Geary County debate over 1% transient‑guest tax increase focuses on sports fields, hotels and renters

The Geary County Board of Commissioners held an extended discussion on whether to increase the county's transient guest tax by one percentage point, a proposal the commissioner who placed the item on the agenda said would support improvements to local sports and recreation facilities intended to attract visitors and tournaments.

The commissioner (first name recorded as Trish) said she proposed a 1% increase to bring Junction City closer to regional comparators and to fund improvements to facilities such as 4‑H fields, rodeo grounds and other amenities. "What I wanna do with those funds is improve the sports stuff that we have already," she said. The commissioner said she intentionally proposed 7% rather than 8% to remain competitive with nearby Manhattan and Abilene.

Hoteliers and lodging operators cautioned that even a small increase can affect bids for contractor room blocks and municipal requests for proposals (RFPs). Jason Keilman, general manager at Candlewood Suites and a member of the CVV advisory committee, said larger cities at 7% or higher are typically either interstate suburbs or larger regional centers, and noted companies that submit RFPs review tax rates. "When we're submitting RFPs into companies, they do look at the tax rate," Keilman said.

Short‑term rental operators said a per‑night increase can be meaningful. Megan Rusch, who operates two short‑term rental units in town, said operating margins are thin: she estimated her properties must be rented roughly 18 nights per month to break even and warned higher fees may depress occupancy. "We have hardly raised our prices since our properties have been open," she said.

Social‑service and community voices also raised concerns about local people living in motels and the way the tax is collected. Debbie Savage of Fresh Start Emergency Shelter said transient‑guest tax rules and the 28‑day cutoff can have consequences for people who live in motels month to month; county staff noted collection and reporting rules rest with lodging operators and Department of Revenue reporting.

Several residents and commissioners urged a planning step before any tax change: either a feasibility study or a joint work session with the city, school district, chamber and economic development to identify concrete projects the money would fund. Commissioner discussion repeatedly returned to the fact that the sports‑complex fund currently holds about $816,700 and that the fund's charter or resolution limits how money may be used; a charter amendment would be required to broaden permitted uses.

A number of speakers — including CVV board members and hoteliers — suggested spending some of the existing balance to make targeted improvements (for example, one additional softball field or upgrades to restrooms and parking at North Park) and then measuring results before any tax increase.

The board did not take a final vote. Commissioners agreed to continue the conversation in a scheduled follow‑up meeting (work session) to allow more stakeholders to provide ideas and to prepare a concrete plan for how any new revenue would be allocated. The board asked staff and the CVV (Convention and Visitor's) advisory board to bring proposals and options to the next meeting for discussion.