You are here: Home / Archives for papatodd

Arizona – the New California?

December 9, 2009 By 2 Comments

Following the lead from our neighbors to the west, cash-strapped Arizona might do that California IOU thing.

State and university employees could wind up with IOUs in their pay envelopes instead of checks in February if the planned sale of state buildings hits a snag, state Treasurer Dean Martin warned Monday.

And that could leave workers with a piece of paper that won’t help them buy food for their families, pay the mortgage or heat their homes.

Martin told legislators that by the end of January the state will have borrowed about $1.1 billion to pay its bills. The total amount Martin has available, both internally and from Bank of America, is $1.2 billion.

“Should that not happen, should there be a hiccup, a sneeze, something, anything gets lost in the mail, we will not be able to make the February school payment,” Martin said. “There’s just not enough cash. The credit cards are maxed out, you’re at your limit.”

That leaves him only one legal option for paying those to whom the state owes money: IOUs.

“They’ll get a note saying, ‘We’ll give you the money on this date,’ up to 90 days” in the future.

Whatiya think, when it’s time to pay my taxes next April 15th, can I just send in an IOU?  Or my mortgage payment? Or my property taxes?  As always, one set of rules for politicians, another set of rules for you and me.

via eastvalleytribune.com.

Filed Under: State Budget, State Economy, State Government

City Severance Packages Cost More than $120,000

November 28, 2009 By 5 Comments

I want to be a city manager.  I know nothing about the job or what it entails.  And who cares?  All I know is want to have get one of these sweet severance packages that city mangers receive when they get kicked to the curb. Like this one.

Firing City Manager John Little may have brought some political peace to Scottsdale City Hall, but terminating his contract came with a price. Little’s employment contract granted him a severance package worth six months of his total compensation, which included wages, vacation time and other benefits. The cost of Little’s severance comes to more than $120,000.

Here is the breakdown of  Big John Little’s package:

  • Six months’ wages: $95,004
  • Six months’ vacation accrual payoff: $10,962
  • Six months’ auto allowance: $3,600
  • Six months’ deferred compensation: $11,400.48
  • Six months’ medical, dental and life insurance coverage: $2,411.64
  • TOTAL $123,378.12

Are you PO’d yet?  No?  the story gets better.

It is cheaper than what it cost when then-City Manager Jan Dolan left in early 2008. Dolan received $160,000 as part of her voluntary separation agreement. Little’s separation is not the first time this year the city paid to get rid of a charter officer. It cost Scottsdale $105,200 to pay off former City Attorney Deborah Robberson’s contract.

Down the road in Tucson, we have a similar story to tell.  When Tucson’s City Council fired city manager Mike Hein last year, he too received a six month severance package.

The City Council voted 4-3 this afternoon to remove City Manager Mike Hein from office.  The vote came after an approximately 20-minute, closed-door meeting to conduct his annual performance evaluation.  The motion was approved with no public discussion.  Hein, who was paid more than $200,000 annually, left the meeting immediately following the vote saying he had no comment. His employment contract guarantees him six months severance pay.

Still not mad?  OK try this out.  Time to pour salt in the wound.  They hired this guy back!

Former Tucson City Manager Mike Hein has been hired to head up the county’s Office of Emergency Management and Homeland Security.

Hein will make $110,000 a year in the new position.

Hein, Tucson’s city manager since April 2005, lost the job in April when the City Council voted 4-3 to fire him. He received six months’ severance pay. He was arrested in September in Oro Valley on a charge of DUI.

So I want to be a city manager.  It obviously does not matter to anyone in the state how you perform.  They are going to reward you handsomely, no matter what.  Nice work if you can get it.

Filed Under: City Government, State Budget

Tucson loses control of Rio Nuevo project

November 24, 2009 By 2 Comments

Acting like any good parent, The State of Arizona has taken away the Tucson City Council’s favorite toy, the Rio Nuevo Project.  After years of acting like spoiled brats [and blowing millions of dollars in the process] the City Council now puts the fate of Tucson into the hands of others.  Considering the track record of the Tucson City Council, this might actually be a good thing.

Control of Tucson’s downtown redevelopment project was taken away from the City Council with the stroke of the governor’s pen Monday.

The legislative fix to Rio Nuevo’s long-standing financial struggles was part of the budget package that lawmakers approved to nibble away at the looming $2 billion deficit.

A nine-member board, appointed by the governor, the House speaker and the president of the Senate, will now control the project’s purse strings. Of those members, only five must be local residents.

