Letter: Time to raise TOT in South Tahoe
To the community,
The city of South Lake Tahoe claims to have a deficit. So why does the city hire consultants and a city attorney at $150,000 a year? It’s a puzzle. Also, new hires are made routinely. Are things what they are said to be or is this a game of pick a number statistics? Whatever.
Bill Crawford
The city, to increase revenue, now has a paid parking program. It’s called a user’s fee. It has caused a verbal storm by locals who oppose paid parking. Some folks believe the program will not raise the projected revenue.
Before rushing into paid parking, it would have been smart for the city to explore raising the hotel room tax, TOT. It has been the same for two decades. The tax on a non-redevelopment room is 10 percent, on a redevelopment room the tax is 12 percent.
At about the turn of the century, the City Council tried to increase the TOT, but the lodging folks united and killed the proposal. So now the city has a deficit and is stuck with a stagnant revenue base on a major industry.
The city should again try to increase the TOT, especially since it has imposed a paid parking free, a tax on the pocketbook of locals. The TOT should be 12 percent on all hotel rooms.
Bill Crawford, South Lake Tahoe
hmmmm, maybe your right Bill. Maybe not. Wonder what’s the TOT in other hotel heavy locations … SF 14%, bay area 10%ish, most everywhere else, less than 10% ish. What is it in Stateline, 0%??? But don’t worry Bill there are those already working to change the demographic of who comes here to the more affluent. They’ll pay.
The idea that the government needs more taxes is ABSURD.
We don’t need more taxes to support the overbearing and over paid government class of people. They need to be cut not increased.
What we need is less taxes and less government intrusion into the Free Market process and more focus on making sure that regulations are evenly applied to all. Government has over stepped it bounds and SLT is the result. Nothing to be proud of at all.
We have created a crony capitalism environment that poisoned the principles of freedom and fairness that America was built on.
It has never been a perfect balance but it had been a much better balance than it is now.
South Lake Tahoe is the example of what communities SHOULD NOT BECOME.
When the tax is a percentage, it increases as the room rate increases.
I was surprised to read that it has not increased in two decades. I have certainly seen increases in the past decade as a consumer.
You will collect more if you make it a more visitor friendly place. Volume is the solution rather than collecting more from fewer people.
The parking has to be thought through.
If not the salaries, the benefits need to be examined.
How did Placer County increase their TOT revenue? Was it by more efficient collection, or did they raise it? If they raised it, what was the old rate and what is the new?
As Mr. Alyeshmerni says, as a percentage, if the rooms cost more today, the TOT will be higher. We travel a fair bit and 12% seems plenty high enough to me. Such taxes are always easy to pass because the voters think it won’t affect them, it’ll get the other guy. . . but only as long as that other guy still sees value for his money.
I think there are many, much better ways to raise revenue than by soaking our visitors without offering them something extra in return.
Are we current in TOT collections? As in ‘The Block’ and all the pirate house rentals in the city? Probably not.
Vacation home rentals pay TOT also. Are owner managed properties being held to the same standard of payment as the agency managed ones? That would increase revenue.
It’s 13.42% on Maui. I don’t like it, but we still go.
New York is very high as well, but we still go. See below:
Hotel taxes: For any room costing more than $40 a night, the state and local tax is equal to: $3.50 per night, plus 14.375% of room rental charges. This tax rate includes NYC and state sales taxes as well as the hotel occupancy tax of 5.875%. Rooms renting for less than $40 are subject to the same rates, but lower nightly dollar amount fees.
San Francisco is up at about 15%.
Your total tax on a San Francisco hotel room will be either 15% or 15.5% of the room rate. There is a base 14% hotel tax rate for all San Francisco hotels, plus a Tourism Improvement District (TID) tax that may be an additional 1% or 1.5% depending on where the hotel is located.
Our TOT is low at 10% compared to other tourist towns.
I agree with Bill. And get rid of the paid parking. Including the parking garage.
