Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Bed Tax Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident urges reinstatement of Water Quality Task Force and transparency in 2% occupancy tax reviews
Summary
John Jablonski urged the committee to restore the Water Quality Task Force’s role in reviewing 2% occupancy‑tax (bed‑tax) applications and to require public identification of reviewers. Committee members discussed reviewer anonymity, county charter responsibilities and local employment trends raised during public comment.
John Jablonski, a Lakewood resident and former member of the Chautauqua County Water Quality Task Force, addressed the committee during privilege of the floor and asked it to reconsider a recent legislature change that shifted review of 2% occupancy‑tax applications away from the Task Force.
"I was surprised and, disappointed to learn that legislature changed that process last month," Jablonski said, urging the committee to reestablish the task force to ensure cross‑agency coordination and consistent technical review of applications.
Committee members responded that the primary concern had been the anonymity of the initial reviewers and that the legislature had previously asked for reviewer names and addresses to be provided for confirmation. One committee speaker, identified in the record as 'Fred,' laid out the county charter duties: "On at least an annual basis... the county legislature shall adopt by resolution a comprehensive financial management policy and investment policy, and shall adopt... goals and objectives as well as specific performance measures," and urged the committee to set measurable employment and economic goals.
The discussion also included data presented by the same committee member who said county employment fell from roughly 64,000 to about 54,000 over recent years, a decline he characterized as "employment's down 10,000 in just 14, 15 years." Committee members agreed to revisit the reviewer‑identity issue and work with staff to determine next steps.
No formal action to change the process was taken at the meeting; members indicated they would review the matter further and seek greater transparency around occupancy‑tax reviewer identities.
