John wrote:
> Actually, there are several.  Austin, Atlanta, Denver, Raleigh-Durham,
> Boston, and several others are centers for high-tech
> industries.  I expect
> the power problems in California may lead to further
> decentralization of
> these industries, rather than centralization in another city.

I reply:

No, Oh No!  Please - no increased growth rates here in the greater Denver
area, at least for a while!

Traffic on all Freeways is now ridiculous, housing costs and taxes keep
going up, and sprawling growth is a mess. The higher growth rates mean
businesses don't have to compete as well, so consumers suffer.

Our "new" airport, which was intentionally built way out on the uninhabited
plains, already has a large number of those whining, crying weenies who buy
houses under the approach paths and complain about the jet noise. (The same
mentality is forcing the end of our only NHRA drag strip.)

Interstate 25, which passes through most of our high-tech areas, is a
parking lot twice a day, and is forecasted to get worse even without the
new-lane construction that is expected to go two to three years.

The only people around here that want more growth are those with interests
in real-estate/development (like, city council members for example), or
those who benefit from growth at the expense of the individual citizens /
property owners (again, city council members are good examples, but add
service providers and retailers who wouldn't be profitable in a more static
economy.)

Long-time residential property owners see their taxes going up significantly
because they get tapped to help build the new infrastructure to handle the
population increase. Every year, fixed income retirees who've not only paid
off their homes, but also paid for a couple of generations of schools, have
to sell their homes because the property taxes went up again.

OK, so we do have some "new dwelling" taxes, but they don't cover it all!
Besides those taxes are very unpopular with the developers (and therefore
with those that we let get into city and county government.)

Boise, Idaho as an isolated study in growth rates over the last four decades
shows us that 3.0% through 3.5% are about the maximum annual growth rates
(in either population or business growth) that can be absorbed in a healthy
and controlled manner (Past mayors of that town have stated so publicly.)

So, if you are looking to get your business out of California, please don't
bring it any closer to Denver than say, Boulder (an esoteric community with
some high-tech businesses, that exists in a beautiful mountain setting, but
is about 40% phase-shifted away from the rest of the state in what we might
refer to as "reality".)

Or perhaps, consider Utah.

-dtd


> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Clogg [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 3:24 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: OT: rotating blackouts ordered for Northern California
>
>
> Actually, there are several.  Austin, Atlanta, Denver, Raleigh-Durham,
> Boston, and several others are centers for high-tech
> industries.  I expect
> the power problems in California may lead to further
> decentralization of
> these industries, rather than centralization in another city.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rick Clark [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 2:17 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: OT: rotating blackouts ordered for Northern California
>
>
> <<stuff snipped>>
> > And to top it all off, Intel said last week that it was
> > shelving all plans to
> > further expand or build new plants in California until the
> > current situation
> > is straightened out -- which could be five to ten years from now.
> >
> > Wirt Atmar
> >
>
>
> Could we see a 'silicon valley' emerging in another part of
> the country????
>