The TOT base contains many smaller motels in town which have been allowed to convert their customer base to long term residents. In other words the TOT base converted to apartments without any change in zoning. All the revenue from those properties is gone.
Why not try to collect the massive amounts of TOT that is being uncollected because the city is run by special interests and incompetents. Millions and millions have slipped through the butter fingers of our elected officials and the citizens pay with a lack of services.
As long as the goal is to “raise government revenue” to support the excessive government the community/State will continue to decline.
I am surprised at the willingness of people to ignore the obvious and accept the lies of their government.
Government is the problem, not the solution.
Another city council blunder.
Hotels and occupancy are directly tied to tourism, what we have and what we offer. If we can’t offer higher quality amenities at hotels or more ” fun” touristy things to do then you will not see a rise in revpar….revpar = revenue per available room….
Increasing your ADR = average daily rate would be the best solution. ToT should be based as a percentage of the total room stay.
If trpa and our idiot city council understood even the most basic of mathematical or economic principals they would see the best way to achieve revenue growth.
The writer of this piece has demonstrated a few times how far out of touch with reality him and his friends ( city council) are.
The attitude that tahoe is ours and we don’t want visitors is also not helping.
Nicer hotels, more amenities and activities will lead to higher sales, which lead to higher taxable sales and more jobs, all of which are needed for good economic balance.
Development of properties leads to higher property taxes, allowing owners to upgrade and modernize there properties leads to higher occupancy and improved finances, all of which translate into more REV for the city.
Don’t raise taxes, ask visitors to pay more for less, let’s offer more,provide more and we rreceive more ( tax dollars)
The Tahoe portion of Placer County saw record TOT revenues this past fiscal year.
Why?
Because Placer County doesn’t step on the throat of businesses and visitors. They encourage development, gentrification, and commerce.
Bill, you are so out of touch with reality it’s actually sad.
Giving the government any more tax revenue is akin to feeding rats in your basement.
Until South Lake Tahoe takes on a progressive pro-business, pro-development attitude, you’re going to see more of the same for the foreseeable future.
Also, we need to replace are city manager, city council and start to ignore trpa policies that don’t work.
VOTE THEM OUT !!!!!!!
SLT needs to focus on creating weekend events 52 weeks a year to bring in tourist dollars. Getting rid of Nancy and City Council won’t accomplish anything. I wonder if Beefcake attends Council Meetings on a regular basis to give fresh ideas? Where’s the Beef?
And a BIG AMEN to Beefcake, VOTE THEM OUT !!!
City Council Members Davis, Laine and Swanson are up for re-election in 2014. Judging by the posts on this site there are obviously a lot of people who are very unhappy with the local government leadership. I’m hoping to see a lot of individuals running for those three City Council Member seats next year and offering up their ideas and expertise in solving all these City issues that are repeatedly referenced in these blogs. This is your chance to actually make a difference and lead the community in the direction where you believe it should go, and with three new Council Members you could end up having a majority vote of like-minded individuals.
The beef is simmering……
I do stay as informed as I can, I do not offer opinions at council meetings….I should, and that time is coming
For me its about having the proper ammuntion for the battle so to speak. Being able to speak clearly, with a laid out plan of attack and vision and community supports is key to SLT being the gem it always should have been.
Bob we agree and disagree….
We agree that SLT needs the product ( events events , events)
Why SLT hasnt is beyond me.
We should have Monster /Red bull / outdoor channel events none stop…along with community and local events for the natives..
However, we disagree on Nancy and the rest ….a true disgrace.
Incompetence and personal battles and agendas, a insane unwillingness to allow the organic change that takes place in all cities to happen. The seemingly Nazi attitude toward any businessman or woman who would dare turn a profit in SLT.
