I went to the TEA party forum on the new tax last night, and it was somewhat enlightening but not reassuring. I can't seem to get the word "boondoggle" out of my head this morning. It's not that I think the proponents are not well-meaning, but the whole package lacks a well thought out approach (I have been calling that a business plan) and no proforma financial projections have been made (which provide the first look at the financial viability of the projects).

Just so we are on the same page, I copied some of the Wikipedia entry on "boondoggle" and edited it to better fit my meaning here;
"Boondoggle (project); A boondoggle is a project that is considered a waste of both time and money, yet is often continued due to extraneous policy motivations. The term "boondoggle" may also be used to refer to protracted government or corporate projects - at some point, the key operators, having realized that the project will never work, are still reluctant to bring this to the attention of the taxpayers. Generally there is an aspect of "going through the motions" – as long as funds are available. The situation can be allowed to continue for what seems like unreasonably long periods, as senior management are often reluctant to admit that they allowed a failed project to go on for so long. In many cases, the actual device itself may eventually work, but not well enough to ever recoup its development costs. While cost overruns are a common factor in declaring a project a boondoggle, that does not necessarily mean the project has no benefit."

In spite of the glaring lack of factual supporting information and data, the push for this tax is going into sales-pitch hyperdrive, with all sorts of anecdotal claims of future benefits if we get right on with the Big Five Quality of Life improvements, and further descent into nothingness if we don't. Folks who want their practical input on the BFQOLI considered are being characterized as against our families, and we were told last night that we being given the chance for the highest form of public input, which is the opportunity to vote for or against the half-baked boondoggles based on next to zero reliable information.

Following are some bits and pieces of the sales pitch;

In general:
"We are losing our families. These projects will help retain and attract families".

"This package of Quality of Life projects is the culmination of two years of our brain trust to find the best way forward for Grant County." When asked why the Angelou plan doesn't mention these projects, the answer was, "We have only been working on this since February", followed by, "The Angelou plan was about economic development, not Quality of Life."

The multiplex:
"You have to have a lot of screens, of diminishing size, because the movie industry requires you to show each first-run for three weeks and the audience keeps getting smaller over that time." (No mention of how many people will likely watch the movies - it might be more cost effective to show for one week then put the movie back in its box... an objective proforma financial analysis would give a better idea about the benefit/cost effects.)

"The Deming multiplex is failing because of bad management - we won't do that." Luna County is on its third bad management entity, what's the Grant Co. secret strategy for getting good management? What if the Deming show is failing because it is an unworkable business model? A business plan and proforma might shed some light on the issue. (Proforma: assumed, forecasted, or informal information presented in advance of the actual or formal information. The common objective of a pro forma document is to give a fair idea of the cash outlay for a shipment or an anticipated occurrence. Pro forma financial statements give an idea of how the actual statement will look if the underlying assumptions hold true.)

"We don't need business plans or financial projections because these are Quality of Life projects, not economic development projects." (I can't believe he said that...)

The golf course paths:
"When people come to conventions at the Convention Center, their families need something to do."

The pools:
"It has been shown that pools pay for themselves in 11 years." (Anecdotal reference to some pools in Lake Tahoe)
"In two years only one student has asked about improving the pool situation." Remind me why WNMU needs pools?
"The pools are so that WNMU can satisfy Title 9 requirements for women's sports in order to bring back men's baseball." (Remember, only one student, sex unknown, has asked about swimming in two years - what if no women's swim team materializes?)
"The pools are for the community."
"The pools will cost $500,000 a year to operate. “That’s $1370/day(365 day basis), paid for from what - fees? Here's where a business plan (yes I know, it's not "technically" a business) and financial proforma would come in handy to make an educated guess as to the probable usage and fee tolerance by the community members who would use the pools. Assuming 50 uses per day, 365 days per year (that seems very optimistic to me) the per use cost would be $27. Hmmm... seems like more thought (input) needs to be put into that Quality of Life non-business proposition.

The Convention Center:
"We can have conferences and conventions, which will put people in motels and restaurants and be economic development." I thought this was all about Quality of Life, not economic development? Again, it would be useful to do a fact based business plan and financial projections (I think we have to call this one a business, along with the multiplex, and the pools, too, if we are going to claim that they will pay for themselves). What sort of conventions and conferences is Grant County poised to compete for? Are conventioneers going to drive in 3 or 4 hours from the airports to come here?
"Anyone here ever heard of a place called Inn of the Mountain Gods?" Yes. It is primarily a casino located in a scenic mountain setting,
"Inn of the Mountain Gods has a golf course and it loses money hand over fist." I never quite got the connection as to why that is a selling point, though I think it was meant to justify money-losing amenities (this is an admission that the improvements to the golf course are a money-losing proposition) that the family can enjoy while Dad is in the casino, or something like that. Though, now that I think of it, we are probably supposed to assume that Dad is there for a convention. How this relates to the Grant County Convention Center is a bit of a mystery, though a proper business plan might help to explain how it all works.

This is a good time to point out that the only reason Grant County even has a convention center is because a previous economic development effort didn't work out. The building is the former Walmart store, purchased and renovated into a short-lived call center. When the call center left, the County was left with a vacant building, which wasn't worth much to sell. Part of it is leased to a hardware store, and the rest has been used intermittently as public space, with a vague plan to make it into a conference center. Recently, the U.S. Economic Development Administration granted money to improve the building and they stipulated that the outside appearance was the priority (more money was to follow for the interior remodel). More money from the USEDA has evaporated with the ailing economy and sequestration. Now we are being asked to pony up to continue the boondoggle (this fits the definition of boondoggle quite well, in my opinion).

Bataan Park baseball field upgrade:
The new WNMU men's baseball team (whose predicted existence depends upon a women's swimming team and maybe something else) needs a proper field for home games.


All of the above I intend to be practical input for considering whether to impose a new tax for the purpose of improving the quality of life of Grant County residents through this proposed package of projects. (There are a good many more issues that need to be examined - this is just the teaser.) My conservative and analytic approach is being characterized as "not supporting families" in Grant County, which is disingenuous, to say the least. Since I do not think that creating financial black holes, or continuing boondoggles, to be good for either Quality of Life or economic development, I believe that we should spend a bit more effort on examining the ideas on the table before voting on funding them.

If we are going to spend $10 million on quality of life/economic development projects, we had better be damned sure they are going to work. This package of projects is riddled with indicators that they won't work as advertised. Why aren't the commissioners willing to slow down and consider the information that is being presented concerning the evident issues with the proposal? Why are they refusing rational and practical input from Grant County residents? Why are they fracturing the community through obstinance and negative characterization of the motives of informed and concerned residents?

It's a rather large insult to be told that our input is going to be restricted to voting for this batch of boondoggles.

Gordon West

Gila Woodnet