Happy Easter everyone. I have gotten a request for a new thread regarding the new room tax proposal that will be going before the council on Tuesday night for approval (I cannot access the city site to see the agenda when writing this, I will try again later). We have been pretty busy this weekend, I will put something together quickly to allow discussion. This is the last act of 2 council members (Scheuermann will not be present) before the reorganization meeting on the 17th.
As far as the increase in the room tax, I really don't care one way or another. I don't think travelers will either. That 2% will not mean that they will go to Appleton rather than get a room here. 2% is still less than the fuel it would take to drive back and forth for events like Country USA or EAA.
BUT, there are considerations to this for me;
1. The money that is generated from this additional tax should be funneled to our Convention Center.
2. This tax should be reversed as soon as the debt is expired rather than use it for other "improvements" throughout the city.
3. Any local residents that are staying in a room (for various reasons) should not have to pay this additional tax. This could be done by presenting an ID that shows residency. Of course this last one would not be a deal breaker for me, just something that I would like to see.
As I said earlier in the post, this has been a busy weekend for us. I will be checking for posted comments as much as possible over the next couple of days. Please be patient. Thank you.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
34 comments:
The council will probably jump all over themselves to approve this. A "new" room tax to generate an additional $200,000 a year WOW...
This money needs be used to pay off debt on the Oshkosh Convention Center.
If the bureau is allowed to establish a development fund for capital projects that attracts tourists, those monies should take care of the new renovation and updates.
The monies should NOT be filtered to someone's "pet" project!
Feed the white elephant take care of the updates and expansion.
The new tax should be approved for Convention Center use ONLY!
Higher taxes are never a better idea. Period.
I do not feel that the Convention Center is viable. It is simply too small. One of the things that made Five Rivers appealing to me was that it would have a large convention center and hotel that would be able to accomodate larger conventions, which are attractive. When Oshkosh lost the Pioneer, we lost our ability to host *any* kind of convention.
Will money funnelled into the Convention Center downtown do much to attract business? I doubt it. The million or so it needs in upgrades won't create much benefit.
We are still in debt, for about 4 more years, with the current setup. Use the 2% tax increase to get out from under the debt. But don't go putting a ton of money into the facility that will have little to offer.
What do we do with the building? I really don't know. But I am afraid that any money we put into it will be for naught.
Kent, now that elections are over, how about trying the forum without moderation? Hopefully it won't be so personal, and since you're out of city politics, there shouldn't be many attacks on you. What do you think?
Unfortunately, I cannot take the chance. I have seen the abuse I am taking on other forums. Some are moderated and some are not. Either way, I am a target and I don't feel that it is productive to allow it to happen on my own site.
As for being "out" of politics, I cannot say that at this time. Right now I don't have any plans to run next year but to say that for certain is not realistic.
Perhaps in a few weeks or months, the maturity will progress and I can remove the moderation. Until then, I apologize for the inconvenience.
I agree new taxes are never a better idea.
It appears our City council is ready to approve this.
According to the recent article in the ONW it has been determined the Convention Center needs about 2M in renovations. The current debt can not be paid off early. So how to use the extra $200,000 the new tax would generate?
If they decide to go forward with the renovations the "new" tax dollars should be invested in the Convention Center. The City should NOT donate 1M to get the Center up and running again. The money should come from the "new" tax.
According to Wendy Heilsberg of the VCB the new renovation plan is a start. No,the updates would not make the center much bigger but it would be able to more attract conventions to Oshkosh.
I agree with a previous poster
NO new tax for "other" projects when the Convention Center sits in dire need the $$$ that can help is.
Apparently the Visitors and Convention Bureau flys under the radar..... the council gave them a 2% raise with very few questions.
I think our council failed the citizens of Oshkosh at Tuesday night's council meeting by making Oshkosh the owner of the highest room tax in the state.
Do we know just how much money the 8% figure raised for the city? How many actual dollars goes to the VCB? We know that included in that 80% is the moneys for the debt repayment. The debt can't be paid off early so why the need for additional $$$?
No one will give us the actual dollars that the VCB gets.
What part of the additional funds will go for salaries?
At budget hearings we heard that department heads needed to present 0 dollar budgets or at least come in with a 3% cuts over last year. The VCB is part of the city and works for the city why do they get a automatic 2% raise?
We did find out the 80% goes to the VBC 19% to the Grand Opera House and 1% back to the City.
No one knows exactly how the additional $200,000 will be used.