The Legislature approved a similar slap at Tucson leadership earlier this year, but it was vetoed because of gubernatorial concerns about non-Rio-Nuevo parts of the budget package. This time around, it passed with overwhelming support on a vote of 51-4 in the House and 23-4 in the Senate.

Now that the City Council has gotten their long overdue spanking, [not only here, but also with the recent and extremely close election results],  let us all see if they have learned their lesson and will now start to act in a more “responsible manner”.  Any betters out there?

via azstarnet.

Filed Under: City Government, Economic Development, State Government

Arizona Mayors Play the Shell Game

November 18, 2009 By 27 Comments

I saw this article this AM and for just one brief moment I was almost giddy.  Or as Chris Matthews puts it, I had a tingle go up my leg”.  But then I read the whole thing and came crashing back to earth.

Four southeast Valley mayors challenged the Legislature on Tuesday to overhaul Arizona’s tax system and think more creatively about how to solve the state’s monumental budget problems.

In the process, they warned lawmakers not to pass down those problems to cities and towns, which have been largely successful in coping with their own fiscal issues.

Read the last paragraph one more time.  We will come back to it again.  The story continues.

Chandler, Gilbert, Mesa and Tempe have coped with drops in sales taxes and development revenue. The mayors said local budget tweaks won’t solve the underlying problem of an unstable state tax system.

“Most of us . . . are funded by sales tax to a large degree,” said Tempe Mayor Hugh Hallman. “And that is a very volatile sector. . . . It’s not going to get better, because the cities don’t have the opportunity to change that model. It’s going to have to be done at the state level.”

Hallman said Arizona should rely less on sales taxes and more on property taxes.

And right there is the money line.  These four mayors “new way od thinking”  is to shift the burden from our sales tax dollars to our property tax dollars.  Pardon me sirs, but isn’t that just a sideways move?  You are really just moving the problem out of my left pocket and putting it in my right pocket.  The big Red Flag here; while sales taxes are based upon a definitive transaction, property taxes are based upon an “arbitrary” number.  I know that there are “formulas” to follow, blah blah blah.  With a stroke of the pen, sorry with the click of a mouse, our property taxes can go up, based upon nothing but a finger in the wind appraisal of all of our properties.  Either way the tax burden still ends up in my mailbox, yours too.

Mesa Mayor Scott Smith said that when his city faced a $61 million budget gap last fall, officials decided it wouldn’t work just to cut jobs without overhauling operations.  “Cutting is a temporary solution, and what we’re looking for is more of a long-term solution, which means you have to change the way you do business,” he said.

Remember earlier in the post when I referenced that money line, “They warned lawmakers not to pass down those problems to cities and towns”?  Rather than come up with some actual new creative ideas, these four mayors are using the same old tired ideas, just re-wrapped for the holidays.  I have already played “three card monty” and I know how it turns out everytime.   Perhaps our elected officials could and should be looking to others for “new ideas”.  heck, you don’t even need new ideas.  Look to states that are prospering in this economy.  Again I reference Texas. No state income tax, low unemployment, a growing economy and they are in the black.  Remember when you where in school?  Didn’t you always try and sit next to the smart kid so you could copy off of him? Maybe we should send our elected officials on a field trip.  They certainly aren’t learning anything sitting here at home.  Back to the drawing board, Mr. Mayor[s].

via AZCentral.

Filed Under: City Government, State Budget, State Economy, State Government, Taxation

Giffords Claims Health Bill Will Cost Nothing

November 10, 2009 By 1 Comment

Gabby Giffords, with all the rest of the Arizona Democrats, marched lock-step with Nancy Pelosi in passing the House version of the government take-over of health care.  In her newsletter she actually claims that the health care bill will not add to the deficit.

Click to EnlargeClick to Enlarge

Now that is really interesting as the CBO [Central Budget Office] has released a report stating that the health care bill will add $1.055 TRILLION to the deficit.

From Nasdaq.

WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- The Congressional Budget Office said Thursday a U.S. House health-care system re-write would extend health insurance to 96% of the nonelderly U.S. population by 2019, and spend $1.055 trillion to do so.

Penalties imposed on individuals who did not purchase insurance, and employers who did not offer coverage to their workers, would raise $161 billion over that time-frame. That brings the net cost of the bill to $894 billion through 2019, CBO said.

House Democrats have seized on that net cost figure to claim that their bill is below President Barack Obama’s upper limit which he set for health-care legislation of $900 billion.

