![[Nameplate]](http://www.gcdailyworld.com/images/nameplate.png)
|
|
Fair ~ High: 35°F Sunday, Feb. 12, 2012 |
|
What do you say, believers?Posted Tuesday, March 16, 2010, at 11:52 AM
I first want to start by saying I hope the Goosepond Fish and Wildlife Area does well. Greene County needs it. It is no coincidence that our budgets are running a deficit, our highway department doesn't have money while losing $82,000 per year in taxes and millions spent in the county. Before GPFWA the farming operation spent approximately $350 per acre to put out a crop. What that means is that every year $2,800,000 was spent at LOCAL BUSINESSES. A check for over $1 million was mailed to a fertilizer company every year. No hoopla was needed, no counting on tourists, no wishing, no hoping, just a stamp and a check. Over $100,000 spent at a local fuel sales, over $200,000 spent at a local machinery dealer, thousands spent at a local parts store, tens of thousands spent at a local tire shop, tens of thousands spent at a local propane dealer and eight full-time employees. All of this happened every year with nothing more than a stamp licking.
The day GPFWA started, all of this local spending stopped. So what did we get in return? I will be the first to say after calling Brad Feaster I was surprised at some of the numbers. NRCS has spent approximately $6 million on excavating work with maybe half going to local businesses. Six-hundred and 35 acres is still farmed, so that's over $222,000 for inputs each year. They have a $178,000 budget for operations which maybe half of is spent locally. Last year they had 2,500 hunters and 1,000 registered birdwatchers. Now realize that almost all hunters register, but very few birdwatchers do. Mine and Brad's guess would be 30% register. That means probably closer to 3,000 birdwatchers. The DNR's economic impact study estimated that hunters spend an average of $34 per day while birdwatchers spend $12. Which means $121,000 spent locally each year. Marsh Madness had 564 people walk through the door. GPFWA has three full-time and two part-time local employees. I figure just short of $500,000 per year total, plus if you were to divide the NRCS money over 11 years another $350,000 per year. For an estimate of $850,000 per year locally in the 11 years it has been operating. This number will probably decrease for a while due to much less NRCS capital expenditures in the future. What all this means is the Doubters have lost $31.7 million spent locally over the last 11 years and the Believers have brought in 9.4 million or 30% and are going backwards over 2 million per year. I am glad Marsh Madness had 564 guests, but keep in mind there is a neighbor to the area that spends $800 on a cookout every year and has 500 show up, so you may not want to brag about spending millions to achieve the same results. Now I would rather light a candle than curse your darkness, so here is my offer. If the Believers stop pointing to the dead horse, I will stop beating it. From now on rather than bringing up a topic that has cost Greene County millions, focus on what to do now. Glendale FWA has over 26,000 campers per year, maybe we could get a little taste of that with campgrounds. Some would like a Visitors Center or observation towers, maybe a letter writing campaign would help. Maybe when the topic is brought up again, rather than bringing up our loss, one could say I know we have a long way to go, so anything you can do to help would be appreciated. You can reach me by e-mail at jpcoleman@smithville.net Comments Showing comments in chronological order [Show most recent comments first] |
Garrulousness  - Archives - Blog RSS feed ![[Feed icon]](http://www.gcdailyworld.com/images/icons/feed-icon-14x14.png){kind=icon} - Comments RSS feed - Send email to By John Coleman - Login Hot topics SILENCE IS GOLDEN(146 ~ 9:25 AM, Jul 20)
GAY MARRIAGE
Laughter is the best medicine
FOR SALE
Released from the UnAssociated Press:
|
Email link
Read comments (52)
Blog archive
John, how do we make money off of visitors? It's a more difficult question than it appears.
For example, more retail-type businesses are probably needed to make an inviting downtown area, yet how can these businesses make it financially until the visitor (and buying shopper) numbers improve?
It seems somewhat like a catch-22. Maybe you have the answer...
I wish I did, I am afraid that is the problem. Small business is becoming a relic. In this current economy any business especially a new one will be lucky just to survive. The internet is getting rid of newspapers by the dozens, large chains are squeezing mom and pop store's to extinction. I fear that this is just the way of the future. I cannot stress the importance enough of buying at your mom and pop shop. Even that is probably just a band-aid. The times they are a changin and to parrot my mom, probably not for the better.
One place to start is by recognizing all of our businesses. I believe Greene County is 300,000 acres with 100,000 tillable. this means that farmers are a 35 million dollar a year local industry. we should cherish them and not take them for granted.
mason, maybe you have the answer there. Farmers could add agri-tourism aspects to their farm to reap additional monies from the Goosepond visitors, while still making money off the actual farming until the crowds increase.
