Why not do it the way they do in Chicago and other big cities: Contracts shall be made only with bidders who have made extremely large “donations” to certain government officials.

EDITOR NOTE–Gordon is trying to say, “Significant economic PRESENTS.”

Folks, money spent on local companies stays here instead of going to California or Taiwan. A dollar spent here that stays here makes us richer as a community, and grows our economy instead of some other one half a world away.

Check out the ‘Think Boise First’ website for info.

Here are the TOP TEN reasons for Buying Local…

BUY LOCAL, SUPPORT YOURSELF

Several studies have shown that when you buy from an independent, locally owned business a significantly greater portion of your money is used to make purchases from other local businesses, service providers and farms — continuing to strengthen the economic base of the community

SUPPORT COMMUNITY GROUPS

Non-profit organizations receive an average 250% more support from smaller business owners than they do from large businesses.

KEEP OUR COMMUNITY UNIQUE

Where we shop, where we eat and have fun — all of it makes our community home and one-of-a-kind businesses are an integral part of the distinctive character of Boise.

REDUCE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

Locally owned businesses can make more local purchases requiring less transportation and generally set up shop in city centers as opposed to developing on the fringe contributing to less sprawl, congestion, habitat loss and pollution.

CREATE GOOD JOBS

Small local businesses are collectively the largest employer nationally and therefore provide the most jobs to residents in communities.

GET BETTER SERVICE

Local businesses often hire people with a better understanding of the products they are selling and take more time to get to know customers.

INVEST IN COMMUNITY

Local businesses are owned by people who live in this community, are less likely to leave, and are more invested in the community’s future.

PUT YOUR TAXES TO GOOD USE

Local businesses in city centers require comparatively little infrastructure investment and make more efficient use of public services.

BUY WHAT YOU WANT (NOT WHAT SOMEONE ELSE WANTS YOU TO BUY)

A marketplace of tens of thousands of small businesses is the best way to ensure innovation and low prices over the long-term.

ENCOURAGE LOCAL PROSPERITY

A growing body of economic research shows that in an increasingly homogenized world, entrepreneurs and skilled workers are more likely to invest and settle in communities that preserve their one-of-a-kind businesses and distinctive character.

EDITOR NOTE–Tom, we agree with all of that, but you can’t make it a LAW!

I remember this was the plan for the capitol restoration project. Locals could not do the work for all the skill sets needed.

I am all for BUY IDAHO when possible and I may even pay a little bit more to keep my dough in state.

The rule is shop globally but try to buy local when possible. At lease you will have a good fix on what is reasonable and proper no matter who gets the jobs.

I’m sorry but I use to try bidding to the local parks on equipment. In 20 years I was never able to obtain one bid. These companys would come in from out of state and bid lower than I could even buy the product for. They would have special contracts with manufactures just for biding to goverments. I for one think the tax money should stay in Idaho. Sorry but somethimes protectionism is important to local business.

Gotta agree with Tom Anderson on this one. Keep the money here, in the LOCAL economy. The Guardian isn’t always right, you sheep don’t have to agree w/him.

I think Mr. Anderson has the right idea. We need to build a local economy here in the Treasure Valley. We need to become more independent from far away companies and spend our money with local companies that will hire local people that in turn will spend their money locally continuing create more local jobs. It’s a no brainer.

Good for Mr. Eberle. I hope his bill passes. With climate change affecting us now (pine beetle sucks!) and peak oil looming around the corner, we need serious reevaluation of every aspect of our lives and business practices. This means reserving transporting people, food, things, business, etc., only when necessary. Please let’s conserve what’s left of our natural resources. If it can’t be grown here, then ship in the almonds, oranges, and coffee. If it can, grow and keep the food here. Would you like to have enough oil to run hospitals, dental offices, and emergency vehicles down the road? Renewable energy, no matter what, won’t provide a fraction of what we are currently using. If we don’t change our ways and stop basing every action on the almighty dollar, these services we take for granted could vanish…possibly when oil spikes. Stop quibbling over pricing and excuses for constant, needless shipping and continual pollution. There’s plenty of competition right in this area.

Transportion costs and exchange rates have a funny way of adding up for foreign-made goods. I always buy the best product or servce I can find at the best price. I could care less where it comes from. If a local product or service is superior and reasonably priced, I’m too happy to spend my money on it.

Health risks of shipping pollution have been ‘underestimated’

John Vidal, Guardian

One giant container ship can emit almost the same amount of cancer and asthma-causing chemicals as 50m cars [that’s 50 million cars], study finds
—
Britain and other European governments have been accused of underestimating the health risks from shipping pollution following research which shows that one giant container ship can emit almost the same amount of cancer and asthma-causing chemicals as 50m cars.