Maybe you could call her office and ask her to explain that one.

Try her DC office at 202-225-2542.  Last time I called, they hung up on me, but I’m sure you’ll have better luck.

Filed Under: Health Care

Parents More Concerned with Money Than Education

November 8, 2009 By 10 Comments

Arizona voters took to the polls on Tuesday and not only said “No” but a resounding “Hell No” to bonds on any given range of topic.  Alex Bloom from AZCentral, in this article postulates that the resounding NO on school funding had to do with the state  of the economy.

The economy apparently was on voters’ minds Tuesday when they walked into Valley voting booths to address school-district spending through bonds and budget overrides.

Valley voters supported only 20 of the 36 school-district bonds and budget overrides on the ballot in Maricopa County, according to unofficial results. That was down considerably from last year, when voters supported 28 of 31 budget measures. Voters’ action comes amid a period of deep cuts to state education spending because of the state budget crisis.

Experts say the economic downturn probably made voters think twice about approving many budget overrides, which allow school districts to maintain or increase property-tax levels.

Alex Bloom’s commentary totally ignores the fact that the Arizona school system has failed and continues to fail to educate our children.

Matthew Ladner from the Goldwater Institute:

The news is not good. Arizona has stalled out with bad scores.

With a score nine points below the national average, Arizona 4th graders know almost a grade level less math than the average American student. Florida and Texas–states with similar levels of spending and student demographics–both scored above the national average.

With marked predictability, the state-run media lays the blame at the feet of the people who are most affected by ill-run policy, rather than hold accountable those who are actually responsible for this dismal performance.

Mr Ladner continues:

Public school apologists can recite their litany on spending and learned helplessness, but don’t expect any results, they imply, until Arizona has the combination of old money, hedge fund billionaires and high income tax rates of Connecticut.

Despite a reform push during the 1990s, the fact is that on the whole Arizona is a K-12 backwater and will remain so until it decides to get serious about reform. Since the 1990s, Arizona’s AIMS has been dummied down, and the positive impact of choice programs have been drowned by enrollment growth. Rome continues to burn, we continue to fiddle.

In a recent post, I pointed out that “industry experts” [like Justin Olson, senior research analyst at the Arizona Tax Research Association and the Peoria Unified, Phoenix Union High and Dysart Unified district officials] are always “shocked, stunned and surprised” when things don’t turn out as they see them through their rose-colored glasses.

The voters here in the great state of Arizona are no longer buying the same tired message of “We are not spending enough on education”.  What we are seeing is that the monies we are spending on educating our children is not delivering anything close to acceptable results. See for yourself here how Arizona ranks at the very bottom in national educational ranking.

Mr Bloom’s theory that we are more concerned with the economy than our children’s education affronts all concerned parents sensibilities.  I can easily do without my Starbucks Venti, but you had better be educating my children well enough to be able to compete in the 21st century global economy.

The Arizona school systems, like Alex Bloom, both get an “F

Filed Under: Economics, Education, State Economy

Lindsey Graham Scolds Conservatives

November 6, 2009 By 24 Comments

From papatodd:

Mr Kumbiya himself, Lindsey Grahamensty, with his southern panties in a bunch, was out today, again refusing to listen to the heartbeat of the American people.  Oblivious to the fact the Doug Hoffman came from total obscurity to almost winning in NY23, the uber-moderate senator scolded conservatives for being, well, conservative.

From the Politico;  The morning after Republicans lost an upstate New York House seat, Sen. Lindsey Graham R-S.C. warned that conservative activists will bring destruction to the Republican Party if they drive out moderate candidates across the country.“To those people who are pursuing purity, you’ll become a club not a party,” Graham told POLITICO in the Capitol Wednesday. “Those people who are trying to embrace conservatism in a thoughtful way that fits the region and the state and the district are going to do well. Conservatism is an asset. Blind ideology is not.”

The senator gets it right on one point;  Conservatism is an asset.  But in the very next sentence, he gets is totally wrong with his comment referring to blind ideology. Senator Graham, no one is blinded here.  If anything, it is the exact opposite.  The American people have finally opened their eyes and are now fully cognisant to the fact that you and the rest of your moderate cronies are the ones responsible for the the GOP’s loss of the White House, the Senate and the House of Representatives.

Your moderate ideology is leading to the destruction of the American way of life. Your moderate agenda is permitting the continued attack on the free enterprise system.  Your unwillingness to listen to these now-outspoken Americans and to the message they send on election day is the reason voters passed on DeDe after you and the GOP gave almost $1 million to her campaign.