Here's my $.02... I think it is admirable of John to let the past remain in the past and instead concentrate his efforts on trying to make a better future.
That's a better idea than the current annexation plan.
You speak as if the Goosepond Project was some sort of government heist. Like Governor Daniels and then IDNR Director Hupfer strong-armed the owner into selling at a ridiculous price. Where is your anger at the owner for selling his property to the residents of Indiana? Maybe, just maybe, this project will lead to future rewards for the citizens of Greene County. Who knows, GP is still in its infancy. What I do know is this...property set aside for recreation and wildlife habitat has been shrinking for years. The opportunity to reclaim and preserve a property such as this only happens once in a lifetime.
Now if you want to talk tax dollars, how much of the money spent to farm Goosepond was subsidized by the Feds and our tax dollars? I would guess it would be in the millions, maybe? Big farmers get bigger and the family farm gets swallowed by farming corporations. The little guy that needs help and struggles to plant a crop every year has gone by the wayside.
Not beating a dead horse...just trying to bury it once and for all.
I am sorry you mis took my piece. It was not a heist at all, it was done in plain sight with our tax dollars. Why would I be mad at the owner, He was a businessman that sold an investment at a profit. It is in its infancy and falling behind at the rate of 2 million per year. As for farm subsidies they are in place to make sure we have more farmers than we need, to make sure our food supply is ample. I do not know what percent of farmers income is from subsidies, I would guess less than 5%, but I do know what percent of money spent on this project is taxpayer money 100%.
"What I do know is this...property set aside for recreation and wildlife habitat has been shrinking for years" A complete lie, It has risen every year.
Not all money spent on the Goosepond Project was taxpayer money. Various conservation groups made donations that helped make it happen.
masonjim49---show me your facts.
Not all money, just most, or almost all, you are correct it was not 100%. I again am sorry you missed the point. I was speaking as to your point of farm subsidies. They are a very small part of any farm and there to help secure our food supply. This project is mostly government money. As for masonjim49, it was you that started the statement, you said: "What I do know is this...property set aside for recreation and wildlife habitat has been shrinking for years" . I also have done a lot of reading and could not find one case where a recreation or wildlife area was taken away. You made the statement--show me your facts
http://www.blm.gov/public_land_statistic...
Your turn---show me your facts
John,
I think you and masonjim49 are on the same side. He was quoting/questioning the statement which was made by on the Blood trail a couple of posts up. You should be asking trail to substantiate the statement.
Some say that the Goosepond was really one big set aside for the acreage to be used for I-69. There's reportedly an acreage ratio that has to be set aside for every acre taken for road construction.
Goosepond = Boondoggle.
Ask any hunter if they have more or less land to hunt now compared to 10 years ago. In order to turn a profit, farmers have plowed under fence rows that once were prime quail and rabbit habitat. Wealthy folks from urban areas lease prime hunting acreage that was once huntable with permission from the landowner. Urban sprawl, housing additions and rural development have all eaten up land that once provided a place for father and son/daughter to hunt together. Ruthless logging tactics turn once productive hunting grounds into a wasteland. The list goes on. If your claim that there are more places for recreational hunting/birdwatching/fishing is true, then why have most of the major conservation groups developed initiatives to develop more places to teach the youth of our nation to hunt?
John, if we, as a nation, already produce more food than our nation and the others we supply can consume, where and why is there a need for more farm ground? How is it good for the local environment for the Goosepond to dump a million dollars of fertilizer into the ground which will eventually make its ways into our streams, rivers and groundwater? The erosion of fertile soil made possible by years of farming the Goosepond will have future effects.
As you said before, the Goosepond is a done deal. Let's find a way to use it for the betterment of Greene County! Those that still say "boondoggle" and "mosquito pond" and such are likely to never offer an intelligent opinion or pitch in to help our county out. If you aren't part of the solution, then you are part of the problem!
Blood if you would take the time to sift thru the link I gave you would see that the amount of land is increasing. You talk about how others opinions are not intelligent and yet you simply contradict the facts with yours.
As for talk of environmental ramifications, that is a different topic, this article is about how this project impacted Greene County economically. Rather than change the subject, the whole point of this article is to simple look at the facts and then if you want to you can say: yes it is costing Greene County millions but I think it is worth it because___________.
masonjim,
Thank you for the fine link to the Bureau of Land Management. When I have some extra time, I will dive deeper into the info. You didn't comment on my opinion about the loss of land for hunting purposes. I am simply stating that the opportunity to acquire a property such as the GP does not come along very often. It provides us with the opportunity to preserve land for future generations, return the land to wetlands as it previously was and provide a huge environmental impact for years to come! (wetlands provide an excellent way to filter pollutants, such as fertilizer, out of our water) No, it has not paid huge dividends, economically. Has it contributed to a loss of tax revenue for Greene County....yes. But so have many other factors.
