Dallas, Show Me the MoneyGram!

• @Wylie H - even if South Dallas political leader extortion was only PART of the equation, it still killed any chance of the Southern sector getting any development (especially when combined with the Don Hill fiasco.) . I mean, seriously - If it was YOUR business, would you relocate down there in extortion central? . South Dallas has only themselves to blame.

• Re: the Inland Port. It wasn't just the South Dallas politicians grabbing for some "equity" that killed that deal-- Leppert was also in there, behind the scenes, blocking and tackling on behalf of his backer, Ross Perot, Jr. who already has a competing deal in Ft. Worth at Alliance. Basically, the Inland Port was on the wrong end of two Dallas political themes: 1) South Dallas political leaders self-dealing for personal gain; and 2) Citywide leaders (in this case, Leppert), throwing the citizens of Dallas under the bus to curry favor with well-heeled out-of-towners (i.e. Perot and his Alliance development).

• @Alan - just in case you haven't been keeping up on current events, companies won't relocate to South Dallas because there's too many politicians that have to be bought off. Just ask the guy who owns the inland port. . South Dallas has literally shot themselves in the foot as far as getting any corporate relocations.

• Minneapolis vs. Dallas? I'd choose Mpls. in a Minnesota minute.

• How about putting our civic money where our mouth is? Let's offer incentives only if the company locates or builds south of I-30, with graduated incentives for the percentage of transferred employees who purchase or lease homes south of I-30. The incentives don't get paid until proof is provided.

• @James. I'm not an idiot. Neither is Tom Leppert, who will have taken these issues under consideration. If I run two businesses and I use one as a loss leader to hook customers for a more expensive service, then I can make the determination that the one pays for the other. Do you think you're the only one who understands that concept? What I want to know is if that's what we're actually doing. Don't give me BS things like "economic activity will increase" and it will pay for itself because "people will buy houses and shop and eat and they'll do it in Dallas and look how great it will be!". $400k is real money, if that's the right number. But what are the details? You need to know the income and level of the employees they plan to relocate. You can bet that a decent percentage will relocate to the suburbs (or HP/UP). That means they will do much of their shopping and eating in the suburbs. There are people who try their best to estimate these types of things all the time (though the last thing I'd do is advocate the hiring of a consultant). If there is a good faith attempt by the city to quantify the economic activity these specific 75 people will bring to the city of Dallas itself (NOT the metro area - which is what the Chamber of Commerce focuses on), then I'm conceptually fine with this kind of deal. What I don't want to be told is that the deal is being sold on the basis that it will attract future businesses to relocate to Dallas because they will see what a great place it is, even though it doesn't specifically pay for itself. Frankly, in absence of evidence to the contrary, I think Leppert's mantra is to overpay on these deals to generate press releases about "economic activity" because the piper won't have to be paid until long after he's gone. But maybe I'm just really cynical.

• How about a bunch of us Dallas residents all go down to council on the same day they rubber stamp that incentive package for MoneyGram and demand some residential and sales tax relief? Think it will work?

• And Joe Citizen, how would you actually monitor such telecommuting requirements? Have DPD conduct random raids on these offices to make sure there aren't too many people working on site as opposed to at home?

• How about employee telecommuting program requirements being thrown in with the tax incentives so Dallas does not have to build roads it can't afford to handle the extra traffic?

• JF, you wouldn't actually be broke! You're forgetting that these relocations bring in people that buy houses, rent apartments, eat at our restaurants, shop at our stores etc... It's good for the city and brings in MUCH needed tax dollars. It's only about $400K in incentives- the City should make that back in no time!

• @James. No. If we are friendly for business because of our low wages, lack of regulation, etc then the relocation should pay for itself. I'm not opposed to incentives for business, even though I consider it corporate welfare and there's no justification for it if you oppose welfare for poor people. I just want to find out how much we are providing in "incentives" and what the ROI calculation looks like. And don't give me trash like "it will show other companies how attractive it is to relocate here". If I loan you $20 and then only ask for $19 in return, you'll tell ALL your friends to ask me for the same deal until I am bankrupt, $1 at a time.

• As Heinbaugh explains, via e-mail: "The incentive package is already in place, but it still is contingent on Council approval. With corporate relocations, that's usually the way it works because the moves generally are kept under wraps. Boeing was a rare exception. Cities generally have guidelines so their Economic Development departments know what they can put forward. If cities consistently bailed on their incentives -- so long as they're reasonable -- you wouldn't get many companies knocking on your door."

• Wouldn't giving them incentives send a message to other companies looking to relocate that we have a friendly business environment, that we're aggresive on relocations etc...? I actually think it would send a positive pro-business message!

• The aim is to attach to success, to wit: Step 1: Company A announces their move to Dallas or their new development. Step 2: Dallas gives after-the-fact incentives. Step 3: Media forget the details, including timeline. Step 4: Dallas brags about business recruitment success, including fabulous incentive program.

• Spoetzl, beat you to it. Already asked Heinbaugh.

• Now the Council is really thinking! Which one of those knuckleheads determined that it would be a good idea to provide a public incentive package to a company that is moving to town without incentives? That's a question for you, Wilonsky; was it council or staff that came up with that one?

• Wait until they find out about the evil property tax increase! Or will they all be exempt under the public incentive package?

TotalComments: 17