Blind ideology? Let us look at what your blind ideology has achieved.

Rush gives us the Top Ten Republican Moderate Moments.

  • Number ten: Newt Gingrich does a PSA on global warming with Nancy Pelosi in 2008.
  • Number nine: Bush-Quayle ‘92.
  • Number eight: Dole-Kemp ‘96.
  • Number seven : Ford-Dole ‘76.
  • Number six: Jumpin’ Jim Jeffords jumps from the Republican Party.
  • Number five: Arlen Specter switches parties.
  • Number four: Richard Nixon resigns in disgrace.
  • Number three: Dede Scozzafava endorses the Democrat, Owens, in New York-23.
  • Number two: The McCain campaign of 2008.
  • The number one top ten moderate moment in Republican history: Colin Powell endorsing Barack Obama, the Democrat, for president in 2008!

You tell me who’s blind, senator! The American people, we love our sports; baseball, football, basketball and the rest. And we do know how to keep score.  We are looking at the political scoreboard and see that you continue to chalk up loss after loss after loss. When our favorite sports team continues to put up a losing season, the front office does not get mad and yell at the players [well, maybe T.O.].  No, the front office looks at the coaching staff and replaces the staff.  And that is exactly what the American people are doing all across America right now.

Now I ask you Senator, just who is blind here?

Filed Under: Campaigns & Elections, Political Parties

Some Call it California’s Cash Advance

November 4, 2009 By 7 Comments

Gird your wallets friends.  The desperate politicians are at it again, this time with more “creative financing” for the state of California.  And once again this “creative financing” is a direct hit at your take home pay.

Spotlight California;

Effective today, the amount of state income taxes withheld from California workers’ paychecks will increase 10 percent.

That might sound like a tax increase, but state officials insist that’s not the case.

The lawmakers say this isn’t a tax increase?  Really?  OK, how about calling it a compulsory interest-free loan from taxpayers to the state?

The idea is to withhold more from your paycheck now, so that come tax time next year, the refund the state owes you will be less.  Uh-huh. The extra withholding tax will reduce Californians’ take-home pay by about $1.7 billion for the year.  Now California is already struggling.  Every sector is down, housing, retail, manufacturing.  Income tax rates went up last year by 0.25%, bringing the top rate to 10.55%, but receipts are already coming in $1 billion below projections, according to the state controller.  So someone please explain to me how this is going to help the people of California and at the same time shore up its growing hole of debt.

The spin continues;

Brenda Voet, spokeswoman for the state Franchise Tax Board. “We’re trying to warn people to go to their personnel and human resources departments for 2010 to make sure they have the proper amount of tax withheld and make any adjustments they need to make. We don’t want people to be surprised by anything.”

This is the same state that has been issuing IOU’s to pay their state contractors, so trust me Brenda,  we are no longer surprised by anything that happens in the “Golden State”. To the rest of the you, pay attention.  If you don’t, your own state officials might get “creative” with your paycheck too.

Filed Under: Economics, State Budget, State Economy, Taxation

Karin Uhlich Slanders Opponents

October 28, 2009 By 29 Comments

With the Tucson City council elections just days away, Karin Uhlich is showing her true feeling towards her constituents.  Rather than standing on the issues and her own voting record, she has now laid the smack-down by calling those who oppose her,  “Tea baggers”.  Not unexpected from the state-run media, but somewhat shocking from my local “enlightened” council-gal.

Right from her website:

Click to Enlarge

Click to Enlarge

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Three Times a Charm for GM

October 28, 2009 By Leave a Comment

President Obama’s administration is SO good at resolving our economic calamities that they are now going to TRIPLE-DOWN on GMAC.  According to the LA Times, GM is simply too big to fail, which makes perfect sense as long as Barack continues to throw billions down the rat hole.  Even though the president has told us that he has brought us back from the brink in May, in September, and October, apparently General Motor’s financial division did not get that memo.

A Treasury Department spokesman confirmed that it was in talks with GMAC about a third helping of aid. The government already owns a 35 percent stake in GMAC after providing $12.5 billion to the lender. It also owns a majority-stake in GM and a smaller stake in Chrysler.

Kirk Ludtke, a senior vice president of CRT Capital Group LLC in Stamford, Conn., who follows GMAC, said the automakers can’t succeed without GMAC.  “We continue to believe that a viable GMAC is critical to the success of GM and Chrysler,” Ludtke said.  [This in spite of the fact that GMAC posted a wider second-quarter loss of $3.9 billion].