The odd relationship that allows the hole to get built but a homeowner who can’t build a 10’x15′ deck…
I’m not evening going to get started on the sidewalk or street light issue ……I like claiming SLT is the only city in California without those. Its a shame as well because that is an ADA and safety issue as well. In every city I have seen development, the owner rebuilds the sidewalk in front of their property, eventually all the sidewalks get done….not as much in residential but more commercial …..doesn’t really matter….want to judge a city? Look at its sidewalks…
Dear “beefcake” and all the other loons that post on this site regularly:
As a member of the Jewish faith, I’m seriously offended by your constant references to “Nazi”-this and “Hitler”-that. Until the City and TRPA start rounding up people in town and gassing them to death, how about we cool it with the ridiculous WWII references? These are people with whom you have a legitimate policy disagreement. They’re not mass murderers.
I promise you it’s not helping you make your argument.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
As a P.S. to my earlier post, I’d like to say that I hope SLT isn’t beyond hope. We did go back to Telluride a few years ago, the change was remarkable. It’s still a very expensive town to visit. But now there is value for the money. The locals no longer treat the visitors like an inconvenience, they make them feel welcome. There’s lots to do there, and no worries about parking meters; you park your car when you arrive and the public transport is phenomenal. SLT could be that if we tried. It takes a massive attitude adjustment, though, and it depends on the locals feeling like they actually have a stake in the success of the town. The way things are now, with most people not even getting a vote on what goes on in the city, it’s hard to feel like we matter. It appears the city is run by the council and for the council and its few VIP’s. The perennial doormat to Nevada.
The city needs to realize that there is more to South Lake Tahoe than a bunch of run-down casinos on the edge of town. And it needs to treat its people like the valuable resource we are.
If you compare the past 15 years in South Lake Tahoe to Bend Oregon during the same timeframe you will find stark differences, none of them favor SLT. In particular look at the parking in the two areas.
Bend has a great policy designed to keep the shoppers, businesses and the residents happy. First two hours are free on the street or if you go to the city garage the first three hours are free. Good plan, yes?
In South Lake Tahoe on the other hand their parking program is all about getting more money for the government and they are going to milk it from anyone that stumbles along. Fewer and fewer people will stumble into that trap.
Amazing that anyone buys the baloney that the City needs to find more revenue! Amazing!
Besides the parking fiasco, since’ ’02 the City has raised our sales tax, twice raised the business license fee, and took 2% of the TOT that was dedicated to promoted our town. All to feed the bureaucratic beast!!
What has all these increases gotten us? The call for evermore increases!
When you’re in a hole, stop digging! The City doesn’t need new tax increases, but rather a new pro-, or at least less anti-, business attitude!
End the duplicity, overlapping departments, higher taxes and fees, nonstop blunders, divisiveness, and endless debate.
Dissolve the city. If Tahoe City and Incline Village can exist effectively without separate, redundant, very costly municipal overhead, it can be done at South Lake Tahoe too.
“We the People” are actually the government the massively misinformed, self-loathing haters deplore. Mindlessly repeating “hate gubmint” nonsense from scammer pantloads like limbaugh, beck and alex jones makes you all look stupid. No wonder none of our councilmembers or civic leaders besides Bill C. and JoAnn C. want to contribute to this forum.
Dissolve the City? Why? So the ElDo County “ranchers” can take over? Buy a clue.
oh god, its the same ol crap here as well, dogzilla and cj and their hateful spewing is really annoying
The only ‘hateful spewing’ I’m seeing here (other than a bit of vitriol directed at a very bad city policy) is from the left side of the aisle, bringing up radio personalities who have nothing to do with this city and its problems.
So what do you have against ranchers??
Says the proud Islamophobe.
@dogula….well said
SLT could be more, it should be one of the best places to live work and visit in California. As was said, more people just don’t care then do care, and then we have the complainers. I still believe and will always that trpa and some of the long standing good ole boys BS on city council has ruined SLT. They will build the loop road even though not one person wants it, they will continue to pass policy and ideas that are conceived in stupidity and executed with and by clown shoes leaders like Nancy, and the council. Like I said before, you want to judge the quality of city….look at the sidewalks.
Congrats SLT leaders….smell like Detroit in here
In any other community, South Tahoe would an endless supply of people clamoring to get in and enjoy, planes in a holding pattern waiting to land at the airport, and folks coming from all corners of the country who want to visit.
