The city of Georgetown has established an economic development corporation (GEDCO) with its own board or directors and budgets that grant economic development funds to selected organizations. In FY17, they plan on spending $6,235,967 on debt service and economic development projects.
Many call this corporate welfare. Government is not particularly good at picking economic winners and losers or knowing when to invest and when to stop investing. Don't expect our city officials to recognize when it is time to turn off the tap of taxpayer money.
The Texas Public Policy Foundation TPPF has recently completed a study of government sponsored economic development and relevant quotes follow:
"It is important to understand that corporate welfare has the same
corrosive effects as welfare for individuals and fails to live up to the core American
ideal of protecting “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”
For instance, if a large corporation used its expertise to break into the bank accounts
of Texans and transfer millions of dollars into its own account, everyone
would condemn this action as theft. Those who ordered and conducted the
raids would be prosecuted and locked in jail. However, let the government take
the money from Texans’ bank accounts and then give it to the same company
and it is called economic development.
Additionally, proponents of corporate welfare suffer from a false belief in
central planning. They believe that either they or government planners can
best determine what technology has the best chance of success, which jobs and
products best supply society’s needs, and where best to expend scarce supplies
of capital. They believe that they just can’t sit back and let the economy take care
of itself; they have to take money and property from citizens in order to solve
the citizens’ problems for them.
Recommendations
Texas is the national leader in increasing prosperity for its citizens. It has arrived
at this point because it has relied on the free market model of economic
development and protected the rights of its citizens while largely rejecting the
government approach. Building upon this approach, Texas should reduce or
eliminate current economic development programs, restrain growth in overall
government spending and regulation, and reduce taxes. Relying on markets is
the best way to promote liberty and boost the economy."
Saturday, December 31, 2016
Wednesday, December 28, 2016
Where Did the Sales Tax Windfall Go?
The City budgeted $21.52M in sales tax revenue for FY16 according to their FY16 budget. It was recently reported that the sales tax refunds from the state set a new annual record of $22.6M. That is adjusted to $22.478 for FY16.
Inquiring minds would like to know where the excess sales tax revenue of $958,000 was spent. Were debt payments accelerated, the funds depositied into the Council slush fund, or were other under budgeted functions covered, like the EMS overtime?
The City needs to be transparent on how and where these funds were applied.
Inquiring minds would like to know where the excess sales tax revenue of $958,000 was spent. Were debt payments accelerated, the funds depositied into the Council slush fund, or were other under budgeted functions covered, like the EMS overtime?
The City needs to be transparent on how and where these funds were applied.
Tuesday, December 27, 2016
ICYMI(In Case You Missed It), Property Taxes are Up!
The Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts published his Biennial report on property taxes. Property Taxes
Property tax is the largest tax imposed in Texas. In 2015, property tax generated more than $52 billion for all taxing units that can levy a property tax, and it represented al most 48 percent of all taxes imposed by state government and local taxing units.
Here are two of the relevant charts.
School districts are the major extractor of property taxes from the citizens of Texas at $28B. The cities extract "only" $8B.
The percentage change in estimated population for Texas from April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2016, is available from the United States Census Bureau. Texas population grew from 25,145,561 to 27,862,596 over this time period. That is a 1.72% annual growth rate.
Recall that inflation has been less than 2% annually over the same period. Thus, while annual population growth plus inflation for the entire state has been less than 4%, property taxes grew 6.31% between 2014 and 2015.
One should be asking their elected repsentatives why the taxes collected are growing at a 50% higher rate than population plus inflation.
Property tax is the largest tax imposed in Texas. In 2015, property tax generated more than $52 billion for all taxing units that can levy a property tax, and it represented al most 48 percent of all taxes imposed by state government and local taxing units.
Here are two of the relevant charts.
School districts are the major extractor of property taxes from the citizens of Texas at $28B. The cities extract "only" $8B.
The percentage change in estimated population for Texas from April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2016, is available from the United States Census Bureau. Texas population grew from 25,145,561 to 27,862,596 over this time period. That is a 1.72% annual growth rate.
Recall that inflation has been less than 2% annually over the same period. Thus, while annual population growth plus inflation for the entire state has been less than 4%, property taxes grew 6.31% between 2014 and 2015.
One should be asking their elected repsentatives why the taxes collected are growing at a 50% higher rate than population plus inflation.
Friday, December 16, 2016
Electric Fund Exceeds Budget by $6 Million
During the City Council workshop this week, it was disclosed that the expenses in the electric fund exceeded budget. The following is the city statement:
The Electric Fund experienced higher purchased power costs than projected. Capital improvement projects are also over budget due to a substation project and increased development. The fund is projected to be $6 million over expenditures. Staff are developing a plan to bring the fund into balance and to cover the 75 day contingency reserve.
During May through August of this year, power consumption was far below normal because the temperature averaged 5 degrees below normal. The city contracted for "near peak" power during that time and found themselves with excess power capacity which could not be sold at a profit on the market. This resulted in a loss.
Since we have been told repeatedly that the city has a 25 year contract for wind generated electricity, presumably at a fixed price with inflation escalators, and it currently supplies 100% of Georgetown's demands, why is the city contracting with ercot for electricity at near peak rates? We have been told by city officials that these long-term contracts for wind and solar generated electricity would provide predictability and stability in electric rates.
This is why we, the citizens of Georgetown, need transparency in all the city departments, including the electric company.
The Electric Fund experienced higher purchased power costs than projected. Capital improvement projects are also over budget due to a substation project and increased development. The fund is projected to be $6 million over expenditures. Staff are developing a plan to bring the fund into balance and to cover the 75 day contingency reserve.
During May through August of this year, power consumption was far below normal because the temperature averaged 5 degrees below normal. The city contracted for "near peak" power during that time and found themselves with excess power capacity which could not be sold at a profit on the market. This resulted in a loss.
Since we have been told repeatedly that the city has a 25 year contract for wind generated electricity, presumably at a fixed price with inflation escalators, and it currently supplies 100% of Georgetown's demands, why is the city contracting with ercot for electricity at near peak rates? We have been told by city officials that these long-term contracts for wind and solar generated electricity would provide predictability and stability in electric rates.
