Posted tagged ‘Leaving California’

Businesses Joined by Non-Profits in Leaving California for Friendlier States

September 21, 2017

Friends in economic development agencies and in the site selection consulting world have asked why I haven’t posted anything in quite awhile. My answer is simple: I’ve been exceptionally busy. It certainly isn’t because there aren’t things to write about.

Another question I’m usually asked is whether businesses are still leaving California.

They are, especially with the state legislature again failing to provide tax or regulatory relief to its home-state companies. Overall, taxes, fees and regulations have gotten worse. Such a difficult business environment, combined with grim treatment by local governments, have caused operating costs to grow faster in the San Francisco Bay Area and Los Angeles than in virtually every other metropolitan area in the nation.

So large corporations and small business entities – joined by non-profit organizations – continue to look for ways to partially or fully exit the state. Today alone brought two examples, which by coincidence both involve Nevada.

The first is a loss for Los Angeles with Virtual Guard, Inc. leaving the city’s Sherman Oaks section. The company plans to relocate its headquarters and interactive command and control center to Clark County (Las Vegas area), citing an “unfriendly economic environment” in California. The move is likely to occur later this year.

There, Virtual Guard  is expected to hire 80 new employees within its first two years of operations. The video monitoring company is also a developer and integrator of technology in the perimeter security sector and its solutions are being used throughout the United States and Canada.

California, which a long time ago was a haven for aerospace companies, will lose another one next year.

ERG Aerospace Corp. plans to relocate its Oakland operations to McCarran, Nevada and make the Silver State its headquarters. The company manufactures materials and components for the aerospace, national defense, semiconductor manufacturing, biotech and other high technology industries. The target date for the move is the second quarter 2018, with operations to commence in the same quarter.

Several months ago, a non-profit organization said it would relocate out of state, too. Horizon University, a private, Christian school that started classes in 1993 in San Diego is heading to Indianapolis.

Horizon’s President Bill Goodrich calls the decision “a no-brainer.” He said Indiana offers a “climate” that was slipping away in California, and by that he wasn’t referring to San Diego’s sunny days. Goodrich said that the university helps people “grow academically” while integrating the “strong biblical teachings and we find in Indiana, there’s an openness to that.”

The move will allow the, accredited university to grow on a 97-acre spread – in a state with less “red tape” – and attract more students.

Thanks to high costs, a sizeable non-profit move is upcoming: Toastmasters International will shift its headquarters from its birthplace in Orange County to Colorado.

With about 180 employees, Toastmasters CEO Daniel Rex said costs in California were a concern. “When you look at the availability of workers, when you look at the cost of commerce and real estate, this is something that makes sense.” The organization is spending $19.5 million to buy a building in Englewood, south of Denver. Toastmasters is a legendary California institution, founded in 1924 in Santa Ana. Since 1990 it’s been based in Rancho Santa Margarita.

Business people who endure the decline in California’s business climate and pervasive cost increases can take some comfort knowing that some non-profit brethren are members of the same club.

I’ll write moe about how California treats its commercial enterprises. But first let’s see how many business-helpful bills and business-damaging bills Gov. Jerry Brown will sign into law.

One focus of this blog has been to address California’s perennially difficult business environment. Joseph Vranich is known as The Business Relocation Coach while the formal name of his business is Spectrum Location Solutions. Joe helps companies find great locations in which to grow. Also, Joe has been a Keynote Speaker for more than 20 years – see A Speaker Throughout the U.S. and in Europe and Asia.

Advertisements

Another Company Moves Headquarters Out of California – This Time it’s Irvine

February 11, 2017

AutoAlert, an Irvine, Calif.-based tech firm, announced today that it’s planning to relocate its headquarters to Kansas City, Missouri. The firm offers automotive software tools for management and communications.

missouri-state-sealWith plans to create 300 area jobs in coming years, AutoAlert CEO Mike Dullea said, “Our company is raising the bar to bring high paying tech jobs right to the heart of Kansas City. AutoAlert’s Kansas City headquarters will be operational in the spring of 2017. It seems the company is wasting no time in heading to the Midwest.

