"Ultra Bob:Will the meeting space and the parking be available
to the public for use by the general public like any other public park? Would
any business be able to use it for their conventions? Would the revenue from its
use go to the public account?"The space will be controlled just
like the Salt Palace space and South Town Expo Center. You would go about using
the space through the same methods.Revenue from the use of the space
and parking would also be funneled to the public accounts the same as revenue is
currently going there from the Salt Palace and South Town Expo Center.This is why I was saying that the public isn't subsidizing the hotel. It
is paying for the meeting space via property tax deferments/credits via a post
Makid Will the meeting space and the parking be available to the
public for use by the general public like any other public park? Would any
business be able to use it for their conventions? Would the revenue from its
use go to the public account? If not it should not be paid for with public
money. The time for businessmen robbing the taxpayer will end,
one way or another. The residents of Salt Lake City should not be ask to
finance business ventures.
Ultra Bob,The subsidy from the government is going for the meeting
space and parking for said meeting space that will be built by the developer.
It isn't going to the hotel directly.Basically, the developer
doesn't build the meeting space and meeting space parking as required, they
get no subsidy.That is the advantage of a post performance subsidy.
It requires the completion of all items before the subsidy kicks in. With the
Convention Hotel, the meeting space would be required to be built into the
design of the hotel. This alone, stops the developer from building the hotel and
then asking for more money to then build the meeting space.
When government subsidies business it is a taxpayer scam. The promises made by
developers of benefit to the taxpayers NEVER happen. The government should loan
money to developers only when there is a guaranteed payback. Our government
should not gambol with taxpayer money. The loan should be like the
mortgage loan of a home buyer and if the collateral for the loan turns bogus the
developer should go to prison.
Jay's editorial is very light on research.Utah isn't so
unique that the experience of other venues isn't relevant to our dilemma.
What has been the experience of the cities like Denver that have enough
facilities to host the Society of Professional Journalists? I think
a little study might shed a little more light on this subject.
Jay,The subsidy isn't for the hotel, it is for the meeting
space and parking to accommodate that.One of the main requirements
of the Convention Hotel is an additional 100,000 sq ft of public meeting space.
This space is generally broken up in pieces with the largest space being between
50,000 and 75,000 sq ft in contiguous size.I have yet to hear of a
single hotel with 100,000 sq ft of meeting space being built anywhere outside of
Las Vegas without a subsidy. Let alone, have you or anyone else heard of any
hotel built with 100,000 sq ft of meeting space letting the public control that
space and not the hotel directly?That is where the problem comes in.
Hotel developers are building as can bee seen just west of the Salt Palace but,
they aren't going to build the extra meeting space and give it to the
public for free.What needs to happen is for people to change their
terminology. The public isn't subsidizing a hotel, the public is paying
for meeting space from increases to the existing tax values not the existing
ones. Worst case is revenue neutral.