Why is there no outrage when farmers sell their valuable farmland to mining companies? Those properties are mined for a short period then eventually sold to private owners or turned into recreation areas.
What I was saying about those who make comments like "boondoggle" and "mosquito factory" is that they are quick to criticize, but add very little when it comes time to offer solutions!
"No, it has not paid huge dividends" Thank you that is what this article is about.
I have not commented on your other points because they are off topic, feel free to email me at masonjim49@yahoo.com if you would like to discuss other topics.
"No, it has not paid huge dividends, economically. Has it contributed to a loss of tax revenue for Greene County....yes"
WELL SAID
During the 19th century (1879) the Heirs of S. Ogle owned the majority of the Goosepond in Stockton Township. Gilbert Ogle owned the majority of the Goosepond (Bee Hunter Marsh) in Washington Township. Josephine Ogle and the Heirs of S. Ogle owned the majority of the Goosepond (Bee Hunter Marsh) in Grant Township. Gilbert Ogle, et.al. owned a majority of the Goosepond in Stafford Township.
By the time the 1920 census was taken there were three members of the Ogle family still living in Stafford Township; a father, mother, and one small child. A few years after the census was taken they also left the Goosepond. I've not yet had an opportunity to check the 1920 census for the other three townships in order to determine if any of the Ogles were living there in 1920.
There has been a succession of owners of the Goose Pond since then.
I believe that Paul Thompson was the only owner that had several years of successful farming in the Goose Pond. One reason was that both he and his wife were millionaires in their own right. When the Goose Pond got flooded out he replanted; one year 4 times.
There were also several years when the Goosepond wasn't planted in crops. A significant area of the Goose Pond was fenced and pastured. Several miles of fence was built and used for pasture. The the cattle were brought in from three other states where Mr. Thompson had farming operations. The cattle brought in in semi-trailers were Herford, Angus, Texas Longhorn, and Brahma. Paul later built a feeding pen at the intersection of S. R. 59 and the Duck Trail where the cattle were moved to before they were sent to the market. A corral was built on County Road 300S between 1100W and 1200W in order to do dehorning and giving of inoculations. The feeding pen is still standing although it is now enclosed.
During Mr. Thompsons's ownership of the Goosepond all eight of the homes on the property were occupied and the occupants were employees of the farming opertion. The Farm Manager lived at the southeast corner of the manmade lake, which Paul Thompson built, on County Road 1200W. All of the homes have now been demolished, I believe, maybe not. There were also two pumping stations in the Goose Pond that I believe are now gone.
In the late 50's-early 60's Mr. Thompson also built new homes on the west curve of S. R. 59. One of the homes served as his office and residence when he was in the Goose Pond. Those homes have also been demolished.
I believe that during my lifetime Paul Thompson was the only owner who owned the Goose Pond at the time of his death.
There has since his death been a long succession of owners of the Goose Pond all of whom were only in operation for a few years.
Considering the ever increasing cost of farming, and everything else, and the annual flooding of the Goose Pond it seems to me that the highest and best use of the Goose Pond is what it presently is; The Goose Pond Fish and Wildlife Area. All the whining, gripeing, bad-mouthing and negative comments will never change it's present use. And some of you are going to end up with a bad case of heart burn and ulcers if you don't quit. Life's too short to let that happen. And, just so there won't be any misunderstaning of where I'm coming from, I firmly believe that EVERYONE has the right to express their opinion on any subject. That's just simply the way it is, and should be, in these United States of America!
"All the whining, gripeing, bad-mouthing and negative comments will never change it's present use."
The exact point of my article. Recently there have been many speak of the Goosepond and rather than being positive only, some have chosen to try to get a jab in on the people that were against the project. This gains nothing and only brings up a subject that proves the doubters correct. If you chose to speak positively about the topic most will join in, here is an example: http://gcdailyworld.com/story/1616718.ht... . If you choose to get a jab in here is what happens: http://gcdailyworld.com/blogs/1465/entry... and http://gcdailyworld.com/blogs/nickschnei...
Now I would rather light a candle than curse your darkness, so here is my offer. If the Believers stop pointing to the dead horse, I will stop beating it. From now on rather than bringing up a topic that has cost Greene County millions, focus on what to do now.
Earlier this morning I received a private message that my entry above contained statements that "-- are a bit misleading.--" and "--Just not true,--" and that I did not understand the point of the original article.
My sincere apologies to the readers.
Could someone with the GCDW please remove my e-mail address from your computer system? Thank you.
