Beaumont council approves $450,000 Stonehenge study addendum with voter-input amendment

The Beaumont City Council on July 15 approved a $450,000 amendment to an interim services agreement with Stonehenge Holdings LLC to expand the scope of consultant work on a downtown hotel project — and added a proviso that voters will have input on the convention center hotel proposal. "I would ask that we only authorize this additional expenditure if voters are gonna have a say so in this convention center hotel," said Councilman Crenshaw during the meeting. Councilman Turner said he supported the amendment: "If all we're doing is looking for voter approval, I do support that and second that motion." The council voted in favor after the amendment passed; the motion carried. The contract amendment covers additional feasibility and consulting work requested by council beyond the original hotel feasibility scope. City staff said the addendum funds would pay for Stonehenge’s work through the November election and clarified the agreement itself provides consulting services only and does not authorize construction or borrowing. City staff and the consultant previously presented feasibility work for a downtown hotel; the expanded scope includes analyses for a convention center hotel and related downtown projects, staff said during the discussion. Council members debated how a voter step might be structured: options cited included a binding referendum on borrowing for a convention center hotel or a ballot question to authorize a venue (hotel-occupancy) tax such as a 2% venue tax to support such a project. City legal staff warned that wording and timing of any ballot proposition affect legal effect and whether a failed vote might bar future similar measures. No binding ballot language was created during the meeting; council simply inserted an additional “whereas” into the resolution committing that the expenditure is being authorized "with the understanding that voters will have a say so on this project." The amendment and payment authorization passed on a council vote. Staff noted Stonehenge provided the cost for the additional work and that the money would be spent regardless of the later ballot result to fund the extra work through November. The council did not adopt a referendum text at the meeting and did not commit to a particular ballot mechanism; staff said the mechanics (venue tax referendum, general referendum, or other wording) would determine legal consequences if voters reject a measure. Ending: The resolution authorizes the city manager to execute the contract amendment with the Stonehenge group and contains a newly added statement that the council intends for voters to have input on the convention center hotel project; staff will return with further steps if the council pursues a ballot measure.