The firm will maintain an office in Irvine, the size of which is unspecified.[1]

“Just got off the phone with the CEO of AutoAlert,” Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens said in a release. “We had a great conversation. He told me that because of new policies like Right to Work, which show our commitment to growing our economy, they are excited to bring their business here and create jobs. This is what you sent me here to do, and I’m proud to say that we are getting results for you.”[2]

Dullea said, “As a tenured CEO I have never received such a personal call from a governor to thank me. The efforts and words of Governor Greitens say a lot about him and the type of leadership we can expect to see moving forward.”[3]

[1] Source: Bobby Burch, “Cali tech firm AutoAlert to create 300 Kansas City jobs, Startland, Feb. 10, 2017 http://www.startlandnews.com/2017/02/cali-tech-firm-autoalert-relocates-kc-creating-300-jobs/

[2] Source: Rob Roberts,”California tech firm will move HQ, create 300 jobs in downtown KC,” Kansas City Business Journal, Feb. 10, 2017 http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/news/2017/02/10/california-tech-firm-moving-hq-creating-300-jobs.html

[3] “AutoAlert Corporate Office to Move: Will Expand to Downtown Kansas City, Mo.,” news release, Missouri Department of Economic Development, Feb. 10, 2017 https://ded.mo.gov/content/autoalert-corporate-office-move-will-expand-downtown-kansas-city-mo

* * *

One focus of this blog has been to address California’s difficult business environment.

Joseph Vranich is known as The Business Relocation Coach while the formal name of his business is Spectrum Location Solutions. Joe helps companies find great locations in which to grow. Also, Joe has been a Keynote Speaker for more than 20 years – see A Speaker Throughout the U.S. and in Europe and Asia.

Uber Regulations Mean San Francisco Loses While Phoenix and Pittsburgh Win

December 23, 2016

Any business person who has dealt with California’s frustrating laws, regulations and bureaucrats was nonetheless surprised to see a story with the headline, “Uber Ships Self-Driving Cars to Arizona After California Ban.”

uber-cars-on-flatbed-truckReally? A state ban on Uber? The poster child of the billion-dollar-plus startup, tech-guru, market-disruptor club? Why would Sacramento give Uber, of all people, a bad time?

Reuters said Uber Technologies Inc. pulled its fleet of self-driving cars from the streets of San Francisco and sent them to Arizona’s friendlier territory:

The California Department of Motor Vehicles banned Uber’s self-driving cars from San Francisco just days after they first deployed. In response, Uber picked up and moved out. “Our cars departed for Arizona this morning by truck, Uber said… . We’ll be expanding our self-driving pilot there in the next few weeks, and we’re excited to have the support of Governor Ducey.”

Gov. Doug Ducey wooed Uber on social media the evening when the ride-hailing company pulled its self-driving test from San Francisco. “California may not want you; but AZ does!” he wrote on Twitter. The next morning, Uber’s fleet was headed his state’s way.

California moved to revoke registrations for Uber’s automobiles, but Uber said its vehicles require oversight by a human driver and shouldn’t qualify under California’s autonomous-driving rules. Nonetheless, the state Attorney General and soon-to-be Senator, Kamala Harris (loyal to unions and hostile to business interests), threatened legal action if the company continued operating automobiles without a permit.

Uber in Arizona

Gov. Ducey’s full statement reads:

Arizona welcomes Uber self-driving cars with open arms and wide open roads. While California puts the brakes on innovation and change with more bureaucracy and more regulation, Arizona is paving the way for new technology and new businesses. In 2015, I signed an executive order supporting the testing and operation of self-driving cars in Arizona with an emphasis on innovation, economic growth, and most importantly, public safety. This is about economic development, but it’s also about changing the way we live and work. Arizona is proud to be open for business. California may not want you, but we do.

Anthony Levandowski, the head of Uber’s Advanced Technologies Group, argued that because the company’s self-driving system is an early prototype and requires test drivers to keep their hands on the steering wheel at all times. It’s no different from driver-assist systems already on the market — and those are exempt from the requirement for a California permit.

Levandowski said that it isn’t clear why the DMV is requiring a permit now when they’ve known that Ubers have been on the streets of San Francisco over a month and have been operating safely for months in Pittsburgh, “where policymakers and regulators are supportive of our efforts.”

Last year, Uber opened its Center for Excellence in Phoenix, where it serves U.S. customers and Uber users worldwide. Now, it seems that more development work will occur in Phoenix. That’s what happens when a state is friendly to business interests.

Uber in Pittsburgh

Uber has been successfully testing autonomous-driving vehicles in Pittsburgh for some time. An extensive Wall Street Journal story in September — Uber’s Self-Driving Cars Debut in Pittsburgh — described how Uber is turning the city into an “experimental lab” where it will have as many as 100 specially equipped Volvo XC90s operating. Also, reported the WSJ, the city has its quirks — like the “Pittsburgh left turn” — which makes it a great location for testing autonomous vehicles.

