Print this story | E-mail story | This story has 20 comments Add your own | iPod friendly
Hotel tax won't hurt, but it may help
Published Monday, June 2, 2008
Will Natchez voters turn heads on beds into tax dollars spent on marketing?
We hope so.
Much discussion has been made lately over a $2 per occupied room hotel tax that Natchez voters will consider on Tuesday’s ballot.
Anytime a tax is considered, it prompts a small, but vocal group of people to immediately discount the idea as outright ludicrous.
Why, members of this group say, do we need another tax? Don’t we already have enough taxes?
In short, yes, we have enough taxes to provide basic city services — police, fire, etc.
But we don’t have enough taxes to properly market the City of Natchez as a destination.
Legislation that allows for the tax in the first place specifically earmarks it for use to market and promote Natchez.
This is what we’d consider a “good” tax in that it fairly assesses the tax on the people who use the service — tourists.
That means the only people who will be paying the tax are people who stay in Natchez hotels. The hotels don’t get a piece of the funds; they simple act as the collection agency, or the pass-through of the funds. And the tax won’t cost Natchez residents a dime unless they need to rent a room.
So before you vote “no” on the hotel measure, consider that doing so would be nixing something that doesn’t hurt you a bit and likely will help not only your city, but your friends and neighbors, too.
When Natchez thrives, all of its residents generally do, too.
And increasing the marketing dollars for Natchez certainly puts the city in a better position to thrive and we all need that badly.
Comments
Posted by texasranger (anonymous) on June 2, 2008 at 12:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Another tax is another tax. Anybody can give a reason why they want the tax to pass,It will always help the ones who push it,not the average worker.
Posted by texasranger (anonymous) on June 2, 2008 at 12:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Another tax is another tax. Anybody can give a reason why they want the tax to pass,as long as have more money than they need,they don,t really care one way or another.
Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on June 2, 2008 at 1:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It is often implied that tourism is what is keeping Natchez alive. Yet if you multiply the census figures by the median family income you will see that the resulting number is far larger than what tourism brings in. The truth is, it is the infrastructure supported by the working people that supports tourism.
The tourism people have fought a long fight to provide themselves with a comfortable income, and their servants with a subsistence income. This began in the mid 1930's with the banning of passenger train service to Natchez to protect the old homes, continued through the 1970's with the council meetings where the phrase "Natchez does not need and does not want smokestack industries", was paraphrased by Darryl Grennel a few years ago when he said we don't want another Johns Manville, and continues with this tax proposal.
If you don't know how much tourism increased your income last year it probably didn't, neither directly nor indirectly. What really happened is that you have been deeply indebted by various federal and state projects aimed at propping up old money and newcomers wanting into the game.
If the tourism industry wants advertising dollars, let them dig it out of their tight pockets. If they want you to give them the benefit of your power to tax others, let them show they deserve it by matching the funds.
Or, do as I most strongly recommend, just vote no. Then they will have to provide it for themselves. Don't be a patsy if you can't be a partner.
To the claim that all of Natchez is going to be promoted I offer this: what is it about Cloverdale, Broadmoor, and Minor Street that will attract tourists? These are simple working people who don't live in fine mansions but struggle every day with the burden of low income jobs and too many taxes alreadly.
Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on June 2, 2008 at 1:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
To the claim that this tax won't hurt you, remember, the taxers did want to hurt you in the beginning with a tax on your food. A tax of one nickel per ten dollars, a rate they consider "absurd" when asked to tax themseleves that same amount.
Posted by beammeupscotty (anonymous) on June 2, 2008 at 8:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)
You can't tax your way out of a budget crisis. That would be the same as someone thinking since a day is 24 hours long If I work all 24 hours then I can make it and pay my bills. Just how long do you think you would last working 24 hours. Yes politicians there is a limit to taxing the citizens. The solution is cutting back and running things within the scope of available funds. No problem with this tax but my problem is I want the revenue to be used for street repair after all, the massive amount of tourist traffic is what is destroying them.
Posted by fire39212 (anonymous) on June 2, 2008 at 10:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Amen to all above.... Why would you vote for another tax?? This tax will bring another tax and another ....
