Cabela's Paying Out the "Big Bucks"
The Cabela's hunting/fishing/outdoors outfitter superstore located in Buda, Texas, is apparently not doing so well. For the second year in a row, the store has missed mandatory employment targets set as a condition of subsidies given to the store by the City of Buda, Hays County and the State of Texas (via Governor Perry's Texas Enterprise Fund).
In a nutshell: To date, Cabela's has received over $61 million in government subsidies (read: taxpayer money) as an incentive to build the massive store in Buda. As part of the subsidy contracts it signed with the City of Buda, Hays County and the State of Texas, the Buda Cabela's agreed to create and sustain a minimum amount of full-time jobs at the store. For the second year in a row, the Buda Cabela's has fallen short of this requirement, and for the second year in a row, Cabela's is being forced to give some of this money back as a penalty under the contracts that it signed.
Because of its 2007 employment target shortfall, Cabela's must now pay Buda, Hays County and the State of Texas nearly $130,000. Additionally, the store must forfeit $200,000 in additional state funding. The Governor's office has taken a hard line here, saying that if Cabela's falls short again, it will have to forfeit even more government funding.
A spokesperson for Cabela's claims that the employment targets set in the subsidy contracts from the city, county and state were set in an arbitrary manner, and that the employment targets do not take into account seasonal employment flows. One has to wonder if this concern was voiced in the original subsidy contract negotiations with Buda, Hays County and the State of Texas. Surely Cabela's could've built its behemoth superstore anywhere it wanted to (let's be honest here: any small Texas town would welcome a massive hunting/fishing/camping store for the same reasons that any major urban area would welcome a Whole Foods)...so why did it agree to build in Buda, signing a set of government subsidy contracts containing mandatory employment targets that it saw as "arbitrary" and unfair? Perhaps because, at the time, Cabela's saw the terms of the contracts as fair?
Or could it be that Cabela's is only saying that the employment targets are unfair now, since it simply couldn't meet them?
What do you think, Austinites?
*Image of Cabela's Buda Store courtesy of gooskimo on flickr. Image of "big buck" courtesy of phillips8589 on flickr.
Comments [rss]
-
guest
-
guest
-
fermilab
-
The_Milkman
-
guest
-
guest
-
adam rice
-
guest
-
guest
-
guest
-
heyzeus
-
kenneth1
-
guest
-
adam rice


