| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 08/24/2009 : 09:54:30 AM
|
| It’s going to hurt the businesses in this city, the restaurants and the hotel. I feel bad because they already got a big hit this year with the business tax. Even though it's small, it can make the difference between going under and just staying afloat. They need a break too. |
 |
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 08/24/2009 : 7:16:28 PM
|
| There is a CC meeting tonight, started at 7:00 PM about the local option meals taxes. The claim is being made that the city would be making over $60,000 a quarter by implementing this tax. |
|
|
|
waterboy
Senior Member
101 Posts |
Posted - 08/24/2009 : 7:38:09 PM
|
| prescott hotel is a rooming house not a hotel, heated debet on 16 carlo has no idea what the hell he is talking about, go eat some more food your wife is feeding you well you piece of crap |
|
|
|
waterboy
Senior Member
101 Posts |
Posted - 08/24/2009 : 7:43:06 PM
|
| when did we have a 8% tax can anyone find it out here |
|
|
|
waterboy
Senior Member
101 Posts |
Posted - 08/24/2009 : 7:45:08 PM
|
| I think the sun has gotten to him lol |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 08/24/2009 : 8:13:21 PM
|
I was only able to catch the last few minutes of the meeting. Can someone fill me in, please?
Why does it seem these important issues go to the city council at the very last minute?
"Deb" |
Edited by - massdee on 08/24/2009 8:13:55 PM |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 08/24/2009 : 9:59:03 PM
|
Well, Massdee, I’ll give it a shot.
Special meeting of the Common Council, The only item on the agenda was the acceptance of the local options meals tax. 13 members present. The absent members were Cornelio (on vacation, out of country), DiDomenico (on vacation, out of state), Sierra, Smith and Caralis.
According to an estimate provided by the state, the city can raise $183,774 in FY10 by implementing a .75% local option meals tax. The amount will be higher in subsequent years because it will be for a full year rather than three quarters. No explanation could be provided of exactly how the state came up with the estimate. Given the state’s forecasting ability of late, who knows how accurate the estimates will be.
In order to implement the tax, the city must approve it 30 days or more before the beginning of a quarter. The local tax amount collected would be submitted to the state along with the rest of the meals tax collected. The state collects meals tax from restaurants monthly but the city would only receive payments quarterly. The money has to go into the general fund when the city receives it.
There was a lot of talk about ear marking this money for specific purposes. With the money going into the general fund, I don’t really see that. I would think that the money would have to go towards the budget appropriation or remain unused and become part of next year’s free cash. I guess you could say that if the money was used to offset a particular part of the budget, it’s being earmarked. But, to me, it’s nothing more than another budget offset.
A lot of the expected arguments on each side of the issue. I believe that the first motion made was to sent it to the Finance Committee (M. Cardello) but I don’t think that it was seconded. Instead, a motion of favorable action was voted on. It passed on a vote of 8 to 5. Both Cardellos, Miller and Simonelli voted against it. I’m not sure of who cast the other no vote. Either I lost track or it was one of the people who didn’t use their microphone when they voted. The question was raised of how many votes were needed for this to pass. Assistant City Solicitor Murphy stated that it was a majority of the members present.
No mention was made of when the Board of Aldermen would be meeting to take up this issue. Could be as soon as tomorrow but I guess it could be as late as next Monday.
I'll have some more comments later. |
Edited by - tetris on 08/24/2009 10:09:45 PM |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 08/24/2009 : 10:08:07 PM
|
| I saw little parts of it as I was flipping the channels but from what I saw, I see the defensiveness is still there, and is getting REAL old. I’m sure it will be income for the city but at what price? This has the potential to hurt Everett businesses, and at this time, I could never support it. Some of the businesses are getting double whammies. They took a huge hit on the business property tax, and now this. I know if I want to get a tuna sandwich and it’s $7.00 in Everett, but $5.00 in Malden……I’ll go to Malden. My opinion is there is just too much spending going on and something has to be applied to the tax rate. I believe that was part of the discussion. We are not going to see roads repaired, etc. |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 08/24/2009 : 10:37:10 PM
|
A few interesting (hopefully) links to the DOR web site:
First, a link to a spreadsheet that shows which communities have accepted the local options meals tax. As of this writing, only 14 of the 351 cities and towns have accepted the option. The sheet appears fairly up to date; a number of the acceptance dates were from last week.
You must be logged in to see this link.
Next, a link to a spreadsheet that shows which communities have accepted the local options rooms tax. What I believe this sheet tells us is that the City of Everett is not currently charging any local rooms tax. Before the recent change, the city could have a local tax of up to 4%; the recent change would allow it to be up to 6%.
You must be logged in to see this link.
Next, a link to a spreadsheet that shows the state estimates of how much money could be raised in FY2010 if these local option tax were implemented on October 1. When a community has a small number of businesses that the tax would apply to, an estimate is not provided for, as Ms. Murphy stated tonight, privacy reasons. Ms. Murphy also stated that the DOR had estimates for FY2011 but I haven’t been able to track those down yet.
You must be logged in to see this link.