Hey I gotta go the aids just came in to take me to my bath and change my diaper.:-)
"Goosepond Ghost"
A/K/A Samuel Miles Cline
hey goosepond Ghost, "When the Goose Pond got flooded out he replanted; one year 4 times. " Misleading because that was 1957 when most farmers in the area replanted 4 times because of the weather.
"I believe that Paul Thompson was the only owner that had several years of successful farming in the Goose Pond." Just not true, Dale Hess and Eugene Smith had many years of success. Eugene lost it because he put it up for collateral on other farms he lost, a big pyramid.
"I firmly believe that EVERYONE has the right to express their opinion on any subject." Obviously you don't understand the point of the article, you made several points none of which addressed the point of the article, Greene county has lost millions.
So it looks as if ""-- are a bit misleading.--" and "--Just not true,--" and that I did not understand the point of the original article." IS SPOT ON!
Dont forget the cost of leasing the property for many years then finally buying the land in your cost!
I left out many costs on both sides, I was only focusing on the impact to Greene County. On a side note, some keep trying to discuss how profitable the farm was a as justification. Let me give you an example. Let assume Linton has 10 restaurants. Now lets rank them from 1 to 10 in terms of profitability. So number one is a very profitable business and number ten not very profitable in fact so small of a profit it sells 6 times in 30 years. Would anyone in Linton be happy if the bottom three all came up for sale and rather than another private person buying them and keeping them operating and keeping jobs and keeping taxes paid, the state buys them, tears down the buildings and puts in playground equipment. This would then be justified by saying that they were not as profitable as the top five restaurants so good riddance. Times are tough and going to get tougher, Greene County needs money spent in Greene County at Greene County businesses.
It doesn't appear that you will ever stop pointing to the dead horse until the past land use revenue meets or exceeds the current land use revenue. So what is your solution to this? Are you asking for ideas or are you just trying to continue pummeling the fact that prime farmland was turned back into a wetland? I understand the concept of taxes and money that was being directly put into the county by the previous landowner. I come from a family who farms approximately 2,000 acres in this county. You have done a tremendous amount of research, which is very commendable. I don't know how we can turn back the past John.
The exact point of my article. Recently there have been many speak of the Goosepond and rather than being positive only, some have chosen to try to get a jab in on the people that were against the project. This gains nothing and only brings up a subject that proves the doubters correct. If you chose to speak positively about the topic most will join in, here is an example: http://gcdailyworld.com/story/1616718.ht... . If you choose to get a jab in here is what happens: http://gcdailyworld.com/blogs/1465/entry... and http://gcdailyworld.com/blogs/nickschnei...
Now I would rather light a candle than curse your darkness, so here is my offer. If the Believers stop pointing to the dead horse, I will stop beating it. From now on rather than bringing up a topic that has cost Greene County millions, focus on what to do now.
I've spent some of my time the last few days pondering over what can be done with the Goosepond Fish and Wildlife Area to replace the income produced when the Goose Pond was being farmed.
I have come to the conclusion there is no short term solution.
I have come to the conclusion that any long term solutions will be very costly, time consuming, and perhaps even impossible.
1. A hotel/motel could be built on a bluff overlooking the Goose Pond F&WA. Positioned in such a manner that it would afford as many clear views of the Goose Pond as possible. The location should be on S. R. 59 somewhere between Faughtville and Sandborn. That doesn't give very many choices for a bluff.
2. A "gambling" boat could be built on the man made lake located on the land at the northwest corner of the intersection of County Road 200S and 1200W; assuming this land is outside of the boundaries of the NRCS conservation easement; and it may not be. Accomplising this could be a very long drawn out process since legislation would be required from the State Legislature. However, since this area is "out in the middle of nowhere" with no adjacent service facilities and totally inadequate roads, it is my thinking that a casino developer/owner would have no interest in locating in the area.
3. DNR might want to consider taking bids for the establishment of a stable of horses and wagons that could provide tours to the public throughout the GPFWA; assuming that horses and wagons would be able to navigate the roads. With the deplorable condition of the roads surrounding the GPF&WA and within the GPF&WA this type of operation might, in addition to bringing in some revenue, also prevent claims for damage to vehicles and loss of life or lives of the visitors to the GPF&WA.
Other than the three above items I have no further suggestions, at this time or in the future, to offer.
Goodbye!
I believe also there are no short term solutions, I thinks some smaller steps would be observation towers, which i think a letter writing to the state may get. Other than that it will just take time.
Good research folks. I still think Greene county should lobby for a nuclear power plant. It would create hundreds of high paying jobs and provide a clean fuel source to add to the grid.