This is why we, the citizens of Georgetown, need transparency in all the city departments, including the electric company.
Monday, December 12, 2016
Increased Appraisals Push Tax Bills Higher
Local politicians like to boast that they have held the tax rate constant or even lowered it, while your tax bill goes up because the appraised value has increased. Some of your Georgetown city council like to make this argument that they are fiscally conservative and that you, the property taxpayer is better off because your property is worth more this year than last year. This in spite of the fact that you have not received a pay increase that covers the increase in property taxes.
Kenric Ward at Watchdog details the latest issues with the county appraisal districts(CADs).
Kenric Ward at Watchdog details the latest issues with the county appraisal districts(CADs).
"By state law, county appraisal districts (CADs) are tasked to do one thing: set the property values that raise revenue for local taxing agencies.
Headed by boards of directors, CADs are bureaucratically opaque, institutionally autonomous and fundamentally incestuous bodies with no effective public oversight.
By state law, county appraisal districts (CADs) are tasked to do one thing: set the property values that raise revenue for local taxing agencies."
Seeking to democratize the captive CADs, Bettencourt, R-Houston, proposes mandating that all directors be elected officials within their respective counties.
“This makes them directly answerable to the citizens,” Bettencourt said of provisions in SB 2.
Just another reason to have your state senator and state representatives back Senator Bettencourt's bill SB 2.
"Local Control" is a Perverted Big Government Argument
Local politicians and big government advocates continually use the argument that local governments should not be constrained by state law on how much they can tax citizens or whom they can annex to increase their control over more people and increase revenue without raising taxes.
Georgetown and the Texas Municipal League are both opposing any state imposed restrictions on a cities ability to increase property tax revenue.
"Why Does the Texas Municipal League Oppose Tax Reform?
Their own governing documents answer this question. TML and other tax-funded government associations exist for the sole purpose of advancing the interests of governments – including their ability to tax, spend, and borrow – not taxpayers. TML’s Constitution. Section 2.1 clearly states:"
“The purpose of this organization is to advance and sustain the interests of the cities of Texas.”
Georgetown and the Texas Municipal League are both opposing any state imposed restrictions on a cities ability to increase property tax revenue.
"Conservative lawmakers, including State Sens. Paul Bettencourt (R-Houston) and Van Taylor (R-Plano), are pushing reforms aimed at slowing the growth of property taxes levied by cities and counties.
Reformers hope to limit excessive tax increases by empowering voters, not via legislative mandate. The most prominent measure would require that cities and counties obtain voter approval for a year-over-year tax increase above 4 percent." Property Tax Reform
"Why Does the Texas Municipal League Oppose Tax Reform?
Their own governing documents answer this question. TML and other tax-funded government associations exist for the sole purpose of advancing the interests of governments – including their ability to tax, spend, and borrow – not taxpayers. TML’s Constitution. Section 2.1 clearly states:"
“The purpose of this organization is to advance and sustain the interests of the cities of Texas.”
"As a governing philosophy, the “local control” doctrine is antithetical to that of our Constitutional Republic, which exists to empower citizens and protect their rights.
What TML actually supports is local government control – the unlimited power of local politicians – not limited governmen
Georgetown citizens need to get involved with the city government and hold them accountable for the budget. Question boldly all the expenditures and make the city justify the expenditures, especially the issuance of bond debt!
Georgetown citizens need to get involved with the city government and hold them accountable for the budget. Question boldly all the expenditures and make the city justify the expenditures, especially the issuance of bond debt!
Thursday, December 8, 2016
UT Study Shows Gas & Wind Generators Provide Cheapest Electricity
The University of Texas Energy Institute has just released a definitive study showing that natural gas and wind generators provide the cheapest electricity when the total direct and indirect costs of
generating and delivering electricity is considered. Researchers used data from existing studies to enhance a
formula known as the Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE). They included public health impacts
and environmental effects and they used available data to calculate
county-specific costs for each technology.
"Natural gas and wind are the lowest-cost technology options for new electricity generation across much of the U.S. when cost, public health impacts and environmental effects are considered, according to new research released today by The University of Texas at Austin". UT Energy Institute
The full report is available at the link as well as online tools the team developed to facilitate a discussion among policymakers and others about the cost implications of policy actions associated with new electricity generation.
"Natural gas and wind are the lowest-cost technology options for new electricity generation across much of the U.S. when cost, public health impacts and environmental effects are considered, according to new research released today by The University of Texas at Austin". UT Energy Institute
The full report is available at the link as well as online tools the team developed to facilitate a discussion among policymakers and others about the cost implications of policy actions associated with new electricity generation.
Wednesday, December 7, 2016
Taxpayers Paying $16M+ to Lobby Texas Legislators
Senator Konni Burton has determined that cities, counties and school districts spent over $16,000,000 in 2015 to lobby the state legislators. That does not include the money that the Texas Municipal League (TML) spent lobbying for the benefit of member cities, often against the best interests of taxpayers. Georgetown pays an annual membership fee to TML for them to lobby the legislature on their behalf.
Kenric Ward at Watchdog provides additional information.
"Burton says local governments do not necessarily share their constituents’ fiscal concerns when lobbying state lawmakers.
The upcoming session promises a bruising battle over property taxes. Cities, counties and school districts vow to fight legislation — including Senate Bill 2 — that seeks to lower Texas’ local levies, currently sixth highest in the nation."
You can be sure that Georgetown and TML will be lobbying our state legislators to not restrict their ability to impose whatever property tax they feel is necessary, without regard to the burden placed on the property owners.
Contact Senator Schwertner and Representative Terry Wilson and ask they support Senator Burton's bill that eliminates the use of taxpayer money for lobbying. The bill is SB 241 and the text can be found at Texas Legislature Online
Tuesday, December 6, 2016
Judge Finds Commissioners Violated Law Questioning Constable Applicant
"A federal judge ruled this week that three Williamson County commissioners violated a man’s constitutional rights when he was asked illegal questions during interviews for a constable’s position.