Posted by lambchop (anonymous) on June 2, 2008 at 11:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)
still voting NO
Posted by RICKYSMITH (anonymous) on June 2, 2008 at 12:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
IT'S A SHAME ALL OF YOU PEOPLE DON'T HAVE A CLUE ABOUT THE "HEADS ON BEDS" FEE. IT ISN'T A TAX, IT'S A FEE. AND, IT DOESN'T AFFECT ANYONE OF YOU UNLESS YOU STAY IN A HOTEL ROOM! I'M SURE NONE OF YOU HAVE VISITED NEW ORLEANS, NEW YORK, LOS ANGELES OR ANY OTHER TOURIST TOWN IN THE WORLD. IF YOU HAD, YOU WOULD KNOW THAT THEIR FEE IS USUALLY A WHOLE LOT MORE. HOW DO YOU THINK THEY ADVERTISE? A TYPICAL ROOM IN NEW ORLEANS IS AROUND $239.00 A NIGHT. AFTER FEES AND TAXES IT ENDS UP $300.00. DOES THAT STOP THE TOURIST? LOOK FOR YOURSELF, IT'S GROWING FASTER THAN EVER. HAVE ANY OF YOU SEEN THE FABULOUS COMMERCIAL OF NEW ORLEANS? THE "HEADS ON BEDS" FEE PAID FOR THAT.
Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on June 2, 2008 at 1:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Fee or tax, whatever you want to call it, it is a negative cash amount for the person paying it. We can't help it if New Orleans voters are idiots and don't mind subsidizing private business with public money, but we don't have to do it to.
Posted by beammeupscotty (anonymous) on June 2, 2008 at 1:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Why can't the hotels get together and increase the cost of rooms $2.00. Then they could form a board and decide how to spend this money on advertiseing. This tax/fee will have to be counted and regulated by government and by the time overhead is spent on salaries what will be left is a 10 second commercial on cabel channel 4. Most of the money is going to go into the pockets of politicians.
Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on June 2, 2008 at 2:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Its because they want to get a foot in the tax door scotty, so they will be able to go for more free money in the future. We all know how much it ever is, it never is going to be enought.
Posted by sodar (anonymous) on June 2, 2008 at 4:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)
EnKiKur and others who agree with him are correct, also remember the poem by Martin Niemöller:
They came first for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
and by that time no one was left to speak up.
If you don't speak up for those who are unaware you can only blame yourselves when they want to tax you.
You should eliminate the excessive spending before you try to cure it with an extra tax. If the CVB was doing their job correct in the first place there would be enough revenue from the existing tax to promote Natchez. I own a business with over 1,500 hotels as clients and none of those 1,500 like more taxes.
Why should the city do the hotels job of promoting the hotel's business. Does the city want to tax gas stations and promote those, how about taxing the hospital and promoting more people to come to it...no thats wrong in too many ways, but I think you get my point. People will go out of their way to come to Natchez if it fits in their budget and they have an enjoyable time, but don't count on them coming back if you stick them with an extra fee at checkout.
Posted by NatchezEnema (anonymous) on June 2, 2008 at 4:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The democrat says "In short, yes, we have enough taxes to provide basic city services — police, fire, etc." Well, I think keeping our streets up is a basic city service! I hear we are waiting on a grant to fix that, but that is for another day. On the tax. I have heard what everybody wants to do with the money if the tax passes. What I have not heard is, what are we going to do if it doesn't? Is the "idustry" going to collapse? Is Natchez going to close it's doors? Or is it going to tighten it's belt and cut the waste? If the quote " tourist industry" is the main source of jobs and income around here, and doing so good, what gives? And if it does pass spend it wisely, and, buy some round up weed killer with it and spray some of these weeds on the side of the roads downtown. Good luck Jake, Chic, and the tax people. Either way whoever or whatever wins do your job!And spend the money wisely!
Posted by rushinghjr (anonymous) on June 2, 2008 at 5:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Taxes have to be managed properly, from what I can see and hear, they have not! Even the politicians admit this fact! Vote NO on all new taxes!
