Slashdot Mirror
Google-NASA Partnership Backlash
Morgalyn writes "Apparently having more jobs moving into the area isn't enough for Santa Clara County. They want some revenue from Google, and are peeved that they are avoiding paying property taxes by building on government land. According to a representative of the county, 'If public land is being used for private purposes, the tenants should be paying local property taxes... We have $30 million in unfunded retirement liabilities. We need the money.' They aren't getting the land for free according to NASA: 'Google will not save any money by building on our property. They have to pay full ground rent based on fair market value and all the municipal-like services we provide like police, fire and garbage.'"
First, there are all sorts of government facilities (or, "public land", per the article) in/on which private companies ply their trades and make money. Every company with contractors present on an Air Force base is using a footprint there to do their private-sector business. There are whole buildings in federal campus-type areas, or large swaths of office space essentially subletted to private companies so that those companies can do what it is the taxpayers are paying them to do for the agency that's hired them. This is hardly new.
Further, most towns with any sort of federal activity would be delighted to hear that a bunch of high-end nerds from Google were moving in. It's not like they (the Google people) are going to live on the public property. These people are going to be buying coffee at Starbucks, eating out at restaurants, buying their kids' school supplies, etc., and that's all economic activity for the local communities.
It's a shame that the locals have such a huge unfunded retirement liability (um... I suspect there's a little more to that story than gambling that someday Google would move in and pay a lot of property taxes, and darn, it didn't work out), but there's another way to look at this. Google may not even have lined this gig up if they'd have to had built on private land and passed all of that expense, through the contract, on to NASA as a higher cost. Even if the deal had still gone through, it just would have been a bigger tab for the feds (meaning all of the rest of us) or less for NASA to spend on other things. In the meantime, only the locals get the other local economic benefits of having those new G-men/women moving into the area.
Sorry, but I smell a grasping local government that has just won the demographic lottery of having this happen in their area at all, and want to grab some more cash out of the deal to make up for what sounds like retirement fund planning sins of the past. Personally, I'd welcome a larger Google Presence in my area - it would raise the local IQ average by a couple of points, and make the area that much more attractive to other tech ventures... no matter which square feet of what bit of (unused!) federal property is being used to house the activity.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Now, see, that's the bit I have trouble with - it's going to cost Santa Clara $3M?? The land/buildings/whatever wasn't being used anyway, right?? If NASA went out and acquired the land specifically to rent it to Google, then OK, I'd see their point. If NASA's owned the land for a long time, it's entirely up to them who uses it.
Even if Google was going to give up some other property in Santa Clara county to make this move, that other property would still exist and garner property taxes for the county.
WAh, wah, wah, bitch, whine, moan. We have a right to that money. It's ours, and Google's stealing it by using NASA property. Moan, bitch whine.
If they want/need more tax income, they can go and get Prop 13 repealled. Freezing a giant part of the states tax income, and then trying to increase services year after year is not a winning plan.
They are paying the money for the services that tax money would go to, I say they shouldn't HAVE to pay taxes. We should learn from research facilities like CERN, building an environment like this IS the way to go, if anything the government should be PAYing Google to move their research facilities there.
Freedom is fragile and must be protected. To sacrifice it, even as a temporary measure, is to betray it.
When public entities whine that they don't have enough money to pay for everything they want to have, and they need more. Especially, when it's thosedamn capitalists who aren't paying enough. errrrgghh!
I don't have enough money for everything I would like, either. As a result, I match my spending with my real income. Perhaps the Santa Clara County official needs to learn the concept of Opportunity Cost before they whine about their productive citizens not paying enough!
Imagine such article published on Slashdot:
"Apparently having more jobs moving into the area isn't enough for Redmond. They want some revenue from Microsoft, and are peeved that they are avoiding paying property taxes by building on government land. According to a representative of the county, 'If public land is being used for private purposes, the tenants should be paying local property taxes... We have $30 million in unfunded retirement liabilities. We need the money.' They aren't getting the land for free according to NASA: 'Microsoft will not save any money by building on our property. They have to pay full ground rent based on fair market value and all the municipal-like services we provide like police, fire and garbage.'"