Just as any government takeover of a private enterprise, one can assume more inefficiencies, waste, fraud and abuse.
I was amazed that the gooseponds owner received millions in rent , then millions in a buyout the subsequent year. Good for the landowner! Profit is profit.
I can hardly wait for the government to tell my doctors what to do.
I drive thru the GPFWA daily traveling to and from work, and it is nice to see newly acquired wildlife in our area. HOWEVER, the most common of these creatures is not viewed with a lens, but rather from the drivers seat of your car. MISQUITOES!!!! I hope DNR will help with west-nile shots when we are all infected, not to mention our livestock!!!!
Rather than trying to come up with what we think needs to be here, it would be better to research and find out what potential tourists want to see.
Have the people using the property been asked what they like, don't like, what they would prefer?
To quote Joe Dirt, "...its not what you like, its the consumer."
James it is quite clear by your post that you have not spoken to Mr. Coleman. I called him and discussed this topic and learned a great deal. Perhaps you should take him up on his offer and learn what has not been printed.
Thank you chevygleen. I appreciate your input.
After some of my own research, I found out from several sources, including the GCDW, that Wilder Corporation, Maurice Wilder's corporation that owned Goosepond and Beehunter Marsh properties, purchased them in 1990. It is unclear from my research just how successful the land itself was or how productive, and because there is no public information I can find on farm conglomerates (and their subsidies), I cannot say exactly what tax contribution they made to Greene County. Let's be clear, I am not saying they didn't contribute. I am saying I cannot find any hard numbers to show exactly what was paid in taxes to Greene County. I cannot state with any specificity, where the tax revenue monies went with an out-of-town (and I think out of state) conglomerate. I'm sure there was some property tax paid on such large tracts of land.
From 1990 to 1999, the land was farmed. In 1999, the Wilder Corporation signed up for the Federal Wetland Reserve Program (FWRP). With that WRP status, the federal resource agency paid Maurice Wilder $7.2 million for a permanent easement on those lands. That easement was a conservation easement so that the land could not be farmed or developed. The intent of those easements is that the land be returned to a natural state or conservation area of some kind. So, if I am not mistaken, that stopped all property taxes from being paid. Does anyone know for sure about the nature of these conservation easements? If the land cannot be farmed, and there is no revenue, and the land is in easement status, with a government agency, how much tax revenue could have been collected?
Okay, that said, I cannot find what, if any, USDA Farm Subsidies the Wilder group received. In addition to looking up the Wetland Reserve Program information, I also referred to the EWG (Environmental Working Group at www.ewg.org/farmsubsidies).
From what I have read and researched, farm subsidies first began during Franklin Roosevelt's term as President. It was part of the original New Deal legislation. Farmers were paid NOT TO PLANT all of the acres of their land. They were paid by the federal government to intentionally fail at farming by either not planting all of their available land, or as the subsidies have come to be used, to subsidize, or pay farmers when their crops fail. The interesting thing is that farmers can claim a certain percentage of crop failure and that makes them eligible for farm subsidies. All federal taxpayers contribute to these subsidies that in the US totaled $177.6 BILLION dollars from 1995 through 2006. The stat from 2007 show that Greene County farms received $1,597,000.
I think it is curious whether Wilder earned farm subsidies from 1990 to 1999. While this has nothing to do with what Mr. Wilder spent in county, or the jobs he created, or any other monies spent to enrich countians, what I am questioning is the profitability of the land because perhaps there was somewhat of an offset of taxpayer monies by probable farm subsidies from 1990 to 1999, and then the $7.2 million easement, and then the purchase price for the land of $8 million. I doubt the income tax the Wilder corporation paid was to GC or the state of Indiana, since the corporation was a Florida entity.
I don't know how much land (in acres) Mr. Coleman owns, but perhaps we can, by comparison (if Mr. Coleman is willing to tell us how many acres he has or farms) figure out what subsidies Mr. Wilder received for Goosepond properties between the years of 1995 to 2006, Mr. Coleman received commodity subsidies for corn and soybeans totaling $475,479.00 According to EWG, Mr. Coleman received $355,006 for corn subsidies and $120,465 for soybeans. Any idea, based on these numbers, how much Mr. Wilder and his corporation could have received from taxpayers or how productive they were? Also, will a farmer receive subsidies if there is a conservation easement on the land? I assume not, but I cannot find this information. Also, does a farmer have to pay taxes on subsidized land?
Something that was not clear from what I wrote above, Wilder bought the Goosepond and Beehunter lands in 1990 and farmed until 1999. Wilder signed up for the WRP and granted an easement from 1999 through 2006. The properties could not be farmed or developed during those 8 years. In 2007, Wilder sold the property. Hope that clarifies the dates.
