With very little discussion, the city council will vote to increase the room tax by two dollars tonight. While I am not opposed to a room tax, if it was going to benefit the citizens of our city, BUT it is clear what the objective is;

INTRODUCTION AND ADOPTION OF ORDINANCES

12. 2nd Reading:  AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SIOUX FALLS, SD, AMENDING THE REVISED ORDINANCES OF THE CITY BY ADDING ARTICLE XII TO CHAPTER 39, ESTABLISHING THE SIOUX FALLS CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT.

It’s soul purpose is to give tax dollars (fees) to a private entity that markets Sioux Falls. My contention all along is that hotels should start their own marketing group to market themselves to visitors. This will set a precedent that will have other private entities with their hands out very soon.

I hope opponents voice their opinion tonight at the meeting.

THE ACTUAL ORDINANCE.


12 Thoughts on “The room tax will be voted on tonight at the SF city council meeting

  1. When it was suggested to use a bed and booze tax to fund an event center the hotel people were against it. When it goes into their pockets, i guess it’s different.

  2. Are they still claiming that their use of this money will somehow increase the sales tax base a hundred fold?

  3. Pardon me – revenues, not base.

  4. If someone will circulate petitions on this one I will be happy to sign and vote to stop this thing.

  5. Pathloss on November 15, 2010 at 4:06 pm said:

    I think we all know to book visitors into the Brandon Holiday Inn. Next spring, there’s the new Iowa Casino. It’s only 10 miles. The new fee may do more harm than good and encourage new hotel construction outside from city limits.

  6. My man mile is raising taxes $1.5 million tonight at turning it over to Evan and the chamber. Is this payback for their support?

  7. And does Mike think that the chamber will support him for reelection? As likely as all of the dems they have supported in past elections

  8. I just started to watch the meeting, but it seems you answered my question.

  9. Dukembe on November 15, 2010 at 9:04 pm said:

    Holy crap. A tax fully dedicated to a private entity. I propose the next tax be a toll at the intersection of 41st & Louise. Everyone entering that intersection must pay a $1 “Buy Dukembe a Nice German Car” fee. This fee will insure that the next time I’m sitting at that intersection I’m comfortable, and don’t feel like I need to choose the emptiest lane & rush forward into whatever lane I really needed as soon as the light turns green. That will enhance public safety. It will.

  10. I can’t even believe it is legal.

  11. Buzz Evenrude on November 15, 2010 at 9:17 pm said:

    This is disturbing that they can do this. How much “tax” is a guest to our city paying already when they visit? What a bunch of BS

  12. BE- I agree. They claim it will help the CVB bring in more people which in turn helps tax revenue, but I have often said, people are on a budget, if they are spending an additional $2 on a room a night, that is $2 less they will spend on goods and services in SF. On top of that, the precedent of raising taxes (fees) to hand directly over to a private entity is scary, even more disturbing is that 7 councilors voted for it (one was absent). I think if they want the CVB to market them better, raise your room rates by $2 a night and cut a check to them every year, leave government out of it.

Post Navigation