Commissioners Lisa Birkman, Cynthia Long and Valerie Covey violated Robert Lloyd’s 14th Amendment right to equal protection when he was asked questions about his opinions on abortion and gay marriage during interviews in March 2013, according to the ruling." Austin Statesman
Williamson County spent approximately $500,000 of taxpayer money defending the commissioners over the last three years. What a waste of money!
Commissioners Lisa Birkman, Cynthia Long and Valerie Covey violated Robert Lloyd’s 14th Amendment right to equal protection when he was asked questions about his opinions on abortion and gay marriage during interviews in March 2013, according to the ruling." Austin Statesman
Williamson County spent approximately $500,000 of taxpayer money defending the commissioners over the last three years. What a waste of money!
Tuesday, November 29, 2016
Property Taxes Outpace Income
City property taxes are growing faster than household incomes in Texas according to data from the Texas Comptroller's Office.
Senator Bettencourt has introduced Senate Bill 2 to provide relief to property owners. Currently, if cities and counties raise taxes by 8 percent or more, residents can petition to hold an election on the tax rate. Under the proposal, the “roll back rate” is lowered to 4 percent, and the referendum is automatic.
Senator Bettencourt has introduced Senate Bill 2 to provide relief to property owners. Currently, if cities and counties raise taxes by 8 percent or more, residents can petition to hold an election on the tax rate. Under the proposal, the “roll back rate” is lowered to 4 percent, and the referendum is automatic.
“Property tax bills go up much faster than people’s paychecks,” Bettencourt said. “The taxpayers’ ability to pay has to be looked at.”
The critics are already attacking the plan and likely Georgetown will lobby against the proposal as have other cities like Austin, San Antonio and San Marcos.
Let your Senator, Charles Schwertner, and Representative, Terry Wilson know that you support property tax relief.
Sunday, November 27, 2016
Dogs in Restaurants in Georgetown
Councilman Steve Fought provided an excellent summary of the issue that was before the Council at the last meeting. Here is the summary he provided in his newsletter.
"This has been one of the most misconstrued issues I've seen during my time on City Council. Articles in the media, my e-mails and even face-to-face conversations, reflected the impression that the City Council made a decision at the 12 July 2016 Council Meeting to disallow dogs in restaurants in Georgetown. These impressions were widespread and understandable but they were incorrect for the following reasons:
First, the City does not determine whether or not dogs are allowed in restaurants, that is the prerogative of the Williamson County and Cities Health Department (WCCHD).
Second, the item on the Council agenda for the 12 July meeting was whether or not the City Council would support restaurant owner's requests for a variance from State and WCCHD regulations which prohibit most dogs* from being in restaurants.
The proposal to support a restaurant owner's request for a variance was rejected at the 12 July Council meeting (4-2, Council Member Gipson absent).
Council Members Eby, Brainard, and Jonrowe then brought the item back to Council at the 22 November meeting meeting for reconsideration. (Please click here to read the agenda item summary sheet and here, then go to Item "AB" to watch the video.)
There were approximately 12 speakers on the issue. Many of the speakers expressed their support for allowing dogs in restaurants, stressing that "their money" was going to other towns which allowed dogs in their restaurants rather than staying in Georgetown. Many also expressed their enthusiasm for Council supporting a restaurant owner's request to the WCCHD for a variance to the current prohibition against allowing dogs in restaurants, emphasizing that the decision to allow dogs in a restaurant should rest with the restaurant owner, and not the "government". One restaurant owner spoke in favor (and I had received one supportive e-mail from another owner as well.)
Between the original decision on 12 July, and the reconsideration on 22 November, I kept asking myself why the City was involved in this decision at all. I had done some research on the matter and more or less reached a conclusion that this was none of our business -- yet it was on our agenda for the second time!
Mayor Ross apparently had the same concern and therefore asked the WCCHD representatives that question. The WCCHD made it clear they are the decision making body on variances of this sort, but, given the controversial nature of allowing dogs in restaurants, they make a practice of asking the City for their opinion on the matter before they consider it. So, whatever the City would decide on the matter, the final decision would rest with the WCCHD.
When it came time for Council Members to speak, I offered the following comments:
"I agree with Keith and others who have spoken here tonight -- this is a matter for the individual businesses to decide. Actually, it's solely a matter between the business owners, their customers, and the county health department. In my opinion the City Council should not have any role in this process -- we should neither support, nor oppose, the business owner's request.
"That is not just my personal opinion, it is consistent with the City Code of Ordinances. Section 8.12.020 (definitions) of the City Code establishes the Williamson County and Cities Health District (WCCHD) as the regulatory authority for food establishments in Georgetown.
"I see no reason for the City Council to get involved in this. The WCCHD has the necessary authority to deal with it. I therefore make a motion that Section 2 of the proposed ordinance by amended from 'The City Council hereby supports the Health District granting a variance..' to read: 'The City Council does not oppose the health district granting a variance...' (remainder reads as written).
"I hope this clarification will be palatable to my fellow Council Members and allow us to come to closure on this item."
Council Member Jonrowe seconded the motion. Discussion and comments followed from the City Attorney and representatives of WCCHD, each of whom confirmed that a simple "no-objection" from the City would suffice and allow the variance request to be processed.
The proposed amendment and the amended Resolution passed 7-0.
We are now in the position in which I believe we ought to be. Restaurant owners can submit a request for variance, the WCCHD can rule on the request, and customers can make their own choices on where to dine -- all without any further inputs/action from the City."
Tuesday, November 22, 2016
City Passed the Lobbying Resolution 7-0
The resolution authorizing the city to engage in lobbying the Texas Legislature on the city's behalf passed 7-0 with very little discussion. In fact, if not for your fearless blogger who attended the council meeting and demanded the opportunity to publicly speak against the resolution, it would have been passed with zero public input. Isn't transparency wonderful?
After making arguments against the resolution similar to those in prior posts, councilman Fought opined that the legislature may do something against the interest of the city and therefore the city needed to be there to protect against that action. Nothing was said that such effort by the city may be detrimental to many of the city citizens.
Mayor Ross chimed in with the observation that the city utilities and airport are businesses and are run as such. Therefore they need to keep contracts secret. If that is true, why is the city running businesses? Shouldn't they be spun-off to private enterprise? He further stated the city was in compliance with state law. He did not address why state law should not be changed to provide more transparency.
