Category Archives: business news

What have you done for us lately, legislators?

Texas Panhandle Days is coming up.

An entourage of Texas Panhandle residents is going to travel to the state’s capital city, Austin, sit down with legislators and tell them what’s on their minds. They’re going to tell them what kind of legislation they want passed and they’ll inform our elected representatives of the results they expect to get from their efforts.

http://www.amarillo-chamber.org/wcevents/eventdetail.aspx?eventid=2539

The Amarillo Chamber of Commerce puts it on. The link kinda/sorta talks about Panhandle Days’ mission.

I’ve never attended one of these events. The only way I’d ever be invited would be as a journalist covering it for my employer. I’m out of the full-time journalism game now.

So I’ll pose a two-sided question: What really and truly gets accomplished at these events and how the folks who organize measure their success?

I’ve known many individuals — from business and industry, from government, civic leaders, professional do-gooders — who’ve attended these Panhandle Days functions in Austin. They all come back and say what a “great time” they had. By “great time,” I suppose that means fellowship, consuming adult beverages and nice meals — all of that kind of thing.

But they’re not the only regional group that goes to Austin to receive the royal treatment. The Metroplex sends a delegation, as does San Antonio; Houston sends its posse to Austin; same for the Piney Woods and the Golden Triangle (where I formerly lived and worked); Coastal Bend sends a team, along with El Paso and the Permian Basin.

They all get their “days” in Austin, their time to slap a few backs, tell each other proud they are of what they’re doing and schmooze a bit with key state government movers and shakers.

They all have specific needs and interests. They’re all competing for the same pool of money to hand out. They’re all trying to get their legislators to pull strings for their interests.

Who are the big winners — and the big losers?

 

Mixed bag with big Xcel Energy plans

The news about downtown Amarillo hasn’t been good of late, what with the master developer hired by the city vaporizing into thin air in the span of a 24-hour day.

But it’s not all bad.

Xcel Energy announced plans to build a $42 million office building, which is the first large-scale office construction project in more than three decades.

Good news, right?

Yes. But there’s a catch.

Xcel is going to vacate the several floors it occupies at the Chase Tower, that huge 31-story skyscraper that juts out of the downtown Amarillo skyline.

I ran into my old pal Wes Reeves recently at the coffee shop on the ground floor of the Chase Tower. He made some cheeky remark about the appearance of the new structure. Actually, it looks attractive — at least to my eyes. It’ll comprise four stories and 114,000 square feet at Seventh and Buchanan. Three floors of office space will sit atop a parking garage that will hold at least 500 vehicles.

Xcel plans to move in by the spring of 2017.

I’m glad to see the activity picking up downtown.

What about the floors that will be vacated at the Chase Tower? Developers there have done a great deal to improve the appearance of that skyscraper. It’s a bustling hub of activity now. However, West Texas A&M University is moving its Amarillo campus operation of out there eventually to a new site where the Commerce Building sits.

The exit of WT and now Xcel will vacate about a dozen floors of the Chase building.

That’s an unacceptable level of darkness in a building that towers so tall over our city.

 

David Wallace: All hat and no cattle?

David Wallace talked a good game when he came to visit us at the newspaper.

I think it was around 2011. He was a partner in this high-dollar development company. He brought his game to Amarillo and pitched it to local civic, government and business leaders. He and his partner, Costa Bajjali, would be the “lead developers” in the city’s effort to rebuild, revive, renovate and resuscitate downtown Amarillo.

He persuaded many of us that he had the goods. He could make it happen. I recall quite vividly the crux of his statement — which I cannot quote verbatim today — that Wallace Bajjali was not in the business of failure. He didn’t make all that money, Wallace implied, by putting the screws to communities that hired him and his company.

Well, guess what? Wallace Bajjali is now history. The firm’s relationship with the city has gone kaput. The Local Government Corporation has declared the firm to be in default. Wallace and Bajjali have had a serious falling out. Wallace has disappeared. So has Bajjali. The city is left holding the bag, so to speak, on a parking garage it still intends to build — despite the absence of Wallace Bajjali as the can’t-miss master developer.

