Subscribe
Shop Local
Magazine
Clip it!
Gas Prices
Sunday, February 13, 2011
After Tuesday’s vote in Jefferson City to increase the city’s lodging tax from 4 cents per dollar to 7 cents, one of the next steps in the process is to annex two more hotels into the city.
According to City Attorney Nathan Nickolaus, the area that will be included in the annexation will not include any residences, but it will include two hotels — the Hampton Inn Jefferson City and Comfort Suites — which are owned by the Puri Group of Enterprises Inc.
But the question of how the city will annex the hotels still looms.
Marry Me
Comments
Festus_Hagen 1 year, 3 months ago
Who didn't see this coming? These people built OUTSIDE the city so they wouldn't have to deal with our self-serving government , bow they will "TAKE IT" from those owners. Typical. Underhanded, selfish and sneeky, but typical for JC.
rodinman 1 year, 3 months ago
No. No. this is totally wrong. Annex only those who wish to annexed.
RetiredOne 1 year, 3 months ago
It is called greed! Anything to pay for the JDL Convention Center. The people were duped into voting for the lodging tax -- let someone else pay for it.
wcywing 1 year, 3 months ago
for some reason, i'm not surprised. btw didn't they try this before, but they tried getting residential areas too? only annexing two hotels. so its JC and the two hotels that get to vote on this? i think the outcome will be clear. hello comfort and hampton, welcome to JC, like it or not.
Graceful 1 year, 3 months ago
This is absolutely disgusting. It must be stopped. Anyone in city governmnet that approves this measure must be shown the door.
Graceful 1 year, 3 months ago
Why does the NT insist on using the phrase "increase the city’s lodging tax from 4 cents per dollar to 7 cents?" Is the NT part of "conspiracy?" Why not use "increase the city’s lodging tax from 4% to 7%?" Could it be that that phrase isn't as attractive?
online_editor 1 year, 3 months ago
It's simply one of two ways to express it, just as sales tax can be expressed as X cents per dollar or X percent. Either is semantically accurate and mathematically identical. --Rick Brown, online editor, News Tribune
Graceful 1 year, 3 months ago
True. But there seems to be a world of difference in PR terms.
tonto 1 year, 3 months ago
Only for those with poor math or logic skills.
TraceyT 1 year, 3 months ago
Uh, nope. While mathematically the same, good PR people realize that 4 cents (per dollar) results in people remembering 4 cents, while 4% results in a calculation being done in people's minds which results in a much higher number than the 4 cents that the people would otherwise be thinking of. If this wasn't true, then stores wouldn't price everything at a dollar amount + 99 cents. They do it because they know that the majority of people remember the dollars, and forget the cents, so a few hours later $6.99 becomes $6.00 in most people's minds, and $7.00 seems like $1 more rather than 1 penny more. In a sales position many years ago, my supervisor told me that if you tell a customer a "price range", they will almost always remember the low price and forget the high price or the "range". This is based on simple psychology, and such is the world of PR and marketing. So, while your math is very good, you don't seem to be applying your logic to the field of psychology very well, because you obviously don't have a very good understanding of PR and marketing. (just sharing some thoughts, not commenting on the motivation of NT)
JCLifer 1 year, 3 months ago
What a crock! This may be true for less-educated people. Either way it is a calculation percent means "per one hundred" and four cents per dollar still means the same thing. They have exactly the same meaning to logical educated people.
I could see that this might be a ploy to exploit less-educated people though, and if so, let Darwin rule!
Graceful 1 year, 3 months ago
Some "educated" folk like to have information presented to them in a way so that they can talk themselves into things that don't make sense otherwise.
tonto 1 year, 3 months ago
It's why we have those three-day rescission laws on consumer purchases. Once the buyer escapes the slick salesperson and thinks a little more rationally, that shiny overpriced doohickey isn't a necessity.
TraceyT 1 year, 3 months ago
JCLifer, I understand your point, and I agree to an exent, but the article didn't say "four cents per dollar", it said "four cents", so it's not exactly the same thing. And, in general, I'm not so sure that if "Darwin ruling" would be such a bad thing. :-)
TraceyT 1 year, 3 months ago
Ok, maybe I read it wrong (or remembered it wrong from when I read it a few days ago). It says "4 cents per dollar", but then it says "7 cents". I always read the price tags that say $6.99 as $7.00, but I can see Graceful's point also.
melbrooks 1 year, 3 months ago
Mr. Puri is using his in-city hotel (the Doubletree) to feed convention and visitors bureau sales leads to his other hotels, the Hampton and Comfort Suites.
