Friday, January 13, 2012
Little Rock Government Chamber of Commerce seeks increase in taxpayer support
Posted by Max Brantley on Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 6:39 AM
The morning outrage, courtesy of Barry Haas, who carefully follows the Central Arkansas Water Commission:
He was present for a commission meeting yesterday at which the Commission was asked for a 100 percent increase in the annual subsidy that water customers pay the Little Rock Regional Chamber of Commerce — from $25,000 to $50,000. He said the Chamber was seeking a whopping $1.5 million, though I'm not clear if that's strictly in public subsidies or overall. A Chamber employee said it anticipates getting the majority of its "Stock in the Rock" development fund from private sources.
According to Barry, the Chamber is making the rounds of public agencies that support it for similar increases in support. The Little Rock budget this year currently is holding fast at the $200,000 annual taxpayer subsidy, but it's unknown what and when increases are planned to grab more of city taxpayer dollars. It will certainly seek a kickback for managing, from secret, the city sales tax campaign.
Haas said the Chamber will be making the rounds of other agencies with a hand out. I first wrote about this chamber shakedown in 2009. It extracted taxpayer and ratepayer money (unbeknownst to the public at large) from the city, Central Arkansas Water, the Sewer Committee, UALR and the Little Rock Port Authority, to the tune of $250,000 or so. n years past, County Judge Buddy Villines has been reluctant to commit county money to the fund-raising drive, in part because of the chamber's aggressive political stance. It's naturally pro-business, which means anti-labor. It has also taken a strong role in backing the corporate interests tearing down the Little Rock School District.
Accountability? It's non-existent. The Chamber won't specifically reveal how its existing tax subsidies are spent. It operated in the shadows to raise money for the city in a half-billion-dollar sales tax increase and then engaged a high-dollar attorney to defeat my effort at the state Ethics Commission to end the sham arrangement by which it laundered campaign money through a campaign consultant, the Markham Group, to avoid disclosing exactly how campaign money was spent.
This should be simple, but it's not in a city where the business community controls city government through a city board controlled by at-large representatives. This board, in turn, appoints members to several of the agencies giving public money to the chamber — water, sewer, port authority.
The chamber says this money is for economic development. THEIR kind of economic development naturally — anti-union, pro-corporate welfare incentive. Who can be against economic development? Not me. But the money paid the chamber can't be segregated from the chamber's other work on legislation contrary to the wishes of many in the community.
The chamber should raise its own money, not operate with a fat subsidy from taxpayers and ratepayers. Certainly not a subsidy arranged without meaningful public knowledge or input through the good offices of people nominally responsible to the public at large. "Everybody else does it" is not a legitimate argument for giving the chamber tax money or robbing banks.
I vote NO on a Chamber of Commerce tax.
PS: Do I need to remind you that Deltic Timber, a major supporter of the LR Chamber, is fighting the strongest measures for land use controls in the Lake Maumelle watershed? Graham Rich should be ashamed of himself.
PPS: A place to watch is the Technology Park Authority, created under a law written by the Chamber and stocked with members from Chamber leadership, including the chamber's executive director and former president, and the business establishment. It will be on the receiving end of $22 million from the new city sales tax. Might it be asked for handout, too? It would be a grotesque conflict of interest, but ...
Barry's note about the meeting:
At today's Central Arkansas Water Board meeting CEO Graham Rich made a presentation seeking an increased annual donation to the Chamber of Commerce from $25K to $50K. He mentioned the Chamber had also asked other entities — L.R. Wastewater, City of L.R., etc.- to pony up more money. The Chamber is trying to raise $1.5 million, according to Graham. You may want to ask Graham to send you his Powerpoint slides showing how the Chamber would supposedly use the money.
The CAW Board had quite a few questions and decided to table the request until next month's meeting. Eddie Powell seemed taken aback at a request for a 100% increase. Graham was unable to answer whether the Chamber was hitting everyone up for a 100% increase. A question was asked about whether or not CAW could legally give money to the Chamber for something not directly tied to CAW's mission —water. CAW contract attorney Tad Bohannon gave a squishy answer in response to that legal question. Graham pointed out 3 industries that had located in L.R. and generated more than $200K in annual revenue for CAW. But it was pointed out those industries located here before the Chamber started getting CAW money, that the Chamber may not have had anything to do with recruiting them in the first place, and also that CAW had given special deals to some of them (waived normal waterline installation expenses in the tens of thousands of dollars or more) upon request from the City of Little Rock, etc. Graham mentioned other towns (Tulsa, Oklahoma City) where the water utility gives the local Chamber even more than CAW does and what a wonderful arrangement it is. Interesting discussion and that the Chamber had Graham make their pitch for them. Harder for a Board to say no to their own CEO than some Chamber lackey?
