Dvorak, the ADP and Pulbic Funds for USM - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Nov 8, 2004

Dvorak, the ADP and Pulbic Funds for USM

Date: Nov 8, 2004

The original bond issue was to support the convention center and was a "temporary" tax until the convention center was paid off. I don't think the electorate would tolerate the shelbyesque tactic of diverting of tax revenue from its intended use to funding athletic facility improvement. Council members who voted in favor of the diversion would be broomed out at the next election.

Date: Nov 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Seeker
"would you be opposed to directing some of the current tourism tax toward the aforementioned projects at USM?"

I can only speak for myself, but if I were a taxpayer who had voted for a tax to construct a convention center, I would expect that tax to go for that specific purpose unless there was a provision in the original referrrendum authorizing those funds to be used for another specific purpose such as athletic facilities. Why should any surplus, or continuing revenue generated from that tax, be used for athletic facilities when there are so many other more important needs?

Date: Nov 8, 2004

All this assumes that there is in fact a surplus after the 2% tax revenues are used to pay off the expenses of running the "Convention Center" & ADP offices. In short, I'd like to see some hard numbers that there is a surplus, before we go spending it hypothetically.

Date: Nov 8, 2004

See that's the problem with the current 2% tax, unlike the proposed 1% hike that was voted on last week, there is no sunset provision in the tourism tax that is currently collected in Hattiesburg. The way it's worded the money is ear-marked for tourism, and goes to the convension center commission. The ADP over-sees the CCC, and has not released financial statments to the public in more than 4 years now. I suspect that the reason the previous ADP Director resigned less than 120 days into his term is because he found something that he didn't want to be a part of.

There has been and continues to be wide speculation that CCC monies are finding their way to the Hattiesburg General Fund, which would be a violation of state law. As long as the ADP dosen't disclose their books and the mayor dosen't call their hand, it will continue and none of us will know what the money is going for, other than a Convension Center that has turned out to be little more than a very expensive community center. Considering that USM"s Payne Center can seat and accomidate larger group meetings than Lake Terrace.

You can disagree with the resently voted upon tax hike for USM, but the real black hole in the community is the Convension Center.

Date: Nov 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Seeker
" . . . a Convension Center that has turned out to be little more than a very expensive community center. Considering that the real black hole in the community is the Convension Center."

I am all for a convention center. The fact of the matter is that many major universities have convention centers right on their campus. At the time the Hattiesburg convention center was an issue, I thought that it would be wise for USM to convert/renovate Elam Arms into a convention center. It has the requisite features: Dining, Lodging, Hotel-like Lobby, and convenience to the main campus which could attract state and regional meetings. The main campus itself could provide the meeting rooms/auditoriums. The Elam Arms location would be particularly appropriate for conventions related to the various disciplines housed a USM. At the time I mentioned that idea, I was told that the university authorities would probably not support such a conversion/rennovation because it would be viewed as competition with the local motels. Another fact of the matter is that the "competition" argument was advanced in many university towns when an on-campus convention center was being considered. Now, however, those local motels are grateful for the on-campus convention center because without the university affiliated convention center the local motels would not get nearly the amount of business they now get with convention center in place. On-campus convention centers are good for the community as well as for the university.

Date: Nov 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Seeker
"See that's the problem with the current 2% tax, unlike the proposed 1% hike that was voted on last week, there is no sunset provision in the tourism tax that is currently collected in Hattiesburg. The way it's worded the money is ear-marked for tourism, and goes to the convension center commission. The ADP over-sees the CCC, and has not released financial statments to the public in more than 4 years now. I suspect that the reason the previous ADP Director resigned less than 120 days into his term is because he found something that he didn't want to be a part of. There has been and continues to be wide speculation that CCC monies are finding their way to the Hattiesburg General Fund, which would be a violation of state law. As long as the ADP dosen't disclose their books and the mayor dosen't call their hand, it will continue and none of us will know what the money is going for, other than a Convension Center that has turned out to be little more than a very expensive community center. Considering that USM"s Payne Center can seat and accomidate larger group meetings than Lake Terrace. You can disagree with the resently voted upon tax hike for USM, but the real black hole in the community is the Convension Center."

It is my understanding that the 2% tax that was approved when the Convention Center was built can be spent for "tourism" and has no automatic sunset provision. That is one reason many of the voters were skeptical about the recent bond issue's purported termination provisions.

I have no idea where that 2% tax money is currently going, but if all of Mr. Giannini's numbers are right, every sports activity at USM is a tourist magnet. We in Hattiesburg ought to either kill the tax, divert all or part to replace the "lost" $12,000,000, or politely request the ADP/CC to justify the continuing need of the Convention Center to be supported by taxpayers.