If I owned a hotel in the city limits, I'd be very unhappy with that fact.
rmsberengaria 1 year, 3 months ago
Hey, since when is it evil or bad to promote your own business? Regardless of it's locations. It is called entrepreneurial spirit! Boo Woo to the other in city hotel owners, if they have the capital let them build other hotels outside the city. Attacking a savy business person is absurd!
melbrooks 1 year, 3 months ago
No absurdity, no attack. I am simply stating the facts.
rodinman 1 year, 3 months ago
I'm sure the in-town hotel owners (some who reside outside the city limits) want the annexation to "level" the playing field. To "level" the playing field just make the tax a flat fee not a percentage. Different hotels offer different rates, accomodations and amenities so there will never be a "level" playing field.
melbrooks 1 year, 3 months ago
How is a percentage not a level playing field? Everybody pays the same percentage--if they are in the city limits.
I can understand the logic behind in-city hoteliers being upset with the situation.
JCLifer 1 year, 3 months ago
Lawyer up and fight the city hall greed hard!
drpepper1885 1 year, 3 months ago
Just that many more miles of blacktop that won't get plowed when it shows again
JCLifer 1 year, 3 months ago
FORCED ANNEXATION is wrong. Very wrong
tonto 1 year, 3 months ago
The two hotels are "just" outside the current city limits. They get city services and amenities, and they compete for the business of visitors to Jefferson City against similar hotels nearby which are already in the city limits. If they wanted to be free of Jefferson City taxes, the owners could have built in Russellville or New Bloomfield or maybe Mokane. It's a simple matter of fairness.
rmsberengaria 1 year, 3 months ago
Come on "it's a simple matter of fairness", who decides what is fair? A City greedy, in an alliance with local in city Owners and Corporate owned properties. Mr. Puri invested his money in a run down property (the Doubletree) and has done wonders with the structure not to mention the tax's he is paying on this in Jefferson City property and the increased revenue this hotel is bringing into the City. Further, I don't think those people staying at the Hampton or the Comfort Suites are travelling to Russellville, New Bloomfield or Mokane to spend Money! City Greed and Cronyism is being disguised as Fairness!
TraceyT 1 year, 3 months ago
tonto "They get city services and amentities"
... for which they pay an agreed upon rate, probably a higher rate than the in-city residents and businesses are paying (unless the city is worse at managing business than I thought). That being said, how is it unfair for the hotels to have the "advantage" of buying service from the city? If it was unfair to the city, they wouldn't have done it.
Also, "if they wanted to be free of Jefferson City taxes, the owners could have built" outside the city limits. Oh wait, they did build outside the city limits. It seems that we agree about this part, except that while I believe that 20 feet outside the city limits is reasonable, you seem to believe that 20 miles is a more reasonable limit.
tonto 1 year, 3 months ago
rms,
You seem confused about the facts. The Doubletree is inside the current Jefferson City boundaries. What does Mr. Puri's very nice refurbished older hotel have to do with annexation?
The discussion was about Mr. Puri's two very nice newer properties which were built just outside the city limits, to attract travelers who come to Jefferson City. The only real difference from annexation will be to make guests at those two properties pay the same tax as they would at the competitors' hotels. Not even their addresses will change.
rmsberengaria 1 year, 3 months ago
The facts are there and I am not confused at all. Am making the point it is greed and cronyism and envy on the part of the other Hotel owners who did not have the forthought, or savy to build outside the city. For the City of Jefferson to try and annex only this sliver to appease cronies and have the nerve to call it FAIR! Kinda like gerrymandering districts to favor one party or the other! So in your world someone who builds another hotel a mile from these should also be annexed into the city to?
rodinman 1 year, 3 months ago
Next will be the furniture, catering and convenience stores just outside the city limits. Just to be fair.
rmsberengaria 1 year, 3 months ago
Exactly rodi the whole premise is corrupt! Spot on!
tonto 1 year, 3 months ago
rms,
You are not the only lost soul trying to make a coherent argument about a topic you don't quite understand. rodinman seems even farther off track. The discussion is about ...
