City leaders to discuss Deciphera deal
Lawrence city commissioners plan to discuss a controversial tax incentive deal at their weekly meeting tomorrow night. Enlarge video
Deciphera Pharmaceuticals
City leaders on Monday became more aggressive in their defense of a controversial set of incentives given to Deciphera Pharmaceuticals.
Several commissioners continued to concede that there were flaws in the process related to approving the deal, but said they hoped the public would take a harder look at why the city was eager to keep the start-up cancer research company from leaving Lawrence.
"I really think it is the right thing to do," City Commissioner Rob Chestnut said of the efforts to keep Deciphera. "If we were going to look out on the panorama of companies we wanted to attract, Deciphera would be right at the top of the list.
"It is a company that is fighting cancer, and it is producing the type of jobs we want to attract. It has all the characteristics of a company we want to attract."
City leaders released new information about the company and the deal that wasn't presented when commissioners approved the package in late October. Commissioners have scheduled time at their meeting this evening to answer questions from the public about the deal, which has sparked an investigation by the Kansas Attorney General's Office on whether the city violated state open meetings laws. The deal also has created questions about whether Mayor Sue Hack violated conflict of interest laws by participating in a closed-door executive session on Deciphera, despite owning more than $5,000 in Deciphera stock.
Among the information released is that the company has 23 full-time employees, and the average salary in the company is $72,000 per year. The company employs 13 people with doctorate-level degrees.
"This isn't a machinery-based business," City Commissioner Mike Dever said. "It is about people and brains, and that is the type of business we want here in Lawrence."
More details
In preparation for today's meeting - which begins at 6:35 p.m. at City Hall - staff members crafted a memo providing a more specific breakdown of how the incentives package works. Among the details:
¢ The total amount of money the local "consortium" - made up of the city, the county, the Lawrence-Douglas County Biosciences Authority and Douglas County Development Inc. - will pay over the 10-year period is capped at $4 million.
¢ The local consortium will pay $1.5 million over 10 years to reimburse the Kansas Bioscience Authority for a $3 million grant it will make to Deciphera. The grant will be used to improve a vacant building in East Hills Business Park, which will become the headquarters and laboratory space for the company. The city will pay 31.25 percent of the $1.5 million, the county will pay 31.25 percent, the local bioscience authority will pay 25 percent and DCDI will pay 12.5 percent. The local bioscience authority is largely funded by the city and county.
¢ The local group will pay up to $500,000 to Deciphera if the company reaches certain employment goals. The company will receive payments if it reaches 50, 100, 150 and 200 employees during the 10-year period.
¢ The remaining $2 million of local consortium money will be spent to fund a tax refund program for Deciphera, and to provide funding for the Lawrence-Douglas County Biosciences Authority to conduct other bioscience efforts. Corliss has estimated that the tax refund program - which has been among the more heavily criticized parts of the deal - won't cost more than $500,000 during the 10-year period. That could leave about $1.5 million over 10 years to go to the local bioscience group to build more lab space or conduct other projects designed to attract bioscience companies.
Tax refund
Several commissioners specifically defended the tax refund program, saying that it provided the city more protection than a typical tax abatement. That's because the tax rebate program is tied to the company having a specific number of employees. The amount of the rebate is reduced if the company has fewer employees than expected. If it fails to meet employment projections for three consecutive years, no rebate is given.
The staff memo, however, did not address many of the questions related to the process the incentives package went through to be approved. For example, the tax refund program - which has never been used before in the city - was never discussed during an open City Commission meeting, although it was discussed during a closed-door executive session.
The refund program also did not go through the normal review process that a tax abatement would be required to go through. The idea of paying a company for the number of jobs it produces also is a new idea that was not discussed in open meeting. Corliss, on Monday, said he would wait until tonight's meeting to discuss why the process was handled the way it was.
Extension of old deal
Several commissioners said the Deciphera deal didn't get much public discussion because it was viewed as an extension of a deal approved in January with the Kansas Bioscience Authority. That deal committed the city to spend up to $1.25 million to remodel the East Hills Business Park building. That deal was discussed in open meeting, and was not objected to by the public.
Commissioners said that because the amount of money the city would spend was not any greater than the January deal, they felt comfortable replacing it with the new deal. But unlike the January deal, the new deal provides cash payments to a private company. Under the January deal, all the money was going to a quasi-public, nonprofit economic development organization.