Instead, businesses are discouraged from being productive, private enterprise is demonized, and South Tahoe blames every party but themselves for the condition of the place.
Want to know what South Tahoe could be? A world class resort destination – consider a combination of world class entertainment (Branson, Missouri comes to mind), incredible skiing (Aspen & Vail), night life (Las Vegas), and phenomenal beaches (Hawai’i) all in one package. This place should be hopping with people dropping $$$ like confetti.
But every single restriction government puts up is a hurdle that people don’t want to deal with. It’s really messed up. To add insult to injury, if you’re a tourist, where are you going to stay? A run down casino that’s 50 years old?
Nobody wants to invest in South Tahoe because the City of South Lake Tahoe doesn’t want to invest in anything but bureaucracy, regulations, restrictions, and taxation. Who in their right mind would want to put money at risk in an environment like that?
If we want to charge taxes as New York and San Francisco does, we need to be more like them. Visitors want to experience what those cities offer. We are not there yet.
In all fairness, the city and the TRPA have been much more business friendly than they have been in the past.
I would not be so quick to judge our city leadership if we have not heard and seen what they hear and see. In fact, gratitude for the amount of time they spend for small reward they get is in order. If you can do better for us, please become a candidate.
You don’t want to dissolve SLT and be run by the folks in Placerville. The Board of Supervisors, Cherie Raffety and the bunch are only servants to themselves, and not the public who elected them. Please don’t even make it a consideration.
Mr. Alyeshmerni:
I agree with your comments 100-percent and would like to thank you for a courteous and cogent post.
As I stated in my above post, three City Council Member seats are up for re-election in 2014 and this is the opportunity for the extremely unhappy posters on this site to actually take a proactive action, run for office, offer up their ideas and expertise to solve all these City issues that are repeatedly referenced in these blogs, and if the majority of the voting public agrees with them to get elected and lead the community in the direction where they believe it should go.
We all have choices: people can choose to take action and try to effect the changes that they believe are so desperately needed, or they can choose to sit at their keyboards and offer criticism.
4-Mer, the trouble is, most of us live in the county. We have absolutely no say about who you people in the city limits elect. Yet we live with the consequences every day. Gets pretty frustrating, to say the least.
Dogula:
I also reside in the County (but I own property within the City limits) and cannot vote in City elections, so your assumption about who I elect is incorrect. I frequently see Meyers and EDC residents address the City Council at meetings, or they send correspondence to the Council to be part of the public record. Some of these people just criticize and complain; other people actually offer suggestions that they believe may help provide solutions. Like I said before, people have choices in the course they wish to take of either identifying solutions or of complaining and criticizing.
4-mer, the fact of the matter is that the people in the county and NV are just more aware than the people in the city. The city’s population really don’t care as much as the people elsewhere about the city’s financial shape or the decisions they make. Yes, there are pockets of concerned and informed citizens. However, they are the minority. This is supported by voter turnout in the city, which is the lowest in Eldorado county. How else do people like Cole and Davis who got us in to this financial and infrastructure mess get re-elected over and over?
Dogula and others, if you care so much, contribute financially or volunteer for a candidate you support. No law against it. Go knock on doors and talk to people for your favorite candidate to be in 2014.
4mer…. part of the problem in electing council members is the question- who is the voting public in SLT?
With so many 2nd homes in SLT, the Council which passes the laws and raise the taxes in SLT aren’t elected by all the residents and property owners.
Property owners, like yourself, whose domicile is not SLT are not allowed to vote for or against the people who can affect them.
On my street of 29 parcels, in the city limits, there are only 4 properties with full time residents eligible to vote. The remaining 25 properties are owned by people who come for the summer and on weekends but can only vote at their primary home somewhere else in California or another State. These people have no say in their representation as it applies to ordinances passed by the City and County.
If property owners were allowed to vote in local elections, where they have financial interest (pay taxes), I wonder if the same people would be elected to the Council.
