The Grossest Love Story Ever Told

The way some media pundits tell this story, it's the greatest love story ever told. And perhaps it is for Carson City's top corporate lobbyists. In fact, we won't be surprised if they read this column by the fireplace tonight with a nice glass of vintage port paired with some luscious dark chocolate.

But for the rest of us, another column on the many wonders of Tesla's extra sweet sweetheart deal is just another reminder of all that's wrong with Carson City.



Down here in Southern Nevada, Clark County School District (CCSD) hit a new record high for enrollment last month. And up north, Washoe County School District (WCSD) is about to receive the rude awakening that Tesla isn't offering any kind of free lunch. Instead, the deal blew an immediate $195 million hole in the state budget and threatens to place an additional strain on state government by encouraging more demand for public infrastructure (such as schools, roads, and health care) without providing needed funding for it.

Boulder City High School and Rex Bell Elementary School are just two examples of our crumbling public infrastructure in this state. Kids attend these and other CCSD schools. And this is what they and staff must endure every school day.



When we take a closer look at the decaying state of our public infrastructure, the very foundation of our economy, "The Great Tesla Giveaway of 2014" makes less and less sense. How can we afford to subsidize a multi-billion dollar corporation while telling teachers and students we can't afford school repairs? How can we afford to continue shortchanging our roads, our health care programs, and our other basic community building blocks while we keep doling out corporate welfare hand over fist? It just doesn't make sense.

There's a reason why we had such a visceral reaction yesterday to the two Southern Nevada newspaper columns opposing The Education Initiative (TEI). They just don't make sense. They and their friends at the No on 3 campaign like to scream about impending doom & gloom every chance they get, yet they can't produce any tangible proof that TEI will hurt our economy. Instead, even their own studies have suggested that TEI will help Nevada's economy by providing our schools with the funding they've been going without for far too long.



It's been a time honored love story here in Nevada. The "bid'ness establishment" types have loved their legal tax evasion schemes and corporate welfare handouts. And why not? It's been a very sweet sweetheart deal for them.

But for the rest of us, we've been told for far too long to "do more with less". We've been told for far too long that "we can't afford" even basic fixes for our schools. We've been told "we can't afford" to take care of our own people while multi-billion dollar corporations continue laughing all the way to the "erotic gift shop" with gift cards that we essentially paid for.

This may be their "greatest love story ever told", but we the people have a chance to close this chapter of our state's history. And really, can we afford to keep buying them all that chocolate & wine?

The (#MLS2LV) Show Will Go On

Last month, we were treated to "visions of stadium splendor". All of a sudden, a Downtown soccer stadium became the magic elixir that could somehow catapult Las Vegas into nirvana...

Until reality set in. And then, all of a sudden, Las Vegas Mayor Carolyn Goodman's (I) MLS dreams came crashing down. Once independent experts started poking through the Cordish-Findlay stadium proposal, they found some nasty red alarms. So Mayor Goodman, Cordish, and Findlay announced a new plan.



But is the new plan enough to assuage Las Vegas City Council Members and Las Vegas residents who have been worried about the city being left with the short end of the stick while Cordish & Findlay laugh all the way to the bank (with all those taxpayer provided subsidies)?



Just might it... If it includes $250 million worth of "Downtown investment"?

Maybe. The Las Vegas City Council just voted 6-1 to grant another 2 month extension to Cordish & Findlay. Apparently, the promise to "enhance Symphony Park" is worth both $250 million and a 2 month extension.

However, this just takes us back to the fundamental question at hand. If Cordish can afford $250 million to "enhance Symphony Park", why are Cordish executives and Justin Findlay still demanding public subsidies? Oh, yes. That's right. Their "profit margins are too thin" without public funding.

Last we checked, Cordish & Findlay are still demanding a $3 million per year annual subsidy from the City of Las Vegas. And last we checked, Council Member Lois Tarkanian (D) has promised to vote against any stadium proposal involving any public subsidies.

So what's it going to be? Will Cordish & Findlay finally drop their demands for the City of Las Vegas to essentially pay them to build a soccer stadium on city land? Or will they try yet another scheme to try to flip Council Member Tarkanian's vote? All we know now is that this show will go on to December.

Don't Expect a "Free Lunch".

Earlier this month, Carson City was in ecstasy... Or was Carson City on Ecstasy? We're still trying to figure that one out.

We're also still trying to figure out what we can actually expect of our state government's giant wet kiss to Tesla. Already, Northern Nevada "tourism executives are salivating" over magically full airplanes and wondrous conventions popping up all over Reno. And already, Southern Nevada must endure yet another round of navel gazing over "why we didn't get Tesla" and "what Reno got right that Las Vegas gets wrong".

But what if the navel gazing that's considered "analysis" today is wrong? What if it's not based on actual facts?

Last week, the Los Angeles Times' Chris Kirkham interviewed some actual economists who have done some real analysis on what Governor Brian Sandoval (R) and the Nevada Legislature gave Tesla. Here's some of what they had to say.

"To assume that the economic impact is $100 billion assumes that everybody who was ever going to work at that battery plant was unemployed," said Enrico Moretti, an economics professor at UC Berkeley.

Choosing a 20-year time frame to analyze also makes the projected economic effect look huge compared with any benefits given to Tesla. But that's misleading, said [David] Swenson, the Iowa state economist.

"It doesn't mean anything," he said. "Let's assume I made $50,000 over the last 20 years. Therefore, I'm a millionaire, right?" [...]

"They're treating all this revenue as if it's free profit that's just going to be sent back to everyone as a rebate," said Dan Rickman, an economics professor at Oklahoma State University who specializes in regional economic analysis and reviewed the Nevada studies for The Times.

Further, Tesla will collect benefits upfront, which could starve local governments of vital revenue, said Peter Fisher, an Iowa expert on tax incentive programs.

"They're giving back 99% of Tesla's direct taxes in the first nine years, yet there are going to be all these new workers with families and children," said Fisher, research director of the Iowa Policy Project and a professor emeritus of urban and regional studies at the University of Iowa. "One way or another, I think the locality is going to find themselves with a strain on local government services."

Hmmmm... We wonder where we've heard this before. Oh, yes. That's right. The Atlantic's Richard Florida and the LA Times' Michael Hiltzik were among several actual economic thinkers who were warning us not to buy into #Teslamania. And there's a reason why Good Jobs First has been criticizing the Tesla deal. While Tesla and its technology hold plenty of promise for the future, there's no guarantee that the State of Nevada's $1.2 billion corporate welfare gift card to this company will magically wash away all of Nevada's economic woes.

But hey, what do public policy think tanks and top-grade columnists (who actually know what they're talking about) know about any of this? According to certain local media pundits, they just don't know how to "play long ball" because they refuse to sit back and enjoy the bright & sunny "optics" emanating from The Governor's Mansion.

Even some local officials in Reno & Washoe County are now admitting there are indeed high costs to the Tesla deal. After all, this deal was never truly "free". Roads, schools, mass transit, and water infrastructure will be needed. And last we checked, those are never free.

