City of Columbia responds to criticisms over lodging tax increase to fund airport improvements
The debate over a temporary 1 percent lodging-tax increase continues as the August 2 vote draws closer.
Just last week, the Columbia Hospitality Association, or CHA, decried the city’s addition of the words “economic development” to an existing city ordinance regarding the lodging tax. The association said the move was a way of enabling the city to use all of the tax revenue for economic development or the airport, instead of what it says the tax was originally meant for: tourism.
“That’s simply not true,” said Steve Sapp, community relations director for the city of Columbia. “I think there’s a lot of commitment from city staff and elected officials that say we’re going to use the 1 percent for the terminal and the other 4 percent that’s being collected right now will continue to be used like it’s always been used.”
Sapp also addressed the CHA’s criticisms that the city refused to be open with the organization about its plans for the terminal and its operating costs.
He said city staff received a list of questions from the CHA and answered them the best they could with the information they had.
“I think all the due diligence has been done,” he said. “I think it’s been discussed in the open for a long time at this point. We have not hidden anything from CHA, it’s all discussions. I’m not sure where that angst is directed to.”
Megan McConachie, with the Convention and Visitor’s Bureau, said the organization is a city department so it will remain neutral on the tax even though it has some serious stake in the lodging tax since it directly funds all of its operating costs.
“It funds our tourism development program which helps us bring new events and new attractions to our city,” she said. “It also funds our operations and salaries and then of course our promotions, sales services, digital web design.”
Since it is a city department, McConachie said it will remain neutral on the tax.
But she said the bureau’s operating costs wouldn’t change if the tax passes.
“At this point we wouldn’t actually have that extra one percent going into our budget,” she said. “It’s not something that will really affect the process that we’ll take on as we budget for each subsequent year.”
The CHA has questioned the city’s assertion that the Columbia Regional Airport is a huge economic driver. It said the airport is more of an exit airport but Sapp disagreed. He said the enplanements and deplanements are pretty much equal.
While the city can’t track the demographics of who is using the airport, Sapp said officials can look at it anecdotally.
“I’ll tell you this. True/False, we know that a lot of producers, filmmakers, the people associated with that have used Columbia Regional in the past so that’s a tourism promotion,” he said. “With Roots and Blues and BBQ, a lot of performers and producers and musicians have come in via Columbia regional.
“The airport is an economic driver, that’s the bottom line.”
He said a 2012 economic impact study done by Landrum & Brown for MoDOT showed the Columbia Regional Airport impacts the city in millions of dollars.
“From an economic standpoint, through direct and indirect means, this firm shows that 87 million dollars is driven by Columbia Regional Airport,” Sapp said, adding that “745 jobs in the region have ties back to the airport. That’s a payroll of almost 26 million dollars.”
Sapp also said the plans for the airport terminal as well as operating budget costs can be found on the city’s website. You can find the budget here.
The issue on the ballot also has a resolution added by Mayor Brian Treece that said if the terminal is paid off before the temporary tax is up (about 23 years), the city would sunset the tax.
He said it was a way to make sure the money is used efficiently and 100 percent for the airport.
“That gives us the incentive to make sure it comes in on time and under budget,” said Treece on the phone Tuesday.
The University of Missouri is one of the groups that has come out in support of the tax.