I have no doubt the CAW Board will rubber stamp a Chamber donation again this year, but I'm not as sure it will be the increased $50K donation requested.
The Chamber is getting more efficient at shaking down public agencies than the Mafia.
Speaking of...
-
Clueless at Little Rock City Hall
May 23, 2012So. Little Rock city government is going to show that it's putting jillions in new sales tax revenue to good use on capital projects. /more/
-
Questionable travel expenses underlie UALR dean's dismissal
May 21, 2012Arkansas Business gets to the bottom of the recent abrupt departure of Anthony Chelte as dean of the UALR College of Business. /more/
-
Smear campaign mounted against ethics initiative
May 21, 2012A surreptitious effort has begun circulating in the Arkansas business community to encourage people not to sign petitions now circulating to improve Arkansas ethics law. /more/
-
Legal challenge brewing on LR Tech Park
May 21, 2012Attorneys are at work studying the enabling legislation by which the Little Rock Regional Chamber of Commerce set up a statutory way to get city taxpayer money — $22 million so far — for a quasi-public venture it controls to encourage private enterprise by building an office building to lure technology companies. /more/
-
Richardson seeks to protect Tech Park neighborhood
May 18, 2012Little Rock City Director Kenneth Richardson is preparing to put other members of the City Board on the spot. /more/
-
Tech Park Authority is out of touch
May 17, 2012UAMS and UALR Chancellors Dan Rahn and Joel Anderson made overdue calls to the Little Rock Technology Park Authority last night for more neighborhood consideration in choosing a site for the taxpayer-financed project ($22 million has been committed so far but documents suggest $50 million is desired for the startup and not a single private dollar has yet trickled in.) /more/
-
Tech Park Authority meeting today: UPDATE
May 16, 2012Leslie Newell Peacock is covering today's meeting of the Little Rock Technology Park Authority. Members of the authority have now voluntarily filed financial interest statements and they eventually will be available on-line. /more/
-
UAMS, UALR leaders raise neighborhood concerns on Tech Park
May 14, 2012I've been at work rounding up internal communications from the varioustaxpayer-supported agencies that have been working to deliver, at significant public expense, a rental office building to entice tech businesses to Little Rock. /more/
-
I am curious: Not yellow? And other Tech Park travails
May 11, 2012I mentioned the other day that a response had been slow coming from the Little Rock Regional Chamber of Commerce on an FOI request I made for information relative to the Little Rock Technology Park Authority. /more/
-
About that five-minute rule for the technology park
May 10, 2012I've griped before about the scientific underpinning of the rigid believe of Little Rock Technology Park boosters that it MUST be located within five minutes of UAMS and UALR. /more/
- More »
Comments (21)
Showing 1-21 of 21
Why is Little Rock Wastewater buy advertising from AT. It must be a shackdown. Do I have an option on how is my wastewater provider? Can we say Corp. welfare?
like
dislike
This is just disgusting. I rarely agree with you Maximus, but I stand with you on this one. The chamber does absolutely nothing. Anytime a business sets up shop, they pat themselves on the back as being the reason why the company came here. Even if they never even met with them. This is nothing more than to hire more political cronies and to jack up their flight expenses and jet around the world all in the name of development. This rich club can go straight to hell.
And if I'm not mistaken, didn't these a-holes get more money with the worthless 1 cent sales tax? Public fund waste is never enough for some people. Gag me with a spoon.
The Chambers of Commerce have been thoroughly corrupted by utility lobbyists, whose interests don't necessarily coincide with most business owners.
AT&T Arkansas CEO Ed Drilling's abuse of his chairmanship of the state chamber to promote the AT&T/T-Mobile merger comes to mind. The phony "Internet Innovation Alliance" he organized with a few pliable local chamber leaders was ostensibly formed to "promote broadband access and adoption throughout the state", but as far as I can tell, the only thing they ever did was support the doomed utility merger.
I'm not as opposed as Max is to the City providing funds to the chamber. Economic development is a legitimate public function. I see nothing inherently wrong with paying the Chamber to perform that function for us or to supplement what City staff may do. I do agree with Max that those expenditures, because they are public money, should be open for review at the same level of detail as would be required if the city was spending the $200,000 itself. I have no direct knowledge of what we get for our $200,000. I am just speaking regarding the concept.