I have print outs of all property taxes paid on every track of the Goosepond. Contact me if you want to see hard numbers. Wilder corp paid 82,000 in property taxes per year, 60,000 to Linton school and 20,000 to WRV. As for subsidies they are capped at 75,000$ per year max. It is safe to assume that Wilder Corp was at the max. I also have extensive Data showing the farm was profitable. I will however give you a common sense proof to show it here. Lets say you were driving thru Indianapolis and saw a business that had been running for over 100 years. Would you think it had lost money more years that it made money? The Goosepond has been farmed for over 100 years. Now Let me give you another example. Let assume Linton has 10 restaurants. Now lets rank them from 1 to 10 in terms of profitability. So number one is a very profitable business and number ten not very profitable in fact so small of a profit it sells 6 times in 30 years. Would anyone in Linton be happy if the bottom three all came up for sale and rather than another private person buying them and keeping them operating and keeping jobs and keeping taxes paid, the state buys them, tears down the buildings and puts in playground equipment. This would then be justified by saying that they were not as profitable as the top five restaurants so good riddance. If you would like to become informed on this topic feel free to contact me and I will go over the data with you.
Okay, so I am confused by your "common sense" examples -- only because if you have the actual information, why not post it? Is it correct to assume that the Wilder GoosePond properties paid property tax every year from 1990 to and including 2006? Also, you didn't answer my question about whether a Wetland Reserve Program property can collect farm subsidies in addition to the monies paid (and collected from taxpayers) for easements? If my numbers are correct, and I believe they are, the taxpayers of the United States paid much more to Wilder Corp than it produced or provided to either Indiana or Greene County. Now, it certainly hurts the two school districts to lose money. That money has not been made up in any way as far as I can tell. But to make a claim that the Wilder property was such a profitable property with the $7.2 Million in easement rights to the government, and as you say, $75,000 per year (all paid with the monies collected from taxpayers, both Federal and State), it all seems to be a wash, doesn't it?
"Okay, so I am confused by your "common sense" examples -- only because if you have the actual information, why not post it?"
Simple economic principles dictate that a to stay in business stays in business by making money. Is it really that confusing That businesses that have operated for 100's of years are most likely profitable, while businesses that go out are most likely not profitable. Why I do not post it is because most of it is personal tax returns from past operators of the Goosepond.
"Is it correct to assume that the Wilder GoosePond properties paid property tax every year from 1990 to and including 2006?"
No that is not correct
"you didn't answer my question about whether a Wetland Reserve Program property can collect farm subsidies in addition to the monies paid (and collected from taxpayers) for easements?"
They cannot
"If my numbers are correct, and I believe they are, the taxpayers of the United States paid much more to Wilder Corp than it produced or provided to either Indiana or Greene County"
You number are not even close, The most anyone can receive in farm subsidies is 75,000$ per year. The farming operation spent over 3 million in the county each year.
"it all seems to be a wash, doesn't it?"
Not even close, take 3 million and subtract 75,000$
Sorry, I was not clear. What I meant was that if the Wilder folks were receiving $75,000 per year in subsidies, and they also received the $7.2 million for easements, that the taxpayers provided (I meant for both the subsidies and the easement monies) then there isn't as much of a difference in what they contributed versus what they received. Add to that the part taxpayer, part private entity purchase at $8 million, and the numbers are basically a wash is all I was saying.
Also, something just occured to me. After looking again at the Farm Subsidy site, I now see that there is also a John Coleman Farm Incorporated. Is that different from just you, the individual, Mr. Coleman? Do you have several different "farms" that are eligible for several different subsidies? I ask because perhaps there were different "farms" within Mr. Wilder's holdings. I read somewhere that different "tracts" were purchased. I take that to mean there were different farms under the same corporation. Is that true?
If I understand you correctly, Wilder received farm subsidies only in the years the property was actually farmed -- so from 1990 to 1999. For those 9 years (multiplied by at least $75,00 per year), the total monies paid to the corporation in subsidies totals $675,000. Add that to the other money and it amounts to about $8 million in taxpayer monies paid to them for farm failures and easements not to farm the land.
You have confused many things here. First of all the discussion is about the impact to Greene County. What has Greene County lost or made from the change. The Farmers of the Goosepond spent over 3 million per year at local businesses. The 7.2 million they received for the easement was money that the federal Government paid them to stop farming. This is not money you add to what they spend in Greene County. If anything you would consider it even a bigger loss. Now consider the 8 million the state of Indiana paid to own the property. This again is money that taxpayers paid to keep Wilder from spending money in the county. Again if anything this would add to Greene Counties loss.