Its time to support Senator Konni Burton's bill, SB 241, to stop local governments from spending taxpayer dollars on lobbying.
After making arguments against the resolution similar to those in prior posts, councilman Fought opined that the legislature may do something against the interest of the city and therefore the city needed to be there to protect against that action. Nothing was said that such effort by the city may be detrimental to many of the city citizens.
Mayor Ross chimed in with the observation that the city utilities and airport are businesses and are run as such. Therefore they need to keep contracts secret. If that is true, why is the city running businesses? Shouldn't they be spun-off to private enterprise? He further stated the city was in compliance with state law. He did not address why state law should not be changed to provide more transparency.
Its time to support Senator Konni Burton's bill, SB 241, to stop local governments from spending taxpayer dollars on lobbying.
City Finally Acknowleges SunEdison Solar Plant Has Sold
The city posted on their website last week that the Buckthorn solar plant, a subsidiary of bankrupt SunEdison, has been sold to NRG Energy. They report that the current deal with NRG Energy is a better deal than the previous contract, but, who knows. The city will NOT share the contract with the citizens.
Construction of the plant near Fort Stockton will resume next year. Remember how they told us that construction had been stoppped due to the bankruptcy. Neither do I! By-the-way, the electricity is not expected to be available until July 2018, one year later than the last projection.
The city has entered into a 20 year contract with NRG Energy and again, it is unknown whether not there are no-cost exit ramps from the contract in the event conditions change over time. So much for transparency!
Construction of the plant near Fort Stockton will resume next year. Remember how they told us that construction had been stoppped due to the bankruptcy. Neither do I! By-the-way, the electricity is not expected to be available until July 2018, one year later than the last projection.
The city has entered into a 20 year contract with NRG Energy and again, it is unknown whether not there are no-cost exit ramps from the contract in the event conditions change over time. So much for transparency!
Monday, November 21, 2016
Pension Woes in Texas
The shortage of pension funds in Dallas has come to the attention of the New York Times.
"The city’s pension fund for its police officers and firefighters is near collapse and seeking an immense bailout. Over six recent weeks, panicked Dallas retirees have pulled $220 million out of the fund. What set off the run was a recommendation in July that the retirees no longer be allowed to take out big blocks of money. Even before that, though, there were reports that the fund’s investments — some placed in highly risky and speculative ventures — were worth less than previously stated. Now the fund has asked the city for a one-time infusion of $1.1 billion, an amount roughly equal to Dallas's entire general fund budget but not even close to what the pension fund needs to be fully funded. Nothing would be left for fighting endemic poverty south of the Trinity River, for public libraries, or for giving current police officers and firefighters a raise."
If Georgetown's leaders think pension problems in Dallas and Houston won't affect Georgetown, they are in for a rude awaking. Money that the State of Texas takes to solve other city's pension shortfalls, just wait its coming, will impact the state money available to the citizens of Georgetown and all Texans. Who knows what the state might do? They could keep part or all of the sales tax revenue, impose a tax on utilities, and any other source of revenue needed to bail out unfunded Texas pension funds. The possibilities are endless and creative legislators, under political pressure, will be very innovative.
Georgetown needs to get its pension unfunded liability to zero as soon as practicable in order to reduce its risk.
"The city’s pension fund for its police officers and firefighters is near collapse and seeking an immense bailout. Over six recent weeks, panicked Dallas retirees have pulled $220 million out of the fund. What set off the run was a recommendation in July that the retirees no longer be allowed to take out big blocks of money. Even before that, though, there were reports that the fund’s investments — some placed in highly risky and speculative ventures — were worth less than previously stated. Now the fund has asked the city for a one-time infusion of $1.1 billion, an amount roughly equal to Dallas's entire general fund budget but not even close to what the pension fund needs to be fully funded. Nothing would be left for fighting endemic poverty south of the Trinity River, for public libraries, or for giving current police officers and firefighters a raise."
If Georgetown's leaders think pension problems in Dallas and Houston won't affect Georgetown, they are in for a rude awaking. Money that the State of Texas takes to solve other city's pension shortfalls, just wait its coming, will impact the state money available to the citizens of Georgetown and all Texans. Who knows what the state might do? They could keep part or all of the sales tax revenue, impose a tax on utilities, and any other source of revenue needed to bail out unfunded Texas pension funds. The possibilities are endless and creative legislators, under political pressure, will be very innovative.
Georgetown needs to get its pension unfunded liability to zero as soon as practicable in order to reduce its risk.
The Texas Legislature Created Local Government
Since the Texas Legislature created all local governments, it has the obligation to review those local governments and their policies that take away freedom and impose financial and procedural burdens on citizens.
The Legislature should impose restraints on cities' and counties' authority when they abuse that authority with respect to their citizens. Why should cities have unconstrained authority to annex property without those being annexed having any mechanism to resist if annexation is not in their best interest. That is a taking of property rights without just compensation, in fact, those being annexed have to then pay additional taxes to the city. What a deal, they take your rights and make you pay for it!
One of Lt. Governor Patrick's top ten legislative priorities is property tax reform. That may require the state to impose limitations on all property tax authorities, including cities, because they play the game of holding tax rates down while appraisals skyrocket. This results in more money leaving the taxpayers pocket year after year. City, county and school budgets increase annually at a rate exceeding population growth plus inflation. Why is that? Because there are no constraints on how much local governments can tax people's property.
Finally, why should cities that own utility systems be allowed to keep secret the contracts they sign with private companies? The weak arguments used by cities, the companies and their lobbyists are that competitive information has to be protected. That is just a smoke screen! If the companies knew up front that the contracts were open to the public, they would not include competitive information. If they think the "price" is competitively sensitive information, then the public's right to know trumps that argument.
Remember, secrecy is the breeding ground for cronyism and fraud.
The Legislature should impose restraints on cities' and counties' authority when they abuse that authority with respect to their citizens. Why should cities have unconstrained authority to annex property without those being annexed having any mechanism to resist if annexation is not in their best interest. That is a taking of property rights without just compensation, in fact, those being annexed have to then pay additional taxes to the city. What a deal, they take your rights and make you pay for it!