Treasury’s move would make GMAC the only U.S. company to receive three rounds of bailout aid.

  • Last December, the government gave GMAC $5 billion in exchange for 5 million shares and GMAC’s agreement to extend financing services to bailed-out Chrysler LLC.
  • Then in May, the Treasury Department announced a new $7.5 billion injection for GMAC — short of the $11.5 billion the government’s stress test showed the company would need to stay afloat if the economy worsens.
  • And now, The Wall Street Journal first reported late Tuesday that the U.S. government could hand over another $2.8 billion to $5.6 billion to Detroit-based GMAC.

In less than one year, Barack will sling $15 billion+ into a company that continues to plummet into obscurity.  A wise farmer friend of mine shares the best common-sense advice:  when you find yourself deep in a hole, STOP DIGGING.  But again we are talking about common sense, which is none too common in Washington DC.

via The AP.

Filed Under: Economics, Federal Budget, Government, Spending Tagged With: , , , , ,

WOW-Stimulus adds/saves 650 jobs in Arizona

October 28, 2009 By 6 Comments

In a recent report, the president’s oversight board released data specifically showing more than 30,000 jobs created or saved nationwide, including more than 650 in Arizona. Recipients in Arizona said they had received $29.6 million of $139 million in contract awards so far.

Again, for you folks educated in the public school systems, I’m going to my old-school calculator to help you out.

$29.6 million divided by 650 jobs equals $45,538.46 per job!  And this is being reported as good news.  Uh-huh.

One last question, How do prove that you saved a job?

via azstarnet.

Filed Under: Economic Development, Economics, State Economy

Brewer Plans to Attract New Business by Taxing Existing Business

October 27, 2009 By 18 Comments
Arizona Governor Jan Brewer (RINO) somehow believes that the way to attract new business growth in Arizona is by
  1. Increasing taxes on existing businesses
  2. Abandoning her promise of tax cuts for business.

Earlier this year,  Gov. Jan Brewer promoted her plan to rid the state government of its record $3.3 billion deficit.

Her five-point plan:

  • Reforming the budget process.
  • Improving Proposition 105, which mandates certain budget allocations each year.
  • Spending reductions of $1 billion.
  • Comprehensive tax reform to attract businesses and create new jobs.
  • A temporary tax increase that would generate $1 billion.

Sounds good, doesn’t it?  Well it did; That is until Jan morphed into John [Kerry that is].  She was for her tax cuts for business until she wasn’t for her tax cuts for business.

Gov. Jan Brewer says that Arizona businesses may have to wait a bit longer than 2012 for those tax cuts.  Brewer noted that her five-point plan for returning the state to prosperity, outlined in March, was built on the assumption of the temporary boost in revenues now.  Brewer said she assumes that the delay in the first part of her plan means a commensurate delay in her tax-cuts proposal.  The state’s tax structure must be revamped for that to happen, she said.  The corporate income tax is now just a hair less than 7 percent. The state needs to look at its property tax system as well, Brewer said.  That system has come under fire because companies not only pay proportionately more than homeowners, but also are taxed, annually, on the value of their equipment. That, in turn, makes the state less attractive to manufacturers.

So Arizona is not very attractive to buisness.  We already knew that. But now the story gets even better: Arizona is out of unemployment money, so they are going to borrow it from the Feds and then tax the hell out of existing Arizona business to pay it all back.
AzstarNet —Arizona needs to borrow about $600 million from the federal government or risk running out of unemployment benefits.
Without a cash infusion, the Arizona Department of Economic Security said the fund used to pay out benefits would be empty by March.
The funds would be paid back by sharply increasing company unemployment-insurance taxes.
Companies currently pay an average rate of 1.34 percent on the first $7,000 an employee makes annually or $93.80 per year.
Under the new estimates, the average rate could rise to 1.9 percent, increasing the per-employee cost to $133 per year.
Instead of this very old, very predictable Kerry-style of  gubernatorial flip-flop, Governor Brewer might at least consider following the lead of Texas. [Which is a state with a Republican governor [not a RINO] that is NOT running a deficit].

According to the Tax Foundation,

Texan’s state and local tax burdens are among the lowest in the nation, 7th lowest nationally, with state and local taxes costing $3,580 per capita, or 8.7% of resident incomes.

Texas is one of the nine states of the United States with no personal state income tax. In addition, Texas does not allow any lower level of government (counties, cities, etc.) to impose an income tax. The state sales tax is set at 6.25 percent.