But the Water Utility? How on earth can you justify taking water ratepayers' fees and handing it over to the chamber? The Water Commission is a utility--economic development is not their mission--providing clean, safe drinking water is their mission. I don't see how $25,000 or $50,000 to the chamber furthers that mission.
I know that there may be times when some kind of concession by the water utility might be part of an economic development package to entice a company to locate here (or stay here). But, in my experience in another city, there were always two conditions--(1) the benefit from the utility (in the form of lower hook-up costs or a negotiated rate or providing some of the infrastructure that would otherwise be the company's obligation) was always part of a larger package designed particularly for the project and deemed necessary for the project and (2) everyone was assured that the utility concessions would pay for themselves, not indirectly, but directly to the utility. After all, when you're treating millions of gallons of water, it doesn't cost much incrementally to treat more gallons. So, if you've got a company who is going to use a lot of water (and pay a big water bill, even though perhaps lower than it would otherwise be), then the water utility knows it's going to get a return on its investment.
CAW money to the Chamber of Commerce for unfettered, undiscoverable use--no way!
We have government of corporations, for corporations, by corporations
It is amazing to me how so-called fiscal conservatives will fight tooth and nail to keep public money from being spent on the people who paid the taxes, but gladly support the redistribution of our tax dollars to profitable corporations.
That tells me the people and political organizations behind this aren't fiscal conservatives at all, but basically lobbyists looking to strip mine the public treasury for private profit.
It seems to me that the limited-government, pro-constitution crowd is actually the big government, pro-redistribution of wealth crowd, fully owned and operated by big business.
It's a mini-Wall Street, right here in LR, brought to you by the same people who bankrupted this country to fatten their bank accounts.
My personal two cents.
Isn't the Chamber pretty much the flying monkey army of the Wicked Witches of Wichita?
Blueinaredstate, your post is absolutely right. Some here go overboard (and often come off as extreme as those they criticize), but your comments are spot on. The City should work with the Chamber on economic development. The Chamber should disclose how that money is spent. Having Water pay doesn't fit.
If the ACLU had an arm that did "economic development" would you support routing taxpayer dollars to it? Or the NRA?
Any organization which is engaged in political lobbying, and which receives undisclosed amounts from foreign companies to use for that purpose, should not be in the path of public money.
In 2010, the Chamber of Commerce said they would spend $75 million to defeat Democratic candidates and purchased over 8000 TV ads in support of Republican candidates. They received a million dollars from Fox and almost a million dollars in disclosed donations from foreign companies.
Please do not try to make the case that this is irrelevant because the Chamber says it is. It is relevant. If a liberal organization were up to these shenanigans, the howls would be unceasing.
Not to mention the Chamber formally endorses employer-based health insurance systems, creating large administrative costs for any small business that wants its employees to have health insurance. It is one big reason we trail most of the developed world in small business job creation, unless one believes that the average small business has the spare time and excess money to spend on health care administration.
It's hard to call such a position "economic development." Better terms for small business might be "overhead development" or "profit undevelopment."
It is time for the people of Little Rock to take a tip from the US's sanctioning of Iran. Withdraw your membership in the Little Rock Chamber of Commerce and start digging your own well so you can disconnect your socialist water meter!
The Fort Baptist Chamber of Commerce is a privately owned company. Is the same not true with the LR Chamber? What if part of your water bill went into the pockets of...oh say, Russell Chevrolet? With all that free money coming in Russell could lower the price of an 8000, 12 year old Honda Civic LX, to 4 or 5 thousand dollars and move that puppy right off their lot. After all my friend, Corporations are people too, ya know.
What kind of Mafia are you all growing in LR? How does Big Tony Stodola get away with this shit? Might check to see what they're adding to your drinking water....oh, but your new back yard well would take care of that....
There was a ruling in Benton County Circuit Court by Judge Xollie Duncan in a similar situation, and may have actually involved a local Chamber of Commerce, that said if you take public money, the books are open under FOI
The LR Chamber of Welfare could take a page out of the Chickenopolis Chamber of Welfare's playbook.
When the going gets tough, our local WELFARE Chamber gets inclusive!
