Background: In 2007 the Coalition supported the elimination of the regressive tax levied on manufacturers throughout the state of Arkansas. The measure, in part, won the support of Governor Beebe on reducing the tax by half by the year 2010. While reducing the tax by half certainly helps our economic development efforts, Arkansas is still at a disadvantage relative to surrounding states having little or no comparable tax. Goal: A complete and permanent reduction in the sales and use tax on energy used in the process of manufacturing as defined by the NACIS cods used by the Arkansas Economic Development Commission. Objective: To increase the number of jobs and investment throughout the Cornerstone region. Scope: Statewide
Alternative Fuels Development
Background: Alternative fuels will be the next economic engine in the United States. Arkansas is already seeing steadily increasing investments in the Fayetteville Shale Play. Small and large bio-diesel plants are coming on-line at a steady pace across the state. To take full advantage of this emerging industry, Arkansas needs to assist counties, cities and economic development organizations make appropriate investments in infrastructure to lower the costs of doing business in our state and allow businesses to put additional capital into the latest cutting-edge technology in the plants in our state. Goal: Develop and fund infrastructure grants for the alternative fuels industry including but not limited to tank farms at public ports, short-haul pipeline, containment pans at loading sites, and other infrastructure as needed based upon company investments and job creation. Objective: To increase the number of jobs and investment throughout the Cornerstone region and become the lead state for the alternative fuels industry. Scope: Regional
Alternative Fuel Demand
Distribution Incentive Background: As alternative fuel production increases Arkansans should have access to these supplies. Arkansas distributors should be encouraged to purchase and distribute Arkansas alternative fuels. Currently, an estimated 90 percent of alternative fuels being produced are shipped out of state for consumption with 90 percent of the remainder used by the producer in agriculture operations. Goal: To establish a distribution incentive of $ .05 per gallon paid to distributors for each gallon distributed to retail outlets. Objective: To increase the demand for Arkansas alternative fuels thereby increasing the number of jobs in the alternative fuels industry in the Cornerstone region. Scope: Statewide
Consumption Incentive Background: To further increase demand for Alternative fuels produced in the State of Arkansas an incentive should be developed to reward school districts for purchasing Arkansas alternative fuels. State vehicles should be equipped and mandated to burn Arkansas alternative fuels. Goal: To create maximum demand in the Arkansas alternative fuels Arkansas School Districts should be paid an additional $.25 per child once the district purchases its 100,000 th gallon of Arkansas Bio-diesel during a school year. All state owned and operated vehicles should use an Arkansas produced bio-fuel by the year 2012. Objective: To increase the number of jobs and investment in the Cornerstone region. Scope: Statewide
Establish an Alternative Fuels Federal Rebate Clearinghouse
Background: The United States Federal Government provides a $1.00/gallon rebate to blenders of biodiesel. Producers may apply for a license to accept the rebate and pass the savings onto blenders, however, the producer must then wait an average 60-90 days for the rebate. Distributors are reluctant to allocate cash-flow to this rebate and led to the development of the license for producers to accept the blenders rebate. Goal: Arkansas should establish a clearinghouse for all alternative fuel federal rebates. The clearinghouse should have the capacity to issue checks to producers or distributors based upon expected rebate checks from the Federal Government. Objective: To free up cash-flow for businesses to continue to invest in capital and feedstock enhancing productivity and employment. This measure would also get the attention of the bio-fuels industry and lead to more capital investments from companies not currently located in Arkansas.
Advocate for additional funding for the Arkansas Economic Development Commission
Background: The Arkansas Economic Development Commission is the primary state agency charged with recruiting new business and industry into the state of Arkansas and working with exiting industries and communities to secure new capital and increase the quantity and quality of jobs available in our state. Goal: Increase the Economic Infrastructure Fund (INCLUDE EIF IN FUNDING CATEGORY “A”) grant dollars available through the Arkansas Economic Development Commission to $25 million, increase the amount of discretionary Incentive money to $2 million, and increase the amount of payroll dollars to allow for the hiring of 5 additional project/business retention managers at the Director’s discretion. Goal: Defeat any measure to eliminate the Create/Rebate Incentive. Objective: To increase the number of jobs and investment in the Cornerstone region. Scope: Statewide
Advocate for increasing the Governor’s Quick Action Closing Fund
Background: Economic development projects are fast moving and fluid with decisions of hundreds of jobs and millions of investment dollars hanging in the balance with one state pitted against another to win the project. The Governor of the State of Arkansas, popularly elected by all the citizens of Arkansas should have at his discretion adequate funds to close a deal quickly and effectively. The Governor’s Quick Action Closing Fund provides such a mechanism. Goal: The Governor’s Quick Action Closing Fund should be increased in dollar amount sufficient for the job. Objective: To increase the number of jobs and investment in the Cornerstone region. Scope: Statewide
Advocate for the lowering of Thresholds for Amendment 82
Background: The Flour-Daniels study, commissioned by the Arkansas State Legislature noted that Arkansas was best equipped to handle medium-sized economic development projects. Arkansas certainly needs the mechanism Amendment 82 provides to realistically compete with other states for “super projects.” Arkansas is a rural state with greater infrastructure needs than current funds can meet. For most Arkansas cities and counties, an economic development project employing 200 people would require more infrastructure than cities, counties and the Arkansas Economic Development Commission could immediately fund. Lowering the Thresholds for Amendment 82 would remedy this shortfall. Goal: Lower the qualifying threshold for Amendment 82 to 200 new jobs and $200 million in capital investment. Objective: To increase the number of jobs and investment in the Cornerstone region. Scope: Statewide