It is customary for the first driver at a stoplight who is signaling a left turn to have priority over oncoming traffic when the light turns green. People in the oncoming lanes generally allow that leftward dash and are puzzled or even angry if it doesn’t occur. Uber has programmed its cars to allow other cars to make the ‘Pittsburgh left’ but not to make it themselves. The city is also notoriously difficult to drive through with steep hills and three rivers that make streets twist and turn unpredictably… . “If you can drive successfully in Pittsburgh, you’re pretty much done,” said Ragunathan Rajkumar, a professor at [Carnegie Mellon University] who specializes in autonomous vehicles.

Last year Uber opened an Advanced Technologies Center in Pittsburgh and this year is developing its second research facility there as part of a massive brownfield redevelopment site. Uber says it likes Pittsburgh’s “world-class research universities and engineers and a thriving technology community.”

Uber entered into a strategic partnership with Carnegie Mellon University to help create its new technology center and also to rely on the university’s National Robotics Engineering Center to do R&D in mapping, vehicle safety and autonomy technology. Safety is one of Uber’s major concerns.

Uber also selected Pittsburgh because of the clustering of robotics companies such as Carnegie Robotics and RedZone Robotics.

Although California prides itself on the pool of technical talent found in San Francisco and Silicon Valley, Uber has found justification to praise Phoenix and Pittsburgh for the the talent available from local universities and the community support of technology and innovation.

Uber’s experience in San Francisco shows that venture capitalists, Ph.Ds in robotics and software engineers are no match for an all-knowing California bureaucracy.

* * *

One focus of this blog has been to address California’s difficult business environment.

Joseph Vranich is known as The Business Relocation Coach while the formal name of his business is Spectrum Location Solutions. Joe helps companies find great locations in which to grow. Also, Joe has been a Keynote Speaker for more than 20 years – see A Speaker Throughout the U.S. and in Europe and Asia.

 

More California Companies Hearing ‘Move to Our State’ Pitches

October 18, 2016

This proves that for every action there is a reaction: New measures by Gov. Jerry Brown and the California legislature that have worsened our business environment have boosted efforts by other states to recruit California companies to their friendlier locations.

Each visiting out-of-state representative outlines how a California company will benefit by relocating to one of their communities. Economic Development agencies also promote the advantages to California firms of placing future expansions in their areas.

california-precip-map-not-copyrightedAlthough no official records exist regarding recruitment activity in California by economic development organizations, I’ve experienced several hundred touchpoints from parties in far-flung locations wishing to discuss the state’s business environment.

California industries being targeted include financial services, manufacturing, robotics, software, e-commerce, food processing, aerospace, pharma and biotech, plastics, electronics, distribution and even family-owned dairy farms.

In the past, officials from a couple of agencies would contact me every month, but now it’s often two or three times per week.

The states with the highest California-related activity are Texas with 62 agencies, Indiana following at 22 and Arizona at 18. I define activity as visits, phone calls or direct-mail campaigns.

But the true level of activity is greater. For example, organizations in Texas, Nevada and Florida – and economic development agencies in Phoenix, Indianapolis and Pittsburgh – make multiple overtures in California.

The representatives are able to project significant operating cost reductions when it comes to labor, workers’ compensation, unemployment insurance, health care, taxes, facility leases or purchases, regulatory compliance and transportation. Affordable housing in other parts of the country also make it easier for companies to attract and retain employees.

Officials in other states follow activity in Sacramento where Gov. Brown enacted about 800 new laws this year, some of which will result in more regulations and higher tax and energy costs for California companies.

They also are struck by the unfairness of California’s new one-size-fits-all minimum wage law, which forces companies in low-cost areas to pay big-city wages as if they were located in the West Coast’s most expensive cities – Los Angeles and San Francisco. The legislature and Gov. Brown put businesses that face competition from foreign companies at quite a disadvantage.

Without a change in California’s political climate, I expect more inquiries to come in from states seeking to grow their economic base.

The identities of the 247 economic development entities that represent touchpoints with Spectrum Location Solutions are as listed below:

Alabama:

  1. Alabama Power, Mobile
  2. Baldwin County Economic Development Alliance, Robertsdale
  3. North Alabama Industrial Development Association, Decatur
  4. Power South Energy Cooperative, Montgomery

Arizona:

  1. Access Arizona, Casa Grande
  2. Apache Junction Economic Development Dept.
  3. Arizona Commerce Authority, Phoenix
  4. Arizona Public Service (utility), Phoenix
  5. Arizona Sun Corridor, Phoenix
  6. Avondale Economic Development Dept.
  7. Central Arizona Regional Economic Development Foundation, Casa Grande
  8. Gilbert Office of Economic Development
  9. Glendale Office of Economic Development
  10. Greater Phoenix Economic Council
  11. Mesa Economic Development Dept.
  12. Queen Creek Mayor
  13. Salt River Project (utility), Phoenix
  14. Scottsdale Economic Development Dept.
  15. Surprise, AZ City Manager
  16. Tempe Economic Development Dept.
  17. Wickenburg Regional Economic Development Partnership
  18. Yuma Economic Development Dept.