Now, commissioners say they recognize that issues about the process need to be addressed.
"I think it is imperative that the community sit down and decide what we're willing to do to keep and attract businesses," Dever said. "This is the perfect time for us to sit down and decide.
"But with this deal, I just felt like we weren't asking the community for any additional dollars. I felt like the community already had spoken out and said it was OK to invest this money. I had no idea there would be such push back from the community."
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
pinecreek (anonymous) says…
'Several commissioners continued to concede that there were flaws in the process related to approving the deal'.
Precisely; they do appear to be the type of company that a community would want. So why did Corliss and the Commission hide the details? After all of the Open Meetings controversies that have happened in the past, how could they possibly think that they could circumvent the law? How could the Mayor possibly misunderstand the basics of 'conflict of interest'? What else is still to be learned?
Good luck to those that attend tonight, hope that you get some honest answers.
toefungus (anonymous) says…
Deciphera is a drug. We need this company the way an addict needs crack. Back room, hidden deals confirms this. This end justifies the means mentality is why these deals happen. Our city commission sucks, through a small tube into their nose. We all need to just say no.
LogicMan (anonymous) says…
"This isn't a machinery-based business,"
Ouch. Insulting a lot of skilled, hard working people is not a good way to cover mistakes.
Oracle_of_Rhode (anonymous) says…
Hack and anybody else with a stake in this company -- resign now.
Oracle_of_Rhode (anonymous) says…
How are these secret-deal cash payouts to a company that is partly owned by the mayor any different from the mayor putting our tax money directly into her own bank account? After all, her bank creates employment too!
Also, Dever's quote about "people with brains" is a shameful insult to anybody who has ever punched a time clock.
MacHeath (anonymous) says…
I keep asking myself if I would do this with my own money. It seems pretty speculative.
This is a start-up company, that as far as I can tell, hasn't produced anything.
Of course, if I were a city commisioner that invested early up-front, and could induce the public into funding the start-up, there would be a chance I could be sitting in tall cotton someday.
cait48 (anonymous) says…
Does anyone else think that Dan Flynn looks like Cheney?
TheSychophant (anonymous) says…
Many of us are wondering why some of our city leaders are invested in a little known start up corporation known as Deciphera. Here's an interesting article from the Journal World archives, written by Dolph Simons himself.
http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2007/jul...
"It all started last fall [fall of 2006] at a Kansas University football game when a meeting was arranged between KU professor Dan Flynn and Clay Blair, then the chairman of the Kansas Bioscience Authority."
"Within a few days, Blair met with Lawrence Mayor Mike Amyx and City Manager Dave Corliss. The three discussed the Deciphera opportunity, Blair suggested several ways he thought a plan that would be attractive to Deciphera people could be put together, and Amyx instructed Corliss to get the necessary preliminary work under way.
"Next came a meeting with Amyx, Blair, Corliss and County Commissioner Bob Johnson, followed by another meeting with Amyx, Johnson, Blair, Chamber of Commerce President Lavern Squier and newly elected Mayor Sue Hack."
Might I suggest that during the negotiations, or after the deal was put together, Hack and Johnson were offered an "opportunity" to invest.
This whole deal stinks.
Godot (anonymous) says…
I question the number of employees, specifically the number of doctorate level employees, and whether this company is providing new jobs, or just providing additional revenue sources for people already employed at the university.
otto (anonymous) says…
I'd rather give tax incentives to small business. We run the risk of having them leave the city too.
TheSychophant (anonymous) says…
H'mmm. The company currently has 23 full time employees. ..... Not quite up to the promise they made to the public almost five years ago. In April of 2003, Flynn told the journal world that in the next three years, Deciphera expected to employ about 35 people. In retrospect, nearly five years later (not three), Deciphera is only employing 65 % of what it projected.
http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2003/apr...
Sigmund (anonymous) says…
"Several commissioners specifically defended the ***tax refund program***, saying that it provided the city more protection than a typical tax abatement. That's because the tax rebate program is tied to the company having a specific number of employees. The amount of the rebate is reduced if the company has fewer employees than expected. If it fails to meet employment projections for three consecutive years, ***no rebate is given.***"
So Deciphera pay the taxes upfront and gets a cash rebate only if they actually deliver on the promised jobs? Seems like a reasonable deal for the city. I wish we paid the Placemaker consultants only after their promised benefits were realized or MV Transportation only if their ridership meets certain levels.