And we'll eventually discover how much economic benefit the state will gain from this. Hopefully, it will eventually be enough to make this trade-off worthwhile. But now, it's becoming increasingly obvious that the Governor's rosy projections were way too rosy.

Economists often like to joke that there's truly no such thing as a "free lunch". Here in Nevada, it looks like we'll have to learn that lesson the hard way. Again. Even after we took a bite out of that rotten Apple.

(We Must Return) Back to Basics.

(In light of recent events, we felt it necessary to revisit this. We dug through the cavernous Nevada Progressive archives to find this gem from May 2013. How is it we can afford corporate welfare for Tesla, but not taking care of our own people? And now, we risk losing federal SNAP funds because we can't get our act together.

Maybe we should consider taking care of our own people's needs before we cater to every whim & fancy of any multinational corporation that whispers sweet nothings into our politicians' ears?)

So Former Assembly Member Steven Brooks is back in the news today. Brooks was supposed to be at a court hearing in Las Vegas today. He couldn't make it... Because he was at a court hearing in San Bernardino County, California.

Here's what's happened so far.

The lawyer for a former Nevada lawmaker charged in a car chase and a police confrontation is asking that his client go through a mental health court program.

Ex-Assemblyman Steven Brooks appeared in a San Bernardino County, Calif., court Tuesday after pleading not guilty to charges stemming from his arrest March 28. Prosecutors say there could be a decision Friday on whether he's eligible for mental health court.

Mental health courts divert people into treatment programs and hold them accountable along the way.

Late in March, Steven Brooks was arrested in Victorville following a dispute with a tow truck driver in Barstow and a dramatic car chase with police. His attorney is now requesting for the California case to be transferred to mental health court. This way, he can finally obtain the treatment he needs.

At least there's a chance of Brooks obtaining the treatment he needs in California. Just before his latest arrest, Brooks sounded eerily prophetic in his final interview with Jon Ralston.

In four brief, surreal conversations, alternately heart-wrenching and frightening, shortly after he was expelled from the Assembly, Steven Brooks said he is "the assemblyman of sorrow," wondered why his colleagues "hate me so much" and declared he was going to "break the state" with a lawsuit worth at least $10 million.

Brooks was alternately angry, with expletive-filled rants directed at Speaker Marilyn Kirkpatrick and Majority Leader William Horne, despondent, weeping and saying he was checking himself into Seven Hills, a Southern Nevada treatment facility, and suicidal, saying he had no other recourse. [...]

"I'm the assemblyman of sorrow," he declared. "Why do they hate me so much? Fill in the blank: I'm so angry I could (blank) myself."

Brooks told me he was "on my way to Seven Hills to check myself into the hospital. He began weeping when I asked why, adding, "I have no other resort. I'm going to kill myself if they keep this up. I have nowhere to go. I'm the assemblyman of sorrow." [...]

"You know why they hate me? You know why want to kill me because I know all of their secrets."

No one expected what was coming next, probably not even Steven Brooks himself. Yet in an incredibly bizarre way, he warned us. Just days after Brooks was sent to jail in San Bernardino County, another former Nevadan emerged in California.

After The Sacramento Bee began investigating the mysterious Greyhound bus trip that landed James Flavy Coy Brown in Sacramento, the Nevada patient dumping scandal steadily grew. Now, there's a strong chance of Nevada facing law suits soon over improper discharge of mental health patients and transport of them out of state.

And now, outrage is spreading to a new state. Last weekend, ABC 15 Phoenix looked into the 100 cases of Rawson-Neal mental health patients bussed into Arizona. And while investigating, they may have uncovered yet another horrifying scandal in the making.

Mark Holleran, CEO of Central Arizona Shelter Services, says it's hard to track those patients down. He says "patient dumping" happens more than you might think. "It just shows you how it's very easy to do this, and it's sort of under the radar. It's hard to detect," he said. Holleran says a few years ago, former prisoners from Nevada got dumped at the shelter. "They had been provided a bus ticket, a small amount of cash, a print out of a Mapquest that showed them how to get to CASS. And written on it was, 'ask for Howie,'" he said. Holleran says these cases often end in chronic homelessness. He says that stretches resources in other states, like Arizona. And it passes along the problem, instead of fixing it. "That might be something we might want to take a look at. Because if we can solve it for one place, I think we solve it for all the places," Holleran said.

So now, Arizona officials are reporting cases of Nevada patient dumping. And not only that, but we may have also dumped former prisoners on them as well! How about that for being a "good neighbor"? One would think this would light a fire under the behinds of the Governor and legislators to fix this glaring crisis. Come on, we're now facing law suits and loss of federal funding! But no, they were too busy kissing the behind of Nicholas Cage. No, I'm not even making this up. And Ralston was downright revolted by today's lurid display of misplaced priorities.

James Flavy Brown can be shipped out of Las Vegas, leaving with barely his wits about him, some meds and peanut butter crackers. But the star of “Leaving Las Vegas” can be treated like royalty, with the mayor of Las Vegas as his sidekick, and an offer pending of enough taxpayer money to buy a peanut butter cracker factory. These are the Legislature’s priorities – cut mental health funding, ignore English Language Learner money but give tax breaks to those who need them least. Brown gets a bus ticket to anywhere while Cage gets a national treasure trove worth of goodies and Apple gets a 90 percent tax break negotiated by the governor. That is tax policy in Nevada. This is the state we are in. I wonder if anyone stops to think: We may get Cage ghost-riding on the Strip, with his production company soaring and a Vegas backdrop for movies. But what does it say if that fake scene is juxtaposed a few miles off-camera in either direction with real tableaus of packed emergency rooms, overcrowded classrooms and jammed thoroughfares. If this is part of a master plan, I’d like to see the drawing because it seems like a blueprint for disaster to me. What exactly is the policy articulated by this approach that allows $80 million to be cut from mental health services in five years but in one bill lawmakers are willing to give half of that amount [$35 million] to prospective Nevada-based filmmakers? Lest you think my heart’s bleeding cuts off circulation to my brain, I get the job-creating argument, the economic diversification argument, the image-changing argument. But why is it a good idea for government to give incentives to anyone – movie producers, renewable energy companies – if offcials don’t provide incentives for people to really want to live here by supporting the quality of life, a culture that values higher and lower education, a political class that leads rather than follows?

He's right about this. It simply doesn't make sense. Honestly, there may be some merit to encouraging more film production here in Nevada. But when we can't even take care of our own, who wants to risk shooting a movie here? Think about it. Why is it that we always hear that "we can't afford" proper mental health care, decent schools, and repaired roads, yet our Governor and Legislature always seem to be able to afford corporate welfare to shower upon multinational corporations like Apple that neither need the help nor deserve it? Think about that as well. How on earth does this lead to a stable economy for our state? And how on earth does neglecting the most vulnerable in our society lead to a healthy economy? It doesn't. That's precisely the problem. Our "leaders" in Carson City keep chasing after mythical economic unicorns while failing to provide the most fundamental building blocks of a sound economy. Sure, luring Hollywood to Las Vegas sounds sexy. But ultimately, that won't mean shit for economic development if our schools keep bursting at the seams, our hospitals keep stuffing patients onto Greyhound buses heading out of state, and our roads are clogged with commuters while paved with just as many potholes. We seriously need to pay attention to the rude awakening we're now receiving. We must get back to basics, and we must do so before it's too late.