We are told it will fund capital improvement projects for the city. Pollack Pool & Titan Stadium were mentioned as needing community
funding.
Why would the VBC funnel any additional dollars anyplace other than the renovation of the Convention Center?
Something just does not sit well with the limited information the citizens were given through the council meeting.
Why is it okay for a councilor to amend a resolution if he can't vote on it due to a possible conflict of interest?
There were a lot of questions asked at the workshop a few weeks ago. If you had such questions why did you not go to the coucil meeting and ask them?
Why would we raise visitor (room) taxes in order to fund Pollack Pool & Titan Stadium? Haven't these projects been planned out already? What is the planned return on investment in these projects? Haven't the returns already been calculated under the previous funding sources? While I think we need to do more to market Oshkosh, we need more real infrastructure to benefit from the marketing. I have a bad feeling about this new source of money. I suspect the money is going to be siphoned to "feel good" projects. Since the council is hell bent on raising the tax, at least have the extra money go toward real returns.
Why would we raise visitor (room) taxes in order to fund Pollack Pool & Titan Stadium?
Actually one of the points:
that is why Tower and Bain DID NOT vote on this issue.
Conflict of interest regarding UWO / Titan could be recipients of dollars raised.
I have a bad feeling about this new source of money.
I suspect the money is going to be siphoned to "feel good" projects.
Not sure why it wouldn't be a conflict of interest to amend the resolution....but it is a conflict to vote on the resolution?
Apparently the hotel-motel tax presented a potential conflict because monies raised from the tax might be used someday for assisting in the remodeling of Titan Stadium.
Can a "city" imposed tax be used to fund university projects?
Titan is UW property, not City property. Also, State law caps the room tax at 8 percent unless the money is used to pay off convention center debt.
So the extra 2% room tax would have to go back to the Convention Center.
I hope that I can clear some of this up;
The CVB gets 80% of the room tax now. Once they have that money, I think it is up to them where it gets dispersed to. I believe one project is Titan Stadium.
Currently, they are paying the debt out of those funds as well. Once the council approved the additional 2% sales tax, they will no longer have to pay the debt on the convention center out of their original 80%. Mr. Dell'Antonio said that the "additional 2%" would be used on other projects when the new tax is implemented.
I think that he meant that once the 2% begins, THAT money will be used to pay the debt and it will free up the money that is currently earmarked for the debt.
I had hoped that it would be "in addition to" thus paying the debt faster but I guess we can't have it all.
I hope this makes sense. I am typing quickly and may have to find another way to explain it if it isn't.
Is it possible for the incoming council to repeal the decisions made on Tuesday evening? Starting with the passage of the room tax increase?
That was my biggest problem while watching this. For all of the talk, we knew before it started how it was going to end: 2 would vote against it, 4 would vote for it. 1 spent 2 years not showing up mentally, this meeting her body went wherever her mind has been, otherwise it would have been 5 voting for it. Garbage fees, room tax fees, they never met a tax they didn't like!
The same thing applies to the rediculous new nuisance ordinance. Simply rubber stamped to get it through, regardless of it's merits. What a sham. Again, the cops basically said if there is a drug house, it's too much work for them to build a case against the tenants, they'd rather just work with the landlord to have the people tossed out, and if they don't, the onus is on the landlord, not the drug dealer, and certainly not on the cops. I understand the concept of the nuisance ordinance. The problem is it's mostly just the cops washing their hands of things that are supposed to be their responsibility. Somewhere down the line, you can predict two things about this ordinance. First, a landowner is going to get injured/killed trying to confront tenants. Second, at some point a landlord is going to take this to a higher authority (court, appeals court) and they will most likely win.
The problem is it's mostly just the cops washing their hands of things that are supposed to be their responsibility.
So they don't have time to control speed limits around.....
they can't or won't build a case against the drug traffikers....
what else don't they OPD have time to do?
Is if a wonder the crime rate is increasing???
This nuisance ordinance is hardly something that was thrown together quickly. The city held off on adopting something months ago. The apartment owners worked with the city for many months making this something they could work with. If they're not upset about it, why are you?
Because it makes neighbors and landlords the law enforcers instead of the OPD!
New room Tax?
Really doesn't matter to me, but I and my fellow road warriors who drive the state roads, will just not stay in Oshkosh. The word gets out quickly and Oshkosh continues to be the LEADER!!!!
