Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Hotel Tax Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pryor Creek hotel-motel board opens review of 2014 allocation resolution, aims for updated language
Summary
Board members agreed to review and propose updates to Resolution No. 2014-10 (hotel-motel tax allocation), citing outdated provisions such as a school band event allocation and a sports-facility reserve; the board set a goal to seek council approval before the next fiscal year.
The Pryor Creek Hotel-Motel Tax Allocation Board on Thursday began a review of Resolution No. 2014-10, the city's statement of intent governing use and allocation of hotel-motel tax revenues, and agreed to continue the discussion at a future meeting.
Board members said portions of the 2014 resolution no longer reflect current needs. They identified specific items that may need revision, including a minimum yearly allocation tied to a band event that no longer occurs and a reserve set aside for 100% matching grants to sports facilities. One board member said the band event is "done" and that the language is dated; another noted that booster clubs and volunteers now maintain many playing fields.
Members discussed whether the current 40% allocation to the Chamber should have more specific allowable uses and whether the 10% reserved for Main Street facade or streetscape projects should be targeted to a specific downtown block. A board member also suggested researching how other municipalities use lodging-tax revenue, noting an example where a neighboring city directs lodging tax revenue entirely to parks and recreation to fund an aquatic center.
The board moved to continue the item and prepare suggested changes for presentation to the city council. Members discussed a practical deadline: several board members said it would be reasonable to aim for council approval and the resolution to be in place before the beginning of the next fiscal year on July 1.
The board voted to table further action until the next board meeting, with the understanding that members would research comparative policies, solicit input, and develop specific suggested language for the council to consider. Roll call recorded affirmative votes from Majors, Williams, Dickinson, Hawkins and Ricky Allen.
Board staff suggested publicly releasing the grant schedule when the revised intent statement is in place so potential applicants understand allowable uses and deadlines.
The board did not adopt amended language at the meeting; it directed members to return with proposed changes at a subsequent meeting.
