I just saw this:
Subject: City's Hotel Tax (Transient Occupancy Tax) - Ballot Measure
From: Councilmember Jean Quan
Recommendation: Adopt A Resolution Submitting, On The Council's Own Motion, To
The Electors At A June 2, 2009 Special Election, A Proposed Ordinance Amending The
Oakland Municipal Code In Order To Provide For A Two Percent Surcharge To The
City's Transient Occupancy Tax (Hotel Tax) To Support The Oakland Zoo, The Oakland
Museum of California, Chabot Space And Science Center And The Cultural Arts
Programs And Festivals..
And had to react. Who's idea was it to have an increase in the Hotel Tax in the middle of a recession in a town not known for tourism? I'd bet the revenue projection was a rosy scenario that will never soon come to pass.
Now the City folks might say "Oakland has the highest hotel use rates in the State" but that comes from data that's almost three years old. This is a new world. Why charge a higher tax that will be passed on to the consumers and make the hotel rooms less attractive?
Read: not a good idea.
The tax is already at 11 percent -- why not go the reverse direction and lower the rate by 4 percent, causing a reduction in room rates to remain competitive? Counter-intutive, but hey it's a recession of deep measure. I'll bet my plan will generate more revenue than the one before the City Council -- that's a failure to be sure.
If they want to get the CVB more money, why not take part of that $7 million from the Redevelopment Agency I mentioned and use that? Now, before you fire off with the "that can't be used for services" actually via a provision in California Redevelopment Law it can.
It's Section 33678:
(a) This section implements and fulfills the intent of this article and of Article XIIIB and Section 16 of Article XVI of the California Constitution. The allocation and payment to an agency of the portion of taxes specified in subdivision (b) of Section 33670 for the purpose of paying principal of, or interest on, loans, advances, or indebtedness incurred for redevelopment activity, as defined in subdivision (b) of this section, shall not be deemed the receipt by an agency of proceeds of taxes levied by or on behalf of the agency within the meaning or for the purposes of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution, nor shall such portion of taxes be deemed receipt of proceeds of taxes by, or an appropriation subject to limitation of, any other public body within the meaning or for purposes of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution or any statutory provision enacted in implementation of Article XIIIB. The allocation and payment to an agency of this portion of taxes shall not be deemed the appropriation by a redevelopment agency of proceeds of taxes levied by or on behalf of a redevelopment agency within the meaning or for purposes of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution. (b) As used in this section, "redevelopment activity" means either of the following: (1) Redevelopment meeting all of the following criteria: (A) Is redevelopment as prescribed in Sections 33020 and 33021. (B) Primarily benefits the project area. (C) None of the funds are used for the purpose of paying for employee or contractual services of any local governmental agency unless these services are directly related to the purpose of Sections 33020 and 33021 and the powers established in this part. (2) Payments authorized by Section 33607.5. (c) Should any law hereafter enacted, without a vote of the electorate, confer taxing power upon an agency, the exercise of that power by the agency in any fiscal year shall be deemed a transfer of financial responsibility from the community to the agency for that fiscal year within the meaning of subdivision (a) of Section 3 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.
Note the BOLD. In other words have the Convention and Visitor Bureau's activity written into the
Redevelopment Plan for Downtown and the Colisem Redevelopment Area. That would do the trick
Uh. Now I know why I go to make a video yelling about Rush Limbaugh. That's fresh meat!
Comments