Visions of Stadium Splendor

Uh oh. Maybe no goal?

In recent weeks, Las Vegas City Hall has been heating up as speculation has been ramping up over a proposed soccer stadium Downtown. Findlay Sports & Entertainment and The Cordish Companies have been hyping the cache of a prestigious sports stadium in the heart of "The Entertainment Capital of the World". Yet while they and Las Vegas Mayor Carolyn Goodman (I) have been hyping the razzle-dazzle of this stadium, others have been asking the tough questions. How many will actually attend games here? What are the real revenue projections? And how much will Las Vegas taxpayers have to pay for this?



Now, we know Cordish wants $3 million per year from the City of Las Vegas in addition to all the other subsidies Cordish & Findlay are demanding from city government (such as the ~$130 million they want the city to chip into stadium construction). That money would come from hotel tax revenues. Mayor Carolyn Goodman actually admitted it earlier this month on his show, even as she was claiming room tax revenue "isn't tax dollars, it's tourist dollars".

Last night, Las Vegas Council Member Lois Tarkanian (D) told Jon Ralston she would not vote for the Cordish-Findlay Stadium if the vote was today. She mentioned the issue of those hotel room tax revenues, and in particular how those room tax funds are used to maintain Las Vegas city parks. Council Members Bob Beers (R) and Bob Coffin (D) have already been sounding the alarms on this, and Tarkanian added that the city is just about to finish repaying bonds for parks in Northwest Las Vegas.



And the City of Las Vegas just recently raised user fees for youth sports leagues to use city parks. So how much will Las Vegas residents actually have to pay for this stadium?

Las Vegas isn't the only municipal company chasing after a MLS team. And when we look at the history other sports stadium subsidy deals, the outlook turns from merely very concerning to downright frightening.



Look, we're not against soccer. Far from it. And no, Mayor Goodman, we're not all just "naysayers". We're realists. And all we're asking for are the real numbers behind this stadium proposal.

We can see why Cordish won't talk to anyone and Findlay only agrees to "happy talk". However, Las Vegas city officials don't answer to Cordish and Findlay. They answer to Las Vegas residents. So they should not be afraid to drop the spin and start talking about the reality behind these visions of stadium splendor.

Goal?

Last night, the City of Las Vegas held its first of a series of six community town hall meetings at Centennial Hills Community Center. Why? Well... Goal!

Or at least, Las Vegas Mayor Carolyn Goodman (I) and some City Council Members are hoping they're about to hit a big goal with a proposed Downtown soccer stadium. However, not everyone seems to be sold on this. Las Vegas city officials looked ready to give a "pep talk", but a number of residents were ready to grill officials over the numbers behind this grandiose proposal.



Las Vegas city taxpayers are being asked to chip in nearly $130 million towards the estimated $410 million price tag for the new stadium. A number of financial experts are now stepping forward to explain the many risks the city will take if it decides to partially subsidize The Cordish Companies' and Findlay Sports & Entertainment's desired Downtown stadium. After all, the city will ultimately be on the hook for at least $82 million even if the stadium succeeds in attracting a well performing Major League Soccer (MLS) team and selling out plenty of games... And that's still a major if.

Over the years, Dr. Judith Grant Long has been crunching the numbers on the public costs of "public-private partnership" sports stadiums. She's revealed the hidden costs of these stadium deals, such as "free land", lease discounts, and tax exemptions. Yet so far, the City of Las Vegas isn't noting any of these costs in its "financial analysis" of the stadium plan.

In 2012, Bloomberg News revealed that Americans had spent $4 billion subsidizing sports stadiums since 1986. And what have we received in turn? Oh, about $10 billion in additional costs while sports team owners laugh all the way to the bank.

There are plenty of good reasons for Las Vegas city residents to be skeptical about this latest stadium proposal. Remember when the City of Henderson ran into trouble over a stadium plan that Chris Milam was never going to get off the ground? While the Cordish-Findlay Las Vegas soccer stadium plan doesn't approach that level of fraud (or at least, not yet), there are already a number of warning signs on the high costs the City of Las Vegas will have to incur for it. And so far, there's little evidence suggesting this stadium will actually "pay for itself". After all, no publically subsidized stadium ever truly has.

Perhaps now that Tesla scored the sweetheart deal of a lifetime from the State of Nevada, Cordish & Findlay now want in on the corporate welfare gravy train. What exactly is the goal of Mayor Goodman and the stadium cheerleaders? That's the key question that City Council Members and Las Vegas city residents must ask at the upcoming town halls.

"Play Long Ball"

Did you hear? Everything is coming up roses! We will be greeted as liberators! Just take a look on the bright side of life! And no matter what, always make sure to admire the bright & sunny "optics".

Last week, the mantra was supposed to be, "Ratification is different from rubber-stamping." But now that Tesla secured the deal it always wanted from Carson City, even the media pundit who uttered those words before the 28th Special Session of the Nevada Legislature is now upset because some legislators didnt rubber-stamp the Tesla deal quickly enough.

Wait, what?! Sadly, even some highly esteemed leaders of the Fourth Estate have caught #Teslamania.



Last week, The Atlantic's CityLab Editor-at-Large, Richard Florida, tried to warn those in Carson City of the risks of placing all of Nevada taxpayers' eggs in one "economic development" basket. And now, Los Angeles Times business columnist Michael Hiltzik is essentially calling our state's leaders "suckers" for approving the Tesla deal so quickly without analyzing the true cost of all the giveaways Tesla demanded along with the possibly way-too-rosy economic forecasts from the Governor's Office. Oh, and Good Jobs First continues to question the wisdom of allowing such a profitable company to operate in Nevada completely tax free for the next decade.

A cool $195 million is already leaving the state's coffers for Tesla corporate headquarters. And that's while Northern Nevada local authorities are just starting to realize the strain on local infrastructure that they just agreed to. How will we pay for the new roads and schools in Washoe, Storey, & Lyon Counties? And how will this affect state funding for the already overcrowded Clark County School District (CCSD), the already overburdened Southern Nevada transportation system, and still-in-need-of-some-TLC Southern Nevada economy?

Yesterday, the above mentioned media pundit used his Sunday Column to chide all the "ivory tower know-nothings and southern partisans" who dared to question Governor Brian Sandoval's (R) "play long ball"/"swing for the fences" strategy. Oh, really? What in any of this deal is "long ball"? How did Sandoval's "economic development team" "swing for the fences" by agreeing to the same old corporate welfare that this state has always tried to use to "diversify our economy"? How's that working out for us? The only difference this time is that the Tesla corporate welfare package is 14 times greater than the previous record setting Nevada corporate welfare package (cough- Apple -cough).