Can you imagine that? Because I can't. Slashdot has become a Mouth of Google.
"Long run is a misleading guide to current affairs. In the long run we are all dead." (John Maynard Keynes)
it's going to cost Santa Clara $3M??
Looks like the government's caught onto the business use of "cost."
"By going open-source, Linux users are costing Microsoft untold millions. They should all be forced to pay for a Windows license."
Unfortunately, Microsoft has made good headway in making Linux users pay the Microsoft tax.
The municipality is whining that they have unfunded pension liabilities - sounds like they are not competent to manage their financial affairs, and they're whining and trying to shift the blame. NASA is making it clear that google is paying them for for services that the minicipality would otherwise provide. Why should google pay twice, once to NASA and once to the municipality?
Ian Ameline
Apparently it's OK to give Walmart tax-free access to land to build ugly stores with low-paying jobs, but it's not OK to do this?
Our system is incredible. People can't afford to pay their bills and taxes, and cities need the tax revenue.
This will all reach critical mass within the next 50 years, and it will be ugly.
Ignore Alien Orders
Politicians see money, politicians want money.
Shucks, I have a couple hundred thousand dollars in unfunded retirement needs, but I sure as hell don't expect Google to give it to me. Their search engine might help me earn it, though.
...can a city complain about a corporation being exempt from taxes, and it's the city that's greedy. Seriously, if the rest of us have to suck it up an pay taxes, there's no reason whatsoever that a multi-billion dollar corporation can't do the same.
Sales tax is usually state-wide. So all that added commercial activity in the area is going to California, not the local municipal governments.
Actually, post-prop 13, the state ends up with the property tax revenue. The state doles it back, less its 'cut' to the counties and cities, though some are "more equal than others" in what they get. What the counties and cities get is most of the sales tax. That's why you see cities doing everything humanly possible to get more retail businesses built: they get more sales tax revenue for every one of those.
Paying NASA is just paying NASA.
Paying NASA is paying the federal taxpayer. I don't know about you, but I pay lots of federal tax and anything that reduces federal deficits I'm in favor of.
The city is now going to have to deal with issues such as increased traffic, upgrading public utilities, etc., and they're not going to get the money to handle it. I'm not surprised that they are ticked off at this.
The city is going to get lots of new, very high-paying jobs. Those people will pay sales tax, buy homes and pay property tax, and in general add to the prosperity of the area. The city is getting a good deal, on balance. However, like many governmental entities in California, they've also bloated their payrolls and overpromised on their benefits, so they think it's up to taxpayers to bail them out. Rather than cut payroll or benefits to fit reality, they're looking at any way possible to shake more money out of the pockets of the people. That's why they're ticked that somebody might be able to escape their clutches.
Google is winning big, and at the expense of the local people.
Exactly the opposite.
Based on track record, it's clear that they don't. The way public education has been going, America's future is very bleak.
Google will have employees with kids who'll be in public school
Which will be paid for by their parents property taxes wherever they live and has nothing to do with the office real estate Google uses.
employees who'll use the police and fire protection
Which will be paid for by their property taxes, again. And when they are at work, this will be provided by NASA and passed through as a cost to Google as was clearly stated in one of the stories above. They aren't free riding.
water and sewer
Again, see above. Paid for by Google to NASA. How NASA/Federal government compensates the locality if it connects to their sewer/water services is another issue, but presumably either (A) they don't connect to the local services or (B) they compensate the locality fairly for any use they make already and thus this is a non-issue.
local roads
This is the only point with some legitimacy - the additional traffic and use of local roads nearby will present some extra cost to the locality. Presumably they should ask NASA/Google for compensation and force NASA/Google to pay for road expansions and repairs to local access roads that will be more heavily trafficed due to the new office park.
But in general, it just seems like Google will be pumping money into the local economy which will generate more property taxes and wealth for the city.