Date: Nov 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Seeker
"See that's the problem with the current 2% tax, unlike the proposed 1% hike that was voted on last week, there is no sunset provision in the tourism tax that is currently collected in Hattiesburg. The way it's worded the money is ear-marked for tourism, and goes to the convension center commission. The ADP over-sees the CCC, and has not released financial statments to the public in more than 4 years now. I suspect that the reason the previous ADP Director resigned less than 120 days into his term is because he found something that he didn't want to be a part of. There has been and continues to be wide speculation that CCC monies are finding their way to the Hattiesburg General Fund, which would be a violation of state law. As long as the ADP dosen't disclose their books and the mayor dosen't call their hand, it will continue and none of us will know what the money is going for, other than a Convension Center that has turned out to be little more than a very expensive community center. Considering that USM"s Payne Center can seat and accomidate larger group meetings than Lake Terrace. You can disagree with the resently voted upon tax hike for USM, but the real black hole in the community is the Convension Center."

They are sometimes called "Alumni Centers." Visiting alumni and friends of the university can stay right on campus, if they choose, when visiting Hattiesburg.

Date: Nov 8, 2004

A perfect example of what you are describing can be found at the University of Houston where they partner their Hospitality Management program with one of the major chain (Hilton or Marriot) who operate a hotel in conjunction with the school on campus.

But, something tells me that some group like Enough is Enough would have opposed that as well.

Date: Nov 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Elam Eagle
"I am all for a convention center. The fact of the matter is that many major universities have convention centers right on their campus. At the time the Hattiesburg convention center was an issue, I thought that it would be wise for USM to convert/renovate Elam Arms into a convention center. It has the requisite features: Dining, Lodging, Hotel-like Lobby, and convenience to the main campus which could attract state and regional meetings. The main campus itself could provide the meeting rooms/auditoriums. The Elam Arms location would be particularly appropriate for conventions related to the various disciplines housed a USM. At the time I mentioned that idea, I was told that the university authorities would probably not support such a conversion/rennovation because it would be viewed as competition with the local motels. Another fact of the matter is that the "competition" argument was advanced in many university towns when an on-campus convention center was being considered. Now, however, those local motels are grateful for the on-campus convention center because without the university affiliated convention center the local motels would not get nearly the amount of business they now get with convention center in place. On-campus convention centers are good for the community as well as for the university. "

They are sometimes called "Alumni Centers." Visiting alumni and friends of the university can, if the choose, stay right on campus when visiting the city.

Date: Nov 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Seeker
"A perfect example of what you are describing can be found at the University of Houston . . . who operate a hotel . . . But, something tells me that some group like Enough is Enough would have opposed that as well."

A university must built what is appropriate to a university as long as it is legal, ethical, moral, and contributes to the institution's mission. I can't see that it would be appropriate for any community group to involve itself with on-campus construction or renovation if only university or private funds were used. Those are not things appropriate for community "vote." I'm sure they didn't vote to construct the new Liberal Arts building, or the Polymer Science building. I'm sure the decision to rent the old Albertson's building for the School of Nursing was not put to community vote; and I don't believe the decision to acquired that badly in-need-of-renovation monster on Main Street for housing the arts was put to community vote. And I doubt that the Houston community voted on whethe or not the University of Houston could or could not operate their hotel facility. On the other hand . . . the USM administration . . .

Date: Nov 8, 2004

at ole' miss the on campus motel is called "alumni house", i dont recollect an on campus motel at ms state

Date: Nov 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: fun for all
"at ole' miss the on campus motel is called "alumni house", i dont recollect an on campus motel at ms state"

There is one attached to the stadium. I have stayed in it and it is very nice. Course they really need one in Starkville as there arne't exactly a wealth of hotels there.

Date: Nov 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: fun for all
"at ole' miss the on campus motel is called "alumni house", i dont recollect an on campus motel at ms state"

An interesting point about the The Inn at Ole Miss (they changed the name from the Triplett Alumni Center recently): the property is technically owned by the Alumni Association & not the University. Hence, it is permissible to have "adult beverages" on the premises. Kinda funny to see folks walking around the pool with Bud Lights, literally across the street from the Law School. Another nice touch is that each room was sponsored by alumni who chose the decor, furniture, etc. Every room has a hard-bound copy of the history of Ole Miss football, too

Highly recommended if one is travelling in Lafayette County

I don't know whether it would be all that useful in H'burg, but in towns like Oxford & Starkville that don't have tons of motel rooms, it is a good service for the University/Alumni Association to provide.

Date: Nov 9, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: ram
"We in Hattiesburg ought to either kill the tax, divert all or part to replace the "lost" $12,000,000, or politely request the ADP/CC to justify the continuing need of the Convention Center to be supported by taxpayers."

Would the ADP/CC financial records, including all operating expenses, be fair game under the FOIA? With no sunset clause, this 2% tourism tax will be around forever, but I cannot imagine that it was intended to be a permanent subsidy to the ADP/CC. Otherwise, how will we really know if the CC is profitable or is a financial drain? Are the salaries of the ADP/CC personnel funded through the subsidy or through self-generated revenue that results from CC bookings? And, as someone else posted, are these funds being channeled inappropriately into the city's General Fund?

Seems like I recall Phillip Halstead saying he wanted to run a more transparent operation at the ADP. Perhaps this transparency would have revealed more than the ADP board wanted known to the public.