Look, we know Tesla likely has a bright future ahead. We even realize Tesla's potential role in a climate change/clean energy/human survival breakthrough. We can't understate the promise of the ground Tesla broke in Storey County.

We're just wondering why we're once again trying to substitute short sighted corporate welfare for long sighted economic planning. If we truly care about the well being of our state and our people, we know how to secure a far better bang for our buck. Yet in order for us to score this kind of real "long ball" deal, we'll need to approve it ourselves.

Not. So. Fast.

Now, it's getting really interesting. Last night, we heard some more about the big move Switch is making in Carson City during the special session of the Nevada Legislature that Tesla initially thought it had all to itself.

Whoops. Apparently, a few legislators may actually be taking Steve Sebelius' advice to heart. Might this be music to Switch's ears?



Not so fast. SB 1 finally dropped last night, and the long awaited Senate bill requires at least $3.5 billion investment in this state before the state government starts offering tax incentives. The bill also requires at least 50% of the workers hired under this program to be Nevada residents. And the bill requires a $22 average hourly wage and health insurance benefits for factory workers.

So that leaves Switch up in the air for now. However, that also leaves the Nevada AFL-CIO as a possible "fly in the ointment". Nevada AFL-CIO Executive Director Danny Thompson has already said he also wants guarantees of fair wages for construction workers alongside guarantees that Tesla will hire local construction workers. We'll have to see how the Legislature assuages AFL's concerns.

But at least for now, it looks like a number of legislators are at least taking some time to digest this. And yes, they're looking at related issues like Switch, the best interest of Nevada workers, the film industry tax credits (that Governor Brian Sandoval [R] wants slashed by over 80%), and public education funding. Isn't this what so many of us were asking them to do? Isn't this even what a certain media pundit was asking for on the eve of #Teslamania?

So why is that media pundit now attacking certain legislators over taking their time to consider this proposal? The State of Nevada may actually end up with a $120 million deficit by the end of the year... And that doesn't even count the overcrowding and under-staffing issues plaguing Clark County School District (CCSD). Can we now afford to hurry up and pass something that pokes yet another hole into the budget while making a big bet on a company that demanded all these tax breaks to build a factory in Northern Nevada?



Not. So. Fast. Those are the three words Nevada legislators need to keep in mind today. While we understand the urge to hurry up, resume fundraising, and bask in the glow of #Teslamania, there are too many important questions that shouldn't be ignored just because one company wants an enormous sweetheart deal. Is this truly a fair deal? Is this a good deal for Nevada workers? Is this a good deal for Nevada schools? And will this deal break Nevada's budget?

Not. So. Fast. As we've said before, there are plenty of merits to Tesla's big move to Nevada. But must we break our bank in order to subsidize their business expenditures?

Welcome, Tesla (?)

So it's official. It's finally happening. And of course, it's the talk of the town all over Reno.

Just moments ago, CNBC broke the news that Tesla has chosen Northern Nevada to house its new gigafactory. And already, a special session of the Nevada Legislature is being set for next week. And of course, we're already starting to hear all sorts of political spin and economic happy talk.

So what's the deal? We know Tesla is planning to spend $5 billion to build its 10,000 square foot gigafactory. What we don't yet know is how much Tesla is expecting the State of Nevada to kick in for construction.

We strongly suspect this deal will involve some Nevada taxpayer money, as a special session looks to be necessary. It's also been no secret that Tesla has demanded public subsidies for this gigafactory.

So how much will this cost us? Most likely, a cool $400 million.

And what are we getting out of this? Potentially 6,500 new jobs for the Reno/Sparks region, along with a breakthrough that may open the door to electric cars becoming more affordable for more consumers.

Here's the good news: This has the potential to actually make a dent in the long promised drive to diversify Nevada's economy. This also has the potential to kick-start the green tech sector and take it to new levels here in Nevada and nationally. Oh, and this can help quite a bit in our efforts to take on the challenges posed by climate change.

Here's the disturbing news: We're once again relying upon corporate welfare for any sort of economic development. And that's just not a sustainable business plan going forward. After all, take a look at how far Reno and Nevada have gone with Apple. Apple continues to laugh all the way to its offshore bank accounts while we're left holding the bag (full of holes, thanks to the many budget cuts we've endured over the past half-decade).

This is why we're experiencing mixed reactions now. On one hand, it's exciting to think that Nevada may be home to the next generation of transportation & energy innovation. But on the other, this achievement seems awfully tainted due to the $400 million we're having to bribe spend to convince Tesla to build the gigafactory in Northern Nevada. Is that money truly well spent? Or is it just more money being diverted from our already "grossly underfunded" schools and other critical parts of public infrastructure?

Right now, let's just say the 63 Nevadans who may soon have to head back to Carson City are about to step into a rather sticky situation.

One More Step

In 2011, a constitutional amendment was introduced in the Nevada Legislature. And somehow, it managed to pass that year despite the acrimony and frustration that came to define the 76th session.

Fast forward to 2013. Even though SJR 15 had managed to pass Round 1, Round 2 was suddenly in doubt. The mining industry had doubled up its lobbying campaign, and it looked like that was about to reap mining conglomerates a huge payday. But then, another strange twist occurred.

As soon as it became a rather eye-popping attempt at "Republican rebranding" and a "no brainer" tax reform plan with actual bipartisan support, Legislature leaders had no choice but to stand back and let SJR 15 sail its way onto the 2014 general election ballot.

Today, the Interim Legislative Commission approved the final ballot language for SJR 15. Despite some last minute mining industry shenanigans and an awkward argument over the physical impact of mining, the Commission ultimately approved the SJR 15 ballot language 11-1.

So now, there's just one more step left for SJR 15. "We the People" must vote on it this fall.

Ever since the founding of this state, the issue of mining taxation has been a rather contentious, irritating, and occasionally even nauseating one. In a way, it's quite fitting that the 150th anniversary of Nevada statehood will be remembered for the people's vote on fixing a long debated error in our state's Constitution. How better to celebrate 150 years of Nevada than to take one more step to on the path to a functioning state government and a more equitable tax system?

Break the Cycle.

Last year, the typical (corporate lobbyist) powers that be in Carson City were suing their darndest to kill The Education Initiative. Ultimately, they didn't succeed.

Earlier this year, they then took Carson City by storm to kill it. Ultimately... They didn't succeed at that, either. Although the Nevada Legislature declined to pass IP 1, this only means We the People will have the last word on The Education Initiative next year.

We've known for some time that Nevada's tax system is broken. And we've known for some time that Nevada's constant underfunding of public education is hurting our economy. And while Governor Brian Sandoval (R) wants us to believe his status quo approach will let us "have it all" (while paying for none), even members of his own administration can no longer deny reality.

Perhaps the biggest disappointment for progressives this year was the Legislature's failure to break the fiscal status quo. Despite many past promises of change, and even a surprise announcement from another top Nevada Republican, we ended up with yet another biennium of the same old status quo. How can we ever break this cycle of FAIL?

