Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Funding Preservation Arts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board discusses coupling arts grants and hotel‑occupancy funds to support preservation; asks staff to develop options
Summary
Staff presented research on how other Texas cities use hotel‑occupancy taxes and arts/historic preservation programs. Board members favored exploring a subcommittee and asked staff to return with more detailed options and budget implications.
Historic preservation staff presented research on using hotel‑occupancy tax (HOT) revenue to fund historic preservation and arts programs, citing examples in Galveston, Granbury and Austin. Board members expressed interest in forming a small subcommittee to refine program priorities and recommended staff return with specific options and any needed changes to city procedures or ordinances.
Shelby summarized models used by other cities: Galveston allocates a portion of HOT revenue to arts and preservation nonprofits and distributes funds over a two‑year cycle; Granbury has a focused preservation program that used HOT funds to rehabilitate many square‑front buildings; San Marcos and Austin run grant programs for events, public art and preservation. Board members said a combined arts‑and‑history approach could help fund plaques, grants for façade repair, and selective preservation incentives.
Several board members suggested beginning with modest, clearly scoped pilot grants and forming a subcommittee to define goals (grant types, eligible applicants, review criteria, and how funds would interact with the Convention & Visitors Bureau). The board asked staff to prepare a tighter proposal, including potential ordinance language, administrative steps, and a suggested timeline for presenting the idea to city council.
