Print this story |
E-mail story |
This story has 45 comments Add your own |
iPod friendly | Bookmark this
What is this?
photo by Ben Hillyer
The $2 per room hotel tax on Tuesday’s city election ballot would fuel a $600,000 promotion budget for the city. The Natchez Convention and Visitors Bureau’s plan for the dollars includes money for leisure tourism, convention and meeting tourism and heritage tourism. Leisure tourism would receive the largest portion of the money. It encompasses any general tourism needs, inlcuding marketing antebellum houses, annual events and attractions. Money in the convention and meetings budget would be used specifically to attract and promote meetings. Heritage tourism focuses on black history sites. The numbers above are proposals, but a 12-member committee will set the exact budget.
Plan for hotel tax is solely marketing
Published Sunday, June 1, 2008
NATCHEZ — Tourism officials hope they’ll soon turn back hotel bedsheets to uncover $600,000.
Passage of the $2 per room hotel tax on Tuesday’s city election ballot would mean the budget of the Natchez Convention and Visitors Bureau would soon become five times larger than its current amount — $120,000.
Tourism Director Connie Taunton said it is a difficult feat to properly market Natchez within the constraints of the current budget.
“It’s a really big chore for a small town like Natchez to have these amenities offered but not have enough money to market them well,” Taunton said.
And even if the hotel tax passes Natchez’s marketing budget would still be less than some other cities around Mississippi.
Executive director of the Vicksburg Convention and Visitors Bureau, Bill Seratt, said Vicksburg’s marketing budget is approximately $1 million.
Seratt said that money is generated from a 1 percent hospitality tax on rooms and restaurants throughout Vicksburg.
The hospitality tax is vital to Vicksburg’s marketing, he said.
In Tupelo marketing dollars are generated from a 2 percent hotel tax and a 2 percent restaurant tax.
Executive director of the Tupelo Convention and Visitors Bureau, Linda Johnson, said those taxes generate slightly more than $3 million for the city.
Johnson said of that money approximately $1 million is spent on marketing Tupelo.
“We do a little of all kinds of advertising,” she said of marketing expenditures.
Print, Internet, radio and some television ads are all funded by Tupelo’s hotel and restaurant taxes Johnson said.
But other towns market themselves for even less.
Executive director of the West Felicaina Tourism Commission, Kitty Martin, said St. Francisville is using a marketing budget of just $50,000.
Martin’s marketing budget is also derived from an occupancy tax of 3 percent.
“On a $100 hotel stay its not even $3,” she said. “It’s not a whole lot.”
The cost of marketing
Selling your city is costly, Taunton said.
The CVB places a full-page advertisement in the AAA travel guidebook every year at a cost of $13,821.
“If you don’t advertise in (AAA,) you’re missing out on a whole market,” she said.
A small 2 inch by 4 inch ad to run once in Southern Living magazine costs $6,800.
And Taunton said only running ads in two publications is not enough.
“You’re defeating the purpose if you’re not running an ad in three publications,” she said.
Sally Durkin, media liaison for the CVB, said the extra money from the tax can open the doors to a wide variety of magazines.
She said they would like to do television and radio advertisements in Nashville, Atlanta, New Orleans, Houston and Little Rock.
“What we would like to do is do cable ad insertions say on the Weather Channel, the Travel Channel and maybe Lifetime,” she said. “In the world I know, it’s mostly women that make travel plans for families and Lifetime reaches a predominately female audience.”
The marketing funds can also go to advertising on the Internet.
“With the new funding, those are media we can afford that we never could afford in the past.”
No room for corruption
One of the major apprehensions among citizens about voting for this tax is that the money could be misappropriated and spent on other things, perhaps pet projects of the city, instead of marketing the town.
The idea of a hotel tax began early this year when tourism officials asked the city for a $1 per room tax and a 2 percent restaurant tax. The restaurant tax — a .5 percent increase on the existing 1.5 percent tax — was eventually dropped after concerns from citizens and aldermen.
The Natchez Board of Aldermen unanimously approved the $2 hotel tax. Next, the tax was approved by the state legislature.
The legislation outlines how the money can be spent and who will govern its use.
A marketing committee — yet to be established — will create a budget for the funds, which can only be spent on marketing.
“It’ll be a separate check that will go into a separate account and be audited separately,” Taunton said. “There’s no way it’ll be mingled with any other money.”
The CVB will appoint the 12-member committe that will determine the annual budget. The committee will consist of three members from the hotel industry, two members from the restaurant industry, one member from Natchez Pilgrimage Tours, one member from the business community at large to be recommended by the Natchez-Adams Chamber of Commerce and one member from the Natchez Association for the Preservation of African American Culture, one member from the Historic Natchez Foundation, one member from the Natchez Business and Civic League, one member from the Isle of Capri Casino and one “representative from a corporate or ownership relationship which may cross multiple sectors of the tourism industry,” according to the legislation of Senate Bill 3191.
Members from future casinos will be added after they open.
The budget constructed by the advisory committee will be approved by the CVB and will receive a final stamp of approval from the mayor and board of aldermen.
No money at the inn
Each fiscal year, the CVB has received a Tourism Marketing Matching Grant from the Mississippi Development Authority Tourism Division.
Taunton said in the last year, they received about $40,000 from the development authority.
For the 2009 fiscal year, the state has notified cities that the money will no longer be available.
While $40,000 was never enough, Taunton said it did help.
No longer receiving these additional funds will have a negative impact.
Durkin said she really wants to encourage people to go out and vote for the tax.
“I understand everyone’s doubts and concerns,” Durkin said. “If I weren’t working with the CVB and closely watched the way the legislation was written, I too would have my doubts it was a good thing.”
“Hopefully people will be able to place enough confidence in the new political regime to support and vote for this legislation because it is a different day.”
Comments
Posted by Peace007 (anonymous) on June 1, 2008 at 12:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Wow, I can see now that the field to go into is advertising.
I'll vote for the tax, as I don't mind helping Natchez advertise. I have to pay tax on the hotel rooms I rent when I go out of town. Let the tourist know where we're located so they can come on down.
Posted by EnKiKur (Marty Ellerbe) on June 1, 2008 at 3:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
At a time when faith in political regimes is at an all time low, with Congressional approval ratings hovering around 11 per cent, Ms. Durkin is indeed a hopeful person.
She is hopeful if she thinks a town reeling from rushed legislation, rushed forced consideration of the sell of its public hospital, and rushed executive sessions dealing with the transfer of large amounts of public money won’t bring scrutiny to this rushed tax proposal.
The same 600,000 dollars Ms. Durkin hopes to raise in this article, that Kevin Cooper evaluates at 400,000 dollars in his column of today, could be raised very simply by having the hotels raise their overnight rates by 2 dollars and contributing that money to the already set up fund within the NCVB while the public has a chance to review the legislation put before them for vote and to suggest changes that may better protect their interests.
If the marketing of the city is going to be conducted along the lines of the marketing of this tax proposal it would be better to wait another year.
While being told that the tax revenue will market all the city of Natchez, with benefit for all, it is immediately obvious this is not so. Ads placed will not just say “Visit Natchez”. As Ms. Taunton says, they will list the amenities of Natchez; these being the hotels, casinos, and restaurants. Of the twelve entities who would be represented currently on the proposed Tourism Advisory Council seven of the twelve votes go to the hotels, casinos and restaurants. Of the eventual fourteen who will be represented on the Tourism Advisory Committee nine of the fourteen votes will go to the hotels, casinos and restaurants. Who has the majority vote in both cases? And who will own together a hotel, restaurant and casino that gets an additional vote on the Committee?
This clearly shows the bill is set up in favor of not all of Natchez, but the hotels, casinos and restaurants who so far have voiced no willingness to match tax revenue with their own funds though that would double the marketing budget. This same segment of entities can reasonably expect revenue of 200 million within three years. It doesn’t seem a lot to ask of them that they contribute matching funds. They can deduct it from their corporate taxes.
Posted by EnKiKur (Marty Ellerbe) on June 1, 2008 at 3:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
From the bill we learn:
“The commission in considering the proposal of the advisory committee shall use its best efforts to give priority to the use of such funds to the recommendations of the advisory committee. On or before September 1 of each year, the financial plan adopted by the commission shall be submitted to and approved by the Mayor and Board of Aldermen of the City of Natchez prior to its implementation for the ensuing fiscal year beginning October 1.”
The commission in this case is the NCVB. We are told that the public is safeguarded by final approval from the mayor and board of aldermen, but the language of the bill says the mayor and board “shall be submitted to and approved by”. Any local lawyers can correct me if I am wrong, but in legal terminology use of the word “shall” differs from the use of the word “may”. The language of the bill directs approval from the mayor and board and makes no provision for them to send it back to NCVB who is given the power use its best effort to follow the recommendations of the heavily weighted Tourism Advisory Committee.
If, as the Democrat says, all politics is local, why should we turn over control of our local politics to lately appearing outside entities who don't want to give but want to take? They have already shown us that they are willing to dismiss disregard for local laws prohibiting the posting of private signs on public property as missing the plate while sprinkling the pepper, with support of local politicians. Do they own Natchez now? If so, who sold it to them?
Posted by fatherof4 (anonymous) on June 1, 2008 at 4:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
No more taxes of any kind......We have managed the last couple of hundred years without it. Let the motels pay for their own advertisment, (Raise their rate $2.00 if needed). Why get the government involved, save the salary that we will have to pay someone to disburse the monies.
Posted by blackwood (anonymous) on June 1, 2008 at 6:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I consider this tax to be one thing that may (finally) be turning Natchez in the proper direction. This town has only played half-heartedly at tourism in the past. Now its all that we have left. This excellent article by Mary Hood demonstrates how other towns are using this same type of tax. Its quite obvious there are folks who post here that want to hold Natchez back. But a yes vote on this is a big step forward for our town.
Marc Blackwood
Posted by EnKiKur (Marty Ellerbe) on June 1, 2008 at 8:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)
If you call a return to the plantation a step forward Marc, then yes, this tax is a step forward.
Posted by southernbelle (anonymous) on June 1, 2008 at 9:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Hello ya'll, I'm usually sceptical about more taxes,but in this case I think its a good idea. Tourism is what we have and we need to flaunt it . That takes money and lots of it. I think Sally and Connie do a good job with the money they have but just think what they could do with more money . Enkikur, do you have a job? Maybe you should write a book . You seem to no more than most folks about just about everything. When people come to see Natchez they need to sleep and eat and they want to have fun . We need to let them know we have what they need . It's basic and very simple. We need to spend money to make money and you can't fault the entrepreneurs for supplying that need in any way they can. They spend plenty on their own to bring people to Natchez . In case you are not aware, the money they receive from their efforts benefits all of us indirectly . Do you think you could do a better job than our people are trying to do for us? Put your money where your mouth is and run for public office.
Posted by EnKiKur (Marty Ellerbe) on June 1, 2008 at 9:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Politicians are the trenchmen of policy making southernbelle. Policy is much more easily and effectively directed from outside the political system.
As to the other part of your argument, I rest my case. I have proven my point suffciently and my case rests on its merit.
And yes, I do have a job. This is public service on my part, a free donation of labor to the common good- though it does come at some cost to me.
How many people living along St Catherine Creek would know that they need to be putting a sharp eye on the St Catherine Creek Authority if I hadn't pointed it out to them? How many of them know that if they sent a copy of the bill that created it to Michael Shaw out in Santa Cruz he could explain to them what that bill means?
We all serve in our own way.
Posted by NatchezEnema (anonymous) on June 1, 2008 at 9:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Good morning Natchez. I will not post much more on this tax, but, there are a few more things I would like for the people to consider before going into the voting booth this week. From what I am geting in this article there are some towns getting a lot more bang for the buck in tourism advertisment than Natchez with less. This article is misleading when it says we have only 120,000$ a year for advertising. Really? Is that it? Wasn't the visitors center built to advertise Natchez, the new light poles, Natchez trace entrance and such. Does it not? How much does that cost the tax payer with labor, supplies and utilities to operate a year, or since it opened? That is a tax payers expense to advertise Natchez they never want to talk about. What about all the tax concessions that have been made to businesses and hotels on the idea it was advetising Natchez? They say we need to advertise more. I did a google search this morning for Natchez just like most modern tourist of today do. Have they? 4,500,000 hits came back for Natchez. That's a lot! You can type Natchez in any search bar and you would die of old age before you read them all. Our history, heritage and great authors have already done all the dirty work for us advertising. Watch the video, a man from Germany said" we know all about Natchez in Germany. Hmmmm. I asked Chick in the democrat chat post if he thought this industry had been burdened with mis management and lack of vision. I challenge everybody look at the answer he gave. We need new vision more than we need new money. Does anyone think if the captain of the Titanic would have survived they would have given him a new ship to command? We need torism, I know that, it's good for us and a lot of people depend on it, I know that. But I am tired of hearing we don't have this building or that building or the money or gas is up, it was too hot, no highway or not enough hotels. Learn from our history and how many excuses we have heard why the tourist numbers have been like flipping a coin in Natchez, up/down/good/bad/maybe. If anyone believes this industry has been run right,managed properly, done everything they could do with what they had, been accountable, well, pull that lever. I think if their yard signs and banners would have said vote for tax assesment vote new vision June 3rd it would be a lot easier for some people. Strange in all the mayors adds and the tax advertisement there a two words I have not heard. NEW VISION! Until we get it, well, there is a horse of a different color!
Posted by blackwood (anonymous) on June 1, 2008 at 9:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
EnKiKur, Please forgive me if I have no idea what you mean by "return to the plantation". Can it be explained in 1 or 2 sentences?
Marc
Posted by southernbelle (anonymous) on June 1, 2008 at 9:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
We vote for those politicians, Enkikur . We have only educated guesses to do this with and sometimes we are wrong . We pay the price. You are good at proving your point but sometimes I think you get so caught up in being right that you have tunnel vision . I like the fact that you back up your facts with your research but I don't like the fact that you can't appreciate someone elses opinion . I respect your right to your opinion and I appreciate the fact that you feel it is your civic duty to inform us of the wrongs in our little city but sometimes we need to remember things are not as cut and dried as they appear. But then again, sometimes we tend to over analyze.
Posted by EnKiKur (Marty Ellerbe) on June 1, 2008 at 9:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Read my letter to the editor 'Is our planet a global plantation' Marc. I lay it all out there.
I do appreciate other people's opinion southernbelle. And I am not caught up in being right. I change my mind whenever I see I have misperceived something. I am going on more than educated guesses. I am going on massive amounts of research into current trends internationally, nationally, and locally. That is why my arguments so sound strong. A weak argument cannot stand up to a strong one. Action based on a weak reasoning will be less effective than action based on strong reasoning. Vision needs to expand beyond immediate financial interests for a small group in a small town.
Posted by EnKiKur (Marty Ellerbe) on June 1, 2008 at 9:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
southernbelle, I am sorry if I seem harsh, especially with you. I just want to remind everyone that we elect politicians to do what we want them to do and not what they want to do. They are supposed to represent us.
Posted by blackwood (anonymous) on June 1, 2008 at 10:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)
EnKiKur, I doubt that I will convince you. But the economics of having more people in town will affect most everyone and not a "small group" as you say. I work out of town (offshore) and my wife has a store that caters mostly to locals so I do not expect this tax to directly benefit me. But I WILL benefit from the improved local economy.
Marc
Posted by EnKiKur (Marty Ellerbe) on June 1, 2008 at 10:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Sure it will affect everyone Marc. Some people will see an increased income of 10 dollars a year, and others will see an increase of thosands to hundreds of thousands. That is the point. A smaller number will see the greater increase. That is why the smaller number needs to put up a matching share for marketing.
Posted by niderbip (anonymous) on June 1, 2008 at 12:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
the tax is ALREADY 10%, isn't it?
why do you throw EXTRA taxes on the very people you're asking to "please spend you money in our town"?
dumb.
Posted by chick26gt (anonymous) on June 1, 2008 at 1:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
NatchezEnema, would you please acknowledge to this site that I have now responded as you requested when the Democrat cut me off re tourism and the powers that be?
Posted by blackwood (anonymous) on June 1, 2008 at 2:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
EnKiKur, It is my understanding that the ads are to be selling Natchez as a destination point and also conventions. No single business is to be advertised. Obviously the hotels will benefit. But what about the hotels in Vidalia? They will benefit too without even collecting the tax. Don't you think Vidalia's RV park will benefit? Food services will benefit too. But also the ones across the river. All service stations will benefit. Liquor stores, quick stores, gift stores......
Marc
Posted by Username (anonymous) on June 1, 2008 at 2:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The ONLY time the hotels fill up in Natchez is not ANY convention or balloon race or music festival.
The ONLY thing that fills up hotel/motel rooms in Natchez is HURRICANE EVACUATIONS that will most likely be paid for by who???? you the taxpayer also known as F.E.M.A.
I will say it again the ONLY thing that fills Natchez motels are the people that are ORDERED to evacuate the gulf areas when a storm is off the coast.
Posted by EnKiKur (Marty Ellerbe) on June 1, 2008 at 2:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Marc, the ads will be sold to specific markets that will favor the parties on the Advisory Committee. Will ads be sold in the in house publication of the Las Vegas Casino Workers Union as a destination for their union convention? Most likely not, and I could give you many other examples.
Posted by NatchezEnema (anonymous) on June 1, 2008 at 4:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Thank you for a little more clarity in you answer. I still do not know if you think the tourism industry has been burdened with miss management and lack of new vision, or what do you plan on doing to do in 0 to 4 years to get it back on track. Are you saying that you think this industry has been operated with proficiency, professional management and we have done all we could do with what we have invested in millions of tax payers dollars? If not, do you trust them to give them more? Do you think we have exhausted all options before raising a tax or biting the hand that feeds us? Jake says he will give free water for a month and it is legal. Why not, don't give free water for a month and just take what the water co. makes in a month and give that to the tourist industry ad campain? What is the difference? To much election hype that we have heard before if you ask me. As for my name, I don't think it is anymore inappropriate than a Viagra or Erectile dysfunction commercial on tv. It turns heads, doesn't it? Makes people notice or listen. Maybe our tourist industry needs to have the same attitude and dilangence to get people listening about touring in Natchez. I will consider making it, Natchez E. Either way my family, freinds and my vote is just as powerful as anyone elses. I think this tax will pass and I support our tourist industry to the fullest As I do Sally Durkin and Connie Taunton. The Lord and I know they have both climbed enough mountains trying to make Natchez better! I don't know why when somone speaks up for and demands accountability, oversight, transparentcy and results in the tourist industry they are called the Enemy. Shurley you demanded the same in your business. I am sure you saw Star Wars the movie. Remember the gold robot c3po? If this tax passes and it is squandered away, we are going to be saying his famous quote "We're Doomed". Anyway, all I did was ask a question, no reason for anybody to get defensive or try to belittle a voter. Thank you for stepping to the plate and taking some heat. That goes a long way with me!
Posted by chick26gt (anonymous) on June 1, 2008 at 4:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)
NatchezEnema,
If I'm not mistaken, I am the first and until very recently the only candidate to mention and hang my hat on attacking the budget problem and the public school system as solutions to our problems. I am not convinced that a recreation facility at the old Belwood site ( where shooting gar with a bow and arrow during each high water session) is a viable solution to anything. My opponent has not presented ideas as to where the money will come from for a new department within an existing one, i.e.,to pave our city streets. What happened to the department originally created for that purpose? Where's the money coming from for the new paving machine my opponent suggested? A tax increase, perhaps? More ideas without concern for cost ,(new, "experienced" theory of city government here?)
My opponent said public education is not the job of the mayor. Well, if Natchez is to survive, it darn sure better be SOME BODY'S job! I am well aware of the limits of the mayor's office where public education is concerned, but I am also aware of what the mayor as a person can do if so driven. I have decided to jump into that fray against much advice---because it's THAT important! No meaningful economical developement will take place here until the children of corporate employees can get a satisfactory public education in our schools. Once they can, companies of all sorts, from menial to highly technical jobs being offered, will come to Natchez because of all we have to offer.
The differences between the 2 candidates should be becoming increasingly obvious.
Chick
Posted by sandyman7 (anonymous) on June 1, 2008 at 5:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)
WOW I'd sure like the job of spending some one else's money....er the added tax on hotel rooms...what is it ....At first didn't I see where it would bring in 800,000 and then some one mentioned millions and now I see where its 600,000...By this I take it no one know how much it will bring in, so if its an unidinfied(sp) amount....WE SHOULD ALL BE LEERY OF IT......
Posted by gottabehappy (anonymous) on June 1, 2008 at 5:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I just wish they would simply tell us the truth about where this money is really going. If you ask me it looks like a nice big huge pay raise for Ms Durkin and Mr Tipton.
And quite simply-I do not want to do that, sorry.
Posted by EnKiKur (Marty Ellerbe) on June 1, 2008 at 5:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Chick, what our area has been lacking is a mayor who has consulted with the people and developed a shared vision of where our communities want to go. We keep getting told we are going to get this or that, don't worry about the funding----and I understand why they say that, having been doing some reading on another subject. What we need is to understand what the Commerce Department, where all the grant money and rules originate, wants cities to do. And then to develop a plan for development based on that, because meeting the aims of the Commerce Department and doing it enthusiastically will result in more funding. What the Commerce Department would not be happy finding out about is if and how grant money gets directed into places where it is not designed to go by the agencies that have oversight over it.
What we have now are not leaders. They aren't leaders because they don't have followers, they have interested constituents. A leader has followers who follow because they share the vision of the leader. Some big public meetings, picnics or something with speeches to explain why the economy is the way it is and how the Commerce Department wants to solve the problem would be informative and fun.
Posted by sammohon (anonymous) on June 1, 2008 at 5:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I voted yesterday...for you Chick...LOL. I agree with what Chick has said and I also am very much against frivolous expenditure of public funds and very much for budget balancing and educational improvement.
That being said, I am also in favor of this tax...it is specifically set up to be for tourism marketing only which is in dire need of funding. EnKikur's idea of matching funds from the casinos is a good one except that they have their own marketing ploys which benefit themselves specifically. I feel that requiring them to match funds would be coercive on the part of the government, something I think he is against. If they do so voluntarily, well then, a gift horse is a gift horse not to be looked in the mouth.
I think Marc is right to remember the "trickle down theory", if you will, because it is true, in this case, that all of Natchez will profit from this particular tax.
Posted by fatherof4 (anonymous) on June 1, 2008 at 6 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If the city didn't have enough money for marketing, how did they find money for pay raises?
Posted by EnKiKur (Marty Ellerbe) on June 1, 2008 at 7:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Yes, it would be coercive Sam. And I am for it in this case because Hotel Consultants is behind this. If you advocate a tax, you should be willing to pay one.
Posted by EnKiKur (Marty Ellerbe) on June 1, 2008 at 7:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If Walter Tipton were behind it, it would have been brought up long before. This only came up with the arrival of Warren Reuther. Don't forget, first they wanted to tax our food at one nickel per ten dollars. If they tax their food, their revenue at the same rate, they will have an additional 500,000 to spend on marketing. The Tourism Cartel will surely bring in 100 million. The one casino already brings in 43 million. If they want to do business on our land, they should pay tribute to us. That is the old and honorable way to do things. And it keeps the unions out. Hotel Consultants really ought to throw in a couple of new city busses that run on bio diesel for being such meanies. If I were king of Natchez, that is what would be happening.
Posted by NatchezEnema (anonymous) on June 1, 2008 at 8:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I agree with you on the schools Chic. When a town looses it's young because of no jobs, or industry because of poor public schools, it looses it's future. We are in disarray and need a leader to lead us out of the woods and back into the light. That's what bothers me about the ignorance of some of the voters in this town or the mentality of the people. This town voted in a man who destroyed the public school system as mayor. I don't mean to bulldog you, but I think the new mayor will have some tough questions and problems to tackle when he takes office. Again, Do you think the tourist industry in Natchez has been burdened with mismanagement and lack of new vision? Or any department in the city of Natchez for that matter? I know tourism is a touchy subject a lot of people want to walk the fence on. Better yet, ( I will let you off on the tourism issue) what department will you target first for waste, mismanagement or lack of vision? And what will you do to make it better? Thank you for putting up with me. Just you being in this blog taking the heat and answering questions speaks mountains to your integrity. It reminds me of when Tony Byrne use to do the same in the democrat in the 70's. And we all know how much better things were in Natchez then. I wish Jake and all goverment department heads would chime in more in these posts. It would do nothing more than make us a better place. God bless you, and good luck to you and your family in the election
Posted by sammohon (anonymous) on June 1, 2008 at 8:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)
EnK...So that's what the double K's in your "nom de guerre" are for...Kings...just so you know, I'm holding two Aces...LOL.
NatchezEnema...I agree with your assessment of the school/youth situation, people should remember that the current mayor helped destroy the public school system BEFORE he became mayor...we don't want it to happen again by either active destruction or neglect.
If an alderman, who is really more powerful than the mayor, can't get anything done for recreation, which he was in charge of...what makes anyone think that he will use the only real tools a mayor has (the "bully pulpit" and leadership") to do anything about education. In fact, Jake has already yielded the field on that issue.