As for Texas’s business tax climate, the state ranks 8th in the nation. Property taxes are exclusively collected at the local level in the state, and are generally at rates above the national average. As a whole, Texas is a “tax donor state” with Texans receiving back approximately $0.94 per every dollar of federal income taxes collected in 2005.

Desperate times call for desperate measures is the old adage.  But these desperate times call not for desperate measures but innovative ideas. Arizona is in deep weeds, no doubt.  Jan Brewer’s claim of tax reform to attract business to the state is the right thing to do and a good place to start.  But to then turn around and pull the rug out from under these tax proposals sends a bad message to any CEO out there.
Another old adage claims;  Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice and I’ll take my business elsewhere.
Filed Under: Legislation, State Budget, State Economy, State Government

Subsidies for Cyclists

October 22, 2009 By Leave a Comment

For years,Tucson Arizona has earned the award of being one of the county’s most “Bicycle Friendly Community”.  Good for Tucson.  It’s good for Tucson’s economy as well.  The el Tour de Tucson alone brings in thousands of  riders and millions of dollars annually. Let’s face it, Tucsonans are into their bikes.

So how does this bike-friendly town fare when we add a government bicycle subsidy program into the mix?  Apparently, we don’t need/want any federal help, thank you very much.

From azstarnet:

Gov’t peddles subsidies for bikes — to little avail

Two-wheel commuters could get cash, but the program just isn’t catching on.

Not a big surprise there.  Government programs are everywhere and of course, few of them ever work as intended. Make it a green program and the results are even more preposterous.

Enter the Bicylce Commuter Act of 2009 sponsored by U.S. Rep. Earl Blumenauer, (Dem. Or), took effect in January.

How does it work?  Employers can pay workers who regularly commute by bicycle $20 a month to cover any expenses related to using a bicycle for commuting.  A participating employer recovers the payments made to employees by deducting them from the taxes the business owes the federal government.

Who’s using it?  Apparently nobody.

Calls to local transportation officials and several local companies didn’t turn up any employers who have offered the benefit.

“I don’t know anybody locally that uses that subsidy. People aren’t big on subsidies,” said Ruth Reiman, travel-demand manager for the Pima Association of Governments.  When talking with employers, “we go in and market commuter fringe benefits; the bike commuter (act) is part of that.  We market the whole package,”  Reiman said. “At this point, when we go out and tell them, no one is asking for it. They’d have to know that there are people that would actually ask for it. Maybe none of their employees have asked for it.”

But surely the eco-loving University of Arizona has their feet in the peddles right?  Guess again, Lance.

The University of Arizona is generally aggressive and enthusiastic in promoting “green” transportation for commuting students and employees, said Jeff Harrison, a UA spokesman. But he said it’s his assumption that the structure of the law — it reimburses employers through tax credits — didn’t provide a way for government agencies to recover their costs under the program.

Why is that you ask?  Again, it’s another  do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do policy, where government somehow forget to include themselves in this save the planet sing-song.

  • Those getting the subsidy cannot participate in any other subsidized commuter program (free or subsidized mass- transit, car-pooling or van-pooling).
  • Government agencies are not participating because they don’t have tax bills from which to deduct the payments they make to bicycle commuters.

What’s the cost?  According to the League of American Bicyclists:

The total anticipated cost of the provision, estimated by the Joint Committee on Taxation, is a very modest $1 million per year.

Bureaucrats, who are always concerned with intentions, never results, doubled down on another bike subsidy with equally predictable returns.

Remember the great SmartBike program in Washington DC?  It is a commuter bicycle rental program in our nation’s capitol.  Price tag, $3 million;  Results? Almost 1000 people have signed up for the program.  You can do the math on that one.

Echoing my same thoughts from the Smart Bike article:

If someone wants to ride their bicycle to work (I did, before the company I worked for went out of business), let them take their hard-earned money and go out and BUY a bicycle.  (I did that too)  They can purchase a cool bike of their choosing from their local bike shop (which would actually stimulate the economy), reduce the size of government, silence blubbering politicians and save the planet at the same time.  Now that would be a win times 4.

Filed Under: Environment

Where is that Audit of the Rio Nuevo Program ?

October 20, 2009 By 1 Comment

Anyone remember this story?

The Tucson City Council voted unanimously Tuesday to look into seeking a detailed, outside audit of Rio Nuevo.