OPD can't be everywhere. There is nothing wrong with peopole taking ownership for their neighborhoods. Part of being a responsible citizen and neighbor is making sure things are not becoming nuisances. It's part of having pride in where you live and really not much different than the Neighborhood Watch program. It's also not just about rental properties and bars. It's about every single property in the city.
To 1:04pm
Let's start off by defining "apartment owners". A better definition is "apartment owners association", and an even better definition is "apartment owners union" or best of all "Apartment Owners Political Action Committee".
The people that you see in front of the council do NOT represent all of the apartment owners in the city, and when you get right down to it they represent very few as a percentage. But, since they're the ones that appear in front of the council, it makes it appear as though it's "all".
This apartment owners PAC worked with the city for many months for one reason: The way it was originally proposed, even more responsibility AND liability would have fallen on the apartment owners. This PAC also recognized that the ordinance would get passed by the "gang of 5" who never saw a reason to vote against anything. So, realizing it was going to pass regardless of it's content, the PAC worked with the cops to minimize their exposure both legally and financially. That is the ONLY reason that this PAC appears to be "for" the ordinance. Once again, don't be fooled, follow the money: No ordinance change at all costs them the least money. Ordinance as originally proposed costs them the most money. Since some new ordinance was almost sure to pass the council, the option that they are "for" now costs them the least money, and that is the ONLY reason they are for it. They ARE upset about it, they just aren't AS upset as they were with the original version!
The mantra on the side of the squad cars is "to serve and protect". Why are YOU so eager to let the cops get by with "to serve, not place life or limb in jeopardy, and basically take the easiest route possible and do as little as possible that we can get away with". We'd have to increase the budget just to paint all those words on the side of a squad car!
The freakin' police chief stood in front of the council, and basically said it was too much work to build a case against people who might be running a drug house, it would be easier for them if they just had this ordinance enacted so the cops could work with the landlords to "abate" the problem. Apparently, these types of answers are acceptable to you, 1:04pm. For the definition of the job, for the amount of money we pay to the chief singly and for public safety in general, this is completely UNACCCEPTABLE to me and a lot of others.
As I asked originally, can the new council repeal some of these newly enacted ordinances?
You call the apartment association a political action committee. That just shows are truly ignorant you are. It is a totally inaccurate statement. Unless that is you can produce where they have filed documentation as a PAC. Next, any landlord can belong to the apartment association which does much more than you will probably ever care to recognize. Maybe we have so many landlords who don't know what the landlord/tenant laws really are because they don't belong to an association which helps educate them about the laws. You'd be surprised the number of landlords who violate the laws because, like you, they are ignorant and don't care to understand things. That's why complaints against landlords are at the top of the list at consumer protection.
You people complain about the crime in Oshkosh but when you have a chance to help do something about it, you complain some more. Someone mentioned Neighborhood Watch. It's a great comparison. So how is something like this so different? It's really not. You just want something else to whine about. Go move somewhere else if it's so bad here. But beware, other cities have good benefits for their employees and nuisance laws too.
I agree with 11:18 and 12:52. For us to believe the cops can fix everything is crazy. By working TOGETHER we can make this a better community and perhaps CERTAIN landlords will start looking at the quality of their tenets rather than just the $$$$ on the monthly rent check.
The Winnebago Apartment Association is a member of the Wisconsin Apartment Association.
http://www.waaonline.org
Some of the listed benefits of joining WAA include "Sharing information and collaborating on local legislative issues. Advocacy and representation of legislative issues of statewide concern".
The Winnebago Apartment Association has a position of "Legislative Representative" listed under their information.
These may not be PAC's in the strictest sense. But, one of the reasons for their existence is to influence laws and ordinances that are brought up for approval.
They are a group or a committee, that takes action on pending laws and ordinances. It's a political action committee. Got it?
As I asked originally, can the new council repeal some of these newly enacted ordinances?
Normally, Any councilor who voted "yes" can bring a resoltion back for reconsideration.
They have to "make a case" as to WHY resonsideration is necessary.
new information???
I don't know if sitting a new council could be reason to bring the resolution back.
It would mean that either Mr. B. Tower or Mr. Bain would have to be convinced there are just reasons to bring it back.
7:48, you are correct. if a councilor was in the majority, they can, at the next council meeting, bring a previously voted item up for reconsideration.
Now, since you'e so in favor of this being brought up again, tell us, how many of the councilors have you called? All six on the new council, for sure, and the mayor-elect, right? You wouldn't grandstand on a blog anonymously only to be too chicken to actually CALL at least the two on the new council who can bring it up for reconsideration, right?
