of new industry ... promote[s] the economy of the state, and thereby eontribute[s] to the welfare of its people.” Jardon, 570 S.W.2d at 675 (quotation omitted). Morgan Keegan also claims that Defendants were intimately involved in the operation of the facility, as they would have participated in the approval of phases of its construction and had the authority to appoint a successor to Mamtek in the event that Mamtek failed. The exercise of some level of oversight over a private company, however, does not on its own compel a finding that the conduct was proprietary in nature. Cf. Parish, 231 S.W.3d at 243 (concluding that the conduct at issue was governmental notwithstanding the plaintiffs’ allegation that the city had a duty to oversee the privately operated redevelo 911 (1976) (<HOLDING>); Reierson v. City of Minneapolis, 264 Minn.
holding that the operation of a prison factory that returned a profit of 6608332 in the year at issue was a proprietary activity holding that overvaluation penalty did not apply where the taxpayers conceded other grounds of adjustment in the notice of deficiency including that they lacked a profit objective that the property at issue was not qualifying property and that the property was not placed in service holding that prison conditions are those aspects of prison life affecting the entire prison population holding that cost of plastic surgery to repair scarring was an expense incurred within one year of the accident even though the physician waited more than a year after the accident to perform the operation holding that more than a year between the protected activity and the discharge is not close enough to support the causal connection requirement