Posted by shedevil (anonymous) on February 15, 2008 at 1:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I think the 2.00 tax will hurt the tourist business.It will have the same effect as the 1.00 a head per bus the city passed a few yrs back.Not many buses coming to town anymore.

Posted by NtzMom55 (anonymous) on February 15, 2008 at 1:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)

This is just not a good time to be thinking about raisisng more taxes. Most of the locals feel we are taxed enough already.

Posted by frogprincenessntz (anonymous) on February 15, 2008 at 2:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The locals could have done their share. What was it.. a nickel on ten dollars or a dime? Remember that, next time you want local businesses to support your pet projects.

I had no problem with this small tax that would bring in people to help our economy. All we have right now is tourism, and if you do not support that, do not call for more industry. Their leaders are watching you now. They do not want to come where they will not be supported.

Posted by gemccull (Gary McCullars) on February 15, 2008 at 5:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I think the locals were trying to do their share with the current 1.5% "hamburger tax". Apparently, the downtown clowns decided the city did not need to spend the money on advertising but build monuments to themselves.

Posted by texasranger (anonymous) on February 15, 2008 at 5:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Just what we need something else that Natchez dreams up to RAISE prices to run off more tourists..What few we have. Most go to the boat anyway, so the tax falls on us, as usual

Posted by colescreek (anonymous) on February 15, 2008 at 7:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The thing is, nobody ever said what the money would be used for. All we got was "marketing". Where? How? By whom? To whom? Seems to me the Democrat should get the WHOLE story before printing an opinion that might unfairly sway the public.

Posted by Idefinitelymight (Tom Scarborough) on February 15, 2008 at 7:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Timing is everything. I do think that eventually raising the occupancy tax is an idea with merit. But we are heading into a national recession. Given the current economic climate and the rapidly souring mood of consumers, it will be challenge enough to sustain current levels of tourist visitation. This is definitely not the perfect moment to hit our visitors with a higher tax. I suggest this idea be put on hold until the economy has steadied and people are in a spending mood again.

Posted by vbats (anonymous) on February 15, 2008 at 7:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I agree with colescreek. Why doesn't the Democrat look into this and tell us what our money is being spent on now and how they propose to spend it in the future. It seems like we are giving these people a blank check.

Posted by sandyman7 (anonymous) on February 15, 2008 at 8:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Taxes running off tourist...Good Grief..Why aren't we worried more about how the whopping taxes paid to the SCHOOL system and NO good results coming from it....Industry looks more at school system and how the students are being prepared for the work force...After a look at the entire counties school systems, all of them, we can't get any industries here...WHY????? OH and REMTECK, Until they start doing groundwork and i see buildings going up, I still think its a PIE IN THE SKY!!!!

Posted by Hambone (anonymous) on February 15, 2008 at 9:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)

sandyman--I concur.

Posted by niderbip (anonymous) on February 15, 2008 at 10:14 a.m.

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Posted by mike8427 (anonymous) on February 15, 2008 at 10:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Very true sandyman....
I don't think the extra tax would chase off tourists, worse case they would stay across the bridge in Vidalia. Nobody even realizes they are getting charged extra taxes until they check out anyway.

Posted by gemccull (Gary McCullars) on February 15, 2008 at 11:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The Riverfront Hotel in Vidalia has a 14.75% tax and our hotels charge 10%. So even with the bed tax (about 2%) our hotels have an advantage of 2,75%.

Posted by Krogers (anonymous) on February 15, 2008 at 11:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)

vbats - I believe the city budget is a matter of public record, you can go to the courthouse and get a copy, I'm assuming that to be true. Has anyone ever asked for one? I think it is unwise to rely on the Democrat for too much info.

sandyman - good point. (especially Rentech) I've long had strong disagreement with our school policies of NO discipline. To me, that is the core problem, and why the WHITE FLIGHT from our public schools is so prevalent. I remember when segregation hit, (back in the 70's) many of us were actually afraid of violence due to the lack of discipline and control in the schoolyard, bathrooms, and in the classroom too. Today, kids can actually get away with cussing a teaching and throwing stuff at him/her. All they get is detention or suspension, so what, they like that. Spanking is the only cure.

But back on point, taxes, no one likes paying them. But most of us like receiving the benefits someone else pays for. One point we have overlooked in regards to these abundant hotel rooms we are so eager to cash in on is that - Many local owned small hotel/motels will be hurt by the new rush of bigger, fancier hotels and casino-hotels. They won't be able to compete due to little fringe benefits a bigger hotel would provide. In the past I have been for a hotel tax, or actually I didn't much care one way or the other since I wouldn't be paying it. I do pay considerable hotel tax when I go out of town though. But I keep going back since I enjoy my time there. People visit here for the beauty, for the history, for special events, and are more concerned about what they will do, how much fun they will have, how good the food is, how nice the people are, the quality of service, than what taxes they'll pay as long as the tax is not outrageous. $10 would be outrageous. Successful business relies heavily on customers that COME BACK AGAIN. As long as they enjoy their stay, I don't think tourists will give a hoot in hell about 1 or 2 dollars tax and will come back, if they have a good time while they are here. We do need the tourists, so be nice to pilgrims please.

