"Today is about job creation," Rell told dozens of officials at the football stadium, which occupies about 75 acres of the 725-acre Rentschler Field tract that its owner, United Technologies Corp., wants to develop.For those of you who have never been to a Cabela’s, you are in for quite an adventure...Keep up the great job creation and economic development, Governor Rell!
UPDATE/CORRECTION
Please note that I inadvertently referenced the Cabela's store as the source for creating 4,000-5,000 jobs. The new Cabela's store should create approximately 300 new jobs, and the overall Rentschler Field expansion project will result in approximately 4,000-5,000 new jobs. [Sorry for the confusion, and a special thanks to "Grumpy" for bringing my error to my attention.]
Source
Uhlinger, Dan, The Hartford Courant, August 16, 2006, East Hartford Cabela's Plans Announced
17 comments:
The East Hartford store will be similar in size to the Kansas City (KS) and Buda (TX) stores.
Kansas City is 180,000 square feet, and Buda's is 185,000 square feet. That's a lot of square feet!
Lots of stuffed large animals, lots of guns. Some stores have indoor archery ranges, and banquet and meeting facilities. Looks like they've got 15 stores now, with another 13 opening soon. All of their stores are in the US, but one of the ones that is opening soon is in Montreal.
Gosh, if I'm John DeStefano, its like the Remington closure all over again. I don't know which way to turn. Jobs and guns. I like one but not the other ... what's a pol to do?
Indoor archery range, huh? Sounds good.
bluecoat-
Do you ever have anyhting nice to say? Maybe if it was 10,000 jobs you would be happy?
bluecoat - maybe you've spent to much time in the hot sun this summer, because this is the most illogical, nonsensical post you have made yet. How exactly is it that job creation is "voodoo" economics, or Rowlandnomics (whatever that term means, since no one in the media or anyone either pro or anti John Rowland ever used that term)? Do you doubt their figures? Do you doubt the place in our economy for such retail outlets and the jobs they create? By the way, the people of East Hartford are happy (including the Democrat Mayor); as are the people who will be working at the store. Get some shade bluecoat, your brain is fried.
If it was announced we were losing 75 jobs, this thread would be full....
Maybe if the state wasn't throwing $21.9 million in public financing for private profit, I wouldn't have a problem with it.
This Cabela's project will do wonders to shift our economy and culture from gross, wasteful consumerism to green entreprenuerialism and self-sufficiency.
I suppose it's like Bush said after 9/11, keep shopping. No word from our enabling press about the quality of health care for Cabela's employees.
This is the same cheerleading we saw for the Patriots' stadium, and I just can't see how 4,000 retail jobs are good for our economy.
Very interesting article by AP on Cabela's. They estimate that the store in East Hartford will draw 3.5 million people a year. Yikes! The average shopper stays in the store for more than 2 hours.
Hey, bluecoat, think those 3.5 million people might do some other shopping, eating or other tourist type activity while they are at Cabela's. You bet they will.
I guess you never owned your own business, huh?
PS Here is what the Mayor said: "This is a giant step forward for the economic future of East Hartford and Connecticut as a whole," said East Hartford Mayor Melody Currey (Democrat).
"It is estimated that the store will create 4,000-5,000 jobs - how's that for election season economic development!!"
Yeah, right. Tell me another one.
The store itself is creating 315 full time equivalent jobs.
The big job creation numbers are based on the assumed economic activity the store will generate in the region. That's one big assumption, but if it's accurate, the state is spending $4,400 - $5,500 to create each of those jobs.
The JI story here has more details. Including these two tidbits:
"On the downside, the study found that the big-box retailer would weaken or push other outdoor retailers out of business, especially independent ones. In that aspect, the store would have a negative impact on local jobs and businesses in the same market, according to the study."
"...the town of East Hartford last year agreed to give Cabela's $6.7 million in property tax abatements..."
Subract those existing local jobs from the rosy assumption of job creation folks. Also, don't forget to tell the East Hartford taxpayers some of those lost jobs are coming from their town and that their property taxes are going to subsidize Cabela's to the tune of $21,000 per job the store is creating.
Yet another example of politicians taxing our families and handing the money over to a greedy corporate special interest.
Some of you peopel are simply clueless. Firstly if you think Ikea didnt get millions ihn tax incentives your delusional. In every state in this country, municipalities and states are giving tax incentvies to attarct new business. this is particularly the case in Connecticut and the Northeast in general. The cost of doing business here is so high that states need to entice these companies to locate here. its just the facts.
Dont blame Jodi Rell for the fact that its too darn expensive to do business in the state and the northeast. Last i checked in fact the major players , NY, NJ, MA and CT may have Democratic contrlled state governments outside the governship. The fact is its the legislative body that has the most ability to make business more affordbale and they do little.
You whining democrats cant even find something positive when a strong successful retailer relocates here. And to the comment that one cant see anything positive about retail jobs being created, thas an awfully demeaning thing to say and believe. Alot fo good people work in retail, some make good money some dont. Thats life......
Aaron--
When it turns out you were wrong, will you apologize to me?