To bolster their "economic development" stats the Spdle Welfare Chamber includes
non-profit organizations and churches, bidness that have been open for years to make the economic development look good in order to get their Welfare Check.
foiaspringdale.blogspot.com/2011/12/in-bla…
Calvin Coolidge famously said, "The business of America is business." I, for one, do not agree. The business of America would be better described as the pursuit of our peoples' happiness, not to increase the Gross National Product or the profit therefrom for stockholders. Neither is it the business of Little Rock's government to promote commerce. Those who will benefit from commerce should and will do that. It makes no more sense for the City to subsidize the Chamber of
Commerce than it would for it subsidize the local medical or bar association.
Kigfish,
Using your or the court logic, Arkansas times books would be covered by FOIA. The City of Little Rock has a contract with the Chamber to do economic development. Little Rock Wastewater has a contract for advertising with Arkansas Times. If you want to open that door, I am right behind you.
Back about 19-ought-90 more or less, Attorney General Winston Bryant (where IS Winnie anyway?) wrote an opinion that it was ultra viries and illegal to boot for ANY public entity--a city, a water utility, a Junior College, etc-- in Arkansas to pay dues to a Chamber of Commerce or a Rotary Club or an Elks Den or anything like that. Now then , AG Opinions aint binding as we all know, but they ought to count for something.
I can certainly see that in a conservative state, conservatives would have no problem taking money from the people and giving it to conservative lobbying organizations.
I only question why they would call such redistribution of wealth to achieve social policy goals "conservative."
There is a state-level department called Industrial Development that represents the entire state in the search for new businesses. They represent the state and therefore, why do individual cities also need one unless it is to poach business from town to town, i.e., teh state fair.
That is Texas' big claim to growth-they poached businesses from other state so the net number of jobs probably went down and because most were lower-paying than where the companies had been, the net value to the working class was a DECREASE in income. The cororation goal is met and Perry tries to be a hero until he opens his mouth and obviously any success in Texas was in spite of Perry, not because of him.
Actually-the answer was corporate greed as the jobs keep seeking the lowest pay and benefits (have they tried Guam? Virgin Islands? lot of available labor in Puerto Rico?)
I'm confused. Why does the city give the CoC a dime let alone consider more? I always thought the advertising from the hamburger tax filtered through the CoC too. Who does handle that? Used to be businesses paid dues to the Chamber so they could post a membership to impress other members with their cooperative credentials. The city receives no benefit from same.
". . . the people and political organizations behind this aren't fiscal conservatives at all, but basically lobbyists looking to strip mine the public treasury for private profit . . ." OccupyLittleRock
Unfortunately, OLR, this is not a new discovery, but in my past experiences and IMO your correlation of outspoken "fiscal conservatives" with lobbyists looking to strip mine the public treasury for private profit is an has been a universal condition for decades, especially those of the fiscal conservatives involved in public policy making.
More by Author
-
Bobby Petrino watch: No decision from Jeff Long today
No puffs of smoke from the Broyles athletic complex today to indicate if Bobby Petrino will remain pope of Razorback football despite having lied to superiors about the young, blonde co-worker who joined him for an ill-fated motorcycle ride.
- Apr 9, 2012
-
Garret Sorensen plea bargains in USA Drug fraud case
The U.S. attorney's office said a plea bargain was struck today in a mail fraud case against Garret Sorensen, who'd been accused of defrauding his former employer, USA Drug, of more than $500,000 when he was vice presidentof marketing.
- May 2, 2012
- More »
Event Calendar
-
Re: The death of American newspapers, Part II
Revenues and expenses aside, readers of the NWA Times, The Morning News, & The Daily…
- on May 25, 2012
-
Re: Surgeon general strikes deal on disturbance charges
I hope it's not lost on anyone how close this incident was to the robbery/murder…
- on May 25, 2012
-
Re: Hurst fined again by bar committee for late filing
Hahaha. Partisanship invalidates opinions? This, coming from folks that are actually talking about supporting Q…
- on May 25, 2012
Top Commenters
Blogroll
Slideshows
-
Police close the Occupy Little Rock camp, perhaps the last Occupy encampment on public land.
Site Index
News
Cover Story / Arkansas Reporter / The Week That Was / Smart Talk / The Insider / The Observer / Editorial / Max Brantley / Ernest Dumas / Gene Lyons / Bob Lancaster / Words / Guest Writer / Letters
Entertainment
A&E Feature / To-Do List / In Brief / Movie Reviews / Music Reviews / Theater Reviews / A&E News / Art Notes / Graham Gordy / Books / Media / Dining Reviews / Dining Guide / What's Cookin' / Calendar / The Televisionist / Movie Listings / Gallery Listings
This Week's Cover
Quick Links
Special Publications
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