Just because one votes for the President of the USA at one address doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be allowed to vote in local elections where they have a vested interest (pay taxes).
You’d think with our computerized world you could set up a voting system which allowed local registration everywhere you pay property taxes while limiting federal voting to only 1 address which is your primary domicile.
tahoeadvocate:
My concern of allowing second home owners to vote in matters that impact residents whose domicile is in SLT (or EDC) is the potential of their having no real vested interest in matters other than what affects them. You noted that 25 of the 29 properties on your street are owned by individuals not permanently residing in SLT. If any of those individuals rent out their property as Vacation Homes and they don’t like having to pay the VHR fees and TOT, should they be allowed to vote in SLT they could collectively make up a majority and elect representatives to the City Council who would address only their concerns while ignoring the concerns and needs of the people who actually live in SLT. For example, what is the incentive for someone with a second home in SLT but permanently residing elsewhere to approve a school tax that would benefit children in SLT when they’re already paying taxes to benefit their own children elsewhere? Allowing people who don’t actually live in an area to vote on matters that seriously impact the individuals that do could live in that area could be a real double edged sword.
dryclean:
I can’t speak to the subject that people in EDC and NV are just more aware than people in the City since I’m unaware of, or have seen a quantifiable report that can unequivocally prove that. I do however agree with your suggestion that individuals living outside the SLT City limits and not able to vote for City Council Members have the ability to identify other methods of participating and influencing SLT elections.
It’s definitely easier to run when you follow the Public Employee mantra! You then get access to their money and guaranteed voting bloc! And if don’t follow it, one instantly has all that working against them!
And participating is great if the Council would stick to what they say they’ll do! I showed up at a meeting with many like minded individuals on a particular issue. Got the Council to vote our way! Then, at a later meeting, when we weren’t there (when you have day jobs, one can’t just block off hours everyday!), the Council just reversed itself! Shamelessly!
So just have to stick with utilizing my 1st Amendment rights!
Regarding the sidewalk issue – Please be aware that the sidewalks being installed right now are the result of state and/or federal funding. Waiting for random acts of redevelopment one parcel at a time hasn’t been so effective at getting our streets modernized. Believe it or not, smetimes gubment has a roll in getting things done.
I believe the discussion we need to have here is what is South Tahoe spending money on?
Prior to raising a tax to fund more bureaucracy, it is important to know where the money is being spent. In particular, how much money is being spent on improving infrastructure?
Aside from personnel, how much money is being spent on hard improvements?
My guess is little to none.
The S.F. Chronicle’s legendary columnist Herb Caen used to refer to ‘parking meters as their form of ‘legalized gambling’: “they’re betting your quarter against your $ 25.00 that you don’t make it back in time”. . . in South Lake Tahoe, a true gambling town, where ’24/7′ was invented just down the street and across the line, we are merely “betting against the come” in only hoping that things will straighten themselves out. . .
I’ve said many times, and now again, Bill Harrah had no particular problem filling all the rooms that were here, whether they were his or not. Harvey Gross benefited from that, as did the myriad motels away from Stateline area.
It wasn’t that the motels were newer then, it was that they were “available” to the numbers that came – that they are older now is irrelevant, as it is the difference in operations and in knowing how to market Tahoe that is missing – all else is just “catch-up” for the fact that so-called management doesn’t really have anything to manage anymore, being left as they are with only crumbs & bungling to overcome.
If no room is left for the future while trying to overcome past mistakes, with interest accruing on those (at rates not currently ‘competitive’), then the shovel must be put down, as the hole can only get deeper.
The City not only stays close to financial bankruptcy this way, but it is also stays bankrupt for new ideas – that’s what “catch-up” means – the business community here, now in supposed concert with “agencies”, are really busy trying to bring Tahoe back into the ’80’s – meaning that we will once again be way behind, even as we’re “catching up”. . .that is more of a disinvestment, which is why there’s so much difficulty figuring out what economic development might look like.