Confidential data from maritime industry insiders based on engine size and the quality of fuel typically used by ships and cars shows that just 15 of the world’s biggest ships may now emit as much pollution as all the world’s 760m cars. Low-grade ship bunker fuel (or fuel oil) has up to 2,000 times the sulphur content of diesel fuel used in US and European automobiles.

Pressure is mounting on the UN’s International Maritime Organisation and the EU to tighten laws governing ship emissions following the decision by the US government last week to impose a strict 230-mile buffer zone along the entire US coast, a move that is expected to be followed by Canada.

Since WalMart is the fastest growing retail merchant in the entire nation, I would think this new language would include CHINA as the greatest provider of ‘significant local economic presence’.
The morons who support so called “free trade” have been brainwashed by the politicians who don’t want them to understand about “fair trade”. The pollution China creates is a by product of our unsatiable consumer appetites promoted by elites who would rather skim money than work for money. This is all based on easy credit markets so you can buy more than you need to satisfy imagined desire.

I think the Republican idea of “no bid” contracts like KBR, Halliburton, Blackwater,etc. got in the terrorist/democracy wars would work well here in Boise. Think about all the jobs! Then we wouldn’t have to worry about where stuff was made. Business will regulate itself. It would not be in the interest for the businesses bidding on taxpayer funded projects to treat the city unfairly. They might not get another contract. This is the problem we have here, too much regulation. Most businesses have what is called enlightened self interest. Why would they poop the public nest?

Is URS considered a local firm? They have an office here. What about other firms that have offices here, are they considered local? If so, they can still out bid the little guys.

Cathy: Local firms are owned by local people and the profits stay here. Foriegn firms have owners somewhere else and the money flows to wherever the owner or stockholder resides.

We pay the same whoever gets contracts, the only difference is that with foriegn firms many of the costs are externalities (hidden costs to society).

Ignorant poor people will always look to price first and don’t care who gets harmed in order for them to get their low price, including themselves in the case of processed poison called food and lead covered toys. Government should be held to a higher standard.

For those of you that are cheerleading for “local” business, are you referring to local or domestic. The problem with your position is that, as a country, we no longer manufacture anything!
Are you referring to clothing? How about automobiles, airplanes, trucks, busses, road making equipment, food, shoes, steel, chemicals, computers, oil, gasoline? If, in fact, you are talking about a truly local economy, what if you had to give up everything you own, or need, in your daily lives that isn’t made in Boise, or even Ada county, and someone gave you $5000.00 in cash,(Oh, wait a minute. No cash because it isn’t made here) you couldn’t exist for 30 days. Just think about it….

I’m a late commentor — I blame the long California commute.

If the funds used by local government to purchase goods and services are derived from the tax-proceeds of local citizens, then it’s in those citizens’ best interest to ensure that local government MUST first consider spending that money on the goods and services provided by local businesses BEFORE they consider sending that money outside the region.

This cannot be a foreign concept – can it?

I admit that it’s unexpected that a Growthaphobe thinks it unwise (and perhaps illegal) to require tax-supported government to shop local…

The Boise area has been the beneficiary of a tremendous influx of out-of-state capital as local businesses offered up their services on the national & global markets — and took full advantage of the government’s “low bid is the best bid” fantasy. But this scenario also meant that as those business grew the local area had to accomodate all those new employees. This was an unsustainable situation — as the Guardian has pointed out — since it slaved the local economy to a volatile economic sector. It got to the point that no matter how many “tax breaks” the legislature passed, those high volume, fragile business ventures collapsed.

Stability will be re-established once local government spending (really the only large-scale spending citizens have any true control over), is contained to the local region.

It’s actually not that unusual for a public agency to restrict acquisitions to companies that are based within geographic proximity. This has very little to do with the equal protection clause, since non-local companies can become eligible for contracts simply by choosing to relocate to Boise — just as Boise (et al) had nothing to do with those companies “choosing” to disqualify themselves by deciding not to locate to the Boise area.

Localism only becomes prejudicial when the “proximity” offered in the spending statute so severly restricts the public’s options, that it is forced to contract with companies that benefit elected officials (their spouses, or other relatives). Typical proximity statutes specify location winthin 20-50 miles of the issuing agency.

The mantra of “lowest bid” has Walmarted America, and induced auto-dependent sprawl throughout once-pristine rural regions. And, as in Boise’s case, over leveraged these once small-populated areas into situations where there aren’t enough jobs left to keep everyone working. The long-term impact of such short-sightedness is rampant unemployment, and the attendent rise in crime and urban blight.

But, then again, if you think this was a good thing — then, by all means, oppose the “buy local” ordinance.