Future live chat events: *Read archived chat here. New site location here.
Friday, February 27, 2009
Parking Tax On Ballot?
I have no idea. How about some background? Where did you hear it? If it's on your mind, it's probably on the minds of other city residents too. Give us some background and debate it.
6 comments:
Anonymous
said...
Here is a bulletin for you. Everything is hush, hush about how the city is going to cut the budget. You will just have to wait and see. The taxpayer will be the last do know what the city is cooking up. Mr. Transparency is always conducting executive sessions.
What is the status of increasing the city admissions/entertainment tax?
I learned from the SR blog some time ago that at the 10% level the admissions tax would provide the opportunity to eliminate the city income tax and also provide ample increased levels of revenue.
Is that an accurate assessment of the impact of a 10% entertainment tax?
The reason I raise this question is because as I recall when there was talk of raising the parking tax for CP a few years ago that the park actually raised the parking fees that year and while the parking tax issue was dropped, CP kept the higher parking rate in place and has periodically increased parking fees ever since.
Seems like the entertainment/admissions tax increase would solve the city's revenue problems....
You are correct on your assumption, however, since there are two connected CP people on the finance committee, one doesn't even live within the city, this will never get to the commissioners to vote on. You also have to ask yourself, how many of the city commissioners have stock in CP.
If I am not mistaken, having stock in Cedar Point and any commissioners holding CP stock and then voting on anything that would impact CP and their stock would be a conflict of interest under Ohio's ethical legislation....and if I am not mistaken, elected officials must file annual financial disclosure reports with the Ohio Ethics commission identifying their assets and where those assets are held.
You are correct, however, this is why they have a finance committee. They can put people who are connected to CP on this committee and the suggestions on a entertainment tax or parking tax will never get to the commission. This relieves them of the conflict issue. It is all very legal but not morally correct and they know it. When you have someone who does not live in the city or work in the city or is paid by the city, which is a criteria to be appointed to the board, but is appointed by "Little Hitler", this makes everything alright. The citizens can never win because these commissioners use every trick, legal and illegal, to help their own agendas. Their idea of a good commission is to do whatever they want legal or not until someone challenges them. Sad city we live in isn't it.
6 comments:
Here is a bulletin for you. Everything is hush, hush about how the city is going to cut the budget. You will just have to wait and see. The taxpayer will be the last do know what the city is cooking up. Mr. Transparency is always conducting executive sessions.
This is brilliant! Let the tourist pay instead of increasing the income tax. Where do I sign?
What is the status of increasing the city admissions/entertainment tax?
I learned from the SR blog some time ago that at the 10% level the admissions tax would provide the opportunity to eliminate the city income tax and also provide ample increased levels of revenue.
Is that an accurate assessment of the impact of a 10% entertainment tax?
The reason I raise this question is because as I recall when there was talk of raising the parking tax for CP a few years ago that the park actually raised the parking fees that year and while the parking tax issue was dropped, CP kept the higher parking rate in place and has periodically increased parking fees ever since.
Seems like the entertainment/admissions tax increase would solve the city's revenue problems....
You are correct on your assumption, however, since there are two connected CP people on the finance committee, one doesn't even live within the city, this will never get to the commissioners to vote on. You also have to ask yourself, how many of the city commissioners have stock in CP.
If I am not mistaken, having stock in Cedar Point and any commissioners holding CP stock and then voting on anything that would impact CP and their stock would be a conflict of interest under Ohio's ethical legislation....and if I am not mistaken, elected officials must file annual financial disclosure reports with the Ohio Ethics commission identifying their assets and where those assets are held.
You are correct, however, this is why they have a finance committee. They can put people who are connected to CP on this committee and the suggestions on a entertainment tax or parking tax will never get to the commission. This relieves them of the conflict issue. It is all very legal but not morally correct and they know it. When you have someone who does not live in the city or work in the city or is paid by the city, which is a criteria to be appointed to the board, but is appointed by "Little Hitler", this makes everything alright. The citizens can never win because these commissioners use every trick, legal and illegal, to help their own agendas. Their idea of a good commission is to do whatever they want legal or not until someone challenges them. Sad city we live in isn't it.
Post a Comment