Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Business Licenses topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Fort Scott commissioners seek draft business‑license ordinance after work session; no vote taken

5936309 · January 28, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

City commissioners held a work session on a proposed business‑license program that would require registration, proof of tax ID and liability insurance, and floor‑plan information for some commercial properties. No ordinance was voted on; staff were asked to draft a proposal and collect more business feedback for review at the first March meeting.

Fort Scott City commissioners on Tuesday held a work session to discuss a proposed city business‑license program and directed staff to draft a detailed ordinance for later review. No formal vote was taken; commissioners asked staff to return a draft that specifies fees, exemptions, enforcement procedures and administrative responsibilities.

The discussion centered on three stated goals: leveling the playing field for brick‑and‑mortar businesses that collect sales tax, improving public‑safety information available to first responders (including whether some commercial buildings should provide floor plans), and creating a registry so the city and economic‑development staff can contact local businesses. Commissioners and staff debated scope, enforcement and possible fee levels.

Why it matters: Commissioners said a business registry could help ensure consumers and other businesses transact with licensed, insured vendors, and could give fire and codes personnel better information about hazardous materials or building layouts. Opponents at the meeting said the measure would impose another recurring cost on small businesses and expressed doubt the city could reliably enforce compliance with only existing codes staff.

Most discussion was procedural. Commissioners discussed several fee models that have been used in other cities: a zero fee or nominal registration; monthly or annual flat fees (examples in the discussion ranged from $10 per month or $120 per year down to a proposal of $30 a year); and models tied to square footage. Participants also discussed a one‑time or annual registration that would require businesses to supply an EIN or tax ID and proof of general liability insurance as conditions of licensing for specified categories of businesses.

Codes and enforcement capacity was a central concern. Commissioners noted that current codes enforcement staffing is limited (discussion cited two current codes officers), and that any new licensing program would shift workload to codes, legal and police staff for enforcement and possible court actions. Commissioners and staff estimated the fully burdened cost of a new full‑time enforcement position at roughly $55,000–$60,000 a year, and discussed whether fee revenue could be earmarked to cover such administrative costs.

The meeting also covered how to treat home‑based operations, temporary vendors and special events. Commissioners asked whether the ordinance should exclude certain home occupations (for example, people who work for an outside employer from a home office) and how to handle food trucks, farmers‑market vendors and short‑term event vendors. Staff advised looking at other municipalities’ exemptions and special‑event or transient vendor licensing sections when drafting the proposal.

Staff and public outreach items: Mary, who represented the city’s business outreach effort, reported 19 responses so far to a business‑retention and expansion survey that closes at the end of the month; she said she is conducting additional face‑to‑face meetings with local business owners and will gather specific feedback about whether businesses want a license, whether they support proof‑of‑insurance requirements, and what benefits they would expect in exchange for a fee. Commissioners asked staff to consider extending the survey window if needed.

Next steps: Commissioners who support pursuing a license asked to work with staff and legal counsel to draft an ordinance. The commission asked staff to prepare a draft that includes: which businesses must register, exemptions, proposed fees, penalties for failure to register, enforcement process, and an administrative plan showing who would process licenses. Commissioners said they expect to review a draft at or before the first commission meeting in March and to hold another work session before any vote. No ordinance was introduced or adopted at the work session.

Public comment and records: Participants repeatedly requested additional data from other cities and empirical evidence about whether passage of business‑license ordinances causes local economic growth; staff were asked to compile examples and any available studies for the commission’s review. The work session closed with direction to continue community outreach and drafting work.