Arkansas:

  1. Office of the Governor

Colorado:

  1. Centennial Economic Development
  2. Colorado Springs Regional Economic Development Corp.
  3. Commerce City Economic Development Dept.
  4. Erie Economic Development Dept.
  5. Longmont Economic Development Partnership
  6. Metro Denver Economic Development Corp.
  7. Office of the Governor
  8. Westminster Economic Development Office

Florida:

  1. Brooksville-Tampa Bay Regional Airport
  2. Enterprise Florida, Orlando
  3. Florida East Coast Railway, Jacksonville
  4. Gulf Power, Pensacola
  5. Hernando County Economic Development Dept., Brooksville
  6. Jacksonville Port Authority
  7. Lake Wells Chamber of Commerce & Economic Development Council
  8. Manatee County Port Authority, Palmetto
  9. Office of the Governor
  10. Orange County Economic Development
  11. Orlando Economic Development Commission
  12. Power South Energy Cooperative, Miramar Beach
  13. Santa Rosa County Economic Development, Milton
  14. Sarasota County Economic Development Corp., Sarasota
  15. Petersburg Area Economic Development Corp.
  16. Tampa Bay Partnership, Tampa
  17. Tampa Hillsborough Economic Development Corp., Tampa

Georgia:

  1. Atlanta Economic Development Corp.
  2. Atlanta Economic Development Dept.
  3. Fayette County Development Authority, Fayetteville
  4. Georgia Dept. of Economic Development, Atlanta
  5. Rabun County Economic Development Authority, Rabun Gap

Idaho:

  1. Coeur d’Alene Area Economic Development Corp.
  2. Grow Idaho Falls Inc.

Iowa:

  1. Iowa Economic Development Authority, Des Moines
  2. Office of the Governor

Indiana:

  1. Bloomington Economic Development Corp.
  2. Carmel Community Relations and Economic Development
  3. Delaware County Economic Development Alliance, Muncie
  4. Duke Energy Economic Development, Indianapolis
  5. Duke Energy Economic Development, Plainfield
  6. East Central Indiana Regional Partnership, Muncie
  7. Fishers Economic Development Dept.
  8. Grant County Economic Growth Council, Marion
  9. Harrison County Economic Development Corp., Corydon
  10. Hoosier Energy Economic Development Dept., Bloomington
  11. Indiana Economic Development Corp., Indianapolis
  12. Indiana Municipal Power Agency, Carmel
  13. Indianapolis Chamber of Commerce
  14. Indy Partnership, Indianapolis
  15. Jackson County Industrial Development Corp., Seymour
  16. Madison County Corp. for Economic Development, Anderson
  17. Noblesville Economic Development Dept.
  18. Northeast Indiana Regional Partnership, Fort Wayne
  19. Office of the Governor
  20. Shelby County Development Corp., Shelbyville
  21. Vectren Economic Development (utility), Evansville
  22. Whitley County Economic Development Corp., Columbia City

Kansas:

  1. Black Hills Energy, Wichita
  2. Go Topeka Economic Partnership

Kentucky:

  1. Bowling Green Area Chamber of Commerce
  2. Hopkins County Economic Development Corp., Madisonville
  3. Kyndle Economic Development for Northwest Kentucky, Henderson
  4. South Western Kentucky Economic Development Council, Hopkinsville

Louisiana:

  1. Baton Rouge Area Chamber
  2. Cleco Power, Crowley
  3. Entergy (utility), New Orleans
  4. Livingston Economic Development Council
  5. Louisiana Economic Development, Baton Rouge
  6. North Louisiana Economic Partnership, Shreveport
  7. Southwestern Electric Power Co., Shreveport

Missouri:

  1. Kansas City Area Development Council
  2. Kirksville Regional Economic Development Inc.
  3. Lincoln County Economic Development, Troy
  4. Missouri Partnership, St. Louis
  5. Moberly Area Economic Development Corp.
  6. Nodaway County Economic Development, Maryville
  7. Northeast Missouri Economic Development Council, Hannibal
  8. Springfield Area Chamber of Commerce
  9. Louis Regional Chamber

