Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tourism Lodging Tax topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would let counties use lodging‑tax improvement funds for county‑owned convention center projects
Summary
Sen. Beau Ballard introduced LB116 to permit counties to use County Visitor Improvement Fund revenue on county‑owned visitor projects such as convention centers and to narrow Capital District Turnback Tax designations to retailers within the applicant county.
Senator Beau Ballard introduced Legislative Bill 116 to amend the Nebraska Visitors Development Act so counties may reinvest lodging‑tax revenues from the County Visitor Improvement Fund into county‑owned visitor projects, including maintenance and future expansion of convention centers owned by the county.
Ballard told the Revenue Committee the change would allow convention centers that create local lodging demand to help fund their own future improvements through locally collected lodging taxes, rather than restricting improvement funds exclusively to non‑county owned attractions. He characterized the change as a flexibility and cleanup measure to help county governments plan for long‑term maintenance and competitiveness of major visitor facilities.
Jason Ball, president and CEO of the Lincoln Chamber of Commerce, and Visit Lincoln representatives testified in support, saying the amendment would give Lancaster County the flexibility to use visitor‑improvement funds for a county‑owned convention center and would limit the Capital District Turnback Tax mapping to retailers within the applicant county so captured sales tax revenues come from the county where the project is sited. Brent Smoyer of the Nebraska Bridal Association and Lancaster County representatives also testified in support, describing the statewide benefit of stronger convention and visitor infrastructure.
Neutral testimony from the Nebraska Association of County Officials acknowledged support for the concept while flagging questions about potential unintended consequences and the precise scope of allowable maintenance and expansion expenditures. NACO noted counties had a few technical questions and wanted to ensure the legislation would not create unforeseen obligations for county boards.
Key clarifications from testimony: Ballard and supporters said the bill contains cleanup language only and that it does not expand the total statewide amount of lodging‑tax funds; instead, it changes allowable uses and limits the turnback capture area to the applicant county. Committee members confirmed there was no fiscal note attached to LB116 and discussed the bill as a local‑flexibility measure rather than a state fiscal change.
No vote was taken at the hearing. The committee received proponent and neutral testimony and closed the public hearing on LB116.