(a) a room tax, (not a sales tax) (b) that is charged to hotel occupants (c) and turned over to the city (d) to fund an imaginary convention center that some City Hall and Chamber of Commerce types hope to build someday somewhere sort of near our "fragile" down town district although there isn't a definite site or a preliminary design concept. Those are just a couple of the more amusing dogfights we have coming up. (e) The hotel owner does not pay the tax. He collects it for the city, or some farcical city commission. (f) The tax is not charged on furniture, cigarettes, gas, catered food, cars, women's clothing, french pastries, or even guns.
That is why your sympathy for "the other Hotel owners who did not have the forthought, or savy to build outside the city." is misplaced. Your comment about someone building a hotel another mile farther out adds to the displacement.
rmsberengaria 1 year, 3 months ago
I understand the topic quite well and fully understand what kind of tax it is. You sir a trying to justify your position. While you are entitled to that opinion I sir do not agree with you. Oh, and you mention "fragile" downtown district well it would not be so fragile had not the "Oh so forthoughted City" not torn down every neighborhood in or near downtown! sir I have lived in this city my whole life and have experienced first hand eminent domain take out business's and neighborhoods not for public buildings either... but to build a HOTEL on sights of former business's. Does Nentweg Lumber, Jefferson City Oils, Conoco station, Slickers Tavern ring any bells in your world? As for the pie in the sky Convention center name one public Convention Center that makes a decent profit? Losses or Meager or break even maybe! Hmm. and how about the whole McCarty Street demolishing for that convention Center give you a dollar says that is what it will look like 10 years from now a big Nothing! Oh, and what makes you some expert on the topic of this discussion? Seems that whole area "The City made blighted...McCarty Street area was to be the convention Center area"!
wcywing 1 year, 3 months ago
the jc downtown has been fragile for a long time. some new business are doing well, prison brews, the mission, odonohues steak house, but they are far away from the downtown area. if JC is such a great place to do business, JC wouldn't have to annex two hotels or anyone else for that matter. they would be coming to JC.
tonto 1 year, 3 months ago
You asked "what makes you some expert on the topic of this discussion?" That would start with 35 years in that line of work and the ability to read and understand multi-syllable words.
You're wanting to make this into a discussion of general taxes when it's much more limited than that. Some guy (Mr. Puri) who took a calculated risk building just outside the city limits to avoid some taxes may lose his gamble if he can't derail the annexation of his two hotels. If he loses he will have to charge his guests the extra hotel tax just like the operators of all the hotels in town.
Festus_Hagen 1 year, 3 months ago
It's simple. The city has rules, which are not in the best interest of anyone but the city , so the hotel owners decided they would build outside the city to get away from the corrupt government that runs it. Now that same corrupt government is changing the rules after the fact, a bait and switch if you will. It's dirty, it's underhanded and it stinks of JC's political climate. These folks could have built inside the city limits but chose not to. Who is the city to say " WE WANT THAT" ?
JC27 1 year, 3 months ago
Our city government is out of control and the News Tribune is clearly on the side of the city in these issues as indicated by their "our opinion" editorial in the Sunday paper before the election. This tax DOES hurt our economy. We are getting ready to start pulling 600k out of our local economy for the next 5 years with absolutley no benefit. The ignorant convention center will have to create 600k in new spending just to get us back to where we where before the tax increase went into effect. But honest economics haven't ever been a consideration in this...they just lie, and apparently 3,000+ people believe it. Raise taxes, pull 600k out of the economy, and have the goverment get involved in private business...real great economics, way to go.
The Purie's made a business decision, and I'm sure it's really easy for you to criticize them for making a wise business move and to just say "ah that's unfair" because you probably haven't ever taken a business risk. When I saw that first hotel go up, I thought to myself "That hotel is going to fall flat on it's face" and I'm sure many others thought the same thing. They took the RISK and now that they are being rewarded for their risk here comes our City government. Go ahead and keep saying that the hotel owners don't pay this tax...keep repeating everything you hear without doing any research. We do pay this tax it comes off of our bottom line. And just to be clear because it appears that our City Admin is telling everyone what all the hotel owners "want" again...if you want to know what these small businesses want, if that is your concern, then I advise that you call the hotels rather than listening to what Steve R. says. He already mislead the hotel owners and the voters with the details of the intital agreement and every single hotel owner in town will tell you that (Less the one who is owned by the group who is going to be raking in 100k every year for the next 20 years from our general revenue).
"More democratic" to just send through a procedural annexation in which not one vote will be cast? I say this is just an excuse for the city council to get out of casting a vote that will end up costing them their little jobs. Disgusting.