What's that? None? You didn't call any of them?
I didn't think so.
BRING BACK the new room tax resolution and make an amendment.....
This money needs be used to pay off debt on the Oshkosh Convention Center. The new tax should be approved for Convention Center use ONLY!
If the bureau is allowed to establish a development fund for capital projects that attracts tourists, those monies should take care of the new renovations and updates for the Convention Center ONLY!
Feed the white elephant take care of the updates and expansion.
The new tax should be approved for Convention Center use ONLY!
THAN AND ONLY THAN should the monies be filtered to someone's
"pet" project!
It is not one of their reasons for their existence. Good Lord wake up and smell the coffee. But guess what, even given the fact that the state organization works on legislative issues, big deal. That is how the real world works. Yo see it as buying influence in Madison. Others see it as keeping a finger on the pulse of developing legislation and making sure they have a voice in laws as they're being written. One must protect their interests. You see it as bad when really it's smart business. I guess next you'll be saying they bought councilors locally right? Gotta love you naysayers and their predicability. At the end of the day, they helped draft an ordinance that they are okay with and that should make all landlords happy. Interesting how they all benefit from not being a member. I would make the point made earlier, too. This ordinance is not just about bars and rental properties. It affects ALL PROPERTIES IN OSHKOSH INCLUDING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. What part of this do you naysayers not udnerstand?
No a new council member can not bring back something already passed by a different council.
10:26, it can only be brought back by a councilor who voted in the majority the first time. In addition, it must be brought back at the next meeting. I am not sure if the meeting tomorrow afternoon qualifies or not.
They only two who may be able to bring it up are Burk Tower and Bain. They didn't have any problem with the ordinance the way it was written, so unless their phones ring off the hook, I don't think it's gonna happen.
10:25am, what is your point?
You are saying exactly the same thing.
The apartment owners association did not like the original ordinance as proposed. You can use whatever reasons that you want. The bottom line is that it would cost them money as proposed. So, they worked (activism) on a political cause, as a group. Political Action Committee. What they got in the end, what they "liked", was something that was not as likely to cost them money, or would cost them less money. Again, you can put all the hows and whys on it you want, but the bottom line is the money. As you say, "smart business". The SMARTEST business was to do nothing, but since the cops insisted on getting this stupid ordinance passed, the apartment owners worked in their best interest on it, since they knew something was going to pass.
DO__YOU__UNDERSTAND? I typed it slow, it didn't appear as though you got it the first time.
Why are you so eager to let the cops off the hook of doing their job? We keep hearing how busy they are? Doing what? We now know it's not busting drug dealers. It's not stopping murders, that's climbed in the last 2 years, it's not stopping armed robber, how many places did that guy who committed suicide knock off? And even then it took Wollangk spotting the guy in Open Pantry. It's not enforcing all the basic ordinances such as speed limits, barking dogs, loud stereos and so forth. What are they doing?
I think it is you who don't get it. You may enjoy insulting people who don't share your views but that just goes to show your ignorance. You don't want to assume any ownership in your own neighborhood, is that right? I'd be interested to hear your ideas on what the police can do to police every street in the city with the resources they have. We're all waiting.
1:32, the police spend their time dealing with petty little naunces that people like you dream up.
Ride along with a cop sometime. Find out how much paperwork they have to do. Find out how many traffic stops they really make. Find out how much they really do know about drug dealers, and murderers. Shoot one of their guns. Shoot one of their rifles. Wear a vest, or a duty belt. Fight with someone who hates your guts. Put handcuffs on someone who doesn't want you to put them on. Spray pepper spray and get it back in your face and see what it feels like.
Keeping a city safe is more about what neighbors do to make it safe then what the police do. Turn off the TV, climb out of your recliner, and figure that out.
3:03pm,
People all over the world do strenous and/or dangerous tasks every single day as part of their jobs. Why, when cops do it, do you see the need to put them on a pedestal? There's a job description. They apply for it, they get the job. They do the job, with all of it's dangers, and at the end of 40 hours they get paid. End of story. Stop with the melodramatics already.
No melodramatics. Just a simple response to complaints and wild claims that they do nothing.
8:29, you have no idea how busy the police are. Yet you complain time and time again about how they're not doing their jobs. You went so far as to attribute murders to their laziness! And yet you call me melodramatic when I defend them?
Post a Comment