Do you support 1 A? (Colorado Springs, Pueblo: sales, credit, home)

[Josseppie]

Question 1A would extend a property tax that sunsets at the end of the year. Supporters say it will generate more than $3 million annually to create jobs, but opponents say it amounts to corporate welfare.

Do you support it if so why if not why not?

[Maynerd]

No. Mostly because I haven't seen a concrete plan listing HOW the measure will create jobs.

I think you need to have the plan before you ask the taxpayers for the money. Just because it's the continuation of an otherwise expiring tax doesn't mean it's not a "new" tax.

[Josseppie]

Maybe 1 A is not the answer but you guys need a new economic development plan the one you have now is not working as well as it should.

[love colo summers]

Yes, I support it. Homeowners who don't want to continue paying the $10 per $200k home value can otherwise hopefully put that $10 to good use when their job leaves town!

We do need an improved economic development plan. We have lost too many jobs in the past few years to other cities. Things that the $3M+ this will bring could have solved may have kept those jobs in CS, and it could help to bring new jobs here in the future.

Since each company considering coming (or leaving) Colorado Springs has unique circumstances, the only way to "plan" to spend the money is review it case by case and have a body in place to determine what is best for CS.

"The referendum establishes a 5 person Board as part of the decision making process. The Board will review funding requests for their merit, develop measurable performance requirements that a company will have to reach, and provide recommendations to the City Council which will thoughtfully determine if the funds should be used for the purpose. The system is designed to be accountable and transparent to ensure that all parties exercise good stewardship in the use of these funds."

[Bob from down south]

Originally Posted by love colo summers

Yes, I support it. Homeowners who don't want to continue paying the $10 per $200k home value can otherwise hopefully put that $10 to good use when their job leaves town!

No, I voted against it.

The idea that this agency would prevent anyone's job from leaving town is pretty goofy.

To say that this bill does not raise taxes is a lie, too. It doesn't impose more tax load than we have right now, but it does impose more tax load that what we would have if the old tax were allowed to expire. People should remember this sort of chicanery the next time somebody asks them to approve a "temporary" tax for anything. We've seen several items on the ballot in the last six months that continue an expiring tax beyond its original life with the LIE that it is not a tax increase written at the front of the text in the ballot initiative.

I don't believe that this is an effective way to enhance employment. Businesses care much more about how they will be taxed, the kind of talent pool available, and whether or not their operations will be subject to the negative impact of a militant treehugging Birkenstock Brigade.

[Josseppie]

PBR and HP and Vesta's and the usaf among many many many more would disagree with you!

[Bob from down south]

Originally Posted by Josseppie

PBR and HP and Vesta's and the usaf among many many many more would disagree with you!

I know quite a bit about how Doss Aviation got the contract for USAF flight screening, and it had precious little to do with paid community lobbying.

My experience with groups like that is that they actually do very little for the money we waste on them, but they are always to be found out front taking credit for things that would have happened without them. They end up being self-serving PR machines whose primary purpose is to pat themselves on the back in the most publicly conspicuous manner possible to justify their continued existence..

[Josseppie]

Originally Posted by Bob from down south

I know quite a bit about how Doss Aviation got the contract for USAF flight screening, and it had precious little to do with paid community lobbying.

My experience with groups like that is that they actually do very little for the money we waste on them, but they are always to be found out front taking credit for things that would have happened without them. They end up being self-serving PR machines whose primary purpose is to pat themselves on the back in the most publicly conspicuous manner possible to justify their continued existence..

As they say the proof is in the pudding and lately Pueblo is always announcing new companies and the Springs is losing them. As you say Pueblo is not a great town so what's the difference, we have a 1/2 cent sales tax for primary jobs and the Springs does not.

[Bob from down south]

Originally Posted by Josseppie

As they say the proof is in the pudding and lately Pueblo is always announcing new companies and the Springs is losing them. As you say Pueblo is not a great town so what's the difference, we have a 1/2 cent sales tax for primary jobs and the Springs does not.

Well, the unemployment rate in Pueblo has gone higher faster than UE in Colorado Springs, so I simply don't buy into your constantly repeated theme that you're doing it better down there in [mod cut]. Just because you say it 1000 times a day doesn't make it anything close to true.

And your PR machine is busy doing things like making an inordinately big deal about small developments like 140 jobs in a water bottling plant phased in over 3.5 years. Yeah, OK, it's better than nothing, but it's not major impact. We don't run the flag up the pole up here for that kind of stuff...and the stats support the assertion that you are not outperforming the Springs in employment opportunites.

[Josseppie]

Like I said vote against it that's fine with me!