02-22-16 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

REGULAR MEETING February 22, 2015 through a corporation he works for and he doesn't get to go back and charge more after the fact. There are bigger issues in this city than the zoo. There are children going to be starving in our community every night. There are people who are still sleeping in our streets every night. So $22 million dollars allocated for the zoo is not something the city needs to focus on. The City needs to stop funding special interests. Samuel Brown, 222 S. Navarre St., spoke against the bill. He stated he is for the zoo but is not for the tax. The Wheel Tax turned him off to taxes in this county. There has to be another way to fund this zoo because it is an important asset to the community. Mark McDonnell, 17180 Wheatrdidge Ct. Granger, he stated he has owned a fine dining restaurant in South Bend for twenty five (25) years. He stated he has no enmity towards the zoo and was a member of the zoo for a time. Restaurants have seen and fought these taxes across the nation for various reasons. There is nothing fair about a single industry tax, an industry where everyone knows its really hard to stay in business and to make money. To make two percent (2 %) profit before interest is a monumental achievement, every single percentage is important. These taxes do not sunset once they are imposed and usually just increase. The zoo is a local attraction and this tax is not a tourist tax. On average, eighty -seven percent (87 %) of these taxes are paid by local people. Mr. McDonnell asked why not tax all retail instead of just one industry or tax groceries which are not taxed. It is not just or fair to tax one industry. Kurt Janowski, 828 E. Jefferson Blvd., 828 E. Jefferson Blvd, echoed what Mr. McDonnell said. He voiced his support of the zoo and the wonderful things they do and their master plan but he does not support industry specific taxes. The only example of an industry specific tax that gets large portions of support are Hotel /Motel taxes because those are indeed tourist taxes and not paid by residents by and large of the community. If the Council decides this is such an amenity that needs public support then it should find its way back into the City's budget. To levy an industry specific tax, despite his support for the zoo, does not makes sense to him. This County already has a higher than average property tax rate, so adding to that already high tax burden is unnecessary. Councilmember Randy Kelly pointed out that this was the spirit of this resolution, to have this discussion on the pros and cons of a food and beverage tax. The zoo has spearheaded this discussion and deserves recognition for the good work that they do every day. To be clear, this resolution does not target the zoo specifically. There was in the County resolution but this one simply states the City is interested in researching this tax as a potential development tool, what entities might develop from it, and looking at other viable alternative options for funding. This resolution is meant to start that conversation. Councilmember Regina Williams- Preston stated she is interested in exploring this and learning more about the options for this tax in addition to the zoo like sidewalks and different things along those lines. Maybe this tax makes sense, maybe it doesn't but it certainly deserves a conversation. Councilmember Randy Kelly wanted it to be known that this is not a new idea or proposal and over twenty (20) counties and municipalities have a food and beverage tax. There is precedence for this kind of tax. Councilmember Jo M. Broden added that she has a mixed mind on this given the lack of data or discussion in terms of the impact that this tax would have on industries that do operate on tight margins. She expressed her interest in continued research but is not sure of how much influence this resolution is going to have down state. Councilmember Dr. David Varner stated he does not understand the purpose of the resolution in general. If the intent is to take it to the state legislature to learn more that is not something he is in support of. A tax solution should not be the first option vetted, the resources the City has already include a number of taxes already in existence which are intended to support these types of programs. Some of the capital needs of the zoo could possibly be listed under economic development which would make them available for TIF money. Perhaps there should be some type of non - reverting fund set up which may help this situation as well. These options should be 10