In case you forgot, the date of this article was March 24, 2009.  Well, guess what, today is October 20th and there is still no audit.  A call to the offices of the 7 dwarfs reveals that the audit process has not even been started.  So after you voted for the audit, you refuse to start the audit (at least until the elections are over).

Councilwoman Nina Trasoff, who heads the now-suspended meetings of the Rio Nuevo subcommittee, voted for the audit proposal after saying that she thought it [the audit] was unnecessary and likely costly.

No Nina, losing the Gem Show is costly; losing the baseball teams is costly; losing our bond rating is costly.  Keeping you and Karen and Dick in office is in all, too costly.  Say Bye-Bye.

Filed Under: Government, Town Hall Tagged With: , , ,

Let’s Pass the Hat to Finish Rio Nuevo Gardens

October 15, 2009 By 5 Comments

The genius think-tank that is the Tucson City Council outdoes themselves again.  After they blew through millions of taxpayer dollars to fund Rio Nuevo and left us with nothing but a big hole in the ground, Mayor Bob and the seven dwarfs (I put Mike Letcher in there) have come up with a great idea to get something, anything, happening downtown.

The city of Tucson will pass the hat, hoping to rake in as much as $1 million in private donations, to help finish Rio Nuevo’s Mission Gardens — the centerpiece of what voters approved 10 years ago.

This Wednesday marked the beginning of Operation Sucker Tucson.  It started with the city council actually agreeing on something but it doesn’t actually start yet.

Wednesday’s unanimous council vote directs contributions to go to a citizens group called Friends of Tucson’s Birthplace. However, the group cannot yet collect donations because it doesn’t have tax-exempt status from the Internal Revenue Service.

No telling how long that will take and a call the the city council revealed that they of course didn’t know how long it was going to take the IRS to put their stamp of approval on it.  Hopefully it will take less than the 10 years it took the city council to agree that it was time to start planning to move forward and begin the process of getting started and moving forward.

Operation Sucker Tucson continues:

The donations would go only to finish the Mission Gardens, not the entire Tucson Origins Heritage Park, which was to include the re-creation of Tucson’s birthplace including the Mission San Agustín and its convention, granary and Carrillo House, for which the city spent $9 million on design and plans.

People get suckered out of their hard earned money every day.  You can watch on television as they tell their sad tale, which will always include the recently-swindled moaning, “But he seemed like such a nice guy!“.  Well of course he was a nice guy.  If he wasn’t a nice guy, you never would have given him the money.

Bernie Madoff seemed like a nice guy too.  And he bled people out of billions.  I find it absurd that anyone would would give money to a man who’s last name is MADE OFF.  That should have been a clue for any potential “investor”.

By now, the residents of Tucson should be well aware of the modus operandi of the Tucson City Council.  Don’t start sobbing if when you hoodwinked this time.

via azstarnet.

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: , , , , , , ,

Democratic Party Proposals are Meant to Help People

October 8, 2009 By 5 Comments

The State of Michigan is in real trouble. Faced with a the highest unemployment rate in the US (14%) and reeling from the continued demise of auto manufacturing in the state, it is refreshing to find some real-world answers to these daunting challenges.

Mark Brewer is the Michigan Democratic Party chairman, and he recently took the bull by the horns and came up with this 5-point plan to help struggling families and get the great State of Michigan back on track again.

From Mark’s Op-ed piece in the Michigan Oakland Press:

We’re facing record unemployment, a poor economy and an uncertain future. We need to be proactive in addressing these problems, and the Michigan Democratic Party believes its proposed ballot initiatives will not only help to get people back on their feet, but also stimulate our economy.  Our plan includes five proposals that put people first — ahead of the greedy, corporate CEOs who are responsible for our economic meltdown.