We'll uncover the answer next year. That's the difference this time. And this may be the one chance Nevadans have to break the cycle of FAIL.

Sure, this may not be the ideal way to enact major change to the tax system. But as long as the (corporate lobbyist) powers that be in Carson City continue to refuse to even consider change, this may be the only way to begin saving our state. And no matter how much Governor Brian Sandoval and his inner circle (of corporate lobbyists) protest, they can't hide the fact that their demands for endless status quo led to this.

Next year, Nevada will finally have the opportunity to break the cycle. Nevada will have the opportunity to better fund our schools and put in place the foundation for a better economic future. This opportunity will present itself on our ballot next year. Will we take it?

Austerity & Apple

Early this week, leaders of the eight greatest developed economies met in Lough Erne, Northern Ireland (UK), for the G-8 Summit. At the G-8, President Obama, British Prime Minister David Cameron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, and others tackled a number of thorny issues, such as the ongoing civil war in Syria. Another major issue tackled this week was corporate tax evasion.

So what did everyone ultimately agree to?

Has the G8 made progress cracking down on multinationals playing off one regime against another to lower its tax bills?

The world leaders have called on the OECD, the body that draws up international guidelines on tax, to draft a template for multinationals to report the tax they pay to taxing authorities in each jurisdiction in which they operate. Cameron claims this will "identify where multinational companies are earning their profits and paying their taxes so we can track and expose those who aren't paying their fair share". Tax campaigners, however, suggest it does not go nearly far enough. There was no commitment for this information to be made public or for companies to provide greater disclosure on other economic activity on a country-by-country basis.

What about closing loopholes in international tax rules exploited by firms such as Google, Apple and Amazon?

Several issues around taxing multinationals are being worked on furiously by the OECD before a wider G20 meeting of finance ministers next month. The G8 promised to "take the necessary individual and collective action" to back up any recommendations from recasting the rules. As a broad statement of intent the G8 leaders said: "Countries should change rules that let companies shift their profits across borders to avoid taxes."

So G-8 leaders agreed to share more information. Otherwise, they mostly just agreed they and other countries "should do something" on corporate tax evasion. We'll see how far this goes.

But hey, at least they acted embarrassed over this. Here in Nevada, however, our state and local governments have rewarded Apple's "unbelievable chutzpah" by showering the multinational corporation with corporate welfare! Even as the rest of the world has become increasingly outraged over Apple stiffing public coffers by exploiting as maby tax loopholes as possible, Governor Brian Sandoval keeps heralding Apple's corporate welfare as "economic development".

But really, is that true? Does Nevada truly benefit from rewarding companies that come here just to avoid paying taxes elsewhere? When did crippling austerity become "economic development"?

Think about it. There's a reason why G-8 leaders were shamed into bringing up corporate tax evasion. While these powerful multinational, multi-billion dollar companies come to Nevada and go elsewhere to avoid paying their bills, real people are suffering the consequences of austerity. Since they don't pay their fair share, we're paying for their sins instead.

Can we afford any more of this?

SJR 15 PASSES #NVLeg, Goes to Voters Next Year

As we mentioned earlier, today is a huge day in the Nevada Legislature. Another of the bills receiving a final verdict in the Assembly is SJR 15, the bill to take the mining industry's corporate welfare sweetheart tax deal out of the Nevada Constitution.

There was some debate on the floor. And Assembly Member Pete Livermore (R-Carson City) offered this insightful quote.

Root Beer speech ! #NVLEG #SJR15 No more ROOT BEER if you kill off mining !!!! #RootBeer #Fries

Oh, yes. That's right. Assembly Member Livermore actually compared multinational mining corporations to his A&W franchise!

The bill passed 26-15. Again, Peggy Pierce (D-Las Vegas) was absent. Otherwise, all the Democrats present voted in favor while all the Republicans voted against.

And now that it's finally passed the Legislature in two consecutive session (it also passed both chambers in 2011), this finally heads to We (Us) the People.

Voters will now weigh in on NV's constitutional mining tax cap next year RT @RGJRayHagar: SJR15 passes Assembly, 26-15. #NVLeg

So this moves to the 2014 general election ballot for final approval. It may not be all that easy...

As reported by @RalstonReports, mining tried to bribe #NVLeg $50mil to kill SJR15. They'll spend at least as much to defeat it in Nov '14.

But now, we can finally look forward to our Carpe Diem moment with this and The Education Initiative on our ballot in November 2014. And even though she may no longer be serving in Carson City, Sheila Leslie's legacy just became even more awe-inspiring today.

Let's toss a little love to @sleslienv who was big on #SJR15 !!! #NVLEG

And on we go...

"Unbelievable Chutzpah"

Every so often, we're reminded (again) of the incredible sweetheart deal Apple now enjoys here in Nevada. Even as Apple (mis)uses Nevada to avoid paying (California) state and federal taxes, the tech giant has scored an $89 million shroud of legitimacy here. Yet while Apple basks in the glory of its Nevada sweetheart deal, the company faces increasing scrutiny from Members of Congress.

Congressional investigators found that some of Apple’s subsidiaries had no employees and were largely run by top officials from the company’s headquarters in Cupertino, Calif. But by officially locating them in places like Ireland, Apple was able to, in effect, make them stateless — exempt from taxes, record-keeping laws and the need for the subsidiaries to even file tax returns anywhere in the world.

“Apple wasn’t satisfied with shifting its profits to a low-tax offshore tax haven,” said Senator Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat who is chairman of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations that is holding the public hearing Tuesday into Apple’s use of tax havens. “Apple successfully sought the holy grail of tax avoidance. It has created offshore entities holding tens of billions of dollars while claiming to be tax resident nowhere.”

Thanks to what lawmakers called “gimmicks” and “schemes,” Apple was able to largely sidestep taxes on tens of billions of dollars it earned outside the United States in recent years. Last year, international operations accounted for 61 percent of Apple’s total revenue.

At that hearing earlier today, Congresscritters on both sides of the aisle were horrified... But one still wanted his daily Apple.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

"If anyone should be on trial here, it should be Congress," [Senator Rand] Paul [R-Kentucky] declared. "I frankly think the committee should apologize to Apple.... I would say what we really need to do is to apologize to Apple, compliment them for the job creation they are doing, and get about doing our job.

Nearly three years ago, after much of the country -- and much of Congress -- was condemning BP for the massive Deepwater Horizon oil spill, Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas) apologized to the oil giant, saying it was wrong for Washington to try to hold the company responsible for its failures.

And now, it's Rand Paul wanting to apologize to Apple for questioning its tax-avoidance schemes. Amazing.

Now to be fair, Senator Paul has one valid point. Congress has allowed the corporate taxation regime to fall into a mound of Swiss Cheese as multinational corporations like Apple exploit countless loopholes to avoid paying taxes. But of course, from there Senator Paul's rant descended into pure nonsense. Yes, Apple's "legal" tax evasion truly is a problem.