Lastly, a link to a document that states that all cities and towns will have to begin assessing property tax on telecommunication poles and wires on public ways. Who is ultimately going to pick up the tab on that?
You must be logged in to see this link. |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 08/24/2009 : 11:39:39 PM
|
I agree with Massdee; why do these things always seem to wait until the last minute? The Mayor himself has said in that past that he didn't appreciate these situations when he was on the Council; so why does he fall into the same trap?
But at least this time, not all of the blame can be put on the Mayor. This is exactly why the Council should not be taking the entire summer off. Legislative matters can't be handled by taking phone calls at the beach. Let's hope that Charter Review takes up the issue and requires the Council to have at least one meeting every month.
But an even bigger question this time around. Why wasn’t the fact that this meeting was taking place not better publicized? If waterboy hadn’t started this thread, how many of us would have even been looking for it to happen? Nothing in the paper, even in the ECTV schedule in the Leader-Herald; other programming was scheduled. City website? Nothing in the city calendar, meeting agendas or the online ECTV schedule. I have to admit though that I forgot to check the program schedule that they run on the ECTV message board. It shouldn’t be so hard to find. Transparency? I think not.
I don't believe that it was appropriate to talk about this tax without looking at the entire picture of where the city stands in regards to the revenues necessary to run the city in FY2010. I think that it was somewhat disingenuous to talk about this tax in terms of the things like redoing parks and streets when it's likely that these funds will be needed to fund the FY10 budget. Do I know that for certain? No. But where does the city stand after the large state aid cut? Yes, the city received a COPS grant and will be able to tax poles and wires. But where does that leave the city and more importantly, the taxpayers?
The fact that the city doesn't charge a rooms tax when they have been able to for quite some time seems to negate the Mayor's claim that not accepting a local option tax sends the wrong message to the State Legislature. Even though it would only raise a small amount, I feel that there should be a local rooms tax if there is going to be a local meals tax. I can’t imagine that this would be a tax that would impact many residents of Everett, other the owner, of course.
So what’s my opinion on the local option meals taxes? Honestly, I’d prefer no new taxes. But, as I said last spring, the only way out of the financial mess that the city is likely in would involve a little bit of everything. I could accept this tax, begrudgingly, if I saw both a local option room tax and further cuts to the budget. And I do understand that more cuts to the budget would likely involve cuts in services. Unfortunately, the pain needs to be shared. |
|
|
|
justme
Advanced Member
1428 Posts |
 Posted - 08/25/2009 : 05:43:36 AM
|
This tax isn't going to put anyone out of business! Assuming all else is equal, that $5.00 sandwich you're talking about Tails, will cost $0.02 more in Everett. If the higher tax is a deal breaker, you should be staying home!
I'm not happy with the way Carlo has handled things since he took office but this is getting ridiculous. There's absolutely nothing he can do that doesn't have most posters here complaining. The city needs the revenue and this tax will help with that without automatically raising property taxes. I see it as a good thing! |
|
|
|
Fran
Senior Member
250 Posts |
Posted - 08/25/2009 : 08:13:59 AM
|
| Why am I not surprised that Lou Sierra was a no show? Over twenty years in office and this guy still never shows up for the tough votes. Tough times make for tough decisions and people that can make them. |
|
|
|
justme
Advanced Member
1428 Posts |
Posted - 08/25/2009 : 08:29:47 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Fran
Why am I not surprised that Lou Sierra was a no show? Over twenty years in office and this guy still never shows up for the tough votes. Tough times make for tough decisions and people that can make them.
Yet he keeps getting re-elected............. Sad, isn't it? |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 08/25/2009 : 09:58:36 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by justme
This tax isn't going to put anyone out of business! Assuming all else is equal, that $5.00 sandwich you're talking about Tails, will cost $0.02 more in Everett. If the higher tax is a deal breaker, you should be staying home!
I'm not happy with the way Carlo has handled things since he took office but this is getting ridiculous. There's absolutely nothing he can do that doesn't have most posters here complaining. The city needs the revenue and this tax will help with that without automatically raising property taxes. I see it as a good thing!
I give credit when credit is due.
What I see is taxes taxes taxes and businesses getting hit yet again, regardless of how small. Why was there not any type of announcement in the papers? The administration claims no one has complained to them……..but who knew?
STOP THE FOOLISH SPENDING. STOP THE HIGH RAISES LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE. We all have to make adjustments….but not for certain individuals? Let’s keep whamming the businesses that already got stuck with a huge tax burden.
How about coming to the podium with a PLAN? Not just say “This is 240K for the city” then be rude to people that ask questions. I want to understand it, and would like to know what the PLAN is for that money since its taxpayers yet again. It may be small, but it adds up and over time, people will be affected. You could be absolutely right that this is a good thing, I just feel if there was better planning and less spending, it would not be necessary. My opinion means crap so good luck with it.
|
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 08/25/2009 : 11:25:23 AM
|
| There is an agenda posted on the city website for a special Board of Alderman meeting on Wednesday, August 26th at 7 PM to discuss accepting the local meals tax option. Again, it is the only item on the agenda. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Joint Convention