One of Lt. Governor Patrick's top ten legislative priorities is property tax reform. That may require the state to impose limitations on all property tax authorities, including cities, because they play the game of holding tax rates down while appraisals skyrocket. This results in more money leaving the taxpayers pocket year after year. City, county and school budgets increase annually at a rate exceeding population growth plus inflation. Why is that? Because there are no constraints on how much local governments can tax people's property.
Finally, why should cities that own utility systems be allowed to keep secret the contracts they sign with private companies? The weak arguments used by cities, the companies and their lobbyists are that competitive information has to be protected. That is just a smoke screen! If the companies knew up front that the contracts were open to the public, they would not include competitive information. If they think the "price" is competitively sensitive information, then the public's right to know trumps that argument.
Remember, secrecy is the breeding ground for cronyism and fraud.
Saturday, November 19, 2016
Spend No Taxpayer Money on Lobbying the Texas Legislature
There are others who believe it is inappropriate and illegitimate for local governments to spend taxpayer money to lobby the Texas legislature against the best interests of citizens. Senator Konni Burton has filed SB 241, which will prohibit individual local governments from lobbying and also prohibit associations, such as the Texas Municipal League, from using Taxpayer money to lobby the legislature. Contact Senator Schwertner and Representative Terry Wilson and ask them to support this bill.
Senator Schwertner has filled a bill, SB 176, that provides for state regulation of Transportation Network Companies, think Uber and Lyft, and prohibits cities from imposing their own unique regulations. Senator Huffines bill, SB 113, would be superior because it allegedly deregulates all ride-for-hire companies. If Senator Huffines bill fails to pass, then Senator Schwertner's bill would be a good second choice.
Senator Schwertner has filled a bill, SB 176, that provides for state regulation of Transportation Network Companies, think Uber and Lyft, and prohibits cities from imposing their own unique regulations. Senator Huffines bill, SB 113, would be superior because it allegedly deregulates all ride-for-hire companies. If Senator Huffines bill fails to pass, then Senator Schwertner's bill would be a good second choice.
Friday, November 18, 2016
Senator Huffines Files Bill to Deregulate All Ride-For-Hire Companies
As a follow up to the post against cities lobbying Texas legislators, we find another area where cities are trying to impose burdensome regulations on emerging transportation companies. Early this year the city of Austin ran Uber and Lyft out of the city, and thus the entire metro area by imposing regulations the companies did not feel were fair or met their objective of improved safety for the consumer. Experience has shown freer markets mean more competition, and more competition means a better deal for the consumer. So this is one more example of cities over-reaching with regulations to favor one provider over another, instead of letting the free market work.
The following press release is from Senator Huffines office.
AUSTIN—On the first day of pre-filing for the 85th Texas Legislature, State Senator Don Huffines has filed a bill that would introduce sweeping changes to the relationship between municipalities and the entire ride-for-hire industry. Senate Bill 113 will preempt any municipality from imposing burdensome regulations on taxicabs, limousines, and transportation network companies (TNCs) alike, creating a free market and level playing field for all market participants. "Since TNCs arrived in Texas, the policy discussions concerning them have focused on the degree to which the Legislature will allow cities to regulate them like taxicabs." said Senator Huffines. "To date, however, we have been asking the wrong question. Instead of asking how or how much we should regulate TNCs, we should be contemplating whether or not the ride-for-hire industry, as a whole, should be regulated in the first place." In recent years, too many cities across the state have taken a stifling, heavy-handed regulatory approach to innovative TNCs like Uber and Lyft, effectively pushing these businesses out of the market. Consequentially, people have lost their jobs and consumers have lost a supply to what has proven to be an enormous demand. The City of Austin is the most notable offender, but it is not alone in trampling economic liberty and consumer choice. Senator Huffines continued, "The ride-for-hire industry keeps asking for the same thing - a fair and equal market - and I agree. But a level playing field need not mean building up regulations on innovative and popular services. Let's tear down regulations to create a truly free market for every ride-for-hire business - whether it's Uber, Lyft, or a more traditional taxi cab. In my experience as a business man, freer markets mean more competition and more competition means a better deal for the consumer." Senator Huffines concluded his comments by remarking, "Unfortunately, this bill might ruffle some feathers in city councils across the state. However, the Legislature has an obligation to act in defense of economic and personal liberty, and that’s exactly what we will do with SB 113."
The following press release is from Senator Huffines office.
AUSTIN—On the first day of pre-filing for the 85th Texas Legislature, State Senator Don Huffines has filed a bill that would introduce sweeping changes to the relationship between municipalities and the entire ride-for-hire industry. Senate Bill 113 will preempt any municipality from imposing burdensome regulations on taxicabs, limousines, and transportation network companies (TNCs) alike, creating a free market and level playing field for all market participants. "Since TNCs arrived in Texas, the policy discussions concerning them have focused on the degree to which the Legislature will allow cities to regulate them like taxicabs." said Senator Huffines. "To date, however, we have been asking the wrong question. Instead of asking how or how much we should regulate TNCs, we should be contemplating whether or not the ride-for-hire industry, as a whole, should be regulated in the first place." In recent years, too many cities across the state have taken a stifling, heavy-handed regulatory approach to innovative TNCs like Uber and Lyft, effectively pushing these businesses out of the market. Consequentially, people have lost their jobs and consumers have lost a supply to what has proven to be an enormous demand. The City of Austin is the most notable offender, but it is not alone in trampling economic liberty and consumer choice. Senator Huffines continued, "The ride-for-hire industry keeps asking for the same thing - a fair and equal market - and I agree. But a level playing field need not mean building up regulations on innovative and popular services. Let's tear down regulations to create a truly free market for every ride-for-hire business - whether it's Uber, Lyft, or a more traditional taxi cab. In my experience as a business man, freer markets mean more competition and more competition means a better deal for the consumer." Senator Huffines concluded his comments by remarking, "Unfortunately, this bill might ruffle some feathers in city councils across the state. However, the Legislature has an obligation to act in defense of economic and personal liberty, and that’s exactly what we will do with SB 113."