I have no corporation, I do not know of John Coleman Farm inc., it is the first time I have ever heard of it, it is not any connection to me. There is a Coleman Farms Inc. which is my father and a different entity.
"If I understand you correctly, Wilder received farm subsidies only in the years the property was actually farmed -- so from 1990 to 1999. For those 9 years (multiplied by at least $75,00 per year), the total monies paid to the corporation in subsidies totals $675,000. Add that to the other money and it amounts to about $8 million in taxpayer monies paid to them for farm failures and easements not to farm the land."
You are making my point with this paragraph. The people of Greene County have been screwed. They had to pay millions of dollars to get rid of a business that spent millions in the county and have it replaced by one that spends/brings in much less to the County. Thank you for proving my point.
So lets do the math for you. Greene County has approx 30,000 people. The U.S. has approx 300,000,000 million people. So Greene county is .001 of the taxpayers. So if Wilder got paid 75,000$ per year as a farm subsidy that means 75$ came from Greene County residents. So you can subtract 75$ off of the 3 million that Wilder spent in the county. Now look at the 7.2 million paid as an easement. This is not money spent in the county. This is a check mailed to his headquarters in Florida. This is money paid By the federal Government to get him to stop farming/spending money in Greene County. In fact that means that that Greene Counties share was 7,200 paid to make then stop farming. The same goes for the 8 million paid by the state to purchase the property.
This article is about the money Greene County lost. If you would like to start a discussion about farm subsidies or taxpayers money being spent in a poor manner feel free to send me an email. The simple fact is Greene County Lost a 3 million dollar a year business and replaced it with less revenue (approx 30%) to the county.
I see things this way:
1990 through 1999 they made $75,000 per year in subsidies alone (totaling $675,000).
They paid property taxes to Greene County and that $82,000 (your number not mine) was divided between Linton and WRV according to the amount of property located in each school district.
The annual offset for the years 1990 through 1999 is $7,000. Wilder corp had to pay out of pocket only $7,000 per year that was not money provided to them by tax dollars, taken from taxpayers here and throughout the country.
Then, from 1999 through 2006, the land had an easement and could not be farmed and for that Wilder again received taxpayer monies in the amount of $7.2 million. If they spent a couple million a year, then between the subsidies and the $7.2 million in easements alone, they were not out much money. Then they got an additional $8 million as the purchase price for the property. That was partially tax dollars and a small portion was private funding.
What I was saying is that the taxpayers PAID to have Wilder farms here in several ways. When there is an outlay of money totaling $15.2 million plus another $675,000 in subsidies (paid to Wilder mostly out of taxpayer monies) how is that profitable in the end for Greene County?
At least now there are no subsidies, saving taxpayers $75,000 per year. Now there are no taxpayer monies for easements totaling approximately $1 million per year for 8 years. That's a taxpayer savings of $1,075,000 per year (at least), not to mention tax breaks, tax refunds, tax credits, or any other government loophole monies received.
By these calculations, if the annual budget for Goose Pond (the entire acreage) is a little over $1 million, then the numbers taxpayers are paying is virtually the same. Goose Pond spends most of its money locally, between goods and services, and payroll, and various other necessities. Most of the activities are privately funded by Friends of Goose Pond or local businesses, churches, sportsman's, bird watching and ecology-minded groups, and civic groups.
Besides sporting events and a couple of festivals (Apple Festival, Linton Music Festival, Freedom Festival), what other activities have brought over 600 people to one main venue, and an estimated 300 more who did not pay for tours and activities, but who just bird watched and toured Goose Pond and other parts of Greene County, including the Greene Sullivan Forest during the two-day festival.
Question: Did Wilder Corp spend the 2 million even in the years there was no farming? That does not make sense since they did not have to buy seed or provide payroll.
If they did not spend the 2 million per year when they weren't farming, then the county was not enriched by 2 million each year. Only Wilder was enriched (by a million a year from 1999 through and including 2006).
"The annual offset for the years 1990 through 1999 is $7,000. Wilder corp had to pay out of pocket only $7,000 per year that was not money provided to them by tax dollars, taken from taxpayers here and throughout the country."
This is correct for the nation as a whole. I was talking about the effect on Greene County. That would be 82,000 minus 75$.
"Then, from 1999 through 2006, the land had an easement and could not be farmed and for that Wilder again received taxpayer monies in the amount of $7.2 million. If they spent a couple million a year"
Here is you mistake, once that money was paid they stopped farming, they stopped spending money in Greene County. Once the federal Gov gave tem 7.2 million it went to Florida and not another dime was spent in the county. a 3 million dollar business closed.
