This is the first in a series of columns that add some detail to the decision by the Jacksonville Chamber of Commerce and Business Association to oppose the proposed Meals Tax. It focuses on the City Council’s decision to implement a surcharge to help pay for police services rather than other funding options.
First, we want to acknowledge that the decision was made by Jacksonville residents. The 7 city councilors are residents who have been elected to represent us and the 7 Budget Committee volunteers are also residents. They have all committed to taking the time to understand the complex and inter-related issues in the overall budget and the city services it funds.
What “Taxation Without Representation?”—The claim of “taxation without representation,” regarding the surcharge added to the water bill is not only incorrect, but is also an insult to those residents who in fact are representing us—either as an elected city councilor or as committee volunteers. It is with great appreciation that we recognize the time it takes to serve in these roles.
The Budget Committee opted to implement the police surcharge over other options including the meals tax. Their intent was to find a reliable and consistent funding source. Providing for public safety is one of the top priorities of the City Council and they need to be assured that the revenue to pay for police services is available. Such funding must also be viable over time.
Adhering to Core Values—In the City’s 2028 Vision—done in 2008 by a group of Jacksonville citizens—several core values where identified for future initiatives. They are:
- A) We value a governmental process that encourages citizens to work actively with city officials throughout the decision-making process.
- B) We value a government that reaches out to inform, involve, and motivate citizens to play an active role in the ongoing processes of governance.
- C) We value a rational and objective process that strives to validate and implement Jacksonville’s evolving values, visions, and goals.
These values were demonstrated by the members of City Council and the Budget Committee throughout their work on the budget.
Unreliable Revenue Source—A meals tax is subject to many forces outside of the city council’s control and makes it an unreliable/unpredictable funding source.
First, there is no assurance that the meals tax would generate adequate revenue. The meals tax proposal is based on assumptions that are not vetted.
Secondly, even if the current level of restaurant business would generate enough revenue, there are no guarantees that market forces would not reduce the level of revenue in the future.
Market factors that impact restaurant revenue include:
Environmental factors
- Smoke filled air from forest fires
- Extreme heat/long periods of rain
Economic Factors
- Consumer confidence
- Gas prices
- Desirability of Jacksonville as a destination
- Number of restaurants/diners in town
Meals Tax Impact—After being hit recently with increases to minimum wage and predictive scheduling legislation, it won’t take much more for some owners to decide it is time to close shop. The addition of the meals tax and the resulting projected drop in business is demoralizing to our local restaurant owners.
Individual business owners may choose to close restaurants and or convert the spaces into other usage. This will result in fewer restaurants from which to generate the revenue for public safety. For example, this year, the “Scoop Shoppe” closed its doors and the building closed escrow this month—the new business occupying the building is not a food-related business and will not factor into a meals tax base. Furthermore, the Liège Waffle and Thai House restaurants remain closed and the meals tax proposal lessens the attractiveness of new owners continuing these businesses.
Fewer restaurants would also negatively impact other businesses in town. Shops would not attract regional shoppers who come to Jacksonville for lunch and an afternoon of shopping. Lodging establishments who rely on the town offering a breadth of dining options could see a drop in return visitors.
In conclusion, the proposed meals tax is unlikely to meet funding needs for full police protection and threatens the livelihood of many of our local business owners. It is an unsound move for both our town residents and business community.
A “NO” vote on the meals tax ballot initiative is the best way to demonstrate your support for the decisions reached by the City Council and Budget Committee to ensure adequate police protection and funding.
I believe this analyst is so right. How about evaluating the cost on the real estate market to base the fees.. I’m looking at senior citizens living in a park on social security checks being charged $20.00 monthly. That means their food or medicine monies being used to pay this cost.
How about charging a fair price based on a home valued at a sometimes more then a million dollars , $20.00. How fair is that…Bet they spend more then $20.00 on cat food monthly. Let the senior citizens live in the aged mobile home valued at less then $100.000.
Street addresses should not mean $20.00 each. Go based on market value.