Time will tell that this is a bad decision for our city, but sadly, our city will suffer before we get the point.
tonto 1 year, 3 months ago
You said: "We do pay this tax it comes off of our bottom line." which is not true. That tax is charged to hotel guests and remitted to the city. It is not ever the hotel's money. Ask your hotel's accountant to explain.
JC27 1 year, 3 months ago
Tonto, when someone comes into my hotel and they have a budget of $60 total after taxes their rate is set for their TOTAL bill to be $60. When our tax goes up, their budget is still $60. Since the tax rate isn't negotiable, guess what goes down? Our room rate. And THAT comes off of our bottom line.
Why don't you do some research and see how many state government employees are staying in Jefferson City with a per diem of $77. The state is our biggest customer and everytime one of them stays now that 4% comes off of the hotels bottom line. Before you start advising people to speak with accountants, maybe you could speak to one?
JCLifer 1 year, 3 months ago
These people think you can just set your room prices where every you want. Guess they have never heard of "free market competition". Soon you will get to compete with yet another motel at the convention center. How's that <50% occupancy rate going to be then?
tonto 1 year, 3 months ago
I am an accountant. There is a problem if you cut your rate every time someone tells you their "budget" is less than your room rate with taxes, but it's not an accounting problem.
TraceyT 1 year, 3 months ago
My first thought when I read your post was that the problem (which is not an accounting problem) is that no one wants to come to Jeff City except the state employees, and with a state employee the hotel has to take what they can get, or go without. I guess this problem will be resolved when the convention center brings the flocks of non-state workers into the city, then the hotels can charge what they need to, rather than what they have to settle for. LOL
JC27 1 year, 3 months ago
Well, if that is what you think then it's probably best that you remain an accountant and shy away from private competitive business.
tonto 1 year, 3 months ago
JC27, you need a decent accountant to help you figure out how to make more money without having to be the lowball bidder. You could ask your banker for a recommendation.
bluesfan13 1 year, 3 months ago
It's not about "lowball bidder".
Again, if you want ANY of the State's business, you must charge them less than $77 per day, total, including all taxes. The State doesn't pay State sales tax, but they do pay lodging taxes and I believe they pay city and county sales tax. Any increase in those taxes cause a corresponding reduced rate on the room itself.
Graceful 1 year, 3 months ago
Thae state is not required to pay any local taxes. I am not sure it goes to the trouble of ensuring that they don't, however.
tonto 1 year, 3 months ago
The state is exempt from sales tax but has to pay convention center and tourism taxes. I know it's not logical but it's the way the law is written.
Graceful 1 year, 3 months ago
No, the state has the power to tell the locals to take a hike. Whether they do or not is another matter. As for "te law as written" I couldn't find where it said the state will pay the tax. Maybe it is there.
tonto 1 year, 3 months ago
It would be a lot easier if a person could analyze something like this logically as you have. Unfortunately, and I really hate that word, in Missouri you have to pay the tax unless you have a specific exemption. General exemptions just don't exist. That's why the state has to pay the tax even thought there is nothing specific about it in the law.
Graceful 1 year, 3 months ago
The state doesn't need an exemption. Localities cannot impose a tax on its superior without the superiors authroization. Local governmnets just don't have that power.
bluesfan13 1 year, 3 months ago
It's an economic problem due to the location...
Jefferson City is a State of Missouri town. State government drives wages and rates in this economy. The State's per diem for loding is $77 per night. Any hotel charging more than that will lose State business. Period.
herewego 1 year, 3 months ago
Thanks for clearing that up, I think most people are unaware of "contracts" that are in place with hotels all across the state with State Government.
Guess you should send our old buddy Steve R a bill for the difference. Or even the new Mayor...
hudson 1 year, 3 months ago
just what we need another building in jefferson city for the taxpayers to maintane!
rodinman 1 year, 3 months ago
tonto, I'm not off track. Just when the city needs/wants more money they will go after other businesses outside the city limits to make it fair. One small step at a time.
JCsleeper 1 year, 3 months ago
JC needs another empty building.
JCLifer 1 year, 3 months ago
If the city wants to annex the area, it needs to annex a more contiguous area such as Rainbow Drive, Apache Flats, the new Elementary School, and the subdivision behind JC Mattress Factory.