"What I was saying is that the taxpayers PAID to have Wilder farms here in several ways. When there is an outlay of money totaling $15.2 million plus another $675,000 in subsidies (paid to Wilder mostly out of taxpayer monies) how is that profitable in the end for Greene County?"
You just don't get it, only farm subsidies of 75,000$ per year were paid to wilder to farm the ground, of that 75$ was from local taxpayers. for this 75k Greene County got a 3 million dollar business spending money in Greene County.
Once the easement and purchase money 15.2 million was mailed to florida all spending in the county by wilder Farms stopped. None of this money made it to Greene County. This article is about the impact on Greene County.
"Goose Pond spends most of its money locally, between goods and services, and payroll, and various other necessities."
This is not true feel free to contact Brad feaster to check. They have many forced purchase accounts from out of the area.
Please reread my article. This is about what the impact to Greene County is. sending 15.2 million dollars to Florida so a farmer will stop spending 3 million in the area is not good for Greene County. You somehow make the leap that the money (15.2 million) Helps Greene County. It does the opposite it stops a business from spending 3 million in the County. You just have your numbers wrong it is that simple.
In the end, I cannot help but ask why should the County support a one-time 15.2 million payment that will help a few people in Florida when that amount of money would improve, build, and supply services to the entire community. Is it fair that those one-time monies be spent on people who are not residents of our community when there are thousands of people who are residents who will gain nothing. Is it fair that a profit corporation, who does not pay taxes in the community, to receive a 15.2 million dollar payment. Is it fair to the downtown business district, who has banded together to revitalize the area and have the city buildings listed in the National Register of Historic Places, only to have 3 million less spent in the area?
FYI I got these thoughts from this article in the paper: http://gcdailyworld.com/story/1256437.ht... second to last paragraph.
I'm not sure what you are reading into what I write. I agree that it didn't do Greene County any good to lose a business that spent money here. I agree that it is a travesty for those monies to have left the state completely. So I'm not sure what you think I'm saying.
What I was trying to say is that it is not the idea makers of the Goosepond who are to blame, nor is it those who support it now who are in the wrong. The wrong was done years ago by a mismanaged corporation (or many failed or non-lucrative farms on the property) and circumstance that have allowed Goose Pond to be recreated.
I just wish people would stop being mad and making nasty comments about Goose Pond and creating a lot of bad press for the area. That just adds insult to the injury of losing the revenue and makes readers not want to come here to spend money. Does it make sense to scare off tourists and visitors?
"I'm not sure what you are reading into what I write. I agree that it didn't do Greene County any good to lose a business that spent money here. I agree that it is a travesty for those monies to have left the state completely. So I'm not sure what you think I'm saying."
first you said: "the numbers are basically a wash is all I was saying"
I am not reading anything in I am showing you that we have a huge loss every year.
"What I was trying to say is that it is not the idea makers of the Goosepond who are to blame, nor is it those who support it now who are in the wrong. The wrong was done years ago by a mismanaged corporation (or many failed or non-lucrative farms on the property) and circumstance that have allowed Goose Pond to be recreated."
This is just not true, I have lots of data show big profits on the GoosePond, If you would like to see it lets meet and go over it. A Business doe not operate for over 100 years and not make money.
"I just wish people would stop being mad and making nasty comments about Goose Pond and creating a lot of bad press for the area. That just adds insult to the injury of losing the revenue and makes readers not want to come here to spend money. Does it make sense to scare off tourists and visitors?"
I couldn't agree more which I why I wrote this piece. I will repeat it again:
The exact point of my article. Recently there have been many speak of the Goosepond and rather than being positive only, some have chosen to try to get a jab in on the people that were against the project. This gains nothing and only brings up a subject that proves the doubters correct. If you chose to speak positively about the topic most will join in, here is an example: http://gcdailyworld.com/story/1616718.ht... . If you choose to get a jab in here is what happens: http://gcdailyworld.com/blogs/1465/entry... and http://gcdailyworld.com/blogs/nickschnei...
Now I would rather light a candle than curse your darkness, so here is my offer. If the Believers stop pointing to the dead horse, I will stop beating it. From now on rather than bringing up a topic that has cost Greene County millions, focus on what to do now.
The limits used to be higher and lower. I believe in those years they were 85,000. In some years they were lower. They have been 75k for several years now. 75k for an average is a very fair number.
I think that between all the people involved in this conversation there should be something that appears to be a resolution or a discussion of the issues that actually face the community however this appears to be nothing more than more of the same that I dislike blogs for... wake me when you get something useful or positve
I know that if we do not support our local businesses, it is our own faults that we do not have nice places to go to dine, shop and have convenient shops to shop. We may have to pay extra but it will be worth it......give the businesses a chance!!!!