The Danger of Long-Term Utility Contracts
The Austin-Statesman is reporting that the Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA) is about to pay $60M to get out of an 18 year contract with a wind energy producer. In 2009, LCRA entered into a contract with a wind energy producer to purchase electricity for $64.75 per megawatt-hour ($0.06475 per kilowatt-hour). The problem for LCRA today is that they can buy electricity for about $25 per megawatt-hour on the open market. That is almost 40% less than the contract cost!
They are fortunate in that there is an exit clause in their contract that allows them to get out of the contract for $60M, although they have had to spend the last 18 months in court to be able to extract themselves. Of course, the consumers of the electricity that LCRA provides will have to pay for the $60M plus legal fees and court costs through higher rates.
The ratepayers in Georgetown should remember that several years ago Georgetown was locked into a long term contract with LCRA that took time, money, and the courts to extract themselves from. Apparently the City did not learn a lesson through that experience as they have turned around and signed 25 and 30 contracts with wind and solar power producers.
Since the city is against transparency with respect to utility contracts (see previous post), we have no idea whether or not there are built-in escape clauses that would allow Georgetown to exit in the event that open market electricity costs are much lower that the contract costs.
Secret contracts also provide an environment for crony capitalism and fraud. Only with exposure to public view will the citizens of Georgetown ever know if the contracts are free from fraud and cronyism.
They are fortunate in that there is an exit clause in their contract that allows them to get out of the contract for $60M, although they have had to spend the last 18 months in court to be able to extract themselves. Of course, the consumers of the electricity that LCRA provides will have to pay for the $60M plus legal fees and court costs through higher rates.
The ratepayers in Georgetown should remember that several years ago Georgetown was locked into a long term contract with LCRA that took time, money, and the courts to extract themselves from. Apparently the City did not learn a lesson through that experience as they have turned around and signed 25 and 30 contracts with wind and solar power producers.
Since the city is against transparency with respect to utility contracts (see previous post), we have no idea whether or not there are built-in escape clauses that would allow Georgetown to exit in the event that open market electricity costs are much lower that the contract costs.
Secret contracts also provide an environment for crony capitalism and fraud. Only with exposure to public view will the citizens of Georgetown ever know if the contracts are free from fraud and cronyism.
Thursday, November 17, 2016
Georgetown Coming Between You and Your State Legislators!!
The City of Georgetown is planning on lobbying your state legislators, using your tax money, on issues that may be against your best interest. They have an item in the consent agenda for next council meeting for a resolution authorizing city officials to lobby.
First of all, lobbying state legislators is not a valid city function. The city and its elected officials exist to provide roads, public safety, sewers, water services, electrical services, parks and libraries - not lobbying state legislators against our interests. This is clearly an expansion of government authority and intrusion into the personal prerogatives of citizens. The citizens have the right to lobby their legislators in their own best interest.
They have couched their resolution in very benign and non-threatening verbiage. For example, who could be against protecting "local control"? Well cities have clearly over-reached here in Texas. Think sanctuary cities, plastic bag bans and fracking bans!
How about the State changing annexation rules so that people who live within a proposed annexation area have a right to vote on the annexation? Is the current annexation rules fair to those people? It doesn't seem so, but, Georgetown officials are AGAINST the legislature giving those people a voice in annexation.
The city wants no limits placed on their ability to provide money, services, tax breaks, etc. to specific companies to entice them to locate in Georgetown. Some, like this writer, call that picking winners and losers. Let the market decide, not government! Others call this corporate welfare and are eliminating or curtailing this function.
The city wants to oppose any restrictions on them to take money from you, the taxpaying resident. No appraisal caps, no caps on their ability to levy property taxes! How is that in the best interest of the citizen/taxpayer?
They do not want the legislature to pass laws that entitle citizens to know the details about utility contracts. Think SunEdison, the now bankrupt solar farm developer that the city refused citizens to see the details of the contract. How is that working out? Why should the city have secrets from the citizens, except in personnel matters. The citizens want and deserve transparency in their government, yet, Georgetown wants to oppose any legislation that will make local government more transparent.
Finally, the city wants to implement this lobbying effort with no public input or discussion. This was discussed November 8 at a workshop, where the public is prevented from speaking, and now it is on the council consent calendar for November 23 where again there is no opportunity for public comment!
Call your councilperson and demand this proposed resolution be delayed until the public is notified and given the opportunity to comment.
First of all, lobbying state legislators is not a valid city function. The city and its elected officials exist to provide roads, public safety, sewers, water services, electrical services, parks and libraries - not lobbying state legislators against our interests. This is clearly an expansion of government authority and intrusion into the personal prerogatives of citizens. The citizens have the right to lobby their legislators in their own best interest.
They have couched their resolution in very benign and non-threatening verbiage. For example, who could be against protecting "local control"? Well cities have clearly over-reached here in Texas. Think sanctuary cities, plastic bag bans and fracking bans!
How about the State changing annexation rules so that people who live within a proposed annexation area have a right to vote on the annexation? Is the current annexation rules fair to those people? It doesn't seem so, but, Georgetown officials are AGAINST the legislature giving those people a voice in annexation.
The city wants no limits placed on their ability to provide money, services, tax breaks, etc. to specific companies to entice them to locate in Georgetown. Some, like this writer, call that picking winners and losers. Let the market decide, not government! Others call this corporate welfare and are eliminating or curtailing this function.
The city wants to oppose any restrictions on them to take money from you, the taxpaying resident. No appraisal caps, no caps on their ability to levy property taxes! How is that in the best interest of the citizen/taxpayer?
They do not want the legislature to pass laws that entitle citizens to know the details about utility contracts. Think SunEdison, the now bankrupt solar farm developer that the city refused citizens to see the details of the contract. How is that working out? Why should the city have secrets from the citizens, except in personnel matters. The citizens want and deserve transparency in their government, yet, Georgetown wants to oppose any legislation that will make local government more transparent.
Finally, the city wants to implement this lobbying effort with no public input or discussion. This was discussed November 8 at a workshop, where the public is prevented from speaking, and now it is on the council consent calendar for November 23 where again there is no opportunity for public comment!
Call your councilperson and demand this proposed resolution be delayed until the public is notified and given the opportunity to comment.