But I agree, what the DeStefano administration pulled off was amazing. That's why I'm voting for him!
In every state in this country, municipalities and states are giving tax incentvies to attarct new business. this is particularly the case in Connecticut and the Northeast in general. The cost of doing business here is so high that states need to entice these companies to locate here. its just the facts.
It is completely ridiculous that the state government should be giving incentives to certain businesses so they'll come here. That's one of the reasons costs are so high here. It is also results in incredible distortions of the market economy. Instead of lowering taxes for everyone, you lower it for a particular store or other business based on how good their lobbyists are.
If a state or municipality wants to attract businesses, then lower taxes for everyone. Then the market can determine should be here.
I hate it that all these municipalities do this. Small businesses don't get this benefit. Why should this store? So that Rell can issue a press release, whereas if 10 stores each hired 32 new workers, that wouldn't make a good press release?
If no incentives were given, does that mean that no stores would locate in Connecticut? I find that hard to believe.
We should be getting away from a property tax driven tax system.
But since that's what we currently have let's take a look at what retail brings in as opposed to manufacturing, office, so forth.
On a per-square foot per year basis; retail brings in 25% of office; factories typically bring in 50-60% of office.
Retail also creates police calls (locked out of my car, shoplifting, etc.) AVG "call" in CT is a little over $100. (number of calls / police budget) not to mention litter - retail always brings an increase in litter.
Retail is in other words, a loser.
BIG retail usually knocks out little retail and then everyone wonders where the Little League sponsors went. (ie: Target refuses to allow any access to their property while good companies (even one really big one Walmart) do).
This deal is stupid, so was getting all worked up about IKEA's attraction to the 91/95 intersection (as if that NH mayor had anything to do w/it - (not))
I don't oppose all government expenditures intended to stimulate the economy and help employers create jobs.
Only the blatantly wasteful and inefficient ones.
What hacks me off is the arrogant lack of accountability when it comes to spending for "economic development." Politicians from both parties in Hartford dole out this money like booze at a campaign fundraiser.
"Why thank you for the check. How much of my constituent's money would you like this year?"
But they do nothing to ensure that taxpayers are getting real value for the money being spent.
$75 worth of "incentives" per square foot? $21,000 in property tax breaks per new Cabela's employee? East Hartford has a little under 50,000 residents. Mayor Currey could have taken that $6.7 million in property tax breaks and instead used it to cut property taxes $134 for each town resident. That would've been $536 in property tax relief for a family of 4.
Give me a break.
I think it's horrible that existing businesses have to pay higher property taxes so this company can get a property tax holiday.
Let's face it, this store would almost certainly have come to somewhere in CT even if no municipality offered tax breaks. Maybe not East Hartford, but somewhere. (If the chain couldn't be profitable without getting property tax rebates, then either there's a serious problem with its business model or property taxes are way too high to support much of any business). By offering these targeted tax breaks, the state makes it more expensive for other businesses in this state, and it also creates a very un-level playing field. When I moved to this state, no one offered me a tax break!
As for the argument that big retailers push out the little retailers, I'm not terribly concerned about that, provided that the playing field was level (i.e., the big retailers are subject to the same taxes that the little guys are). Businesses come and go all the time, and it makes no sense for the government to try to pick which businesses it thinks are worthy and which aren't. Many businesses fail every day. If we have businesses failing because of intense competition, ultimately the customers will benefit (because if businesses are failing due to competition, customers are obviously choosing the competing businesses). If many businesses are failing because of bad tax policy, regulation or other governmental action or inaction, then this will act as an unfortunate catalyst for the government to change its policies. Or for the voters to change the government.
I don't oppose all government expenditures intended to stimulate the economy and help employers create jobs.
Even if an expenditure is efficient, it may not be right. I'm sure tht the New London eminent domain case is (excluding the lawsuits) efficient, and will create a bunch of jobs and will stimulate the economy. However, because it effectively destroys the concept of private party, which is one of the most important, if not the most important, components of our free-market economy, I'm still opposed to it.
And I'm opposed to this deal, even if it makes perfect financial sense and is net revenue positive for the state, because it creates an unfair playing field, and forces other companies to essentially pay more in property taxes so this one can pay less.
GMR said... this store would almost certainly have come to somewhere in CT even if no municipality offered tax breaks. Maybe not East Hartford, but somewhere.
I-691 & I-84 or (and also looked at I believe) I-84 at Rt 229 (the road to Bristol / Lake Compounce)
More central, easier access and probably better demography. Equa-distant Boston/NYC
Southington's econ. dev guy didn't fight for it as the total long term tax base isn't there and he (a Dem no-less) isn't stupid.
Derby Conservative -
I don't think retail is "bad." I do think it's bad public policy for Governor Rell and the legislature to shovel our tax dollars into the pockets of corporations without any regard for whether the state is getting real value for that expenditure.
It's obscene how many tax dollars are being thrown at this project.
I'll refrain from taking on your asinine union, communes and guns comments since my experience is that people who use the phrase "you people" aren't generally interested in anything beyond name calling.
Post a Comment