Dan Cole is certainly making excellent use of the space he's given each week on The Gazette's editorial page.

Today he takes tiger firmly by tail by asking whether it's appropriate that the head of the Colorado Springs Economic Development Corp., Mike Kazmierski, is such a consistent and vigorous advocate for bigger government and higher taxes, considering that a portion of his annual budget comes from public funds. I've often wondered about that myself; it seems like a conflict of interest to me.

It's a little odd, really: EDC exists to promote the business climate in Colorado Springs, yet it often promotes government expansion and higher taxes instead. The government and business sectors need not be adversaries, but they shouldn't be in bed together either, since this convergence of interests can put the taxpayers at risk. We see it at the federal level with bailouts and stimulus packages. Here at the local level, it's manifest in a proposal to use taxpayer dollars to promote business ventures and "job-creation."

Cole uses the term "reverse lobbying" to describe this situation, but why get clever -- it's lobbying, plain and simple, by an organization that receives public funds. Whether or not it's legal, it seems improper. And now is not a bad time to spotlight this, since EDC is bound to be deeply involved in the campaign to pass the city ballot measure. What safeguards exist to ensure that some of the fungible public dollars EDC receives won't be used to promote a ballot measure that, if approved, has the potential to pump even more money into EDC coffers, and to greatly enhance its influence? None that I am aware of.

Cole also catches Kazmierski in a glaring inconsistency, in that the EDC chief was not long ago promoting an increase in the county sales tax, arguing that "essential services" are suffering because local government is starving for more tax dollars, but now is backing a city ballot measure that would dedicate $3.2 million annually for nebulous and unspecified economic development purposes, while "essential services" are on the chopping block. That, too, seems like an excellent point.

But there's no need to repeat all Cole's points, when I can paste his entire piece below:

EDC engaged in reverse lobbying?

February 6, 2009 - 9:49AM

Whenever local government decides to propose a tax increase, Mike Kazmierski, president of the Colorado Springs Economic Development Corp., is sitting near the front of the room, promising to "educate the public" about the tax's innumerable virtues.

In fact, Kazmierski seems so intent on "educating the public" that he just might succeed in creating an entirely new profession: the lobbyist-in-reverse, employed by local government to influence the vote of the people.
It would be a smooth transition for Kazmierksi. After all, his economic policies take as their only consistent premise that, without larger government, our private sector won't prosper.

Furthermore, he doesn't seem too particular about what he's promoting, provided it's a tax increase.

Last fall, as chairman of the group pushing the goliath public safety tax, Kazmierski argued that the city's reputation for low levels of basic services discourages businesses from settling here. As he told the Denver Post, "We've come up with some things we find pretty scary."

Ironically, this alarmist rhetoric served only to reinforce our undeserved reputation, but that's beside the present point.

Three months after the public safety proposal failed at the polls, a property tax is about to expire. When the council gathered last week to discuss the issue, there was no doubt they would request a permanent extension. The only question was whether the $3 million per annum should flow into the general fund, bolstering the very services

Kazmierski had warned were so dangerously underfunded, or instead underwrite a governmental Economic Development Authority, with the vague mission of "attracting, retaining, and creating jobs," presumably through corporate handouts.

Evidently oblivious to his own arguments from last November, Kazmierski now maintained that creating an Economic Development Authority should be our top priority. Councilmember Darryl Glenn and Mayor Lionel Rivera held the line on basic services and public safety, but the rest of the council voted in favor of the corporate slush fund.

This erratic, haphazard economic strategy has wearied both sides of the political aisle.

In the words of Nathan Fisk, outgoing executive director of the El Paso County GOP, "Kazmierksi eagerly proposes tax increases, when he should be looking to free market principles and trying to eliminate onerous regulations and taxes."

Allison Hunter, outgoing president of the El Paso County Democrats Club, doesn't necessarily embrace Fisk's limited government philosophy, but she does believe that Kazmierski gives tax increases a bad name. "Kazmierski skips from tax to tax, from one priority to another, billing each as ‘extremely urgent' and ‘do-or-die.' He makes us progressives look ridiculous."

As someone more aligned with Fisk's view, I tend to think that Kazmierski's ability to make tax-hikers look ridiculous is actually one of his greatest virtues. The problem, from my perspective, is that his capriciousness infects certain members of the council, to the point where they vacillate as wildly and inexplicably as he does.

Margaret Radford, for example, initially recognized the absurdity of increasing corporate welfare at a time like this. Why throw money at corporate jobs, she reasoned, when shortfalls are already forcing the city to eliminate essential jobs here at home? After her courageous talking points, Radford voted for Kazmierski's slush fund anyway. The managing editor of the

Colorado Springs Independent mysteriously remarked that Radford was the only one who "got it," but he must have left the meeting before she switched positions, leaving Rivera and Glenn to stand alone. It was probably just this type of political contortionism that led the Colorado Springs Business Journal to describe most councilmembers' statements as "incomprehensible."

Infectious fiscal fecklessness aside, there's another significant problem with Kazmierski's organization. The EDC receives public funds. Before we think about approving a tax that could provide millions more for Kazmierski's projects of the day, the EDC needs to get out of the business of selling tax increases.

Last year, the EDC contributed $14,000 to Kazmierski's sales tax campaign. Money is fungible, so additional public infusions would allow the EDC to dedicate even more revenue to "educating the public." It's appalling to realize that a quasi-public institution is collecting public dollars and then spending money lobbying for higher taxes.
-
Cole, of Colorado Springs, is a writer, translator and political organizer. Readers can reach him at
dancoloradan@yahoo.com.