Still, because city finances are shrouded in secrecy you can't blame taxpayers for being suspicious. Especially when the City continues to push for increased taxes or new taxes to provide basic services like maintaining our roads.
To avoid these misunderstandings in the future City finances need to become much more transparent to the Citizens of Lawrence. Lawrence needs an independent audit of all of the its finances over the last five years, then we all can see what is what. At the very least such an audit would lift the veil of secrecy over city operations and help dispel the distrust taxpayers have of Lawrence's leaders from both sides of the political spectrum.
artichokeheart (anonymous) says…
I love it! Rob just turned me to the other side.
"I really think it is the right thing to do," City Commissioner Rob Chestnut said of the efforts to keep Deciphera. "If we were going to look out on the panorama of companies we wanted to attract, Deciphera would be right at the top of the list.
"It is a company that is fighting cancer, and it is producing the type of jobs we want to attract. It has all the characteristics of a company we want to attract."
They( when I say they I mean the entire medical profession) know how to cure cancer Rob it's just they want to hold out for the highest bidder and experiment on those who suffer.
MacHeath (anonymous) says…
This is not an established company. Its the pipe-dream of a university
proffesor and some of the city "fathers", for lack of a better term.
These guys work for KU for years, getting funding from government grants
to do reasearch.
They have their undergrads, and grad students do most of the work, and keep the research
as private intellectual property, with the idea of hitting it rich someday.
Sometimes you get the bar, sometimes the bar gets you.
alfie (anonymous) says…
H'mmm. The company currently has 23 full time employees. :.. Not quite up to the promise they made to the public almost five years ago. In April of 2003, Flynn told the journal world that in the next three years, Deciphera expected to employ about 35 people. In retrospect, nearly five years later (not three), Deciphera is only employing 65 % of what it projected
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
What We need to Know is where do the employee's live, does this help Lawrence???????
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
smitty (anonymous) says…
15 million raised in Kansas on '03:.company will go public in '08:..
http://www.deciphera.com/PDFs/121803_...
Kansans inveset more than 15 million:.names some invstors:.
http://www.lrtc.biz/news_centerfundin...
KCCatalyst in business review article complete with controversial statement from FLynn about funding sources.
http://kansascity.bizjournals.com/kan...
Consortium Agreement is on line and gives the same percentages of money and terms as today's article credits to city sources.
http://www.lawrenceks.org/web_based_a...
JW quote from previos article OCT 25, 2007....
+++They said that the city needed to move quickly to keep Deciphera, a drug development company, from moving to a Johnson County community that was offering an incentive package to lure the bioscience company.++++
How can so many investors and movers and shakers from our area including the c of c be involved and have this come down to a "take it now or lose it "deal? Pressure offers are not usually on the up and up, they are considered scams. In all the reading and research on Deciphera I can not detect any reason why the need to do an unethical perhaps illegal quick deal. Hack isn't the only one to be held accountable.
It's a local call:invest now!!!
Deciphera Contact (one of the phd employees)
For further information on partnering opportunities, contact:
Diane Thompson, PhD (Primary Contact) or Christine de los Reyes
busdev@deciphera.com
(785) 838-3767
OonlyBonly (anonymous) says…
23 full-time employees, and the average salary in the company is $72,000 per year. The company employs 13 people with doctorate-level degrees
Big deal that's the average. What's the MEAN? What's the highest? What's the lowest?
recall! recall! recall!
OonlyBonly (anonymous) says…
"This isn't a machinery-based business," City Commissioner Mike Dever
And just what in the H()* is wrong with a "machinery-based" business Mr. Dever? For your information those businesses helped make America what it used to be! Once again another example of "we-don't-want-no-po'-folk-around-here" mentality which is one of the reasons Lawrence is in so much trouble now!
Elitists!
KsTwister (anonymous) says…
Still if done according to procedure show me the part where city taxpayer's benefit to the extent as our city government stockholders. With our tax dollars do we get stock too? The $3-4 million is from Lawrence citizens; surely our dividend check would be outstanding. Show me the gain on OUR investment. Consortium was the right term to use; unfortunately I do not think it included everyone in Lawrence with a stake in the venture. Someone else will have to make that decision for propriety.
smitty (anonymous) says…
http://www2.ljworld.com/photos/2004/a...