I read in the paper today that Richard Brown, the current president of the LGC, said everyone — including the media should have done a better job of vetting Wallace Bajjali. I guess Brown is trying to shed some of the responsibility for this mess-up by suggesting the media deserve some of the blame for getting entangled with this company.

But the city did lay out some dough. I understand it totals about $1 million. For that kind of money, I think the public deserves an explanation on what in the world happened to this one-time supposedly fail-safe partnership.

I know we can’t force Wallace or Bajjali to spill the beans on each other. But as a taxpayer and as a one-time member of the media who was sold a bogus bill of goods, I’d like some answers to what went so terribly wrong.

What? Cities can't decide these things?

Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin has signed a law that bans cities from enacting municipal minimum-wage standards for businesses within the city.

That’s strange. I have thought Republicans, such as Fallin, were categorically opposed to what they call “government overreach,” that local control should trump bigger-government control whenever possible?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/15/oklahoma-minimum-wage_n_5152496.html

Oklahoma cities, like cities in all the other states, do have this thing called “home rule charter” form government. I believe that enables cities to set the rules inside their corporate limits. Do I have that wrong?

Gov. Fallin’s signature on the bill now disallows cities from making that call.

It reminds me a bit of the Texas statute that used to prohibit cities from deploying red-light cameras if city officials perceived a problem with people running red lights, causing accidents and putting local residents in danger. That law has been amended and some cities — such as Amarillo — are using the cameras to catch those who run through red lights.

Those who support the Oklahoma minimum-wage ban say it “levels the playing field” for all cities. A GOP state representative said, “An artificial raise in the minimum wage could derail local economies in a matter of months. This is a fair measure for consumers, workers and small business owners.”

Sure thing. But if business owners agree that the $7.25 hourly wage is too low and are willing to pay more, don’t they have the right to do so if the city where they operate grants them permission?

Local control, man. Local control.

I thought that was preferable to patronizing Big Government.

 

'Transfer of wealth' talk likely to surface

Can we now discuss one of President Obama’s key points in his State of the Union speech?

It’s about that tax cut for the middle class.

He took considerable pain Tuesday night to extol the virtues of middle-class Americans and the work they do to make our country strong economically. He wants to give middle classers — folks like my wife and me — a break on their taxes. To pay for it he wants to ask more of wealthy Americans. They need to pay more in taxes to finance the tax relief he’s planning for the rest of us.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/republicans-have-one-word-for-president%e2%80%99s-proposals-and-veto-threats-%e2%80%98no%e2%80%99/ar-AA8pnAq

Those on the right and far right have a term for it. We’ll hear it. It’s called “transfer of wealth.”

Let’s try to set the record straight.

As I understand the meaning of the term “transfer of wealth,” what would have to occur is that the federal government would have to actually take money earned by rich folks and give it to not-so-rich folks. Legend has it that Robin Hood did that in medieval England when he “took from the rich and gave to the poor.”

That’s wealth transfer.

What I heard the president propose Tuesday night was nothing of the kind.

A tax cut for the middle class wouldn’t deprive rich Americans of their wealth. They’d still be rich. They’ll get to keep their yachts, fancy cars, summer/winter homes and all their bling.

The middle class would get to pocket a little more disposable income to spend on things they want or need.

All this being said, I do understand GOP criticism of the president for proposing something he knows won’t ever be enacted into legislation he can sign into law. On that score, Barack Obama has proved his political deftness, as his proposal was met in the congressional chamber with applause from Democrats and silence from Republicans. How do you suppose that looks to millions of middle-class Americans watching who actually favor a tax break?

I don’t intend to tolerate any demagoguery about wealth transfer in describing what the president has pitched.

How about debating the proposal on its merits: Do the folks who control Congress favor a tax break for middle-class Americans or not?

 

Recovery bigger than presidency or Congress

Barack Obama gets a lot of blame and takes a lot of credit.

The president deserves some of the blame and much of the credit.