City Still Ignoring Airport Neighbor Concerns
Several Georgetown citizens made presentations to the Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board (GTAB) this past Tuesday expressing their concerns about development of the Georgetown airport. Following is one presentation that seems to caputure the essential elements of the airport neighbors concerns.
AND NOT GETTING ADEQUATE PUBLIC INPUT
BEFORE THEY DO WHAT THEY ARE DOING.
NOT ONLY ARE THERE 25 SIGNIFICANT PROJECT ELEMENTS PERTAINING TO AIRPORT EXPANSION THAT NO ONE EVER HEARS ABOUT, THERE ARE 101 CONTRACTS PENDING 101, ALSO THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF TREES REMOVED RECENTLY ALONG LAKEWAY DRIVE. AND LOTS OF PROPERTY WAS JUST ACQUIRED UNDER THREAT OF CONDEMNATION, AND YOU THINK THIS IS ABOUT THE FUEL FARM.
I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THIS COMMUNITY AND SO SHOULD YOU BE."
"AGENA ITEM D
AIRPORT PROJECT AND
TIMELINE
11-15-16
WENDY DEW
30109 SPYGLASS CIRCLE
GEORGETOWN TX 78628
I SPOKE AT THE TTC
MEETING WITH OTHER ACC MEMBERS WHEN JIM BRIGGS AND DIRECTOR FULTON FROM TxDOT
SPOKE TO GET THE 10 MILLION GRANT.
JIM BRIGGS WAS
ASKED IF THERE HAD BEEN ANY PUBLIC MEETINGS ON THIS ISSUE AND HE MISS REPRESENTED
HIMSELF TO THE TTC AND SAID:
"YES THE CITY
HAS NOT ONLY MET BUT EXCEEDED THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REQUIREMENTS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW AND THAT THREE DIFFERENT PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REQUIREMENTS WERE HELD.
AND THAT THE ENTIRE
PROJECT IS DESIGNED FOR TRAFFIC CURRENTLY USING THE AIRPORT.
THERE HAD ONLY BEEN
ONE MEETING AND THAT WAS ONLY ON THE FUEL FARM, NOT THE WHOLE 25 COMPONENT PLAN.
QUESTION IS WHY
WOULD THEY NEED TO EXPAND THE THE FUEL TANKS BY 60% IF IT "WAS" FOR EXISTING TRAFFIC?
THEN MR FULTON GOT UP AND SPOKE AND THE TTC MEMBER STATED THAT: "IT STATES HERE THAT THIS IS A PASS
THROUGH GRANT, IT HAS FOR PAVEMENT ELECTRICAL
IMPROVEMENTS AND TO PREPARE AN UPDATE TO THE MASTER PLAN. IS THIS FOR EXPANSION??
DIRECTOR FULTON MISS REPRESENTED HIMSELF AND SAYS: NOT IN ANY WAY
NOWHERE IN WHAT WAS GIVEN THE TTC BOARD
WAS THERE ANY MENTION OF THE FUEL FARM DO
YOU KNOW WHY?? BECAUSE THAT IS HOW YOU
ILLEGALLY GET AROUND ENVIRONMENTAL
STUDIES.
THEY DO WHAT IS CALLED SEGMENTING WHERE
THEY TAKE ONE ASPECT OF THE PLAN AND PUT IT
BY ITS SELF AND AS A SINGLE ISSUE IT DOESN'T
SEEM TO BE AN ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEM
ESPECIALLY
WHEN THEY PRETEND THAT THEY ARE
DOING THIS FOR THE ENVIRONMENT,
THE INTERESTING TRUTH ABOUT THIS WHOLE
MESS IS THAT G.R.W WILLIS THE ENGINEER THAT
DESIGNED
THIS MASTER PLAN CLEARLY STATES IN
HIS PLAN THAT THE THE EXISTING CAPACITY OF
THE FUEL FARM IS ADEQUATE FOR THE PLANNING
PERIOD.
NOT ONLY DOES THE CITY AVOID TALKING ABOUT
THE FACT THAT THEY ARE EXPANDING THE TANKS,
THEY PUT OUT THIS LITTLE SING SONG ABOUT WHY
THEY ARE EXPANDING THE TANKS IS TO SAVE ON
DELIVERY.
I CALLED AVEFUEL AND ASKED THEM HOW MUCH
GTU WOULD SAVE ON DELIVERY BY EXPANDING
THE TANKS AND SHE SAID NOTHING, IT WOULD
INCREASE DELIVERY COSTS BECAUSE THE
TRUCKS THEY HAVE NOW DO NOT FILL EXISTING
TANKS.
SO THAT IS A COMPLETE FALSEHOOD FROM OUR
ELECTED OFFICIALS! I
ALSO THEY HAVE THIS BIG RUSH TO DO THIS BECAUSE MR. POLASIC SAID THE TANKS ARE LEAKING, I EMAILED MR VOLK AND ASKED HIM FOR THE
INSPECTION REPORT THAT INDICATES LEAKAGE,
AND HE SAID THERE HAS BEEN NO INSPECTION AND TO HIS. KNOWLEDGE
THEY DONT LEAK.
SO WHY ARE WE DOING THIS!!!!
OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE ALLOWING THIS COMMUNITY TO BE IRREVERSIBLY COMPROMISED BY:
ACQUIRING THIS GRANT BASED ON INTENTIONAL FALSEHOODS
ABOUT THE CITYS INTENTIONS AT THE AIRPORT.
NOT GETTING PROPER ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
NOT USING PROFESSIONAL FEASIBILITY STUDIES
INTENTIONAL FALSEHOOD ABOUT NEEDING TO
REPLACE FUEL FARM
INTENTIONAL FALSEHOOD ABOUT BEING ABLE TO
SAVE ON DELIVERY COSTS.
INTENTIONAL FALSEHOOD ABOUT NOT ACQUIRING
ADDITIONAL LAND
INTENTIONAL FALSEHOOD ABOUT THE 60 %
EXPANSION OF FUEL TANKS
INTENTIONAL FALSEHOOD ABOUT CONDITION OF
THE RUNWAYS
AND NOT GETTING ADEQUATE PUBLIC INPUT
BEFORE THEY DO WHAT THEY ARE DOING.
