Luring Business to El Paso

My buddy David K was calling for the head of Claudia Ordaz the other day over the fact that Ordaz, Niland, and a few other members of council raised questions about the deal to bring a business to El Paso through incentives.

Let me begin by saying that I'm not a fan of this idea.

Its like paying for sex.

In principle I think we should be looking for ways to invest in our community that make us attractive to businesses without having to pay them to come here through the form of incentives.

But I recognize its competitive out there and the city has to do what it has to do. But what is wrong with our leadership doing their job and trying to get the most we can get while paying the least amount of money for it.

Frankly, I don't buy the idea the Detroit analogy either. I don't buy that we will lose out on these high paying jobs if they are in Santa Teresa as opposed to west El Paso. I really give a damn if the business sets up its shingle in Santa Teresa over El Paso because exactly where do you think they are going to draw their employees from? And once those employees get hired, where do you think they are going to spend their money? You think a worker, who will likely be an El Pasoan, is going to drive to Cruces for their groceries or to gas up?

Hell no.

City Rep Claudia Ordaz rightfully made the point that a single mom could qualify for public assistance on some of those wages. Which is fine if that is what the company wants to pay, but why the hell should we taxpayers subsidize a low-wage job?

Am I the only one that thinks that the math is wrong when we subsidize a job that the employee could then turn around and get public assistance (which we all so pay)?

Thats like paying for sex and taking a hooker out to dinner.

Look at any major metropolitan area in the country and there are companies that are located in suburbs around the city but the presence of the business contributes the the regional economic development. I mean do I really need to give examples like Houston, Dallas, Austin, Phoenix, Los Angeles, Atlanta, San Antonio, etc...?

Interestingly while DK makes the very valid point that most of the members of council do not have business experience, if I remember correctly it was the city representative with business experience, Larry Romero, that actually made the motion to table the issue. DK might have missed that.

The reality is that several members of council questioned the issue but Ordaz was singled out. At first I thought it was because she has to run for reelection in this election cycle, but then I realized Representative Niland raised the same questions and is also up for reelection.

But while DK called for Ordaz's head, I think he fails to realize one key point.

Who in the hell are you going to get to run against her?

Young, smart, attractive, and a pretty strong track record already. Oh and she's not bat-shit crazy. Good luck finding someone to run against her. I live in District 6 and I was thinking of several scenarios I can't honestly think of a viable candidate. She won every precinct in the election. She still has a ton of money. She has a strong base north of the freeway and she lives south of the freeway. Which doesn't matter because, as I said before, she won every precinct.

Seriously...someone come up with a name that would be remotely viable.

Just one.

Go ahead...I'll wait...