This piece-meal annexation is just plain wrong.
tonto 1 year, 3 months ago
Chickadee, the new bag plant is in Callaway County, adjacent to Holts Summit. It would be difficult for Jefferson City to annex that. The ready-mix plant is in Jefferson City already.
TraceyT 1 year, 3 months ago
That's right JCLifer, It absolutely is wrong. If you think back, shortly after two out of the three annexation votes of larger areas failed, one of the city big shots said that they realized that they need to annex smaller areas so they can be sure to give good service to the annexed area. What his notes actually said though, is that they learned that they need to annex smaller areas so the city vote can successfully override the annexed area resident vote and succeed in the forced annexation.
TylerWoods 1 year, 3 months ago
First, the tax was raised from 3% to 7%, increase by 4, not 3. Second, these issues are the focal point of distrust in city hall and our current elected officials. These type of issues need fresh perspective, new ideas, and someone with creative thinking that will not follow the pack. A younger generation of city government is needed to weigh in on topics such as this one. Jefferson City has a lot of deciding to do on a lot of different issues in the near future. Our city needs someone that will be active in learning and working with the people to represent the people in these decisions. That is why I would appreciate your vote April 5 for City Council Ward One.
lovemyboys 1 year, 3 months ago
You all do realize that when you travel to other cities/towns and pay for a hotel room, the taxes you pay directly benefits that City in some way? Last summer, my family went to Eureka Springs, Arkansas and paid taxes out the whazoo...even sales tax and gas prices are much higher there. This summer, we have a hotel room booked in Council Bluffs, Iowa and the taxes there are $46 dollars for 3 nights. That's 12%. Jeff City is very cheap..too cheap when compared to other areas.
It's unlikely this increase will affect very many of you directly...I don't make it a habit to stay in a hotel in my own hometown, do you? You all want Jeff City to improve itself and then when it tries to, you complain. Run for City council and make your voices heard...vote...don't just sit on the sidelines and play Monday morning quarterback.
JC27 1 year, 3 months ago
Ok, so all taxes that don't affect someone individually are just fine, huh? I don't think anyone who voted is "Monday morning quarterbacking". I'm personally angry because the issue was misrepresented by city officials.
Just so you know 15% of this project is being paid for out of general revenue NOT lodging tax. I'm sure you didn't know that because it was mentioned exactly once before the vote in any media outlet.
Also, you mentioned 12% like it was a lot? Do some research and you'll find out that Council Bluff TOTAL (sales + lodging) tax is 12%...as of April 1st Jefferson City's will be 15%. If 12% is a lot, then maybe you would take back your "Jefferson City very cheap comment"
Columbia and the Lake are cheaper than us and now we are nearly as expensive as Kansas City and St. Louis. We clearly have as much to offer as all of those cities in the way of entertainment. Hey, you know since the lodging tax doesn't affect anything or anyone maybe we should just raise it to 75%...using the logic of the supporters of this, that would be fine.
TraceyT 1 year, 3 months ago
I like your idea JC27. Let's take a good thing and go even farther. If we raise it 40%, then we can pay off the convention center 10 times faster, right? LOL
RTWise 1 year, 3 months ago
First of all, I want to state that I work for one of the hotels that the target of forced annexation. I am not speaking for the management and or the owners. I am a registered voter in Cole County.
What the people pushing this tax increase and the annexation fail to tell you if you pay MO Income Tax you are paying lodging tax. The State of MO has to pay the lodging tax, thats right every night a state employee stays in a JC hotel they pay the now 7% lodging tax. It does effect the tax payers of JC.
One thing that has been posted is that the Hampton Inn and Comfort Suites benefits from leads from the CVB. This is not true leads from the CVB must be responded to at CVBleads.com. Only hotels that are within the CVB may respond to bids. There is no information on how to get a hold of the who ever requested the bid, or for anyone to retrieve or directly contact who ever requested the bid. This statement is just another way to mislead the public. I know for a fact that the CVB has sent prospects to Columbia/Kingdom City rather than tell prospects that these two hotels exist. CVB have given neither of these two hotels any support. The explanation I was given is they hotels that support CVB's. Companies may not come to JC as often because of the 7% lodging tax and that will hurt the local restaurants, convenience stores, retail stores and auto repair shops. If people don't come to JC as often, it will hurt the economy.
In the years I have worked at these hotels the majority of guests that stay here, do business in JC. They buy gasoline, eat meals and shop in JC. I have never understood the idea these hotels don't make a financial contribution to the economy of JC. The guests that stay at these hotels may not support the CVB, but pay sales taxes that help fund all city services.
