Calpers and Calstrs money is certainly public. We taxpayers responsible for meeting minimum requirements for the state-set pensions of public employees. If they screw up on investments, we foot the bill. This is public money, and requires public oversight. State employees do not themselves direct where this money goes. It is set by the pensions, run by various board members, but many of them appointed by the governor.

If California wishes to make investments that keep jobs in the state, then their should be taxes incentives for investors. (Having worked in the film industry, this has become a highly effective tool by other states to suck the life blood out of Los Angeles by creating “run-away productions”. Now New Mexico, NY, Louisiana, you name it, has some form of investor tax credit which is stripping away the supply of good paying middle income film jobs.)

If we want to keep jobs in the state, rather then create a new tax break for a single company (even though I love the Tesla), we should create jobs-related transferable tax credits for those who invest in California based companies that create jobs in state.

If California wishes to make investments that keep jobs in the state, then their should be taxes incentives for investors. (Having worked in the film industry, this has become a highly effective tool by other states to suck the life blood out of Los Angeles by creating “run-away productions”. Now New Mexico, NY, Louisiana, you name it, has some form of investor tax credit which is stripping away the supply of good paying middle income film jobs.)

If we want to keep jobs in the state, rather then create a new tax break for a single company (even though I love the Tesla), we should create jobs-related transferable tax credits for those who invest in California based companies that create jobs in state.

CALPRERS and CALTRF are not taxpayer’s money. They are the property of pension owners like school teachers. We teachers trust venture capitalists like Vantage Point to invest our money in order to make our retirement funds grow. Many of the top-shelf VCs invest retirement fund monies.

What are you saying? Companies with VC backing should not apply for any grants or other incentive programs? Are you trying to make our teacher’s investments worth less?

A website like VentureBeat should understand the difference between an investment in a venture capital fund, with an expectation for significant financial returns, and state incentives for businesses. CalCEF has invested in Vantage Point ostensibly because they feel that Vantage Point will provide strong returns through smart investment. Vantage Point has invested in Tesla because they believe that Tesla will be a successful investment for their clients. This investment does not amount to state support for Tesla Motors.

Any investor in a business venture expects that the management of that company will do their best to manage the shareholders’ investment to generate adequate returns. It’s the fiduciary duty of management and the board to do so.(Note that Vantage Point Venture Partners has a seat on Tesla’s board of directors.)

In making a major capital expenditure, such as locating an assembly facility, Tesla needs to analyze all the options and consider all the aspects of each location (such as labor costs, logistics, etc.) in order to make the best decision for shareholders. In an effort to attract business and jobs to their states, governments sometimes offer incentives that they feel will benefit their constituents. This is the normal course of business today.

Last – the facility being discussed will assemble the next Tesla car, a 4-door 5 passenger sedan which will retail at $50,000 for the base version. It is not the facility where we assemble the Roadster, our 2-door sportscar.

Darryl Siry
VP Marketing
Tesla Motors