Paul aside, the bipartisan tone was one of assailing Apple for using Ireland-based shell companies to avoid U.S. corporate income tax. Said Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the subcommittee: “The offshore tax-avoidance tactics spotlighted by the subcommittee do real harm. They disadvantage domestic U.S. companies that aren’t in a position to reduce their tax bills using offshore tax gimmicks. They offload Apple’s tax burden onto other taxpayers – in particular, onto working families and small businesses. The lost tax revenue feeds a budget deficit that has reached troubling proportions, and has helped lead to round after round of budget slashing and the ill-advised sequestration now threatening our economic recovery.”

And ranking member John McCain (R-Ariz.) added, “Apple’s corporate tax strategy reflects a flawed corporate tax system that allows large multinational corporations to shift profits offshore to low-tax jurisdictions. For years, Apple has opted to forgo fully contributing to the U.S. treasury and to American society by shifting profits and circumventing U.S. taxes. In the last four years alone, Apple has avoided paying taxes on $44 billion in income.”

And as we've discussed before, this is a serious problem. After all, taxes are the price we pay for civilization. So when corporations like Apple exploit numerous loopholes to stiff the feds (and the states), we can expect less civilization.

Stuffing revenue in some low-tax, high-privacy bank in the Caribbean? 'Bout as forward-thinking as a Blackberry. Apple, as the New York Times reported today, uses nothing less than the iPhone 5 of tax havens, exploiting the loopholes of the international tax system in such a way that billions of dollars in profits have not been listed in any tax filing anywhere.

At the center of the operation is an Ireland-based subsidiary called Apple Operations International, which collected $30 billion in income between 2009 and 2012. Over the last five years, Apple Operations International has not filed a tax return in any country.

As USC law professor Edward Kleinbard told the Times, "There is a technical term economists like to use for behavior like this: Unbelievable chutzpah."

The revelations about Apple's tax strategies emerged from a Congressional investigation into the company's finances. The examination found that Apple "shifted at least $74 billion from the reach of the Internal Revenue Service between 2009 and 2012," according to the Times. The most startling discovery, though, was in how Apple's tax plan was so effective. [...]

Every dollar Apple saves, of course, is a dollar that doesn't go into America's public bank account. Which means one less dollar to go into education or health care or some other government service; or one more dollar to be pulled from somebody's paycheck. While Apple's revenues make it among the country's largest tax-payers, the Congressional investigation reported that the Silicon Valley giant paid a tax rate of 20.1 percent, which is four to 12 percent lower than it lists in its disclosures.

Across the nation, school districts are being forced to shut down schools "thanks" to recent state and federal budget cuts. And here in Nevada, the state faces a possible law suit for chronic underfunding of public education. Even Nevada State Board of Education President Elaine Wynn recently admitted, "We are grossly underfunded." Schools continue to fall apart, classrooms continue to overflow, teachers continue to face constant threats from administration, and students continue to suffer.


And why? So that Apple and other multinational corporations can engage in "legal" tax evasion? So that their executives can bask in the glory of slightly bigger profit margins? How is this helping any one? Think about it.

King of Pain

Last year, we were raising red flags when Nevada State, Washoe County, and Reno City officials rushed to supply Apple with cover right on the heels of The New York Times catching the multinational tech giant red handed in tax evasion (and misusing Nevada's lax tax laws to do so). Not only was our state swooping in to (inappropriately) cover Apple executives' asses, but this exposed Nevada to some serious risk. But wait, what would that be?

Think about it. Apple has effectively exploited numerous loopholes to avoid paying corporate taxes to California and the federal government. What made Governor Brian Sandoval (R-Denial) and various Northern Nevada politicians think we would never face the same fate?

Well, to be fair, Apple finally seems to be moving on the new data storage center long promised to Washoe County. However, the also promised Downtown Reno business center still looks very MIA. And one must wonder just how worthwhile that $89 million worth of corporate welfare tax breaks is turning out to be.

Before Apple officially selected Northern Nevada to house its fourth data center project, both the city of Reno and Washoe County agreed to nondisclosure agreements with the company until the plans for the project, including $89 million in tax breaks, were announced at public meetings in June 2012. [...]

Generally, the area where Apple could build in downtown Reno is limited to the so-called Tessera District, which is a state-sanctioned (and City Council-approved) “tourism improvement district” located in one of the city’s most blighted neighborhoods. It encompasses the northeastern section of downtown east of Virginia Street and north of Fifth Street.

The Tessera District will allow Apple to keep 75 percent of the sales taxes it owes on equipment purchases for the data center, saving the company an estimated $72 million in sales taxes that otherwise would have been paid to the state, schools and local governments over the course of a decade.

Last fall, the Reno Planning Commission gave its approval to a 14,800-square-foot light industrial building on an empty parcel at 520 Evans Ave., located on the southern edge of the Tessera District. [...]

While the building permit was issued in October, United Construction still has not picked it up. In April, the contractor requested an extension through Oct. 10 on the permit.

There's been a glaring lack of transparency with this project. And it's been unclear when Apple will finally begin delivering on its promises to Reno and Nevada. And many are still scratching their heads and wondering why Nevada would reward Apple for its "legalized" tax evasion program. (Imagine if Apple was instead a family in need of food stamps.) Thanks to Apple's "legal" tax dodging, the federal government lost $9.2 billion in revenue. That's money that could have kept 70,000 kids in Head Start, rescinded the 10.7% cut in unemployment benefits now taking effect, fully funded disaster relief efforts, and undone even more Manufactured Crisis induced budget cuts now ravaging the country.

The scheme that Apple cooked up this week to finance a $55 billion stock buyback for its shareholders was orchestrated to avoid paying $9.2 billion in taxes, Bloomberg reported Friday. That $9.2 billion tax bill that Apple dodged would have been enough to make unnecessary all of the major budget cuts we’ve been writing about this week as part of our “Repeal the Sequester” campaign. [...]

Apple was able to do this because of techniques it uses to keep its U.S.-made profits offshore, and because of provision in the tax code that allows it to deduct interest it pays on money it borrows. That’s a double whammy: It does not pay the taxes it should on the money it earns from all of those i-whatevers we buy (including the Macbook Pro I am using to type this post) and it gets money from the government when it borrows money from a big bank rather than using the money from its overseas stockpile.

Apple makes great products, but the obscenity of its use of the tax code to avoid paying its fair share for the functions of government that make its success possible is only exceeded by the tax code itself and the nexus of ideology and corporate greed that created it.

This latest news from Apple underscores the need to end corporate tax evasion – not with lobbyist-written schemes like the “territorial tax” that would essentially engrave offshore tax dodging into the tax code but with fair, more progressive tax structures that require corporations to pay taxes on their earnings just as working people must by April 15 every year.

Nevada is now feeling the pain of the latest Manufactured Crisis, along with the rest of America. So why again are we rewarding a company that's refusing to pay its fair share? Why are we rewarding a company that's denying the federal government revenue that could have been used to help people and maintain our public infrastructure?

And in case that's not bad enough, Apple now wants a "tax holiday"! Supposedly, it's to encourage "repatriation" of corporate investment in America. Over the weekend, The Guardian's Heidi Moore reminded us of what happened last time we tried this.