And the idea of these hotels getting city amenities, what are they. We don't have bus servcie. Our law enforcement is provided by (and they do an excellent job) the Cole County Sheriffs Department and snow removal is Cole County.
I don't understand the idea of building a new hotel that will receive property tax abatements that contribute nothing to the general revenue fund, but will be promised a guaranteed 100k kick back every year for 20 years that actually totals cost of $2Million to build the hotel.
The city has decided that just because it is built, they will come. My question is, what do we do with them once we get them here? We have a severe lack of activities for the people who come into Jefferson City. Most cities with convention centers have activities that also attract people to get out and enjoy the local community.
There is no easy way to get to JC. The Col Reg Airport should be developed to make it practical for people traveling to Jefferson City to fly in, rather than fly into Kansas City or St. Louis and then rent a car and drive for at least 1.5 hours.
Graceful 1 year, 3 months ago
State agencies should not pay the tax. The state is exempt from paying any taxes imposed by muncipalties. The questiosn is whether those agencies take the trouble of issuing their exemption letter.
tonto 1 year, 3 months ago
Sorry to post this again. You would be correct logically except the law was not written that way. The state is exempt from sales taxes but has to pay convention center and tourism room taxes. If it's a tourism sales tax they don't pay it - but if it's a room tax they pay it.
Graceful 1 year, 3 months ago
No, the state doesn't. There is a thing called sovereign immunity. The tax is simply inapplicable whether there is a statute or not, unless of course it is explicitly waived.
JCsleeper 1 year, 3 months ago
What will conventioneers do when they get here? Eat, visit historic uptown JC, eat, eat....... So much to do so litttle time.
JCLifer 1 year, 3 months ago
We have the new statues.
herewego 1 year, 3 months ago
What is there to do in Jefferson City: Watch the bikers go across the new bridge, or go down to the new river front island/beach and swim some. Or they could go out and count the empty store fronts in the Mall, or catch a ride to Columbia and eat in a fine Olive Garden. What the heck is there to do in JC after they roll up the sidewalks downtown (except dodge the drunks), oh wait, they could get a tattoo, if they go early enough. This new convention center is a laugh, what conventions?
bluenurse 1 year, 3 months ago
If you're a political junkie like me, you hang out at The Cap & watch the House/Senate proceedings-but that's only a few months out of the year.
RTWise 1 year, 3 months ago
Unfortunately, the way the law is written the Tax Exempt Certificate only exempts state and county sales tax, not the local lodging tax.
The state per diem (the amount allowed for the state to reimburse for overnight lodging in Jefferson City. It is different in different areas) is $77.00 so if you calculate the new Jefferson City lodging tax, the state will be paying $5.39 per night.
Isn't interesting that the people who said the local residents wouldn't have to pay this tax didn't mention this. The CVB is so desparate to get this convention center they are willing to take advantage of the local citizens they are supposed to be representing.
Graceful 1 year, 3 months ago
There is a thing called sovereign immunity. The tax is simply inapplicable whether there is a statute or not, unless of course it is explicitly waived.
tonto 1 year, 3 months ago
Sovereign immunity laws are about suing a government organization. It has nothing to do with taxes.
Graceful 1 year, 3 months ago
Exactly how do you think political subdivisions would go about collecting the tax they want? They have no power to sue the state unless the state allows it.
bluesfan13 1 year, 3 months ago
They charge the tax up front at point of sale. If you don't want to pay the tax, you don't purchase the service. I think this falls under a voluntary surrender of sovereign immunity. The state voluntarily chooses to purchase services in an area that have fees attached. They could avoid the fees (or taxes) by purchasing in a different location.
Graceful 1 year, 3 months ago
You'd be wrong. Who gave the political subdivisions the authority to tax? Did the state explicitly give away the right not to be taxed? I haven't been able to find that. If not the tax does not apply to the state. Otherwise it would be like children making their parents pay rent in their own home. How ridiculous would that be?
bluesfan13 1 year, 3 months ago
Think of it more as a "convenience fee" that Tickemaster charges rather than an actual tax. You can avoid the fee by purchasing somewhere else.