Peter Petillo owns properrty in Lawrence but no listing for Matt McClorey or Dan Flynn is available on the tax valuation site..
jimmyspeachbaskets (anonymous) says…
Dear Lawrence Homeowners and Consumers:
I hope you enjoy paying your taxes because the burden just got worse. If we don't have a thriving commercial property tax base and companies paying high salaries the tax burden will fall to residential property taxes and sales tax. Wouldn't you rather let business pay for our municipal services? There's been a lot of talk of money going into pockets and frankly I'd rather keep my money in my pocket than pay the lionshare of of our tax burden.
OonlyBonly (anonymous) says…
What's the MEAN in my earlier post should be MEDIAN.
sorry
Noweigh (anonymous) says…
Interesting to see the current "anti-commission"(anti-growth) crowd now whinning about a comment they take as deameaning to "working people". Where were you when Am. Eagle and all the other companies that offered "working people" jobs years ago? Back then you whined about the "quality" of those possible new jobs. Just ask "working people" in Ottawa what Am. Eagle has meant to them. And ask all the new people that will be working there when they expand in the near future. Those jobs could have been here, but naturally, Lawrence was "too good" for those kind of jobs.
Stop whinning, or at least whine consistently.
igby (anonymous) says…
Many years ago Oread Labs had the same start up intentions. They made a few good jobs and a lot of low paying jobs. They were using part time students and paying them $5.00 per hour. They also were dumping chemicals in the sewer and not following disposal requirements. You really have to wonder about their intentions, we've heard this line before.
Smitty: Your links are worthless some error when routed, you may of missed a backslash somewhere.
Regardless of the Companies position and the deal at hand that was made. These commissioners should of did a better job of explainning the important signifacants of this deal and what it means to the city of Lawrence. Rather, they did this behind closed doors arousing questions for the public and varibal unknowns. The closed meeting did more damage than good and the very basic nature of their closed deal is supect to say the lease. Now, with Mayor Hack, addmitting to error and failing to disclose her interest. Questionable motives are possiblities.
smitty (anonymous) says…
Don't know why it won't link but if you copy the addy and paste it to google it will give you the stories.
sorry, I was trying to make it easy to reference the details but for whatever reason the copy paste of the addy won't link directly. It may be another of JW's policies that killed the link.
The KC business links are particularly interesting since Flynn and the kc money raiser seem to be at odds amongst all the positive articles. Something about St Louis investors rejected investment into Deciphera.
blindrabbit (anonymous) says…
"Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes" or as translated from the Greek in Virgil's Aeneid "beware of Greeks bearing gifts". This is not to disparage the Greek culture but to warn the Lawrence electorate of the wisdom of this old adage and how a loose translation applies to the situation of the City Commission, City Manager, Chamber of Commerce and thier behind the scenes manueuvering with the Deciphera (or Deceptora) issue. Hope A.G. Morrison is up to the task at hand.
Godot (anonymous) says…
How much are they paying for the building, and where is the money coming from?
Ceallach (anonymous) says…
I hate pimps! So secretive, always making deals that involve spending money earned by the poor wretches in their stable. Oh wait, WE are their stable!!! I hate pimps!
igby (anonymous) says…
logrithmic: You are so right about this Dever bum. He went to school here but moved away and then came back about three years ago. He's been ridding the shirt tails of developers by getting referrals from his cronie buddies to do inspection, like looking for lead paint ect. Enviromential Anys. for new and old construction. He's basically a service contractor and has no real production expreience unlike Chestnut who has more knowledge of the business world and company mechanics. Eventhought, Chestnut, a bean counter as he may seem, hows how to balance the books, lol.
crackers (anonymous) says…
The Jayhawks are 10 and 0.
Sigmund (anonymous) says…
Ceallach, don't be a playa hayta, hate the game.
So while we are on the subject of enriching private bidnesses, let not forget the the great sprinkler sweepstakes for downtown landlords each an every year. Lets all congratulate this years winners which include:
Tellers, 746 Mass: George Paley
Lawrence Masonic Temple, 1001 Mass: Consolidated Properties, (aka Doug Compton)
Buffalo Bob's, 719 Mass: Bob Schumm
Goldmakers, Peter Zacharias
The Bayleaf, 725 Mass: Anne Yetman
The Casbah, 803 Mass, David Millstein
Hobbs, 700 Mass, Mark Swanson
Silverworks and More, James & Cara Connelly
http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2007/oct...
