Left In Lowell

The Local Meal Tax or a $500,000 Cut in the Budget

16 Responses to “The Local Meal Tax or a $500,000 Cut in the Budget”

1. Bob Forrant Says:
   August 24th, 2009 at 9:37 pm

   Now we will observe who actually knows how to lead on the council and who is just a yipper & yapper without any serious ideas for where we will generate the $500K if not from the meal tax. And, the reality is the meal tax will probably not generate this much in revenue simply because the economy is struggling so much. People are going to spend less $$$ going out to eat - this is a fact.

   As for the arena, this is a very long, protracted negotiation and it is difficult for me to see how the university is going to get this revenue on top of the $$$ it will receive for its new science center and the purchase and renovation of the Doubletree.

   Somewhere the council needs to find quite a bit of revenue and with the state’s revenue projections we will probably be looking at more state aid cuts for the city and the schools come January. But the sitting councilors will try to avoid this reality until December if possible. A little dose of reality will interfere with sitting councilors desires to make the campaign be about sniping at the city manager and passing resolutions about marijuana smoking and prostitution.

   Still waiting to hear one councilor say something about the fire stations - I have been raising this for several weeks and as usual on matters of substance the silence is deafening.

2. C R Krieger Says:
   August 24th, 2009 at 10:37 pm

   I think I might quibble with Mimi saying $0.75% (I think it is 0.75%, without the dollar sign) (fifth paragraph), but the fact is, we need to implement this tax.  I do not think it will have a significant impact on who eats out and what they order.  As Mimi notes, it is 75¢s; per $100 spent.  When my wife and I eat out together it never gets to $100—go ahead and call me cheap.  I asked someone from Garcia-Brogans Thursday last and they said that they thought the tax would have no impact.

   As Prof Bob Forrant suggests, it is time for members of the City Council to stand up and be counted, rather than wait to face (additional) major problems in January.

   Regards  —  Cliff

3. Kim Says:
   August 24th, 2009 at 11:15 pm

   Some money is sitting out there. However, I am sure cuts to services will not be addressed until after the election. We need a leader!

4. Fred Bahou Says:
   August 25th, 2009 at 6:01 am

   I agree that people will not be fazed by paying an extra 38 cents on a $50 restaurant bill,also did’nt Tyngsboro just pass it? and i’m pretty sure that N.H. charges 8%.The council should pass this not just because it’s in the budget, but also because the State has given the municipalities the opportunity to raise money from out of towners who visit daily, and work in the city, it truly is a trivial amount and should’nt affect anyone who eats out.

5. Mimi Says:
   August 25th, 2009 at 6:18 am

   Cliff, thanks for “proofreading.”

   And Fred’s comments made wonder if other Greater Lowell School Commmittee and Lowell School Committee candidates will support this local meal tax.

6. Lynne Says:
   August 25th, 2009 at 7:00 am

   OK, if Cliff Krieger says, I’m OK with a little increase in the meals tax, you KNOW this isn’t controversial. Considering which side of the aisle he’s on!

   If this needs to be passed by Aug 31, then we’re screwed if it’s not on tonight’s meeting agenda. Can motions still be made? Or can it be approved at a later date?

   This was poor planning on the CC’s part…

7. tryin to stay anonymous Says:
   August 25th, 2009 at 7:27 am

   Good Luck with the fire station issue Bob. I’ve been saying it for years. I’m just glad its not me for a change. My dead horse is beaten beyond all recognition. Make sure your smoke detectors work and your insurance is paid up is all I can say.

   Is anyone else not surprised that the council won’t bring up raising any taxes before an election? (even though I’m sure the quite a few challengers would agree with it)

   Is this a big revenue stream? Likely not. However it IS a part of the budget this council approved.

   One of my favorite quote exchages comes to mind:

   Coach to player: “What is your problem son, ignorance or apathy?”

   Player: “Coach I don’t know and I don’t care.”

8. Paul@01852 Says:
   August 25th, 2009 at 11:20 am

   Anyone have a Lowell Sun contact we can get on board? Jen Myers or Kendall Wallace maybe? I do believe a motion can still be brought forward under suspension of the rules but the question is does the CC have the *will* to do it. I suspect that if one of the councilors attempted to suspend the rules so that a vote could be taken the gang of 6 would vote to NOT alow the suspension thereby preventing a vote at all. Later when layoffs come they would lament that the CC never had the time to properly address and debate the issue of a local meals tax option. It’s too late for the Sun to editorialize or publish a story that emphasizes that this needs to be done before 8/31 but they sure can make the incumbents miserable by chastizing them for *not* taking care of this before the deadline!