Even those who engage in civic entrepreneurship ( a more vital version of so-called ‘public/private partnerships’) are left out-in-the-cold, as the current thought is geared to what-we-can-afford (that looks the same) instead of how-can-we-afford (to do what we need to do), if we knew what that was. . .in any event, we can’t take the time to think about that, as we are too busy thinking about how not-to-sink-any-further behind.
Wonder what a conundrum is – now you know !. . .
4mer…. If you take your argument regarding only people domiciled in an area should be able to select lawmakers, invert it and you have the situation which exists today. People who may have no financial ownership in a community (other than the rent they pay) are selecting lawmakers for matters that seriously impact the individuals who don’t domicile here but who may pay a majority of the property taxes. It is already a double edged sword.
To me the best solution is to allow everyone with an address in a community to be able to elect their local representatives.
I think we should look at the numbers from this summer before making important decisions.
I didn’t perform a $20,000 study but I think this summer has been the busiest in seven or eight years. The traffic has been heavy the sewer plants stink more and the newspaper boxes empty quickly.
The vacation rental next to me was booked all summer and I couldn’t find a parking space at Sky Meadows to visit my friend on the weekends.
I think everyone who claimed the forty mile an hour speed limit would kill us was wrong.
tahoeadvocate:
You have presented a point regarding individuals who have no financial ownership in a community other than the rent they pay, don’t pay property taxes, vote on issues that do in fact impact property owners and the taxes they are assessed, and participate in the selection of lawmakers who will represent those renters’ best interests. But for the sake of an example, my spouse and I by choice never had children, however we are required through the taxes that we are assessed to pay for the public education of other people’s children, even though we never had need to utilize any of those services. One could theoretically say that since we had no need for those services that we should not have been required to pay those taxes and that it should have been the actual service users who pay for the service based on the number of children they enroll in the system. My point is that attempting to identify a clear-cut demarcation of both social and fiscal responsibilities for the overall well-being of any specific community’s residents is extremely difficult and I think that all these types of issues are very complex. I certainly don’t have the answers and I don’t believe there are any simple, clear-cut answers. I do think there will always be a double-edged sword situation and that its likely that both sides of that sword will continue to sharpen.
Thank you for providing an interesting exchange of ideas–this has been enjoyable.
sunriser 2:
I agree with your observations and you gave me a really good laugh. Many thanks to you!
The worst type of supercilious(born on 3rd base, think they hit a triple)people are the ones that actually think that because they were fortunate enough to inherit or marry into their family’s money and property they are somehow the deserving overclass.
“People who may have no financial ownership in a community(other than the rent they pay)…The working class folks of So. Shore deserve the vote more than you do, they are the infrastructure of this town. We need the schools, roads, police and fire, snow removal and all the other City services 24/7, 365.
I say that the locals have more interest in the overall health of everyone in our community because our “financial ownership” in real dollars taxed and spent here dwarfs your property taxes on primo real estate you were sperm-lucky enough to inherit.
Right on, Sunriser2!
BBill… Reading your responses always makes me wonder why you try to insult people’s heritage when you don’t know anything about them.
No one in this exchange has suggested one group should have a vote over another or take anything away. The discussion was that the voter base should be expanded to include everyone who has a legitimate interest to make the community better even if they don’t domicile at the SLT address. No one suggests anything other than having the ability to elect representatives who impact both your and their interests.
As far as your statement with regards to taxes, I look forward to you providing data which we can all review, not just another insult at those few in our community who might still own a family property. Most of the property in SLT has been sold through the years and pays significant taxes even if the owner resides somewhere else. The families which still own property developed by their ancestors should be viewed as the foundation of the community. They are here to stay and want the best for the community. Your throwing verbal spitballs at this foundation of our town, rather than trying to work together with them for the betterment of SLT deserves a deeper review on your part.
Bill Crawford: Thanks for staying involved in the community through your “Opinion letters”.