Michigan:

  1. Lansing Economic Area Partnership

Mississippi:

  1. Jackson County Economic Development Foundation, Inc. Pascagoula
  2. Mississippi Power, Meridian

North Carolina:

  1. Advantage West Economic Development Group, Fletcher
  2. Beaufort County Economic Development, Washington
  3. Charlotte Regional Partnership
  4. Davidson County Economic Development Commission, Lexington
  5. Duke Energy, Charlotte
  6. Greensboro Partnership Economic Development

New Mexico:

  1. Albuquerque Economic Development
  2. Mesilla Valley Economic Development Alliance, Las Cruces
  3. NM Partnership, Albuquerque

Nevada:

  1. Economic Development Authority of Western Nevada, Reno
  2. Henderson Economic Development Dept.
  3. Las Vegas Global Economic Alliance
  4. Nevada Office of Economic Development, Carson City
  5. Northern Nevada Development Authority, Carson City
  6. NV Energy, Reno

Ohio:

  1. Cuyahoga County Dept. of Development, Cleveland
  2. Greater Akron Chamber
  3. Greater Cleveland Partnership
  4. Jobs Ohio, Toledo
  5. Piqua Economic Development Dept.
  6. Team Northeast Ohio, Cleveland
  7. Tipp City Community and Economic Development Dept.
  8. Youngstown-Warren Regional Chamber

Oklahoma:

  1. Greater Oklahoma City Chamber
  2. Norman Economic Development Dept.

Oregon:

  1. Business Oregon, Eugene
  2. Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Res., Economic Dept., Pendleton
  3. Greater Portland Inc.
  4. Hillsboro Economic Development
  5. Klamath County Economic Development, Klamath Falls
  6. McMinnville Economic Development Partnership
  7. Port of Portland
  8. Southern Oregon Regional Economic Development, Inc. Medford

Pennsylvania:

  1. Altoona-Blair County Development Corp.
  2. Armstrong County Dept. of Economic Development, Kittanning
  3. Governor’s Action Team
  4. Greater Pittsburgh Chamber of Commerce
  5. Greater Reading Economic Partnership
  6. Penn-Northwest Development Corp., Mercer
  7. Pittsburgh Regional Alliance

South Carolina:

  1. Central South Carolina Economic Development, Columbia
  2. Myrtle Beach Regional Economic Development, Conway
  3. Oconee County Economic Development Commission, Walhalla
  4. Richland County Economic Development, Columbia
  5. Santee Cooper (utility), Moncks Corner
  6. Spartanburg County Economic Futures Group

South Dakota:

  1. Governor’s Office of Economic Development

Tennessee:

  1. East Tennessee Economic Development Agency, Knoxville
  2. HTL Advantage (Haywood, Tipton, Lauderdale), ED Coalition, Covington
  3. Knoxville Chamber
  4. Montgomery County Economic Development Council, Clarksville
  5. Nashville Area Chamber of Commerce
  6. Tennessee Economic & Community Development, Nashville
  7. Tennessee Valley Authority, Nashville
  8. Williamson County Economic Development, Franklin

Texas:

  1. Allen Economic Development
  2. Amarillo Economic Development Corp.
  3. Arlington Economic Development Dept.
  4. Athens Economic Development Corp.
  5. Austin Chamber, Economic Development Dept.
  6. Bastrop Economic Development Corp.
  7. Bay Area Houston Economic Partnership
  8. Bowie Economic Development Corp.
  9. Brownsville Economic Development Council
  10. Buda Economic Development Corp.
  11. Burleson Economic Development
  12. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway, Economic Development Dept., Fort Worth
  13. Cedar Park Economic Development
  14. CenterPoint Energy, Houston
  15. Copperas Cove Economic Development Corp.
  16. Dallas Regional Chamber
  17. Denton Economic Development
  18. DeSoto Economic Development Corp.
  19. Flower Mound Economic Development Dept.
  20. Fort Worth Chamber, Economic Development Division
  21. Frisco Economic Development Corp.
  22. Georgetown Economic Development
  23. Greater Houston Partnership
  24. Greater Irving-Las Colinas Chamber of Commerce
  25. Greater Waco Chamber Business Development
  26. Harlingen Economic Development Corp.
  27. Houston Port Region Economic Alliance
  28. Hutto Economic Development
  29. Katy Economic Development Council
  30. Kilgore Economic Development Corp.
  31. Kyle Economic Development
  32. Laredo Development Foundation
  33. Levelland Economic Development Corp.
  34. Lockhart Economic Development
  35. Longview Economic Development Corp.
  36. Lubbock Economic Development Alliance
  37. Matagorda County Economic Development Corp., Bay City
  38. McKinney Economic Development Corp.
  39. Midland Development Corp.
  40. Mount Pleasant Economic Development Corp.
  41. Nacogdoches Economic Development Corp.
  42. New Braunfels Economic Development
  43. Office of the Governor
  44. Oncor (utility), Dallas
  45. Pearland Economic Development Corp.
  46. Plano Economic Development
  47. Port of Houston Authority
  48. Richardson Economic Development Partnership
  49. Rio South Texas Economic Council, Edinburg
  50. Rockwall Economic Development Corp.
  51. Round Rock Chamber Economic Development Partnership
  52. Rowlett Economic Development
  53. San Antonio Economic Development Foundation
  54. San Marcos Partnership Economic Development
  55. Seguin Economic Development
  56. Southern Texas Economic Development Foundation, Beaumont
  57. Sugar Land Economic Development
  58. Team Texas, Austin
  59. Texas Economic Development & Tourism Dept., Austin
  60. Texas Secretary of State
  61. Victoria Economic Development Corp.
  62. Wichita Falls Economic Development

