I'm not sure where to post this, but below please find a response to Matt Tate's letter to the editor found in the Pocahontas Times. At the behest of some of the owners at Snowshoe, Mr. DeBerry sent out the following response:
To the Editor;
I am writing at the request of several Snowshoe community home owners to share some information in response to Mr. Tate's recently published letter. In his letter, Mr. Tate raises questions over whether a Resort Area District would have the authority to take hotel occupancy taxes away from the County and therefore do the County great financial harm. While I understand and appreciate the impacts of such a concern, I can openly share that the short answer to Mr. Tate's question is very plainly, no.
As Mr. Tate points out, only counties or municipalities may collect occupancy tax. Also as Mr. Tate points out, resort area districts and municipal corporations are defined under different sections of WV State Code. In other words, while both municipalities and resort area districts are considered to be types of public corporations, not all public corporations are municipalities, and this holds true for Resort Area Districts; in that they are public corporations, but are not municipalities. While the term itself is not widely used every day, public corporations are not new to us. Boards of Education, Public Service Districts, Economic Development Authorities, and Community Enhancement Districts are all just a few examples of public corporations that exist throughout our state today. Similar to resort area districts, each of these public corporations have defined limits on how they generate funds to support operations; and a resort area district would have no more authority to take occupancy tax from the County than do any of these other examples.
Further supporting my point, the resort area district statute was developed quite intentionally with a 'do no harm' approach. We knew that we had to do something to help the Snowshoe community better deal with the impacts of hundreds of thousands of guests impacting our shared roads, transportation, public safety, and other community services at such intense levels. We also knew that our approach most certainly would fail if it negatively impacted the rest of the County. Occupancy tax was off-limits from the start. The statute provides no authority for resort area districts to 'claw back' occupancy tax, and as such this tax remains off-limits today and in the future.
Rumors can be harmful to good ideas because they groundlessly instill fear in place of facts and understanding, and the same is true here. There is no mischief whatsoever in the resort area district concept. If anyone has heard things that lead them to believe otherwise, I do hope that they will take the time to call or write me. I'm more than happy to present the truth.
Mr. Alderman,
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure where to post this, but below please find a response to Matt Tate's letter to the editor found in the Pocahontas Times. At the behest of some of the owners at Snowshoe, Mr. DeBerry sent out the following response:
To the Editor;
I am writing at the request of several Snowshoe community home owners to share some information in response to Mr. Tate's recently published letter. In his letter, Mr. Tate raises questions over whether a Resort Area District would have the authority to take hotel occupancy taxes away from the County and therefore do the County great financial harm. While I understand and appreciate the impacts of such a concern, I can openly share that the short answer to Mr. Tate's question is very plainly, no.
As Mr. Tate points out, only counties or municipalities may collect occupancy tax. Also as Mr. Tate points out, resort area districts and municipal corporations are defined under different sections of WV State Code. In other words, while both municipalities and resort area districts are considered to be types of public corporations, not all public corporations are municipalities, and this holds true for Resort Area Districts; in that they are public corporations, but are not municipalities. While the term itself is not widely used every day, public corporations are not new to us. Boards of Education, Public Service Districts, Economic Development Authorities, and Community Enhancement Districts are all just a few examples of public corporations that exist throughout our state today. Similar to resort area districts, each of these public corporations have defined limits on how they generate funds to support operations; and a resort area district would have no more authority to take occupancy tax from the County than do any of these other examples.
Further supporting my point, the resort area district statute was developed quite intentionally with a 'do no harm' approach. We knew that we had to do something to help the Snowshoe community better deal with the impacts of hundreds of thousands of guests impacting our shared roads, transportation, public safety, and other community services at such intense levels. We also knew that our approach most certainly would fail if it negatively impacted the rest of the County. Occupancy tax was off-limits from the start. The statute provides no authority for resort area districts to 'claw back' occupancy tax, and as such this tax remains off-limits today and in the future.
Rumors can be harmful to good ideas because they groundlessly instill fear in place of facts and understanding, and the same is true here. There is no mischief whatsoever in the resort area district concept. If anyone has heard things that lead them to believe otherwise, I do hope that they will take the time to call or write me. I'm more than happy to present the truth.
Frank DeBerry
President
Snowshoe