Graceful 1 year, 3 months ago
That is like saying the sales tax is not a tax as you can go out of state and purchase. It is a tax. It is labeled as such. People can twist their minds in the way you suggest. Liberals do that all the time. They told us that the individual mandate in health care was not a tax when they were trying to sell it. Now that it is in court it is a tax.
tonto 1 year, 3 months ago
One of the great things about this state is that the law is what is written down after it is agreed to by the people's representatives in the house and senate and signed by the governor. You can twist words around in your head all you want but at the end of the day it's the writing that defines the rule. That's a good thing; if we had to go by whatever someone thinks is the way things ought to be, we'd be in a much worse mess than we are.
justaword 1 year, 3 months ago
Criticism had been directed toward a state agency by a past Missouri auditor relative to lodging, time and travel in 2002. This agency held a training conference and the location was not by competitive bidding. It was suggested not only was cost a factor, but employees traveling AWAY from Jefferson City should be taken into consideration. Since employee concentration of most state agencies are in the capitol are all conferences to be held there? With that said, it places out of Capitol locations at a distinct disadvantage. What we have is government siding with private business to determine loss or reward. The first “loss” is a tax on individual citizens staying in motel rooms. The second loss is placing out of capital competitors at a distinct disadvantage. The third loss is forced annexation requiring local competitors to help finance their very competition. Help me out, please. If socialism is the redistribution of wealth by government, what would be the term for extracting money from individual citizens to enrich capitalism? What is the term for government using its power to assign advantage to one financial entity, while punishing another?
RTWise 1 year, 3 months ago
Sovereign Immunity does not apply here. The state and all not-for-profit charitable organizations have to pay the lodging tax.
Graceful 1 year, 3 months ago
It applies if the state says it applies. Charitable organizations are a differnt matter.
TraceyT 1 year, 3 months ago
So, Graceful, maybe the question is "where does the state say it applies" or doesn't apply? Care to cite your source? (just for those of us who truly don't know and would like to read it, and no this part is not sarcasm)
tonto 1 year, 3 months ago
Tracey, not everyone has a reality-based existence. Some people seem to think they can make up the definitions all by themselves.
RTWise 1 year, 3 months ago
Does anyone else see the insanity of building the convention center on W. McCarty Street? Didn't they tear down the State Lab because every time the floodwaters rose (and it does seem to be in a flood plane) the waters got inside the lab and the building filled with mold to the point it wasn't usable for anything else and had to be demolished?
If this is such a money making enterprise and such a good business opportunity why hasn't someone who is in the money making business already built a convention center in the Great City of Jefferson?
And how much money are the people who want to build this investing in buiding the convention center (Other than what they are taking from the public?)?
wcywing 1 year, 3 months ago
JC is not the most accessable town in the world. getting around JC can be a pain, especially around McCarty. don't forget the problems capital plaza has when it floods.
its hard enough to run a small business in JC much less a convention center.
Good question on the third point.
RTWise 1 year, 3 months ago
Tonto, I have disclosed that I am connected to the Puri Group of Hotels, using my real initials and name as a handle, even that I am employed and work at the properties that are the subject of this annexation debate.
I challenge you to disclose which property you are affiliated with. What is your stake in this discussion? Are you a hotel owner? employee? Lets put the cards on the table. I think you have to know the source of information to determine the accuracy and the motive to be able to use the information.
It has been suggested to me that you are affilitated with the hotel that is owned by the company that has been selected to build the hotel/convention center. If this is true then you have a interest that should be made public. I don't know if this is true or not, but we will see if you stand by what you write here enough to identify yourself.
tonto 1 year, 3 months ago
RT, I don't know why you would think anyone is entitled to know where I work. Even so, you're not going to like my answer. I do not work for a developer, or a hotel company, or the city, or even the county. I am in the real estate business here in town, and there is money to be made by smaller investors like me once the bigger pieces fall into place. I am not a big enough player to try to make things move my way, so I need to understand how things might work out before I make a commitment.
In case anyone wants to fuss or nitpick, I am still a working accountant. It gives me an understanding of how tax systems work.
JCLifer 1 year, 3 months ago
Yeah, posters here are always more concerned with who is posting rather than what they are posting...