Utah:

  1. Cache County Chamber, Economic Development, Logan
  2. Economic Development Corp. of Utah, Salt Lake City
  3. Office of Economic Development, Salt Lake City
  4. Office of the Governor
  5. Ogden Community and Economic Development Dept.
  6. Weber County Economic Development Partnership, Ogden

Virginia:

  1. Fairfax County Economic Development Authority, Tysons Corner
  2. Hampton Economic Development
  3. Hampton Roads Economic Development Alliance, Norfolk
  4. Isle of Wright County Economic Development, Isle of Wright
  5. Office of the Governor
  6. Portsmouth Economic Development Dept.
  7. Roanoke Regional Partnership
  8. Rockingham County Dept. of Community Development, Harrisonburg
  9. Virginia Beach Economic Development
  10. Virginia Economic Development Partnership, Richmond
  11. Virginia Port Authority, Norfolk
  12. Virginia’s 2000 Business and Economic Development Alliance, Lynchburg
  13. Virginia’s Growth Alliance, Keysville
  14. Washington County Economic Development & Community Relations, Abingdon

Washington:

  1. Greater Spokane Inc.
  2. Port of Sunnyside
  3. Yakima County Development Association

West Virginia:

  1. Jefferson County Development Authority, Charles Town
  2. West Virginia Development Office, Charleston

A state-by-state tally is below:

Rank

State

Number of Organizations
1 Texas 62
2 Indiana 22
3 Arizona 18
4 Florida 17
5 Virginia 14
6 Missouri 9
6 Tennessee 9
8 Colorado 8
8 Ohio 8
8 Oregon 8
11 Louisiana 7
11 Pennsylvania 7
13 North Carolina 6
13 Nevada 6
13 South Carolina 6
13 Utah 6
17 Georgia 5
18 Alabama 4
18 Kentucky 4
20 New Mexico 3
20 Washington 3
22 Idaho 2
22 Iowa 2
22 Kansas 2
22 Mississippi 2
22 Oklahoma 2
22 West Virginia 2
28 Arkansas 1
28 Michigan 1
28 South Dakota 1
Total

247

One focus of this blog has been to address California’s difficult business environment.

Joseph Vranich is known as The Business Relocation Coach while the formal name of his business is Spectrum Location Solutions. Joe helps companies find great locations in which to grow. Also, Joe has been a Keynote Speaker for more than 20 years – see A Speaker Throughout the U.S. and in Europe and Asia.

Los Angeles KTTV Editorial – ‘California Losing Companies & Jobs’

October 7, 2016

Now here is an editorial that gets to the point about California’s business departures, saying, “Governor Brown: Your attitude needs to change…. Creating a climate that is business friendly should come from the top and be a priority.”

ch-11-point-of-view-calif-losing-jobsThe piece runs a lengthy news crawl at the bottom of the screen that shows the names of some of the companies that have relocated in full or in part out of California.

The commentary cites my study issued in January, entitled, “California Business Departures: An Eight-Year Review 2008-2015.”

The views expressed by the station’s Vice President and General Manager, Bob Cook, are in concert with the assessments held by business leaders throughout the state.

See KTTV’s “Point of View: California Losing Jobs.”

* * *

One focus of this blog has been to address California’s difficult business environment.

Joseph Vranich is known as The Business Relocation Coach while the formal name of his business is Spectrum Location Solutions. Joe helps companies find great locations in which to grow. Also, Joe has been a Keynote Speaker for more than 20 years – see A Speaker Throughout the U.S. and in Europe and Asia.