Hi Diana,
Your point is spot-on and is why the City of Jacksonville implemented a relief program, enabling those with lower incomes to pay less or pay zero for the $20 Police (and Fire Department) surcharge. Currently, anyone earning less than $25,000 pays $0…those $25001 – $30,000 pay $10. The city has 96+ residents on the discount program, 88 of whom pay $0. The reason for this program is simple: the city cares about it’s residents and takes care of its own. To apply, all one needs to do is fill out an application at City Hall – all applications are kept strictly confidential and NO names are ever released and made part of the public record. Please, if you know anyone needing financial assistance for the fire or police surcharge, the city is there to help. All the best,
Whit Parker, Publisher
I wrote and posted the comment below on the “Yes Meals Tax” Facebook page this morning. It was removed by the afternoon. Now there is no ability to comment on their posts. If they are so confident in their initiative, why are they suppressing facts?
The argument on how to support the police department is between the Surcharge voted upon by the City Council and a Meals Tax to be voted upon by the citizens in the November election. What no one is talking about, especially the Meals Tax authors and supporters, is that the meals tax proposal is based on faulty assumptions and will NOT sustain the police department from the outset.
Looking at Doug Phillips’ initial proposal behind the initiative, there is an obvious overestimate of the expected revenue. To get a restaurant’s gross receipts, he calculated his figures on EVERY seat in every EXISTING restaurant times two meals per seat times the average cost of a meal times the number of days open.
First, there isn’t a restaurant in Jacksonville that turns over EVERY seat twice. It’s more like 1.5 times on a really good day. Second, not EVERY restaurant is open 350 days per year, and third, not ALL seventeen restaurants be counted on to stay in business. The Scoop Shop, Deja Vu, Thai Restaurant, Cheese Monger’s Wife and The Liege have all closed over the last several years. Finally, what seems to becoming an annual summer event are fires producing enough hazardous smoke that keep tourists from coming to shop and dine in Jacksonville. Restaurants have had to close their outdoor patios, further reducing the amount of customers served per day and therefore their gross sales.
Considering the faulty assumptions versus the reality of the situation, where is Doug Phillips’ guarantee that a meals tax will generate enough CONSISTENT revenue from year to year to maintain the town’s Police Department? Given that there will likely be a shortfall, the initiative says absolutely nothing as to what to do in that case. Lay off police officers? Sell a police car? It just shows the lack of foresight by everyone involved in supporting the Meals Tax. It is an outrageously risky solution for paying the people who keep us safe and protect our property.
The argument on how to support the police department is between the Surcharge voted upon by the City Council and a Meals Tax to be voted upon by the citizens in the November election. What no one is talking about, especially the Meals Tax authors and supporters, is that the meals tax proposal is based on faulty assumptions and will NOT sustain the police department from the outset.
Looking at Doug Phillips’ initial proposal behind the initiative, there is an obvious overestimate of the expected revenue. To get a restaurant’s gross receipts, he calculated his figures on EVERY seat in every EXISTING restaurant times two meals per seat times the average cost of a meal times the number of days open.
First, there isn’t a restaurant in Jacksonville that turns over EVERY seat twice. Having polled the restaurants, it’s more like 1.5 times on a really good day. Second, not EVERY restaurant is open 350 days per year, and third, not ALL seventeen restaurants can be counted on to stay in business. The Scoop Shop, Deja Vu, Thai Restaurant, Cheese Monger’s Wife and The Liege have all closed over the last several years. Finally, annual summer fires produce enough hazardous smoke to keep tourists from coming to shop and dine in Jacksonville. Restaurants have had to close their outdoor patios, further reducing the amount of customers served per day and therefore their gross sales. Many report their business is down by 25%, one at nearly 40%.
Considering the faulty assumptions versus the reality of the situation, where is Doug Phillips’ guarantee that a meals tax will generate enough CONSISTENT revenue from year to year to maintain the town’s Police Department? Given that there will likely be a shortfall, the initiative says absolutely nothing as to what to do in that case. Lay off police officers? Sell a police car? It just shows the lack of foresight by everyone involved in supporting the Meals Tax. It is an outrageously risky solution for paying the people who keep us safe and protect our property.