Your comments bring out a myriad of viewpoints and keep the thought juices flowing through the keyboards.
tahoeadvocate,
I’ve been paying property taxes since the ’70s when I originally moved here and bought my 1st home with money I saved from working since high school and all through college. I raised successful kids and contributed to my community by supporting our schools and local service organizations and by voting for bond measures and some unpopular tax increases for things to benefit all of our citizens over the years.
It has been my experience from close interaction with wealthy 2nd homeowners and part-timers because of my career that the vast majority would only cast ballots that serve their personal benefit and could not care less about our schools, overall infrastructure or the City service needs for what used to be SLT’s vibrant middle class. They would overwhelmingly vote against any ballot measure that would raise revenues that benefit the full-time locals and their families. I think the true foundation of this town is working folks and their families and maybe you should review your thinking about who should be allowed to vote where. If you’re insulted by my observations and opinions then so be it.
BBill- I’ve been paying property taxes here since the 1960s so that argument is mute.
No one questions what you’ve accomplished on your own but your attacks on SLT’s heritage property owners seems to be uncalled for.
No one is advocating doing anything to hurt our community but rather to broaden the voices who can have a positive impact on it.
I politely disagree with your opinion of my neighbors who are 2nd homeowners and how they would vote. My experience is different than yours. Unfortunately I also take issue with your evaluation that the only people who matter are “working folks”. My neighbors work very hard to be able to afford the time they spend here. Their families, in some cases generations, working to be able to afford the time they spend here while improving their property and their community. They are the ones who might be insulted.
I don’t know what interface you’ve had with “wealthy 2nd homeowners and part-timers” but it sounds like you are discriminating. Why not try to integrate all viewpoints not to vilify those you seem afraid of.
Bill Crawford, for shame on your extremely misleading opinion piece. Claiming that the the cities share of The TOT has not been increased for 20 years is entirely untry. about 8 years ago the city increased its TOT tax by taking away the marketing budget that was used to increase our visitor base. At that time the city was collecting 8% TOT for the general fund and 2% to market South Lake Tahoe. So the city recieved a 25% increase. This fiscual year thru May of this fiscual year(which ends in Sept 30) the city has recieved close to 1 million dollars a year in TOT taxes, and this does not even include June, July, Aug. & Sept.which account for 50% of our TOT.
As already noted before TOT is a percentage of income
Bill Crawford, for shame on your extremely misleading opinion piece. Claiming that the the cities share of The TOT has not been increased for 20 years is entirely untry. about 8 years ago the city increased its TOT tax by taking away the marketing budget that was used to increase our visitor base. At that time the city was collecting 8% TOT for the general fund and 2% to market South Lake Tahoe. So the city recieved a 25% increase. This fiscual year thru May of this fiscual year(which ends in Sept 30) the city has recieved close to 1 million dollars a year in TOT taxes, and this does not even include June, July, Aug. & Sept.which account for 50% of our TOT.
As already noted before TOT is a percentage of income not a fixed dollar amount. If we used your view of raising taxes, why dont we just increase sales taxes 2% every 15 to 20 years that way we could in 30 years be paying sales taxes of 12%. While we are at it lest also increase the property taxes and income taxes 20% every 15 to 20 years. I know that it will mean that the city will have much more money than they would need but dont worry if we give them the money they will figure a way to spend it. Just like they figured out how to spend the 25% increase they recieved 8 years ago.
How does Placerville balance its budget without TOT or parking meters and have a free parking garage downtown?
They have been hit by Red Hawk too. Lots of people once stopped there to eat and buy gas on the way to Tahoe.
We don’t need to raise the rate of the TOT. We need to get more people paying it. Lower vacancy in hotels and motels will result in higher revenue. Find venues which will attract hotel guests at least every weekend.
Don’t let motels convert to apartments without some penalty for the loss of a TOT collection property.
let the run down motels rent long term, that is less inventory, less inventory means the average daily rate goes up, the more that goes up the higher the tot
What percentage of the TOT goes to marketing the area to get more visitors and subsequently more TOT?