KFI Audio Clip: Leaving California, Leaving San Francisco, Minimum Wage & More

May 9, 2016

ECC MicrophoneYours truly appeared on the ‘John & Ken’ show on KFI Radio, Los Angeles, regarding companies continuing to leave California, why so many people want to move out of San Francisco, and the hidden costs of the state’s new minimum wage. Seems like almost no one understands how it will hit businesses hard  — very hard.

The interview was sparked by the Jamba Juice Inc. announcement that it’s moving its headquarters from Emeryville, Calif. to Frisco, Texas. The Smoothie company has had a long history with California because that is where it opened its first stand 25 years ago.

Two years ago Toyota Motor Corp. announced it will move its Torrance headquarters to Plano, Texas, one of Frisco’s neighboring jurisdictions.

At that time, Gov. Brown revealed his aloofness towards the challenges of running a business in California by saying, “We’ve got a few problems, we have lots of little burdens and regulations and taxes, but smart people figure out how to make it.” The Wall Street Journal came back with this: “California’s problem is that smart people have figured out they can make it better elsewhere.”

The show, which aired on Friday, May 6, also explored some of the reasons that an estimated 10,000 companies have left California during the last eight years for other states or nations.

Because John and Ken have a huge listenership on KFI, which broadcasts at 50,000-watts, the program is the No. 1 local radio talk show in the United States. The audio link to the segment (about 14 minutes long) is here.

One focus of this blog has been to address California’s perennially difficult business environment. Joseph Vranich is known as The Business Relocation Coach while the formal name of his business is Spectrum Location Solutions. Joe helps companies find great locations in which to grow. Also, Joe has been a Keynote Speaker for more than 20 years – see A Speaker Throughout the U.S. and in Europe and Asia.

We Must Create Accountability or California Will Keep Bashing Businesses

March 24, 2016

Recently, when my firm completed a study that found about ten thousand companies left California in the last eight years, it hardly surprised leaders in the business community.

Some say there is one thing in California worse than taxes – and that is the complex set of directives enforced by unforgiving state inspectors. In fact, many business owners consider the state’s regulatory environment to be worse than its notorious tax burden.

Kathye & Jim Rietkerk, Kallisto Greenhouses

Kathye & Jim Rietkerk,
Kallisto Greenhouses

California’s political elite and their regulatory enforcers don’t understand that business owners enjoy running their enterprises and virtually all of them try to do the right thing. One example can be found in Kallisto Greenhouses, which closed in Fontana in response to Sacramento stinging them from many directions like a group of killer bees.

Suffocating a Nursery

Even a non-polluting, greenhouse-gas reducing, job-creating, tax-paying, greenhouse run by good employers can’t escape the punishing regulatory noose.

Kallisto Greenhouses operated with a peak of 36 employees shipping tropical indoor plants to ten western states and Calgary Canada since 1977. But the owners padlocked the doors because of actions by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and California’s Occupational Safety and Health office (Cal-OSHA).

CARB Calif Air Resources BoardCARB required heaters that underperformed despite costing tens of thousands of dollars and also insisted that their truck – which almost certainly would be legal in most states – be replaced by a new vehicle with an unaffordable price tag.

“Contributing factors included the ripple effect of an increase in the minimum wage and addition of paid sick leave,” said Kathye Rietkerk, co-owner. “But the nail in the coffin was Cal-OSHA. We got a letter saying we had the choice to invite in a visit by a Cal-OSHA consultant to review employee manuals or take the chance of being visited by an inspector.”

Outrageous Fine for Simple Mistake

Naturally, the company opted for help from the state’s consultant. Upon his arrival he noted that a numerical calculation on a certain OSHA form was in the wrong column, which resulted in a $5,000 fine. Not that the number was incorrect. Only that it was in the wrong place on the form.

By the time he was done, the fines he felt he could assess had he visited not as a consultant but as an “inspector” would have been in the hundreds of thousands of dollars for similar mistakes.

Cal OSHA“Also, the corrections to procedures and existing manuals were deemed not exact enough to suit the Cal-OSHA consultant, so it took six months of staff time to satisfy him.” she said. “They wanted us to be rigorous on things that aren’t that important.” (Note: Cal-OSHA rules are more stringent than required by federal OSHA regulations.)

For example, the agency wanted a requirement that mandatory disciplinary proceedings be initiated for certain employee mistakes even if the employer doesn’t want to treat long-term employees that way.