Posted by redusmfan (anonymous) on June 1, 2008 at 9:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
No new taxes !!!!!!!
Posted by gemccull (Gary McCullars) on June 1, 2008 at 9:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
NEW TAXES??
I could argue that it is a method for the local hotels/inns/B&B/etc to make an effort to market the area without giving up confidential information and there will be accountability for contributions from each of the establishments. The state does our accounting for us and gets a cut of the funds as a processing fee. The establishments pass the "tax" along with deniability (sp).
Now whether the contributions for each entity are equitable is another matter. We could argue about a flat rate per room, percentage of the revenue per room, etc. Whether, the money is spent as intended, who knows or will know???
To my way of thinking, some of the current 3% room tax and the burger tax should be transferred to the new fund if passed. At least $100,000 or more and maybe all of tax revenue generated by the new establishments should be a part of the marketing/advertising account.
I am still on the fence?
Posted by blackwood (anonymous) on June 1, 2008 at 10:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Sam, I wasn't thinking of the old 'trickle down" stuff, but whatever works. I've been renovating the old house and have been hiring carpenters, electricians, plumbers, painters, etc. That includes buying lumber and also hardware, tools and paint. This is for my home. But the lady down the street is doing much of the same, on a grander scale, for the tourist business. And she is not alone since others are doing it too. Its easy to see how the dollars move from one hand to the other and the guys getting the work now have money to spend for their own needs/wants. I hear that Iraq has one of the world's most vibrant economies right now since dollars tend to change hands and don't like to sit still. Anything that will get people into town where they will start spending their dollars with us is simply good for the whole local economy.
Marc
Posted by rushinghjr (anonymous) on June 1, 2008 at 10:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I would love be a "fly" and watch this $2 tax for a 2-year period, if it passes, and this so-called advisory committee, a useless proposed group! Why do we need an advisory group when the City already has the administrative group to spend the monies?
Posted by sammohon (anonymous) on June 1, 2008 at 11:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Marc...ahhh...capitalism in action...I love the smell of money exchanging hands in the morning...I don't care what you call it, but it works, money moves around...people earn livings...part of capitalism is the fact that if you have a product or service to sell you MUST advertise the fact...it's all good...for all of us...I'm not going to profit directly, but I will indirectly.
redusmfan...I think it will pass because people understand this tax as a direct benefit to the entire area...as for the advisory group, I think it's absolutely necessary because the BOA aren't educated in the tourism business...I would much rather an advisory group give them just that, advice...it cost us nothing for their advice...and maybe it will educate those who need education.
Posted by EnKiKur (Marty Ellerbe) on June 2, 2008 at 3:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The Iraq economy is booming because we are shipping pallets of hundred dollar bills over there and giving them out. As late as December we were paying insurgents eight dollars a day not to shoot at us. That is why the troop surge appeared to be working.
The only thing required to make an economy active is sufficient currency for exchange to take place, as you point out Sam. What is happening in Natchez is that what currency does come gets salted away in a few pockets and investment accounts, the same accounts and pockets that want this new tax.
Posted by gottabehappy (anonymous) on June 2, 2008 at 8 a.m.
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by crawgator (anonymous) on June 2, 2008 at 11:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Back in the early 80's an outgoing political figure in Natchez told me that " Tourism would be the fall of Natchez". I don't know about that, mainly because I don't know the figures it brings in. I do know however if Sally Durkin is in charge of it, it will get her very best. I have seen her personally bring certain things from the brink of death to heart pounding success. She has what they call in the sports world as the IT FACTOR.
Posted by whataboutit (anonymous) on June 2, 2008 at 3:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Now wait a minute...I forgot what are they doing with the tax now that they have put on the food and hotel lodging? It sounds as though other cities use their (hamburger money) for the same thing, but I do not remember reading or hearing they are trying to get more money. Plain and simple why not use the tax that is already on the people who stay in our hotels and b&b's? Other towns do it on only 1% why can't Natchez?
Posted by fire39212 (anonymous) on June 2, 2008 at 11:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
fatherof4 very very good point......
whataboutit because it seems that natchez leaders surely aren't cpa's.
Posted by niderbip (anonymous) on June 3, 2008 at 5:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)
get them to return the "diverted" tax money that was supposed to be used for this.
why would you vote for a new tax when they didn't handle the old one properly?