Posted by sammohon (anonymous) on June 2, 2008 at 10:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
OK guys, and gals...I'll have to stand in the fire on this one...I shudder to say it, but this is one tax that is warranted and will be good for Natchez. The NCVB has the budget to cover operating costs, payroll, etc. but that's not what this is about.
It's also not about the Convention Center or their management. Convention centers DO NOT MAKE MONEY on their own...they create spin off money for hotels, casinos, restaurants, shops, and a plethora of other businesses who cater or supply the conventions.
It's not about the casinos, who can and do advertise themselves. It's not about the hotels and restaurants who also advertise themselves.
This tax is about financing the MARKETING OF NATCHEZ as a whole. Yes all of the above-mentioned entities will profit and so will most of the ones we forget about or don't mention. The NCVB just doesn't have the finances required to go to the next level of attracting tourists and INCREASING our tourism industry. Where are all you folks who are constantly clamoring for industry, more business, more jobs...here's your chance to really put a tourist's money where your mouth is.
EnKiKur, rushinghjr and all you other folks who know my mind...I'm a conservative, small government, less tax kind of guy, but I do know that if you want the business that we call Natchez to grow you've got to invest...you've got to market...you've got to tell people what you have to sell and make them want to buy it.
If people want to revert to the status quo of the 1930's they don't know their history. Natchez was in the throws of depression just like everywhere else...a little old blue haired lady (Yeah, one of them) had the idea to entice tourists to see the old mansions that had fallen into disrepair after the Civil War...what a stroke of brilliance! a win/win situation, the houses were saved, the economy rebounded...it saved Natchez and it's history.
The past can be repeated and can go even further if we choose to do it. Imagine, everyone getting behind Natchez, supporting it's growth in tourism...it could be another Branson in the making, bringing in lot's of money and JOBS! Please don't be so myopic that you run into a tree before you even get the chance for them to block your view of the forest. VOTE YES for the Assessment!
Posted by sammohon (anonymous) on June 2, 2008 at 10:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Ricky...I appreciate what you said just don't SHOUT...we're trying to be civil here.
Beammeupscotty...this tax, fee, whatever, is specifically for marketing NATCHEZ and for no other purpose. This has no bearing on budgets for the City or NCVB or the Convention Center or anything else but marketing of NATCHEZ. One would think that being Natchezians that we could get behind something that markets us all!
Posted by fire39212 (anonymous) on June 2, 2008 at 11:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)
sammohon I think what people are worried about is that the money will not market natchez as they are saying it will...If this tax/fee passes then when is the next to come? It's always on the working man to support all.. What have they done until now? I am with rushingjr (i think it was) that said what if it don't pass will they tighten up and manage better?
sammohon wouldn't it be wonderful if we were like Branson?? I have said several times no reason we can't be like pigeon forge...No reason at all...
Posted by sammohon (anonymous) on June 2, 2008 at 11:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)
fire...that's one of the reasons I'm in favor of this measure at this time...it is stated in the proposal and backing law that the money can only be used for marketing Natchez...it isn't the working man or woman of Natchez footing the bill, it's the people who come here to be tourists...what is wrong with charging them two dollars in order to get more of them to come?...tightening the NCVB budget which hasn't got much of anything budgeted for marketing isn't going to help marketing...I think that this is a case of true belief in smaller government, less taxes philosophy over ruling common sense and pragmatism...I hope people will look at this as a way to come together for the benefit of us all.
Posted by niderbip (anonymous) on June 3, 2008 at 5:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
did you ever think that maybe more would come if you had a "pro-tourist" tax REDUCTION?
and why would i ever vote for a new tax when the OLD tax wasn't handled properly (diverted)?
Posted by sammohon (anonymous) on June 3, 2008 at 7:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
niderbip...I can't argue your point, you are right that the mayor at the time, Butch Brown and the BOA at the time shanghaied the first "heads on beds" tax, which is why this one is more important and more rational...it can't be diverted unless someone breaks the law...Natchez must market in order to survive.
Post a comment (Terms of Use Policy)
(Requires free registration.)