Rison 1 year, 3 months ago
Who are you to say that? ; )
tonto 1 year, 3 months ago
Someone with a sense of humor lurks among the whiners. You are a brave person, indeed!
online_editor 1 year, 3 months ago
Just a general observation to no one in particular, just to keep things focused on issues... I'm sure we can all appreciate folks here who voluntarily disclose their identities and/or their backgrounds. It is relevant to what one knows about a subject and it can add credibility to what a person is saying. However, it's not essential. Let's also remember that one of the reasons this forum offers anonymity to those who elect having it is so that the writer can express his views about issues without fear of potential retaliation or harassment by his employer, supervisor, colleagues, patrons or others who vehemently disagree. If a person chooses not to reveal certain personal or professional information for privacy reasons, that doesn't make their viewpoints invalid, nor should it be reason to call them out about who they are and what their motivations are. If we respect each other's privacy, we can still find value in weighing viewpoints by judging their inherent merits and responding to the ideas expressed without regard to who is saying it or why. Just sayin'. Carry on. --Rick Brown, online editor, News Tribune
tonto 1 year, 3 months ago
Rick, that's a good point. People can regress to the elementary school playground mentality pretty quickly. tonto
RTWise 1 year, 3 months ago
You are correct Mr. Brown about the reasons for anonymity. But anonymity should never be used to make statements that can't be backed up. Tonto stated that Mr. Puri was taking leads and giving them to his other hotels, and made it sound as if he knows this for a fact. I feel it was appropriate to ask Tonto what his role in this matter is. He kindly responded that he is in real estate and accounting and that he is looking to make money off the annexation or the conference center or both, so he shouldn't get a free pass to make unfounded statements that he can't back up. No one, including myself should be able to do that.
People actually read the post here and will believe what is said, even if it isn't true. Now that Tonto has disclosed his motivation in this matter people can make an informed decision as to the reason for his stance and opinion. I certainly don't think anyrthing has boiled down to schoolyard bullying, I have been on sites that get to the point where the bullies control what is said and what isn't said.
My opinion is that Jefferson City does not need a convention center. A convention center will never be a viable operation in Jefferson City for two reasons:
1) No easy access to Jefferson City from a viable airport and: 2) No evening or weekend entertainment activities for the people attending the convention and little entertainment during the daytime hours if they bring their families with them
I also think it is unfair to build another hotel in Jefferson City being partially underwriten by taxpayer money. It isn't fair to the other people who have invested their own money to build or buy the existing hotels. If someone wants to come in and build a hotel and fund it themselves, then I say go ahead and do it. I wouldn't like it, but people are free to invest their own money as they see fit. I think the last I heard hotel occupancy is about 56% in Jefferson City. So if a new tax-subsidized hotel is built it will lower everyones occupancy. And when the other hotels close then we will have more vacant building in Jefferson City. And local citizens may be out of a job becuase when occupancy goes down, it takes less people to operate the hotel. And it is the lower paid workers that will be the first to feel the pinch, such as the housekeepers and front desk staff. All because the CVB wants a convention center and is willing to go to any lengths to get what they want.
If the convention center is so important, let the city build it with the tax revenue and operate it. Then let the builder of the new hotel decide if they are willing to build a new hotel with theiir own money.
tonto 1 year, 3 months ago
Mr. Wise, you made a mistake when you said:
"Tonto stated that Mr. Puri was taking leads and giving them to his other hotels, and made it sound as if he knows this for a fact."
You need to keep your facts and your allegations straight. I did not say that since I do not care how Mr. Puri runs his hotels. So far as I know he does a good job. For the record, that was:
melbrooks 6 days, 8 hours ago
“Mr. Puri is using his in-city hotel (the Doubletree) to feed convention and visitors bureau sales leads to his other hotels, the Hampton and Comfort Suites. If I owned a hotel in the city limits, I'd be very unhappy with that fact.”
You could look back a few threads if you care to verify that, or not.
RTWise 1 year, 3 months ago
My apology Tonto. I made a mistake. My sincere apologies.
tonto 1 year, 3 months ago
Accepted.
wcywing 1 year, 3 months ago
any news on how the City is going to annex the two hotels?
sarahlong 9 months, 2 weeks ago
If these two hotels are outside of the city then how does it make it right to collect tax'es off them. They choose to be there for a reason and because of that they may benefit from a tax break but they also lose out on the foot traffic that they would have got from being in the city. If you annex them it would destroy them.
JCLifer 9 months, 2 weeks ago
City "leaders" don't understand that no one WANTS to be annexed. No one WANTS to be part of the city. People move outside the city limits to get away from the city.
Fix the stupidity and make our city a place of choice for people to live. Instead of spending energy trying to force annexation, how about spending that energy to turn this city around so people will WANT to live inside the city limits?
Please review our Policies and Procedures before registering or commenting
Or login with:
OpenID