He doesn’t deserve all of what he gets or what he takes.

Politico has published a fascinating analysis of the economic recovery that is under way and wonders whether the president is taking too much credit for it. Its answer is “yes.”

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/does-obama-deserve-credit-for-economy-114107.html?hp=t1_r

I’ve been generous in my praise of Barack Obama’s handling of the financial meltdown that was occurring when he took office. He was bold and brash when he launched efforts to stimulate the economy with cash and when he persuaded Congress to enact bailout legislation that helped the automobile and banking industries.

Those efforts have paid off. Indeed, the auto industry has paid back the money it got and the Treasury is fatter because of it.

The latest job-creation numbers continue to show improvement in the economy, but as Politico points out, an $18 trillion economic machine — which is what the U.S. Gross Domestic Product is — is too big for a mere president or Congress to control.

As Politico reports: “Republicans say the economy is finally – and only partially – shaking off the impact of Obama policies like the Affordable Care Act, tax hikes and financial reform, all of which they contend slowed down growth. And they point to paltry wage gains once again evident in the December jobs report. Democrats say that’s sour grapes from partisans whose warnings of a disastrous ‘Obama economy’ look increasingly ridiculous.”

Furthermore, writes Politico: “Economists – on the left and right and in the middle – say the facts suggest a vastly more complex middle ground. Obama deserves significant credit for some shrewd and politically difficult moves early on his presidency, economists say, including the stimulus and the automobile and Wall Street bailouts.”

Congressional Republicans are now trying wrestle some of the economic recovery credit away from the president. Some have joked that the GOP has taken control of the full Congress only since Monday, noting that Democrats have run the Senate while the House has been in GOP hands only since 2011.

I’ve also noted that credit for the recovery can be shared, just as blame can be found on both sides for the collapse that occurred in the final years of George W. Bush’s presidency.

https://highplainsblogger.com/2015/01/01/how-about-sharing-the-credit/

The bottom line is that the economy is too huge, too complicated and contains too many traps for a single set of policies to manipulate.

 

Economy now off the table for 2016 campaign?

Let’s allow this declaration: Barring an unexpected collapse that could occur at any moment, the state of the nation’s economy will not be an issue in the 2016 campaign for president of the United States.

The Labor Department released more job numbers today. They’re good.

The economy added 252,000 jobs in December; unemployment fell from 5.8 percent to 5.6 percent.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/10/business/economy/jobs-unemployment-figures-december.html?_r=0

Is it a perfect score? No. Wages took a slight dip in December, compared to the substantial growth they showed the previous month.

Republican contenders for the White House, though, are going to have to look beyond our borders for issues to toss against Democrats — namely against Hillary Rodham Clinton. Those opportunities aren’t going to be that easy to exploit against the former secretary of state, former U.S. senator, former first lady and prohibitive frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination.

The economy? Well, I’ve noted before how the Obama administration took bold steps early on to stop the free fall it inherited when Barack Obama took the presidential oath on Jan. 20, 2009.

The economy is picking up considerable steam now.

The war on terror? It’s still going on. Yes, the president said the “war on terror is over.” He misspoke. The nation continues to hunt down killers, who continue to strike at innocent victims, such as those most recently in Paris.

Let’s face this cold, harsh fact: The war on terror is unlike any war we’ve ever fought. There will be no way to declare victory. The 9/11 attacks brought forward what intelligence analysts and deep-cover agents have known all along, that terrorists are out there plotting against us.

That fight will go on, and on, and on.

At home, though, the economy has recovered.

Abandoned building gets another new owner

Is this it? Is this the corner that an abandoned, dilapidated, rotting hulk of a downtown Amarillo office building needs to return to life?

A Dallas developer, Tom Pauken, has just foreclosed on the long-abandoned Barfield Building, wrestling it away from its owner who’s said for longer than anyone can remember that, by golly, he’s going to find someone to develop the structure.

Todd Harmon hasn’t delivered the goods. From where I sit, it doesn’t appear that he ever will.

