What is there to hide?
State should reveal Amazon offer
State officials doled out $1.3 billion in tax breaks and other incentives to bring Tesla’s battery factory to the Reno area. You can bet the package they put together to enter the Amazon lottery — the contest to land the company’s second headquarters — is even more lucrative.
But state taxpayers may never know.
The Governor’s Office of Economic Development has refused to provide even basic details of the proposal submitted to lure Amazon to Southern Nevada, opting instead to operate in a cloak of secrecy designed to keep state residents in the dark.
“The existence and nature of all discussions with the company,” said GOED Executive Director Steve Hill in a letter, “and all information related to the company’s business, including without limitation information related to the company’s plans, opportunities, proposed terms and knowhow, whether via written, oral or other means of communication, are confidential information of the company.”
This is absurd gobbledygook.
Amazon purposely solicited offers from across the country in an effort to pit states and local governments against one another to see what locale would present the biggest gift basket. It should come as no surprise to the company that taxpayers in various jurisdictions might have an interest in holding their elected officials accountable for their generosity.
“When you can’t get any details, it becomes a lot more than skepticism,” said Barry Smith, president of the Nevada Press Association. “You start to worry things are being done under the table that aren’t to the benefit of the public.” No kidding.
This isn’t about company trade secrets. Nobody is asking to see Amazon’s marketing strategies or its internal communications about long-term planning. The company is seeking lucrative tax breaks that will have an effect on Nevada’s fiscal future. State taxpayers have an absolute right to know what their representatives have promised in their names.
Nor should there be any argument that transparency will work against the state’s bid to land the project, which the company claims will generate $5 billion of investment along with 50,000 high-paying jobs. Nevada’s chances of success are minuscule, while other candidates, including some thought to be high on the company’s list, have already released at least partial information regarding their offers.
Obviously, any tax abatements and incentives would need legislative approval in a public setting if Amazon surprised the world and selected Nevada. But even if the company goes elsewhere, state taxpayers have a compelling interest in judging whether development officials acted appropriately and responsibly with their financial offer.
The views expressed above are those of the Las Vegas Review-journal. All other opinions expressed on the Opinion and Commentary pages are those of the individual artist or author indicated.
The Review-journal welcomes letters to the editor. Letters should not exceed 275 words and must include the writer’s name, mailing address and phone number. Submissions may be edited and become the property of the Review-journal.
Email letters@reviewjournal.com Mail Letters to the Editor
P.O. Box 70
Las Vegas, NV 89125
Fax 702-383-4676 grounds for a career-ending public shaming of the “offender.” Let me say from experience, far worse things happen in the workplace than asking someone for a date or making a sexual flirtation. Sure, it’s sometimes inappropriate, but is it worthy of such exaggerated reactions? This case is not rape, sexual assault or intimidation a la Harvey Weinstein, Matt Lauer and other such monsters. If it were, I’d applaud Rep. Kihuen’s ever-so-sanctimonious Democrat colleagues suddenly calling for his head.
I’d love to see Rep. Kihuen lose his congressional seat at the polls, but not because of an unsubstantiated accusation as minor as this one. Have we taken leave of our collective senses? a story inside the Nevada section relating the tale of a man with Metro’s Explorer program who was falsely accused of having sexual relations with a minor. His life was at least damaged, if not ruined, by an accusation that the accuser made up for whatever reason. It is sad that a trial had to take place in order for truth to come out.
I would like to point out that anybody can accuse anybody else of anything. Whether or not there is any truth to it is beside the point. Politicians (not statesmen) will posture and twist the truth on issues in order to gain advantage and, as I pointed out above, completely ignore the basic principles of justice. If they can willingly ignore this, then what else can be ignored for gain?