The Journal also weighs in on the secrecy constantly surrounding economic incentives deals in Davidson County.

The editorial recalls last year’s strange episode when economic development director Steve Googe had problems articulating the name of the company that was seeking $640,000 in incentives.

Then there’s last week’s ‘public hearing’ where Googe requested an incentives package for a company described as only as ‘R-Two’:

…Googe and the commissioners are at it again. Last week, the commissioners held “public” hearings concerning incentives offers for three companies, one of which Googe declined to name. They approved incentives for all the companies, including an offer of up to $80,000 in incentives over five years for the unidentified one that would, officials say, provide up to 100 jobs in its first three years and invest $5 million in its first phase.

Googe told the Journal’s Michael Hewlett that the company didn’t want its name disclosed because it’s negotiating in several other communities and is worried about having its plans known by its competitors.

What comes first, the company or the taxpayers’ right to know what offers are being made with their money?

Excellent points, but what the Journal didn’t mention was Googe’s claim that the company “would not like their employees to be aware of what they’re proposing to do.”

Sound good? Evidently it did to county commissioners. They approved the incentives package by a unanimous vote.