Companies had a tax holiday once before, in 2004, when a set of major corporations were allowed to bring back their overseas profits at a tax rate of only 5.25%. You might imagine that it resulted in an enormous economic boost, but here's what happened instead, in the words of Treasury official Michael Mundaca:

"There is no evidence that it increased US investment or jobs, and it cost taxpayers billions … the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service reports that most of the largest beneficiaries of the holiday actually cut jobs in 2005-06 – despite overall economy-wide job growth in those years – and many used the repatriated funds simply to repurchase stock or pay dividends."

So we tried a tax holiday before, it accomplished nothing except lining some corporate coffers, and it hurt the economy. It actually gave a kind of moral permission for companies to cut jobs, even when the economy was booming.

Perhaps this time will be different... But only if there are strings attached. Rep. John Delaney (D-Maryland) has proposed a corporate tax break in exchange for investment in infrastructure bonds. At least that isn't a total giveaway.

On the other hand, Carson City has been giving away the entire store and doling out tons of corporate welfare. And what have we seen in return? Oh, we have amazingly busted public infrastructure and an incredibly tattered social safety net. Multinational corporations avoid paying us taxes, and we get screwed.

As of late, we've been seeing discussions on "The T Word" in Carson City devolve into pure nonsense. And with the clock beginning to run out up there, time is running incredibly short. And with time running incredibly short, state legislators don't seem to be agreeing on any kind of major "T Word" reform.

Alas, it's incredibly difficult for Governor Sandoval and Nevada legislators to agree on any kind of "T Word" change that would make the wealthiest and most powerful corporate interests pay something closer to their fair share. And in turn, it's incredibly difficult for them to provide what our state truly needs. This is why we're stuck with busted schools and broken hospitals and plenty of pain for the 99%.

This is the problem. As long as we fail to change the status quo, Nevada will remain the King of Pain. And the same is true in Washington.

Think about it. Why are our people suffering? And why are companies like Apple rewarded for tax evasion? Is this pain truly necessary?

Unacceptable

Is this NEAT or what? Earlier this week, we caught a whiff of Assembly Speaker Marilyn Kirkpatrick's (D-North Las Vegas) latest tax bill. And now, we have NEAT... Which is also referred to as AB 498.

Last night, Speaker Kirkpatrick appeared on "Ralston Reports" to discuss her proposal for the Nevada Entertainment Admissions Tax (NEAT). It replaces the current Live Entertainment Tax that levies 5% on some venues, 10% on others, and 0% (no, really) on others, with an across-the-board 8% rate that applies for everything from Strip shows to movie theaters to golf courses. And it's rumored to bring in at least $50 million this session.



Apparently, this is the beginning of #NVLeg Democratic leadership's rollout of their official tax plan. Ralston wrote earlier today about the full tax package that's being cooked up as we speak. Apparently, it will raise roughly $350 million in the coming biennium (with AB 498 included).

Yet before it can raise any money, it has to pass. How can it pass? Ralston envisions a scenario where Democratic leaders enter into a pact with "The Senate GOP Mod Squad" and various corporate lobbyists to force the unions to give up The Education Initiative in exchange for yet another "Frankenstein Budget".

This is the dream scenario – and not just for Democrats. As the business community – or at least some – and the gaming folks – or at least some –realize that the the margins tax on the ballot could pass unless the teachers are willing to euthanize it, many here in the capital are starting to talk about such an endgame scenario.

But is this the stuff of Grimm, or a grim reminder that some sort of ugly mishmash of taxes, cobbled together to reach a number and without regard to policy, likely will pass this session, as so often happens? Or is this unlikely to become even a fractured fairy tale, with the denouement being that partisanship will trump cooperation and the teachers will whistle a merry tune on their way to the ballot in 2014, with gobs of money spent against the margins tax and a chance – a chance – it passes anyhow.

Perhaps this is just a reminder that we can no longer band-aid and "quick fix" our way out of a long brewing systemic disease. For far too long, Nevada "leaders" have patched together budgets that looked "reasonable" on the surface, but ultimately did little or nothing to truly fix our long-term problems. Case(s) in point: 2003... And 2009... And 2011.

As the 76th session of the Nevada Legislature came to a close in June 2011, I asked why We the People should not finally go to the ballot box to fix what couldn't be fixed in Carson City. And frankly, I'm still asking that today. Why not just do it already?

Let's face it: The two main tax plans being discussed up there now are shit sandwiches. One is likely illegal and definitely political(ly toxic). And while the other one has some decent elements, it's just another hodge-podge of patchwork that doesn't really fix the root problem or cure the systemic diseases of regressive taxation & chronic underfunding of our public infrastructure. Both may be better than what we have now, but neither offers a true cure.

Something must change. The status quo in Carson City is no longer just unpalatable. It's now simply unacceptable. And if the Governor and (many) legislators still can't see that, then it's time for We the People to change it.

Priorities

What a day we saw in Carson City. Yesterday, we saw some bizarre misplaced priorities on display there. We saw shock & awe at the Nevada Legislature as actor & filmmaker Nicholas Cage made a surprise appearance there.

“I know investors around the world. I could give you names. Give me six months and I’ll give you a list of names of folks who would love to come to Nevada to make a movie,” he said.

Cage was testifying in favor of Senate Bill 165, sponsored by Sen. Aaron Ford. The measure would provide qualified film producers transferable tax credits worth 20 percent of production costs. Additional tax credits would be given for hiring Nevadans. [...]

“I’m trying to make an investment in the culture of our state,” Cage said. “It’s not just a financial thing; I’m trying to make an investment in the perception of Nevada. I’m someone who travels the world quite often. I’m at work in different parts of the world. I’ve met many people around the world, and I want them to go to the movies and see how beautiful our state is, because it actually works." [...]

Carole Vilardo, president of the Nevada Taxpayers Association, testified against the bill, saying it doesn’t make sense for lawmakers searching for new revenue for education and other services to grant tax credits.

She also criticized the language of the bill itself.

“This is totally open-ended where the laundry list of everything in the world would be open for exemptions,” Vilardo said.

If enacted, SB 165 will offer tax credits for film production here in Nevada. That includes movies and TV shows. At the surface, this looks like interesting job creation legislation. And isn't that what the Legislature is supposed to do?

Honestly, this doesn't seem like a completely bad idea in and of itself. Yet with that being said, SB 165 does come with a $35 million price tag. And it seems so awkward that Nevada may be willing to toss $35 million to the entertainment industry, yet our state can't take care of our own. We're even risking costly law suits because of that.

As we discussed yesterday, something looks wrong here. Why does our state continue to hand out corporate welfare endless tax breaks in hopes of luring this or that company here, yet our "leaders" continually claim "we can't afford" to mend our tattered & torn public infrastructure? What's more important to economic development than good schools, good health care, and good transportation options?

In and of itself, SB 165 doesn't seem so bad. But in examining the big picture, we must ask ourselves what our priorities are. Are we providing our kids with quality public education? Are we ensuring everyone can access the health care one needs? Are we creating the kind of environment that businesses will want to grow in? Are we taking care of our own?

How has the mound of corporate welfare given to Apple helped our state? How has the stockpile of corporate welfare offered to multinational mining corporations helped our state? And how has the sweetheart deal offered to big box retailers and other multinational corporations profiting off our state helped?

Think about it. We must rethink our priorities.

Back to Basics

So Former Assembly Member Steven Brooks is back in the news today. Brooks was supposed to be at a court hearing in Las Vegas today. He couldn't make it... Because he was at a court hearing in San Bernardino County, California.

Here's what's happened so far.

The lawyer for a former Nevada lawmaker charged in a car chase and a police confrontation is asking that his client go through a mental health court program.

Ex-Assemblyman Steven Brooks appeared in a San Bernardino County, Calif., court Tuesday after pleading not guilty to charges stemming from his arrest March 28. Prosecutors say there could be a decision Friday on whether he's eligible for mental health court.

Mental health courts divert people into treatment programs and hold them accountable along the way.

Late in March, Steven Brooks was arrested in Victorville following a dispute with a tow truck driver in Barstow and a dramatic car chase with police. His attorney is now requesting for the California case to be transferred to mental health court. This way, he can finally obtain the treatment he needs.

At least there's a chance of Brooks obtaining the treatment he needs in California. Just before his latest arrest, Brooks sounded eerily prophetic in his final interview with Jon Ralston.

In four brief, surreal conversations, alternately heart-wrenching and frightening, shortly after he was expelled from the Assembly, Steven Brooks said he is "the assemblyman of sorrow," wondered why his colleagues "hate me so much" and declared he was going to "break the state" with a lawsuit worth at least $10 million.

Brooks was alternately angry, with expletive-filled rants directed at Speaker Marilyn Kirkpatrick and Majority Leader William Horne, despondent, weeping and saying he was checking himself into Seven Hills, a Southern Nevada treatment facility, and suicidal, saying he had no other recourse. [...]

"I'm the assemblyman of sorrow," he declared. "Why do they hate me so much? Fill in the blank: I'm so angry I could (blank) myself."

Brooks told me he was "on my way to Seven Hills to check myself into the hospital. He began weeping when I asked why, adding, "I have no other resort. I'm going to kill myself if they keep this up. I have nowhere to go. I'm the assemblyman of sorrow." [...]

"You know why they hate me? You know why want to kill me because I know all of their secrets."

No one expected what was coming next, probably not even Steven Brooks himself. Yet in an incredibly bizarre way, he warned us. Just days after Brooks was sent to jail in San Bernardino County, another former Nevadan emerged in California.

After The Sacramento Bee began investigating the mysterious Greyhound bus trip that landed James Flavy Coy Brown in Sacramento, the Nevada patient dumping scandal steadily grew. Now, there's a strong chance of Nevada facing law suits soon over improper discharge of mental health patients and transport of them out of state.

And now, outrage is spreading to a new state. Last weekend, ABC 15 Phoenix looked into the 100 cases of Rawson-Neal mental health patients bussed into Arizona. And while investigating, they may have uncovered yet another horrifying scandal in the making.

Mark Holleran, CEO of Central Arizona Shelter Services, says it's hard to track those patients down. He says "patient dumping" happens more than you might think.

"It just shows you how it's very easy to do this, and it's sort of under the radar. It's hard to detect," he said.

Holleran says a few years ago, former prisoners from Nevada got dumped at the shelter.

"They had been provided a bus ticket, a small amount of cash, a print out of a Mapquest that showed them how to get to CASS. And written on it was, 'ask for Howie,'" he said.

Holleran says these cases often end in chronic homelessness. He says that stretches resources in other states, like Arizona. And it passes along the problem, instead of fixing it.

"That might be something we might want to take a look at. Because if we can solve it for one place, I think we solve it for all the places," Holleran said.

So now, Arizona officials are reporting cases of Nevada patient dumping. And not only that, but we may have also dumped former prisoners on them as well! How about that for being a "good neighbor"?

One would think this would light a fire under the behinds of the Governor and legislators to fix this glaring crisis. Come on, we're now facing law suits and loss of federal funding! But no, they were too busy kissing the behind of Nicholas Cage. No, I'm not even making this up. And Ralston was downright revolted by today's lurid display of misplaced priorities.

James Flavy Brown can be shipped out of Las Vegas, leaving with barely his wits about him, some meds and peanut butter crackers. But the star of “Leaving Las Vegas” can be treated like royalty, with the mayor of Las Vegas as his sidekick, and an offer pending of enough taxpayer money to buy a peanut butter cracker factory.

These are the Legislature’s priorities – cut mental health funding, ignore English Language Learner money but give tax breaks to those who need them least. Brown gets a bus ticket to anywhere while Cage gets a national treasure trove worth of goodies and Apple gets a 90 percent tax break negotiated by the governor. That is tax policy in Nevada.

This is the state we are in.

I wonder if anyone stops to think: We may get Cage ghost-riding on the Strip, with his production company soaring and a Vegas backdrop for movies. But what does it say if that fake scene is juxtaposed a few miles off-camera in either direction with real tableaus of packed emergency rooms, overcrowded classrooms and jammed thoroughfares.

If this is part of a master plan, I’d like to see the drawing because it seems like a blueprint for disaster to me. What exactly is the policy articulated by this approach that allows $80 million to be cut from mental health services in five years but in one bill lawmakers are willing to give half of that amount [$35 million] to prospective Nevada-based filmmakers?

Lest you think my heart’s bleeding cuts off circulation to my brain, I get the job-creating argument, the economic diversification argument, the image-changing argument. But why is it a good idea for government to give incentives to anyone – movie producers, renewable energy companies – if offcials don’t provide incentives for people to really want to live here by supporting the quality of life, a culture that values higher and lower education, a political class that leads rather than follows?

He's right about this. It simply doesn't make sense.

Honestly, there may be some merit to encouraging more film production here in Nevada. But when we can't even take care of our own, who wants to risk shooting a movie here? Think about it.

Why is it that we always hear that "we can't afford" proper mental health care, decent schools, and repaired roads, yet our Governor and Legislature always seem to be able to afford corporate welfare to shower upon multinational corporations like Apple that neither need the help nor deserve it? Think about that as well. How on earth does this lead to a stable economy for our state? And how on earth does neglecting the most vulnerable in our society lead to a healthy economy?

It doesn't. That's precisely the problem. Our "leaders" in Carson City keep chasing after mythical economic unicorns while failing to provide the most fundamental building blocks of a sound economy.

Sure, luring Hollywood to Las Vegas sounds sexy. But ultimately, that won't mean shit for economic development if our schools keep bursting at the seams, our hospitals keep stuffing patients onto Greyhound buses heading out of state, and our roads are clogged with commuters while paved with just as many potholes. We seriously need to pay attention to the rude awakening we're now receiving. We must get back to basics, and we must do so before it's too late.