economic-growth-data-beauty-premium/589480/

it works like MAPS. They collect the tax money in a separate fund then there has to be approved projects, budgets, and ultimately city council has final say to approval of allocating the funds.

It's "actual" money in the same way as any other tax revenue.

I see. Very helpful information. Thank you.

^

Then that would also explain why JoBeth the others didn't vote against that allocation while making an issue of the $250K to Booz Allen.

And it also seems to signal that they will provide much more scrutiny -- necessary, IMO -- on the new economic development incentives put in front of them.

That seems to be a smart thing to do if it happens. A study should be done spanning say the last 5-8 years on how much was awarded to each company/entity, what the conditions of the incentive were, what companies achieved those qualifying bench marks and what was done to recoup the funds from companies that failed to achieve those marks. Additionally a breakdown on what the cost per job was and how much was lost by existing competing businesses in profits and lost tax revenues by the existing business. I am generally against these incentives as they warp the free market. If a company can not make a profit w/o the incentives, what is the justification in thinking the company will be viable when the incentives disappear. The government should not be picking winners and losers with tax monies to for profit companies. If BASS PRO would not locate here with out the kick backs, maybe they are not viable with ACADEMY essentially providing the same thing without the tax payer juice.