Posted by niderbip (anonymous) on February 15, 2008 at 12:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Nobody even realizes they are getting charged extra taxes until they check out anyway."
----------------------------------------------

interesting outlook.........tag the tourist on the way out the door.

Posted by roberth33 (anonymous) on February 15, 2008 at 12:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Every tourist destination soaks the tourists.

Have you ever been to Florida????

Man some people need to get out into the real world.

Posted by niderbip (anonymous) on February 15, 2008 at 1:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Man, some people need to realize just because everyone else is doing it doesn't make it "right" and attractive.

Have you ever traveled outside of Florida?

Posted by misslou (anonymous) on February 15, 2008 at 2:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

If they are going to raise taxes I’m glad to see them drop the restaurant tax and just put it on the hotel room because this hotel tax will not be a factor on whether someone comes to tour Natchez or not. But I can’t hardly afford to eat out now.
Raising taxes is the easy way to get more money for an incompetent government to waste. They don’t want to work and figure out what existing waste that can be cut to come up with this money. Oh no, lets just raise taxes. Mr. Tipton stated that for every dollar spent on marketing you will get a return of $10-$13, well if that is true Mr. Tipton and his multi-faceted marketing committee that he is wanting to form can go borrow the money and the city will pay them back from the increased tax revenue from all the new tourist pouring into Natchez from this marketing. How about some accountability, the Natchez alderman should put a time line on this tax increase and if we don’t meet the goals that our tourism leaders say the tax will be eliminated along with their positions.
I’m not knocking tourism but we are already burden by to many taxes and I hope when everyone goes to vote and elect a president they remember this. Both democratic candidates want to do away with Bush’s tax cuts and don’t be fooled by their lies that these tax cuts were just for the rich because they were made for everyone who pays taxes (rich & poor). They also say they want a national health care system which if ever approved would be a disaster and mean even more taxes.

Posted by niderbip (anonymous) on February 15, 2008 at 2:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

FYI -

If you had an AGI of $62K in 2005, you were in the top 25% of wage earners (so you really were kinda "rich", as the top 25% paid 86% of all personal federal income taxes)....

$104k put you in the top 10% ("filthy rich", with top 10% paying 70% of the taxes)

$365k? TOP 1% ("megarich", who paid 39% of all federal personal income taxes)

The bottom 50% of wage earners? Paid just 3% of the taxes.

The "rich" not paying their "fair share"? Hardly.

Posted by Krogers (anonymous) on February 15, 2008 at 5:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey MissLou

Did you hear Obama finally say something specific about his college aid program

He would give $4000 per year to every student, if they joined the Peace Corp or some other same type organization and go out in the world for a few years

Do you really think it is worth that to take such a risk and we all know how far $4000 will go for college, WHAT A JOKE!!

HOPE and CHANGE!! YEAH RIGHT
first the USA and then the WORLD!! this guy must think we are ALL FOOLS

Posted by Krogers (anonymous) on February 15, 2008 at 5:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

hey texasranger,

and after they finish loosing their money at the boat

no money left for a room

Posted by Krogers (anonymous) on February 15, 2008 at 5:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Why so many hotels all of a sudden?

What do the hotel people know that we don't, or should I say, that I don't

I just don't see all these hotels being used, and that means that in a few years, bellyup go the hotels, and we have a bunch of nice looking, EMPTY CLOSED DOWN buildings.

Unless there should come along more HURRICANES,

GLOBAL WARMING,

HOGWASH!!

But I do hope it works out good for Natchez, don't get me wrong, I just think that this big gamble the hotel people are making won't work out personally.

Posted by texasranger (anonymous) on February 16, 2008 at 12:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I have lived in Natchez over 60 years and they have fought against almost every kind of business they could to keep this a sleepy southern town aimed at a certain click of people that controlled most of it. They are still in place and are glad that all the major industries are gone. Now they don,t have any new business offers anymore. So we can slowly and quietly SINK more and more into a quiet sleepy little southern town with the click running it just like they always wanted too. Except i think the last couple of years,their business has even lost money. ha..It backfired on them. With no industry and no progress,soon the lights will grow dim, course the bark boiler and generator is still sitting on the IP grounds..Maybe they can run it and keep the lights burning ......

Posted by Mucasplug (anonymous) on February 16, 2008 at 8:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Walter Brown needs to stop running this town. Please God, make him go away! He has sucked this town dry and enriched himself and his cronies.
On another note, why in the world should the new Country Suites hotel on Canal street get a tax free ride while the other hotels in Natchez have been paying full taxes and have been good citizens for years. Its not fair in the least. Natchez is helping a new business put the hometown business out of business. Its horrible!