Posted by beamreach (anonymous) on June 3, 2008 at 5:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Just a little more education for a couple of bloggers who seem to be confused on some points:
Niderbip...tax on hotel rooms is 3%, 7% of the entire 10% assessed is State Sales Tax.
gottabehappy...Mr. Tipton is no longer employed by the CVB so no raise can come out of the money for him and Ms. Durkin does contract work for the CVB and is paid from the portion of the hotel/food taxes that make up the operating budget of the CVB... she can't receive any money from the new marketing fund because of the way the law is written. Read the legislation.
EnKiKur...Walter Tipton began discussing increasing the existing tourism taxes with the CVB Promotion Commission, or CVB Board for short, before he ever even met Warren Reuther (CVB board meeting minutes are public documents)
NatchezEnema...the "official" tourism web site you found wwww.visitnatchez.com is paid for out of the CVB's existing marketing budget (also in meeting minutes). Also, in regard to the recent influx of German tourists, there are reports in the CVB board's meeting books from Ms. Durkin regarding all the travel writers she works with from all over the world, and the largest influx of those seem to have come from Germany over the last year. One was a radio personality who has a show that airs on a Public Radio network over there and he has a listening audience of 350,000 according to her report. I though that was pretty cool.
Username...here's a little test for your hurricane theory. Call any hotel in Natchez and try to book a room for balloon race weekend this year, and let me know if you find something. I tried two weeks ago to book rooms for some family members that want to come this year, and the only rooms any hotel had were being held by the balloon race committee for pilots and entertainment. There might be one available once they have that all settled, but I was told that most likely there wouldn't be any.
Oh...and just FYI everyone... I was told that the biggest nay sayer in this whole hotel tax issue, EnKiKur, doesn't even live in Natchez.
I just wish more people, like free driveway rag self-proclaimed journalist wannabe's, would do their homework before they make comments about things. I hope it passes for all our sakes because the money isn't going to magically appear and we need it, and it will be used to market Natchez, not the hotels, casinos, and restaurants as some would have you believe. The marketing committee will be made up of an equitable number of industry representatives and if some aspects have a stronger voice or more votes than others, it's because they are bringing greater amounts of revenue to the existing tax base than their counterparts in my estimation. It makes perfect sense.
Posted by beamreach (anonymous) on June 3, 2008 at 5:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Oh...and EnKiKur...please show me in any article where Ms. Durkin said anything about $600,000. I can't seem to find it in any of the tax related articles.
Posted by EnKiKur (Marty Ellerbe) on June 3, 2008 at 7:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It is not going to be used to market anything but the tourist attractions of Natchez beamreach. What point would there be in marketing the alley cats and stray dogs and all the people not involved in tourism?
It is no secret I don't live in Natchez. Don't want to pay the Mississippi taxes, they are far too high already.
Tipton never tried to get a bed tax passed before this year when the convention center hotel was going to open up, which Reuther is running with Tipton's help. It was a Democrat article that said Reuther laughed about the 150,00.00 advertising budget, and by that he meant the CVB budget. There is no budget for advertising all of Natchez.
I did not say Sally said 600,000, I said Kevin said 600,000 in his column and in this very same aritcle you are blogging to, first sentence, the 600,000.00 figure is repeated.
As to me being a self proclaimed driveway rag wannabe journalist, I am very happy I didn't waste any money on a journalism degree given the quality of information and depth thought issuing from those more "qualified" than me.
You would think that something as major as taking water control out from under the Public Service Commission would have been a big story in the local news, but no, it was presented as something else entirely.
And your assertion that The Cartel should have more say on how the advertising money is spent because they will bring in more sales taxes is just a ridiculous admission that all I have been saying in that regard is true. The tax is to promote The Cartel and the other hangers on have been hooked in by the simple human mechanism of greed.
If, as Sally says, more can be done collectively than individually, then let all the tourism busineses pool their money and leave the rest of the people out of their socialist schemes for propping up business.
One last thing, reading the original bill that created the NCVB it is obvious the bill was written for the purpose of transferring the publicly built convention center to private control. This makes me wonder just when Tipton did meet Reuther, and just how far all this goes. The transition was quick and smooth. Too smooth if you ask me.
Post a comment (Terms of Use Policy)
(Requires free registration.)