Heh – I heard, while running around at work doing about ten things simultaneously, Mike Stenhouse mention this on the radio Friday.

Get it?  Thirty eight questions?  38 Studios?  (I like it.)

Click here to see the whole list.  Below are some that stuck out for me.  However, any elected official who votes for taxpayer funded tax credits or loan guarantees or corporate welfare of any form, whether or not the beneficiary is actually identified in the legislation, must examine and answer all thirty eight of these questions (at which point, of course, s/he could not vote in favor).

5.    If you call it a tax credit, but you then let the developer sell it to other taxpayers, isn’t it just a really inefficient way of handing out a multi-million-dollar corporate welfare check?

12.    And while we’re at it, how can the HR&A report (page 30) claim that the “magnitude” of the project implies that the spending is “net new”?  They seem to be arguing that 95% of the spending is “new to the region” because a project of this size “would not have otherwise taken place” without the taxpayer subsides.  If Rhode Islanders have that much money lying around doing nothing, perhaps the developers should just take up a collection.  Or maybe there’s a reason the project can’t gather funding without involving politics and taxes.

13.    Why does the developer get to retain $15 million in declared value while arguing functional obsolescence at the same time?  If you need this bailout to keep the lights on (literally), isn’t the building really worth nothing?

18.    Who’s on the hook for the bad investment?  Who invested the equity to allow the company to purchase the property, and who loaned them the money?  Who are we really bailing out here?

19.    More bluntly, does our proposed multi-million-dollar subsidy go to the new development, or does the plan include paying off old debt or old investors?

24.    Specifically, what do we get for $3,105,678 in “legal & professional” fees and $3,342,050 in “administration & development” fees?  (Would it be too bold to ask who exactly gets that $6,447,728?)

31.    Man of Steel aside, if we’re subsidizing “stainless steel appliances” and “granite kitchen and bathroom counters,” can we leave our doggie bags there when we go out for a night on the town after dinner? How about using the “24 hour fitness center” and “24 hour concierge/security”?

32.    Given the roughly $75 million in total proposed handouts, the proposal amounts to a subsidy of about $200 per square foot for 265 new households (HR&A, page 34.)  That kind of money builds a nice house; how about we just build a bunch of those and give them away?  That certainly seems more equitable than subsidizing one tall building in a single bound.

Monique Chartier

Monique is a political gadfly, data junkie and contributor to the Ocean State Current and Anchor Rising.  Please consider supporting the terrific work of the Rhode Island Center for Freedom and Prosperity here:

https://secure.piryx.com/donate/7rkChZKP/RI-Center-for-Freedom-and-Prosperity/