9. K-R-S Says:
   August 25th, 2009 at 11:44 am

   Paul, then the CC would use the opportunity to point fingers at the CM, because $500K in cuts will have to be made…convenient..

10. Bob Forrant Says:
    August 25th, 2009 at 12:59 pm

    I agree with KRS here - the sleepy six will likely block this from happening and then when the city is forced to rebalance the budget minus the projected revenue they will take their TV face time, slap arounf a few bloggers, and then turn on the city manager because by law budget cuts will need to be made.

    BY just about everyone not being up front and honest about the city’s financial woes, we are now nearly on the very slippery slope to unplowed streets, further classroom cuts, even greater cuts to a lot of important city regulatory departments and safety and the massive grandstanding that will be the Kazcier clique as they sharpen their knives to attack the city manager and line up a hand-picked successor to do their bidding - something the current city manager was not willing to do, and rightly so.

11. Lynne Says:
    August 25th, 2009 at 2:36 pm

    Bob: nice term! Kazier. I love it!

    If it’s possible to pass this later on, maybe it’s best to wait. Doing battle on this on top of everything else is just straining. I had the impression that this had to be enacted this month to be enacted at all, but maybe that’s not the case. What we need to get the candidates on the record on this issue, so it can enter the debate in this election. Another way for challengers or some incumbents to differentiate themselves from the Kaziers in the race.

12. Bob Forrant Says:
    August 26th, 2009 at 8:24 am

    Interesting that in last night’s council meeting the big way AK wanted to save dollars was to put city workers on the job building out the police training center in the first floor of the new parking garage. When it was explained numerous times by the city manager why this was not possibe in terms of the workforce and as well in terms of not being able to use parts of the funds available because it would be against the law to use the dough to pay normal salaries of city workers, AK persisted in arguing why can’t we do this? why, why wha wha can’t we do this?

    Just wondered what part of ‘against the law’ needs interpretation here. Looked to me like just another grandstand play to make it look like he cares about the city’s budget.

    Meanwhile the other haf of the Kazier team went off on a question about roughly $10K in gross receipts on parking revenues that it appears were not colleted at a series of events where folks parked in the large city lot near the Arena. She kept saying I am not picking a fight - though in a funny aside she asked A. Mercier if he wanted to step outside. Her point dragged on and was done in an accusatory way.

    The city manager responded that yes he had the same information Ms Mercier had and was already trying to figure out what happened.

    From here it looked like both needles from ‘the Kazier’ were designed to plant the seeds in TV land that the CM was not looking out for our finances properly. Anyone else share this impression or am I reading too much into these pre-election how can we make the city manager look bad hijinks?

    On impt matters like the meal tax, Jim Leahey’s recent school committee motion to push for a series of meetings on how to maintain our schools in the face of past and future budget cuts -unless I missed it - the sounds of silence prevailed all across chamber land. Sleep tight dozing six and everyone else keep pretending that city finances are fine, the JAM Plan is on target, our schools will be great forever.

    Come January when the grim reality facing the next city and school budget starts to sink in and when the streets are not plowed as well as they usually are and fire protection is not what we want/need it to be- don’t say Dr Doom did not warn you.

13. Right in Lowell Says:
    August 26th, 2009 at 12:48 pm

    Bob, I thought the same thing. They take every chance they get or can conjure up to push some blame or other onto Lynch. Does Kazanjian ever understand anything the first time. Seems like everything he says has to be repeated over and over and even after it’s explained to him in 10 different ways, he is still not happy or is he just looking for face time? I was waiting for him to go after Milinazzo again. The 2 Merciers should be ashamed of their grandstanding.

14. waittilnextyr Says:
    August 26th, 2009 at 1:44 pm

    Those councilors are playing both sides of the city worker/taxpayer fence, and truth is falling by the wayside.

    And “businessman” Kazanjian deserves no place in our government, as his willingness to tread on what is right to achieve the ends should not be tolerated in this public forum.

15. Bob Forrant Says:
    August 26th, 2009 at 1:47 pm

    Right - we have to stop meeting/agreeing like this - tongues and keyboards will wag:)

16. Right in Lowell Says:
    August 27th, 2009 at 9:33 am

    Bob:

Leave a Reply