Enter the group headed by Pauken, a lawyer, real estate developer who’s worked with property in Amarillo, former Texas Republican Party chairman — and a longtime friend of yours truly. (I thought I’d throw that last thing in for grins and giggles.)

Pauken leads a group called Henderson Willis Ltd., which has foreclosed on mortgage notes totaling about $550,000 on the building at the corner of Sixth Avenue and Polk Street.

It’s a complicated procedure, but as of today Pauken’s limited partnership has control of the Barfield Building. The former controlling owner, Harmon, so far hasn’t responded to media requests for comment.

Pauken’s foreclosure comes as well after another Amarillo business group sought to develop the Barfield Building, only to have Harmon get it back in some more complicated maneuvering.

What is Pauken’s aim here? He wants to find someone to invest in breathing life back into the Barfield Building. Harmon had gutted the ground floor and a few floors above. Then the work stopped. The ground floor was boarded up and the crews walked away; that was a decade ago.

It has sat vacant, rotting ever since.

Pauken said he believes the Barfield “is a natural” for some sort of redevelopment. Harmon had sought to turn the 88-year-old building into a combination of apartments, retail shops, a restaurant, day spa, bank branch, coffee house — and Lord knows what else.

Enter the Pauken group, headed by someone who’s already had some success redeveloping property in downtown Amarillo.

Can this group do what no one else has been able to do? I am cautiously optimistic my pal Tom can get ‘er done.

 

 

Such wealth is mind-boggling

The late golfing great Bobby Jones once said of a young golfer who would become the greatest in his sport’s history that Jack Nicklaus “plays a game with which I am not familiar.”

Accordingly, an Oklahoma divorce settlement dispute is dealing with money with which I — nor most normal Americans — are unfamiliar.

I cannot get over what the former wife of an Oklahoma business tycoon is asking.

Harold Hamm offered to write his former wife, Sue Ann Arnall, a check worth $975 million to settle everything. It would be over. The two of them would part company and never have a word to say each other … ever again!

She refused the money.

Why? The bottom line is that it’s not enough.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/harold-hamm-offers-dollar975-million-divorce-check-ex-wife-rejects-it/ar-BBhBvJS

Wow! And double, maybe triple, wow!

Arnall is appealing the initial divorce settlement of $1 billion. Her ex-husband has been accruing interest and penalty charges of $93,000 per bleeping day.

The guy wants out. His wife is arguing that she deserves more than the amount ordered by the court.

Now she’s refusing a one-time payment of nearly a billion bucks.

What in the name of the deepest of pockets am I missing here?

https://highplainsblogger.com/2014/11/15/1-billion-settlement-just-isnt-fair/

Someone help me out. Please.

 

Sanctions seek to punish North Korea

It turns out President Obama is going to be up front and visible as he responds to North Korea’s alleged cyber attack on a major American company.

He took time from his vacation in Hawaii to sign an executive order slapping economic sanctions on North Korea.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/obama-sanctions-north-korea-sony-cyberattack/story?id=27965524

I’m still thinking the president had a hand in North Korea’s Internet crash shortly after dictator Kim Jong-Un bullied Sony Pictures into holding back release of “The Interview,” a fictional story about a plot to assassinate the North Korean dictator. The bullying included the alleged hacking into Sony’s emails and other communications.

Obama threatened a “proportional” response.

Now we have the sanctions. They’re sweeping and designed to bring serious economic pain to a government known for bringing plenty of pain of its own to its people.

According to ABC News: “The order authorizes the Treasury Department to shutdown access to the U.S. financial system, prohibiting transactions and freezing assets, for specific officials  and entities of the DPRK (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea) and anyone who supports them.”

Further, according to ABC: “‘The order is not targeted at the people of North Korea, but rather is aimed at the Government of North Korea and its activities that threaten the United States and others,’ Obama wrote in a letter to House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell notifying them of the action.”

Will the sanctions work? Well, Kim Jong-Un ought to ask Soviet strongman/president Vladimir Putin about the effectiveness of these sanctions.

Yes, they’ll work.