WRITTEN BY DAN SCHAETZLE
HELP SUPPORT INDEPENDENT JOURNALISM BY BECOMING A SUBSCRIBING MEMBER. YOU CAN ALSO MAKE A ONE TIME DONATION HERE.
GRANGER, Ind. — Hello fellow citizens. I am Dan Schaetzle, St. Joseph County Councilman for District C (the Granger area). On March 12th, I voted against a proposed abatement ordinance that would have replaced St. Joe County’s current, overly complicated abatement ordinance. I do want to see a more streamlined, less cumbersome process for encouraging employers to bring jobs to our county; however, there were inadequate processes in and unhealthy consequences to passing this particular ordinance.
First, no representation from the Commissioners’ office (county executive branch) participated in the development of this proposal. The County Economic Development Team, which is part of the executive branch, plays a major role in negotiating the terms of any abatement and then assures compliance within an approved abatement. They, along with the commissioners and the commissioners’ legal representation, were not involved in crafting this proposed county legislation. The combined wealth of knowledge and experience within the executive branch would have been incredibly useful in creating a better document. Those who wrote and sponsored this ordinance point to a couple of emails sent weeks after they had begun serious work on the ordinance and claim they tried to get participation from the commissioners and the county’s Economic Development Team. The sponsors know the location of the offices of the commissioners and County Economic Development Team. They regularly see each other at meetings. Yet the sponsors and their legal advisor rushed forward on their own. From the beginning, there really was no excuse for excluding the knowledge and experience of the executive branch in this process.
Furthermore, I could not vote for this proposed ordinance because the document would have given the County Council, the legislative branch of our county government, undo power in negotiating abatement terms with companies. Ultimately our job as council is to vote a proposed abatement up or down, not negotiate terms with the abatee. It has been our American tradition, going back to President Washington and the Jay Treaty in 1794, that the executive branches of government negotiate treaties and contracts, not the legislative branches. Therefore, it is an executive branch function to negotiate terms of an abatement. Executive branch personnel are the experts in this area, not the council. Think of it this way: would you rather have Economic Development Team members and their legal team negotiating with the likes of AM General and Amazon or would you prefer a librarian(Councilman Root), housewife(Councilwoman Drake), bureaucrat(Councilman Figg), small business owner(Councilman Thomas), and teacher (myself) lead the negotiations? You don’t have to be a business school graduate to understand that the
professionals within the Economic Development Team are going to serve the county better in that role.
Equally as significant, the proposed ordinance had zero incentives for companies receiving
abatements to hire local labor and local contractors. Billions of dollars in new investments are headed to St. Joe County. As county government, we should and we must operate with an Abundance Mentality as we endeavor to elevate our jurisdiction to a place where opportunity abounds and transformative wealth is commonplace for those willing to gain education and work hard. We have great assets in our local workforce and in our local contractors, who invest in our community on a daily basis. Therefore, if we are going to give tens of millions of dollars in tax breaks to the largest of America’s corporations through abatements, we should incentivise those companies to use local labor and local contractors. I understand that it is not always possible for large, national corporations to change contractual obligations. Still, we should be able to come up with an ordinance that offers a second level abatement that gives companies a better deal in exchange for a percentage of their workforce and contractors coming from St. Joe and the contiguous counties.
Finally, the good news in this situation is very good news. The County Council can vote on a
new abatement ordinance in six months. The world already knows we are open for business. We need to make it less complicated to do so. By working with the right executive branch representatives, crafting a document that leaves negotiating power in the hands of the executive branch, and making sure there are incentives for companies to use local labor and contractors, we can get the right ordinance for our community. That is my goal; however, the conditions I have listed are required for my vote in the affirmative on any abatement ordinance. I am prepared and willing to either work with the sponsors of the failed ordinance and executive branch representatives to craft a new ordinance or work exclusively with executive branch representatives to get the job done.
Respectfully,
Dan
Want to keep seeing the news the legacy media just won’t report? REAL News Michiana relies on member subscribers to keep going. As a subscriber, you’ll get an RNM mug and invites to special events. Help us continue to expose corruption and report on the news conservatives care about by subscribing here.
Makes perfect sense!