1. We’re proposing that all employers in Michigan be required to provide affordable, quality health care for their employees and dependents or pay a penalty. We have more than 1.2 million people in this state who do not have health insurance. Many of those people are employed but their employers do not provide health insurance.These uninsured and their children are either going without health care or are flooding our emergency rooms for health care, forcing those who are insured to pay significantly higher premiums. This proposal would not only save businesses money in the long-run, with better, healthier workers but would save all residents money and lower premiums.
2. We believe the minimum wage should be increased from $7.40/hour to $10/hour. A worker who is earning the current minimum wage while supporting a family of four is living below the poverty level. This is unacceptable. Someone who is working 40-plus hours per week should not be earning below poverty level wages. Study after study has proven that raising the minimum wage would not deter job creation in our state. These higher wages would allow businesses to save money long-term by having a less transient and more stable work force. Higher wages also would provide an economic stimulus.
3. We must increase unemployment benefits for those out of work through no fault of their own and close loopholes that prevent more than a quarter of a million people from receiving any benefits at all. Michigan’s unemployment benefits have not increased in years and are not keeping up with the rate of inflation. We believe increasing these benefits by $100 a week would provide more stability to our struggling families. We should extend the amount of time the unemployed can receive those benefits by six months. This gives these citizens more time to find jobs, or get training, and stay in our great state.
4. Cutting utility rates by 20 percent would be a significant savings to both consumers and businesses. Electric rates alone have skyrocketed more than 30 percent in the last six years. This is an unnecessary burden for our citizens and businesses and is hurting our economy.
5. A one-year moratorium on home foreclosures would address the emergency faced by tens of thousands of people who face foreclosure. Foreclosure depresses everyone’s property values and creates eyesores and havens for criminal activity. This freeze would allow banks and homeowners to work out problems.These proposals are just some of the ways we can help people in this state. We are all in this together and must unite to resolve this economic crisis.

And now you know why Michigan has the problems it does.

Filed Under: Economic Development, Economics Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , ,

A Street Car Named Nada

October 7, 2009 By 7 Comments

Big news for Tucson. We can spend even more money on yet another streetcar project.

The Tucson Modern Streetcar just got approval from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to go ahead and proceed with their final design.

First I must clarify.  The Tucson Modern Streetcar Project is a totally different from the the Old Pueblo Trolley Project.  The Trolley Project connects the University of Arizona campus to downtown Tucson. The NEW Streetcar Project will be much better because it will connect the University of Arizona to downtown Tucson.  See the map.

The NEW Tucson Modern Streetcar will be a 3.9 mile rail transit system connecting the Arizona Health Sciences Center, University of Arizona, Main Gate Square, 4th Avenue Shopping District, and much, much more. According to the Tucson Transit Study website, this economic calamity is only going to cost $150 million dollars.  According to my old-school math, IF this comes in on budget, [yeah right] that breaks down to $38.46 million per mile.

Sleepy Tucson voters approved a 1/2 cent sales tax increase back in 2006 for half the cost of the modern streetcar project.  “Federal funds” would be matching the targeted $75 million raised  from the tax increase.  Tucsonans fell for that old “shell game” once again. (Apparently these same sleepy voters forget that those federal funds come from their own wallets, but I digress…).

The FTA states Tucson can “incur costs” for rails, ties, demolition, commodities and other specialized equipment. But all is not guaranteed.  The FTA goes on to say it’s not a commitment on the part of the government that it will approve future federal funds.  The city undertakes “these activities at its own risk“.

The FTA must have seen the way Tucson’s City Council handled Rio Nuevo.

Let the fun begin with this quote from Tucson Transportation Director Jim Glock:

“We’re going to provide a modern streetcar to this community by hook or by crook” .

Looking at the track record of Tucson’s City Council,  I’m going to go with “B”, Meredith, by crook.  Confidence abounds everywhere in the Tucson leadership, first at the Federal level:

The federal government now believes that Tucson can “pull it off” and has allowed the city to enter into the final design as an exempt project.  But the construction process must still be approved and that comes next.  It could come in January. [Uh-huh].

And now at the local level:

Jimmy Glock continues “I’m cautiously optimistic that we’re going to fare well. It’s been a long road getting here to date and you never know”.

And wrapping up this trifecta recipe for disaster, our own Raul Grijalva weighs in with his expert opinion.

“The Streetcar project will help Tucsonans connect to each other and will encourage the economic vitality of our city and revitalization of our Downtown.”

Hey Raul, you forget to get in your customary “rich cultural heritage” and “Tucson’s diversity” lines in your press release.

So there you have it, yet another Street Car project coming our way.  The Old Pueblo Trolley has really helped revitalize Downtown Tucson. 4th Ave tie-dye shirt sales are up, Medusa Hookah Lounge’s business is booming and the Sharks Bar is still hanging in there.   Tucson’s city council doubled-down on development with the $47 million 4th Ave underpass. (That came in only $15 million over budget).  Now Tucson with “cautious optimism“, is going to, someday, maybe,  “pull it off” and have another $150 million streetcar that starts nowhere and ends up leaving Tucsonans with nothing.

Just remember, even the Feds understand, “The city undertakes “these activities at its own risk“”.  We’ve been warned.

Filed Under: Uncategorized
« Older Posts
Newer Posts »