Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Lodgers Tax topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Arts board hears continued decline in lodgers tax revenue; adds buffer to grant recommendations
Summary
Board staff reported multi-year declines in lodgers tax revenue, discussed hotel and short‑term rental impacts, and finalized grant recommendations (including a $22,000 buffer in Tier 4) to present to City Council.
The Littleton Arts and Culture Board received an update showing lodgers-tax revenue has trended downward over the past three years and heard staff plans to present the board’s revised grant recommendations to City Council at a study session two weeks from the meeting.
The update matters because lodgers‑tax receipts fund local arts grants; lower revenue could force cuts to recommended awards or change how the board refers applications to other funding sources.
Anna (Public Art Administrator) told the board the program’s revenue has been “declining, not just recently, but really long term over the last 3 years,” and that staff have been working from a baseline assumption of roughly a $100,000 annual decline. To preserve flexibility, the board’s grant executive summary added about $22,000 to tier 4 as an off‑cycle buffer.
Board members asked how much of the lodgers tax comes from short‑term rentals (Airbnb/VRBO) versus hotels. Anna said the finance department’s remittance records mix collections and she did not have an answer yet, but staff will ask finance for a breakdown. Board members and staff noted anecdotal event attendees often stay in short‑term rentals outside Littleton because of perceived hotel quality or distance from downtown.
The board also discussed that roughly 50% of grant requests had been referred to other entities—particularly for stadium and community partnership grants—and that staff expected the stadium funding line to be closed this year after council or the recipient disperses remaining balances (Anna said there was roughly $105,000 left from prior activity, referenced verbally during the meeting). Board members asked for a post‑mortem on allocations in November.
Staff said the recommendations and referral history would be included in the packet for council. No board motion was required at the meeting; staff will present the board’s recommended tiers and the added Tier‑4 buffer to council at the upcoming study session and will return with any council direction.
Sources: Board meeting remarks by Anna and other board members; presentation slides and executive summary referenced by staff.