TOT is collected and recorded as revenue in the General Ledger in the month following the actual motel stay. That doesn’t sound like the use of it is predetermined. It sounds like it can be used for anything.
Here’s a link to the May 2013 report.
Looks like amounts are higher this year over last.
http://www.cityofslt.us/DocumentCenter/View/3222
Not one dime for marketing to bring in more people? Surely some of the TOT should be used to promote the city.
Springamp, that is precisely the scam that the lodging association and others involved have been using practically forever to try to convince their friends on the council (who, truth be told, don’t require much convincing due to their own business backgrounds) that TOT should be directed toward marketing.
TOT is a tax intended to pay for the city services that a hundred thousand or so use virtually every summer week and most winter weekends. Tourism is the city business, but the very roughly 25,000 or so actual citizens can’t be expected to pay for all of the city services – police, fire, public works, recreation etc. and so on – that are used by the visitors who outnumber the tax payers by three or four times.
The tourist lodging industry keeps buying council elections and the TOT continues to be sold as a marketing ploy. And the voters keep buying into the scam.
The folks who love and live in South Lake Tahoe continue to depend on the tourist dollar to keep their city alive – the dirty little secret is that the dollar is needed to pay for the services the tourists use and the folks who make a living from tourism do everything they can to avoid requiring their customers or their businesses to pay a fair share.
Back in the mid-80’s the TOT was increased, by a public vote, from 8% to 10%. The added 2% was for the express purpose of going to the LTVA to promote our tourist economy. Initially, the money went directly to the LTVA!
When redevelopment came along, the City of SLT voted to have that 2% go thru the general fund, but still be used for tourist marketing! It was felt that it would be easier to get, or we could get better terms, on redevelopment bonds, the more money it appeared was in the general fund.
As soon as that money appeared as General Fund dollars though, everyone was trying to get their hands on it! At first, 25% of that 2%, was taken in the mid-90’s. And then the rest was taken by 2008.
There were these rationales of: #1. We don’t like how the LTVA is spending the money. And #2. How various govt. services, things such as road maintenance, public safety, etc., are a form of marketing.
Whatever one thinks of those rationales, it totally distorted and changed the issue!! The 2% was to go to the LTVA for marketing! Period! If you didn’t like how it was being used, then the 2% increase should’ve been rescinded!
The grab of that 2%, and the dishonest arguments behind it, truly soured my view of our City govt! And made me extremely cynical of the powers that be!
But beyond my personal rant, the fact is taking that 2% was a revenue grab, and a roundabout tax increase!!
Well, there were the two ladies from LTVA who had that little gambling problem. That is where quite a bit of that money went.
Some also went to their little drinking problem.
Yes that is correct the city does not spend one dime from the TOT to market the area to bring in more tourist. After the money grab the city did in 2008, the lodging properties self imposed a tax on their clients so that there is money to market the area. This tax is $3 a night for motels/hotels and $4.50 for vacation homes that are professionally managed. The only money that is from this pool of money from the Tourism Improvement District.
One would think that between the LTVA, the casinos and the City, we could strive to have an event every weekend much like Reno does. They are always attracting visitors and it’s broadcast on their News Channels to report on how successful they are.
While we don’t have the news media of Reno, what more can we do to demand the city return the share of TOT they stole?
Copper, I dont know if you know this or not but almost every city in the US that has a TOT uses a portion of it to market their area. They do this because they know that if they dont invest in marketing their tax base will come down and continue to go down. Any business that does not market itself will sooner or later fail, just as the city would fail if it had a declining TOT income base.
The TOT that will be collected this year will be over $5 million dollars that is enough to pay all of the cost of the fire department(the second most expensive department in the city. Plus when you include the real Estate taxes paid by lodging properties plus sales taxes paid by the tourist it would be hard to say that tourist do not pay thier fair share of taxes to support the city services that they use.
Bill – Who are you?? I see your face every time I check the website. Maybe I’m naïve and don’t know all the “special people” in Tahoe, but what do you do to represent the local residents of Tahoe.