Think of this site like shareware. If you like it, donate. If you don't, don't.

To see all the links and

previous stories, return to the Home Page

Wrongmont.Com

Somebody Trying To Hide Something?

1/11/08 – Different people in different ways make my work easier. Some people are outspoken, often offensive and abrasive. Then once in a while they screw up and try to bury it. Then other people, occasionally anonymously, do some of the footwork and get the information to me either directly or indirectly. I’m more than happy to be another outlet to get that information out to a wider audience. Nearly all of this latter group I’ve never met, emailed, or spoken to. And credit is deserved.

The people backing Richard Juday for City Council in this upcoming election are spending much of their time trying to smear opposing candidates. Yet at the same time they’re being very sneaky about hiding certain things their candidate has written in the past. The TakeBackLongmont website has been out in front defending against the smears on Gabe Santos, and has been blistering towards Mr. Juday in some of his comments conveniently removed from his website. You can find a link to a cached version of it at their website. (Since it may disappear, scroll to the bottom of this page to read it in its entirety)

Another reader sent me a link to Mr. Juday’s Report of Contributions and Expenditures, click on it to read it, it’s public information. You’ll see some familiar names, including most of the often mentioned “bloc of 4” as already reported in the Times-Call. Oddly missing is an “in kind” contribution from the person who’s maintaining his website, or is that service free, or self administered? Only reason I ask is over these pages that were so abruptly pulled down. What was on the Science Vs Creationism page? Some of your potential voters might like to know.

(Pay attention Councilmembers Benker, McCoy, Levison, and Hansen, these questions are for you also, as you either accepted Mr. Judays support in your races, or have donated to his candidacy, or both. You can either respond publicly, or get repeatedly asked and publicly embarrassed. Remember the more open and listening council idea? Here’s to see if you really meant it.)

Mr. Juday wrote of big box stores and his obvious disdain for them, which is his right. But what he removed from his website was his idea, or approval of this: “write down license numbers and trace them to residence” in reference to finding out who’s shopping where. Or having the customer report his city, if asked. He’s toned that down to its current version of “recorded zip codes of shoppers.” So we have a choice of “Big Box” or “Big Brother” thanks to Mr. Juday and friends. Also, Mr. Juday needs to respond to whether he approved or encouraged the questionable practice of secretly videotaping signers of the Lifebridge anti-annexation petition. He proudly led his group to city hall with those petitions, if he’s the leader, he needs to answer. If I hear “no big deal” over this, I can’t imagine the people being taped unknowingly would agree.

Here’s what it boils down to. Mr. Juday and his pals in and out of council don’t like places like Walmart, BestBuy, Costco (funny they don’t mention Target, quite a big box) and want to make it hard on them to do business. Not only that, they look down on you for shopping there and want to collect information on those of you that chose to go there, whatever your reason. This is NOT Longmont, at least not the Longmont I chose to move to. This is elitist thuggery and if Mr. Juday and those on council that lean with him don’t answer these important points, they should be held accountable, severely. And no answers equal agreement with these comments and actions.

I’m not asking you to vote for a particular candidate, but I am asking you NOT to vote for this candidate, Mr. Juday. If you have a problem with the new members of council over this, take it up with them, but they were already elected.

________________________________________

Big Box, Tax, and IGAs

The Big-Box Stores (can we call them BBSs?) are interested fundamentally in the profit they return to stockholders. That’s fair, it is free enterprise and capitalism, and that’s how we choose to run this country. One should keep that fact in mind as we deal with those establishments. A good deal of Longmont’s income is from sales taxes at retail establishments, and a city does not run without income. That’s a fact too.

Retail income is from purchases made by folks living within their area of influence, and under conventional taxation, the city in which the retail establishment is physically located gets the tax. This situation permits BBS Inc. to hold cities hostage, in effect, playing one off against another. I think Longmont caved in when permitting BBS Inc. to construct a monstrosity on the NE corner of Main and Highway 66. It was under threat, as I understand things, to move the construction site (and subsequent tax income) to another city that Longmont capitulated and agreed to the building permit. (I would be pleased to set the record straight if I misunderstand this situation.)

In any event, I will work to prevent this kind of banditry. Here’s how. It is not an entirely original idea of mine, but it is what makes sense to me and what I will work toward. It is certainly NOT implemented (yet).

BBS Inc. draws customers from a region that will include portions of possibly several cities. Longmont should form an IGA (inter-governmental agreement) with its several neighbors to the following effect. Suppose BBS Inc. builds a store in City A, and draws customers from surrounding cities B, C, and D in such numbers that its income derives 50% from A, 25% from B, 15% from C, and 10% from D. City A is so provident as to recover its actual costs for providing water, sewer, etc. in fees for those services. Police and fire protection, etc., though, are not charged for in proportion to their costs. There will be other administrative costs as well. Under the concept of “revenue leakage”, the sales tax paid by the residents of Cities B, C, and D all go to City A.

I would have an IGA in place before BBS, Inc., ever even thought of building in City A. Under the IGA, City A would recover its non-proportional and administrative costs from the sales tax heap, and the balance would be distributed according to the proportion of income its citizens provide to BBS, Inc. There are two ways to do the accounting; one would be to have a customer designate the City to which the sales tax revenue goes, and the other is to do occasional studies of customer populations (write down license numbers and trace them to residence; in-store surveys, etc.). I prefer having the customer report his city. The actual price of the goods is fairly represented, there is no invasion of privacy, the register burden is low (I already have to enter my Zip Code when using my American Express card at numerous gasoline stations), and the reportage should be accurate in that a customer is motivated to have his tax dollar go to his own city. In my example, City A might take 10% off the top for administrative costs, and of the 90% remaining, half would go to City A, a quarter to City B, etc.

Under this arrangement, BBS Inc. can not work one city against another, taxes return to the cities according to how they arise in the population, and all together BBS Inc. has to play fair and can not gain an advantage.

In a somewhat related matter, I would like to explore whether a city can legally require its companies to pay a higher salary than the federal minimum, so that BBS Inc. would know upon coming in that it will have to give its employees a real living wage. In that fashion, low-wage pay does not result in a lowered lifestyle and living standard when BBS Inc. arrives.

________________________________________

DISCLAIMER: The opinions in this site are of the authors, anonymous sources, and random thoughts or rumors from our visitors. The information and stories have been gathered as accurately as possible, but all details can not be verified or guaranteed. What is important is the BIG picture and what's wrong with it.... Read the following at your own risk. By reading this disclaimer you agree to not hold liable the authors/webmaster in any way. We present the following for informational gathering purposes only. Make up your own mind. Draw your own conclusions. Make your opinions known. No unauthorized reproduction of any materials on this site is allowed without the written consent of the authors/webmaster.