Washington County should say no to Intel

Chuck Sheketoff over at Blue Oregon has a post entitled “Is Intel Bluffing Washington County Commissioners?

In the post he explains how the Washington County Commissioners are considering givng up about 579 million bucks in local tax breaks for Intel over a 15 year period under the strategic investment program (SIP).

According to Commissioners no new jobs will be created and this appears to be a necessary part of the strategic investment program (SIP).

Washington County signed a previous SIP and Intel did not uphold its end of the bargain.

Intel says it will move its manufacturing facilities overseas if the Washington County Commissioners don’t cave in to Intel’s demands.

Since Intel didn’t keep its end of the bargain concerning a previous SIP what makes the Commissioners think that Intel will uphold its end of the bargain with this new SIP.

I think it’s time for the Commissioners to, “Just say no.” What good is having Intel here when Intel only has about 500 employees in Washington County and hardly contributes to local government because of the ridiculously low taxes it has to pay?

I like Intel. I like having Intel in Washington County. But there has to be some sort of limit on how much corporate welfare Intel should get.

Related posts:

  1. Update to Intel’s tax breaks
  2. Washington County Deputy secretly indicted
  3. Intel Layoffs: How many?
  4. Did Intel lose their minds?
  5. High Tech in Oregon: It’s Not Just Washington County

5 Comments so far

  1. Josh Bancroft (unregistered) April 25th, 2005 11:26 am

    Wha? Intel has way more than 500 people in Washington county. More like 8000+, I think.

  2. ryanknapper (unregistered) April 25th, 2005 11:59 am

    I know little about the anything, but I would suggest that Washington County grant the request, but include either:

    a) Yearly minimums and penalties when those metrics are not met.

    b) Increase the benefits for Intel in direct proportion to their actions of social conscience. If they create 100% of agreed upon jobs (and/or other standards) they receive 100% of their request. 150 jobs, 150%, etc.

    Without monetary incentive it is in Intel’s favor to screw the county. Either reward good behavior or punish bad.

  3. ExtraMSG (unregistered) April 25th, 2005 12:07 pm

    Intel is Oregon’s largest private employer. You need to double-check your numbers. Plus, there are contractors and companies that do business with them. See this study:

    http://www.intel.com/community/oregon/ecokey.htm

  4. John Hays (unregistered) April 25th, 2005 1:25 pm

    The five hundred number about the number of people working in Washington County was wrong. I should have done a little more research.

    For more info about Intel’s operations in Oregon you can visit Intel’s website at

    http://www.intel.com/community/oregon/campus/key.htm

    The following between stars is from Intel’s website.

    *****************************

    Intelís operations in Washington County produced $6.12 billion in output in 2001, directly employing 15,319 persons who received $1.51 billion in wages, salaries, cash bonuses, and realized gains from stock options. From 1998 through 2001, Intelís contribution to state output and personal income increased approximately 85 percent. Intelís contribution to state employment increased over 70 percent during the same period. The annual economic impacts of Intelís operations on Washington County, the Portland metropolitan area, and the State are shown in Table 1, with personal income being a component of output.

    http://www.intel.com/community/oregon/ecokey.htm#Key5

    *****************************

    Now that I’ve done some PR work for Intel I still wonder if there has to be some sort of limit on how much corporate welfare Intel should get in Washington County. I’m for giving Intel some tax breaks, but how much is enough?

  5. ExtraMSG (unregistered) April 26th, 2005 1:37 am

    Well, from the govt’s standpoint, the limit should be a) as little as necessary to keep Intel, and b) at maximum, whatever will still give the gov’t/people a net gain. (If, eg, the gov’t had to build roads, etc, and create services that surpassed the tax revenue they would gain from income taxes, corporate taxes, etc.)


Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Content: Creative Commons | Site and Design © 2008 | Metroblogging ® and Metblogs ® are registered trademarks of Bode Media, Inc.