Why losing AT&T isn't a big deal... (Houston: sales, sales tax)

[pr57001]

This move has little to do with the airport!! The move must be rationalized in some fashion.

Travel has been slashed at "T" for years!

These moves occur at the whim of the CEO (greed/power/cowboys) take your pick. If you read the San Antonio Light article on Southwestern bell moving to San Antonio, that I posted on the other similar thread, you will laugh at how silly the relocation arguments were then...but it was in our favor.

This was first order of business for the new CEO.

[oldmanshirt]

True, the rationale behind AT&T moving (closer to suppliers, better airport) are absurd when you consider a) This is a communications company and should be able to conduct most of their business from anywhere in the country, b) if anything the suppliers should be coming to them, as they are the bigger company, and c) these guys all travel in corporate jets anyway, so whether they fly out of JFK or Des Moines Int'l shouldn't matter.

[Kofi713]

Originally Posted by oldmanshirt

True, the rationale behind AT&T moving (closer to suppliers, better airport) are absurd when you consider a) This is a communications company and should be able to conduct most of their business from anywhere in the country, b) if anything the suppliers should be coming to them, as they are the bigger company, and c) these guys all travel in corporate jets anyway, so whether they fly out of JFK or Des Moines Int'l shouldn't matter.

The real truth is, the new CEO lives in Dallas, and wanted the company there.

[jerryg]

Baltimore City and Baltimore Country are explicitly separate political beings. The City managed water 'company' services parts of the County, but aside from that, that are absolutely separate.

I only lived in Baltimore County for a decade, and Maryland for over 20 years.

I'm actually thinking that there's a lot more similarity between the two cities than initially meets the eye, but there's enough differences that it's really a wash.

[smitty12]

Originally Posted by jerryg

Baltimore City and Baltimore Country are explicitly separate political beings. The City managed water 'company' services parts of the County, but aside from that, that are absolutely separate.

I only lived in Baltimore County for a decade, and Maryland for over 20 years.

I'm actually thinking that there's a lot more similarity between the two cities than initially meets the eye, but there's enough differences that it's really a wash.

I meant that Baltimore City is not located in any county. Essentially in Baltimore City the City and County Government is one entity.

Yes I did vaguely realize that there is a separate county called Baltimore County that surrounds the city. If you live in the city you can not vote for county representatives.

That arrangement is not possible under Texas Law. The city of San Antonio resides within Bexar County. Therefore Residents of San Antonio have separate City and County governments and vote for representation in both governments. This is not the same structurally, though in practice it is similar.

[jerryg]

interesting.
thanks for the civic lesson, it's appreciated (no sarcasm intended - one of those things I'm learning as I live here )

[the_dimwit]

Thanks for clarifying, smitty. I understand what you're saying, but I still find it a bit odd that Bexar County relinquishes so much to the City of San Antonio. After all, what happens in 50-odd years when SA reaches a border and "needs" to annex another community in another county? (No sarcasm, just curiosity...)

I'm not a city planner, nor do I pretend to know everything. I have a limited frame of reference as far as major cities go.

--Dim

[smitty12]

Originally Posted by the_dimwit

Thanks for clarifying, smitty. I understand what you're saying, but I still find it a bit odd that Bexar County relinquishes so much to the City of San Antonio. After all, what happens in 50-odd years when SA reaches a border and "needs" to annex another community in another county? (No sarcasm, just curiosity...)

I'm not a city planner, nor do I pretend to know everything. I have a limited frame of reference as far as major cities go.

--Dim

In reality the county does not have any choice. Home Rule (the ability to create laws) is something only a City with a Home Rule charter can do. The county can not create laws or regulation, they can only enforce laws passed by the Texas Legislature and spend tax money collected. The county also can not effectively stop annexation.

Also the majority of people who vote for county commissioners and county judge live in San Antonio. Is it really in their interest to elect people who will not relinquish control to San Antonio?

San Antonio has already annexed some small areas in surrounding counties. The only way to stop San Antonio from annexing your community is to start up a City with Home Rule in unincorporated areas that are also not in San Antonio Extra-Jurisdictional Territory. With the way EJT works though, this isn't easy.

BTW communities like Terrell Hills and Alamo Heights are Home Rule Cities, which is why San Antonio can not annex them. San Antonio did try in the 50s, but were unsuccessful in their pursuit of that, the Texas Supreme Court ruled that San Antonio could not annex existing Home Rule Cities.

IMHO the Baltimore model makes more sense for Large Cities. Though the Texas Model is better for all but a few counties. Most counties might have 5 or 6 small home rule cities, and the county administers the land in between. Unfortunately when the laws were set up, no city was anywhere close to the size of a county.

[pr57001]

Originally Posted by Kofi713

The real truth is, the new CEO lives in Dallas, and wanted the company there.

I keep seeing this posted. It is simply not true. He has been living in San Antonio.

[Kofi713]

Originally Posted by pr57001

I keep seeing this posted. It is simply not true. He has been living in San Antonio.

Yes it is. He is from Oklahoma, and lived in Dallas before becoming the CEO.