“To be forced to be inflexible makes you an adversary to your employees, and we should be allowed to determine when discipline makes sense and when it does not,” Rietkerk said. I contacted workplace expert Tom Martin of People Management Professionals in Riverside, Calif., who confirmed her viewpoint that Cal-OSHA indeed makes inflexible “one size fits all” demands.

Company Hit Hard

Meanwhile, the company’s operating costs kept increasing as water bills rose despite having installed $300,000 in sophisticated water-saving technology, health insurance prices went up, electricity became more expensive, and taxes continued to climb.

“The day after the OSHA consultant left we called the developers who had been seeking to buy our property for yet another distribution warehouse to serve ‘products imported from abroad,'” Rietkerk said. The company owned ten acres, six of which were covered by 257,000 square feet of greenhouses.

Kallisto Greenhouses had loyal employees (76 percent with more than 20 years of service) and offered health insurance since the early 1980’s, three weeks vacation to long-term employees, seven paid holidays and flexible working conditions.

Kallisto Greenhouse

Kallisto Greenhouse

“We were forced to make decisions we never dreamed of because of the incredibly hostile small business environment in California,” she said. “It is sad that government programs that are ideally intended to protect employees can result in complete job loss instead.”

“We got into business because it was enjoyable and we loved producing a product that enhanced people’s lives. People who create jobs are not ‘the enemy’ and we were grateful to have choices when the onslaught of regulations made the choice of closing more attractive,” Rietkerk said.

It appears that the majority of California legislators, Gov. Jerry Brown’s “jobs czar” Michael Rossi, and state bureaucrats are just fine with ignoring the hardships the state imposed on Kallisto Greenhouses and continues to inflict on other businesses.

Hold the State Accountable

It’s time we make life uncomfortable for state inspectors who have been allowed to remain anonymous while inflicting unreasonable demands on entrepreneurs.

I have such a way – it’s called accountability.

Let’s begin requiring that California regulatory agencies publish online the names of inspectors every time a business shuts down or leaves the state because they decided there was a regulatory “failure.” The inspector would be free to list the details of infractions, but, in the same posting, an option should be available for the company’s leadership to tell their side of the story.

Doing so would help journalists and the public better understand how harsh treatment by public agencies motivates companies to transfer jobs and capital to other states or close their doors.

California needs such disclosures because the majority of voters are ill-informed about what it takes to run a successful enterprise. Such voters elect majorities of business-bashing politicians to the state legislature and to city councils in liberal strongholds like Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Consider the popularity of Presidential Candidate Bernie Sanders, a fierce socialist who attracted a huge crowd in San Diego on Tuesday. It seems that the ranks of voters antagonistic toward business are expanding.

If we fail to expose how California politicians and their regulatory armies treat companies, the proverbial man in the street will continue to be unaware of the pain that leaders of commercial enterprises have to endure.

An Astonishing Contrast

Many California Democrats represent a Jekyll-and-Hyde disorder by being contemptuous toward business interests while coddling state agencies that are guilty of far worse behavior.

Calif HSRAFor example, legislators recently blocked the State Auditor from examining financial mismanagement at the California High Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA); they did that after eliminating the rail agency’s obligation to report twice yearly on a project likely to cost in excess of $100 billion. Now, the CHSRA must report only once every two years despite evidence of serious cost overruns, dubious changes in plans and multiple statements that lack credibility.

Members of the Authority’s board ignore the stipulations contained in Proposition 1A, which voters passed into law in the 2008 election. California propositions that pass at the ballot box become law, and that high-speed rail law is being violated in so many ways that the list is too long to publish here.

Members of the Authority’s board continue to ignore the stipulations contained in Proposition 1A, which voters passed into law in the 2008 election. California propositions that pass at the ballot box become law, and that high-speed rail law is being violated in so many ways that the list is too long to publish here.

Can you imagine the outcry if Kallisto Greenhouses had copycatted the High Speed Rail Authority by demanding elimination of audits by the California Franchise Tax Board or the Internal Revenue Service? Or obfuscated details in documents required by state law?

The double standard in the way California treats businesses and public agencies is enough to turn the stomach of any business owner. Without more voters becoming concerned, we will continue to see company relocations to friendlier states, or – as in the case of Kallisto Greenhouses – simply go out of business.

One focus of this blog has been to address California’s perennially difficult business environment. Joseph Vranich is known as The Business Relocation Coach while the formal name of his business is Spectrum Location Solutions. Joe helps companies find great locations in which to grow. Also, Joe has been a Keynote Speaker for more than 20 years – see A Speaker Throughout the U.S. and in Europe and Asia.


%d bloggers like this: