Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Arts Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Arts Garage urges CRA and community to oppose Florida bills that would curtail bed-tax funding
Summary
Marjorie Waldo of Arts Garage asked the CRA board to oppose proposed Florida legislation that would restrict tourist-development taxes and dissolve tourist development councils, warning those changes would eliminate funding used locally for arts, culture and tourism promotion.
Marjorie Waldo, executive director of Arts Garage, used the CRA meeting's public-comment period to urge local action against two Florida House bills she said would redirect bed-tax money and dismantle tourist development councils.
Waldo told the board the bills, which she identified as House Bill "70 33" and "12 21" in her remarks, would "eliminate nearly all funding for arts, culture, and tourism promotion" and could force arts organizations to choose between accepting government funding and changing programming or rejecting that funding and suffering severe budget cuts.
The nut graf: Waldo said the bed-tax revenue paid by hotel visitors has historically supported arts programming, beach renourishment and events, and that changes at the state level could "effectively gut local investment in the quality of life and tourism." She asked CRA members and the public to contact local legislators and consider a city or CRA letter opposing the proposed changes.
Waldo said Arts Garage's board has voted to continue its mission even if that results in tighter budgets, and she encouraged residents to act quickly because the bills were moving through the Legislature. CRA board members discussed whether the city could send a letter; Chair Burns suggested the topic be discussed at the next city meeting and CRA staff indicated they would follow up with timing and potential coordination with county leaders.
Waldo also mentioned Arts Garage's upcoming fundraiser and invited CRA members to support it.
No formal action was taken by the CRA during the meeting in response to the public comment; board members indicated interest in discussing a possible letter and said staff would report back.