And lets wish all the other downtown landlords (or their privately held partnerships and PLC's whose flesh and blood owners shall remain nameless lest they be embarrassed) the best of luck next year, including those currently serving on the Commission.
At some point and time Lawrence, you are going to realize you are being taken for more than a ride on an empty bus by BOTH ends of the political spectrum. Their deals come first, our streets come last, unless your taxes go up.
Can we all agree that any business organization who hides the names of their owners should be required to disclose the names or forfeit their tax rebates, public grants, and and tax payer handouts? All of this secrecy absolutely destroys the publics confidence in the integrity of the Cities leadership.
And while we are all about requiring disclosures from private businesses, lets also require disclosure from our City. Lawrence needs to hire an independent CPA firm to conduct an audit of the last five years of Lawrence finances. Where did the surpluses go and where is all the money for street maintenance being spent instead? Every publicly traded company is required to hire an outside accounting firm, perform audits, and release the results. Why shouldn't our City do the same on an ongoing regular basis?
I would think Dolph Simmons would be writing editorials calling for it, the PLC/GRA and past Kommissioners would be demanding it, and the the current manager suggesting it. If all these groups really have Lawrence's interests above their own and nothing to hide, why not? Prove to us we just always happen to run out of money about the time we have to do street repairs or provide basic services. It makes you wonder what they are hiding, doesn't it?
igby (anonymous) says…
Hawk: If your referring to "whipped cream", I'm sure we'll see some tap dancing tonight at the commission meeting. The LJW ran the agenda for a short time yesterday but you really have to go back to the 12th to find it.
Fritzel and Co. are getting worried that Mayor Hack, will have to stepdown and someone will be appointed to replace her during this investigation. Fritzel wants a vote tonight on the hotel deal because it will be Boog and Amyx against Dever, Chestnut and Hack. They'll do a lot of explaining tonight, however, the hotel deal was "deferred" until yesterday, when it suddlenly was put back on the agenda for tonight. Fritzel is worried the vote at a later date may kill the deal if Hack's, not on the commission then. Whipped cream and canned. Lol.
This will be an interesting commission meeting. Property owners on 12th street are not aware of the ride-of-way grab thats been hidden from the public with this hotel deal. The plan calls for 12th street to be widened and the curbs and sidewalks will be pushed back to make their hotel fit. Property owners will lose their on street parking, as well as, their off street parking due to shorter driveways.
otto (anonymous) says…
tax bills are being mailed this week --- I'm going to feel good about paying through the A-- so a company like this can get a tax break.
blackwalnut (anonymous) says…
The commissioners ought to be forbidden from approving any new deals, including the hotel, until this investigation is over.
There is just too much suspicion and it must be cleared up.
blackwalnut (anonymous) says…
hawkperchecontheriverfront says:
What are the salaries of the 23 people. Top pay first please and position and down the list.
Important point.
nlf78 (anonymous) says…
I can't wait to hear what the State Attorney General's office has to say about this whole thing. I'm hoping Hack's time will be cut short!
TheSychophant (anonymous) says…
Even though Deciphera is a "start-up" corporation, it appears to show some promise, as evidenced by the 15 million dollars in venture capital it was able to land in 2003 from unnamed Kansas investors.
"It potentially is the largest amount of financing an area startup has received in 2003, said Elizabeth Usovicz, who tracks venture capital financing for the Enterprise Center of Johnson County, a Lenexa incubator. The Enterprise Center has not yet compiled 2003 figures.
"This is potentially significant," Usovicz said of the $15 million investment. "That's an enormous amount of money."
According to the Enterprise Center's findings, all area biotech firms received a total of $1.8 million in financing in 2002.
source: http://kansascity.bizjournals.com/kan...
Here's a suggestion: The local deal puts Lawrence and Douglas County on the line for about $1.5 million each. if it is such a good deal, why don't we taxpayers insist on the same proportional share of the company as the unnamed investors are getting. This would be the only way the taxpayers will truly be able to share in the rewards should Deciphera emerge in several years as a power player on the international scene.