NOT ONLY ARE THERE 25 SIGNIFICANT PROJECT ELEMENTS PERTAINING TO AIRPORT EXPANSION THAT NO ONE EVER HEARS ABOUT, THERE ARE 101 CONTRACTS PENDING 101, ALSO THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF TREES REMOVED RECENTLY ALONG LAKEWAY DRIVE. AND LOTS OF PROPERTY WAS JUST ACQUIRED UNDER THREAT OF CONDEMNATION, AND YOU THINK THIS IS ABOUT THE FUEL FARM.
I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THIS COMMUNITY AND SO SHOULD YOU BE."
The city government seems to be ignoring these concerns by refusing to enter into any meaningful dialog with these citizens. The city just stonewalls and refuses to answer the obvious questions posed in the above presentation.
Isn't it time for the city to engage these citizens and address their concerns?
Wednesday, November 16, 2016
Hedge Funds Don't Belong in Pension Funds
More and more pension funds are recognizing that hedge funds are high risk and high cost and the return does not justify either. Many large public pension funds are divesting themselves of hedge funds. Hedge Funds performance subpar
The Texas Municipal Retirement System (TMRS) is currently invested 10.1% in hedge funds and increasing allocations in Private Equity and Real Return asset classes, which are also higher risk. Here are the returns for the last year for the asset classes.
It is clear that Absolute Return, another name for Hedge Funds, is a drag on overall investment performance. Remember, the overall return for TMRS must be 6.75% annually in order to meet their pension payment obligations.
The Texas Municipal Retirement System (TMRS) is currently invested 10.1% in hedge funds and increasing allocations in Private Equity and Real Return asset classes, which are also higher risk. Here are the returns for the last year for the asset classes.
It is clear that Absolute Return, another name for Hedge Funds, is a drag on overall investment performance. Remember, the overall return for TMRS must be 6.75% annually in order to meet their pension payment obligations.
Tuesday, November 15, 2016
Williams Drive Transportation Corridor Study
The Williams Drive corridor study is underway and the city is asking for citizen input. Consult the city website Williams Drive Study for more information.
Get involved to let the city know your views on how Williams Drive should be improved to meet your needs.
The pedestrian and bicycle constituents are making their desires known thus forcing study time, design and construction effort to accommodate their wishes. Automobiles will be the transportation mode for 99% of the people in the foreseeable future and therefore 99% of the design effort and construction $ should be directed at making the automobile travel fast, safe and efficient.
Be aware that some in our city government would like to use the force of the city to dictate to property and business owners along Williams Drive how they can use their property. It has been suggested that zoning laws should be used to restrict land use along Williams Drive to any commercial use except anything automobile. That would mean no gas stations, repair shops, car washes, dealers, auto parts stores, etc. would be allowed on Williams Drive. Eliminating automotive related businesses by government completely ignores the will of the people who may want close, quick and easy access for all things automotive. Let the people choose, with their consumer dollar, the businesses and locations they will support.
This idea needs to be stopped dead in its tracks. This is government picking winners and losers. That is not the role of government. Let free enterprise decide what the people want and where they want it.
It should be noted that the City is planning to install two traffic roundabouts on Rivery Drive, North of Williams Drive, that connects to Northwestern Blvd which will cross I 35 and connect with Austin Ave. Let your city planners and council members know whether or not you think roundabouts are a "good" idea here in Georgetown.
Get involved to let the city know your views on how Williams Drive should be improved to meet your needs.
The pedestrian and bicycle constituents are making their desires known thus forcing study time, design and construction effort to accommodate their wishes. Automobiles will be the transportation mode for 99% of the people in the foreseeable future and therefore 99% of the design effort and construction $ should be directed at making the automobile travel fast, safe and efficient.
Be aware that some in our city government would like to use the force of the city to dictate to property and business owners along Williams Drive how they can use their property. It has been suggested that zoning laws should be used to restrict land use along Williams Drive to any commercial use except anything automobile. That would mean no gas stations, repair shops, car washes, dealers, auto parts stores, etc. would be allowed on Williams Drive. Eliminating automotive related businesses by government completely ignores the will of the people who may want close, quick and easy access for all things automotive. Let the people choose, with their consumer dollar, the businesses and locations they will support.
This idea needs to be stopped dead in its tracks. This is government picking winners and losers. That is not the role of government. Let free enterprise decide what the people want and where they want it.
It should be noted that the City is planning to install two traffic roundabouts on Rivery Drive, North of Williams Drive, that connects to Northwestern Blvd which will cross I 35 and connect with Austin Ave. Let your city planners and council members know whether or not you think roundabouts are a "good" idea here in Georgetown.
Monday, November 14, 2016
Solar Panels on New Westside Service Center
Observers of the enviroment around them notice that the roof of the new Westside Service Center has been populated with several hundred solar panels that are presumeabley tied into the Georgetown electric grid.
Has anyone seen the payback analysis for this installation? In other words, how many years will it take to save enough money by not purchasing commercial electrical power to offset the cost of the panels, associated equipment, and installation? Since Georgetown is purchasing electricity for on the order of 5 cents/KWhr, it is likely to take a very long time if based on the electricity used by the Service Center alone. If there is excess electricity generated and dumped into the Georgetown grid, how much will the City save annually by fore going the purchase of electricity from commercial providers?
This kind of analysis ought to be routinely available to Georgetown citizens and in fact should be done prior to any committment of capital resources to aid in decision making by the City Council.
Has anyone seen the payback analysis for this installation? In other words, how many years will it take to save enough money by not purchasing commercial electrical power to offset the cost of the panels, associated equipment, and installation? Since Georgetown is purchasing electricity for on the order of 5 cents/KWhr, it is likely to take a very long time if based on the electricity used by the Service Center alone. If there is excess electricity generated and dumped into the Georgetown grid, how much will the City save annually by fore going the purchase of electricity from commercial providers?
This kind of analysis ought to be routinely available to Georgetown citizens and in fact should be done prior to any committment of capital resources to aid in decision making by the City Council.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)