Godot (anonymous) says…
This is what is so wrong about so-called private businesses getting taxpayer funding in exchange for producing jobs: normally, the public has no right to know what someone who works for a privately held business earns. Now, in this case, private wages become fodder for public argument.
Godot (anonymous) says…
To the commissioner who commented that there was no need to inform the public because a deal was sealed in January, and though the deal changed by October, the dollars spent were the same, I say this:
We do not know that, and we cannot trust what you say. However, one major, major difference is that, in the January deal, Deciphera was to be a tenant in a public owned building; presumably, if Deciphera went belly up or left for greener pastures, the public would still own the building and could either lease it out or sell it. In the October deal, Deciphera owns the building, and it is theirs to do with as they wish. When they leave (and they will) they can lease or sell that building the taxpayers paid for, and keep the profit for themselves. That is a huge difference, both in concept, and in dollars, and lost opportunity.
As far as the taxpayers are concerned, this deal stinks.
fetch (anonymous) says…
fetch may have to order some pizza and have a city comm watch party. Can we get this in HDTV?
fetch (anonymous) says…
Can we just burn em all on the stake tonight and get it over with? Can we? Can we?
ralphralph (anonymous) says…
Sack the Hack!
You don't have to 'prove' anything, really, for a recall election. Just have a reasonable basis, which she has admitted.
Sack the Hack!
TheSychophant (anonymous) says…
I believe that the building was built in 1992 on speculation for about 2.3 million. It was funded by a consortium of five local banks. Currently it is appraised by Douglas County at a little over 3 million dollars. The property taxes, if my memory serves me properly, are either 78 or 88 K per year, and are current. The sales price of the building under the current deal is around 2.4 million. (these figures are all approximate based on my memory, but you can find the exact information, as I did--but forgot to write down by searching the archives of the LJW.)
TheSychophant (anonymous) says…
Here is a question we all need answered. I hope someone has the guts to ask it at the city commission meeting: How much money did Sue Hack invest in Deciphera and (this is very important), what is the date of her investment?
Godot (anonymous) says…
Hawk and Sycophant, thanks for the info on the building, sort of. I guess you are saying I am incorrect in thinking the building is taxpayer owned; if that is the case, how, and, for that matter, why, do the city and the bio science authority and whoever else have the right to make any deals regarding the sale and remodeling of the building? Were the building owners part of the discussions that were not open to the public?
TheSychophant (anonymous) says…
Correction: The building cost 2.9 mil in 1992.
TheSychophant (anonymous) says…
Anybody remember the recent Serologicals Corp. debacle? Here's a link to the article. I understand the building remains vacant.
http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2006/jan...
TheSychophant (anonymous) says…
Godot, the deal is obviously a savior for the five bank consortium that financed the 2.9 million dollar building in 1992. Even though the banks are probably losing 400K to 500K on the project (I think the sales price is around 2.4 million), its still sweet for them. The building has mostly been vacant for all these years, and the deal presents an excellent opportunity to save the banks from their initial poor judgment in financing a 2.9 mil building in 1992 on speculation.
VoiceOfReason (anonymous) says…
I really don't get the partisan bickering about this one. I voted for the newest commissioners. I thought they were a heck of a lot better for our town than the old ones. I still think that, in general, in a purely fiscal sense, but they also committed some very (seemingly) unethical actions while approving this deal. The worst of the group was the one that I didn't have a chance to vote against this time...Hack. She's a remnant of the old establishment in this town and she needs to go. But so does every other commissioner involved in the unethical and/or illegal "rebate" that they passed. This isn't about parties...it's about the typical crooked politician. Parties don't matter...being involved in politics does.
I am also strongly in support of economic incentives for businesses...in general. I believe in the free market and I think that growing the economy in this town, through new business development, is one of the few ways to save the shrinking, and ever more burdened, tax base that already exists. If a few years of incentives will attract a company that will bring in millions, in the long run, then I'm all for it. But public scrutiny is essential when spending the public's money. Anything less than absolute transparency gives at least the suggestion of wrong-doing and creates public distrust. I don't trust anyone that wants to spend my money but wants to hide the details of the arrangement. Breaking numerous laws (from what I've seen) to pass a shady deal is not what these people were elected for, no matter which side of the political spectrum you fall on.
VoiceOfReason (anonymous) says…
So what happened in the meeting? Did they adjourn into executive session and all scurry for home?