A recent guest editorial described the city of Decatur’s recent hotel purchase as a “centerpiece for future economic development and provides a large amount of revenue for local taxing bodies.” While this facility is nice to have for Decatur, a fair minded person may arrive at a different conclusion.
Consider the facts:
Needed hotel renovations will likely cost Decatur tax-payers several million more dollars over the coming months.
Thirty percent occupancy rates show the limited demand for this hotel (financially successful hotels operate at 60 percent or higher.
Total “room-nights” from both the Farm Progress Show and the Illinois Republican Convention represent two percent of the possible annual sales for this facility.
There is now, and has been for the past several years, little commercial development interest in the adjacent tracts to the hotel.
Recent comments from the city’s public works director indicate that there are major repairs needed now on an aging storm sewer system in this city. Other department heads are calling for a new multi-million dollar police facility and millions more for a new lake reservoir. Perhaps we need to do a better job of setting our pri-orities as to where our tax dollars need to be spent.
The guest editorial also stated that, “this is not about the money.” When using taxpayer funds to compete with private business it’s only about the money. It was also stated that this taxpayer investment was about saving the 160 jobs at this facility. I am certain that there are many former K’s Merchan-dise, Intermet and other former Decatur business owners and their employees who wish they had known about this current policy at city hall prior to them shut-ting their doors.
Decatur taxpayers footing the bill for this hotel simply does not make good sense.
Terry Howley
Decatur
September 13th, 2007 at 3:03 pm
Right on Mr. Howley, excellent post!
September 13th, 2007 at 3:18 pm
Amen.
The city could have assist many others in need in saving jobs.
Looks like all we are doing is trying to save the Republican State Convention and city pride. Since it appears there are investors who want to expand hotels north of the city where the business is. Unfortuneatly, it appears the city bought a white elephant of hotel business. Maybe ot wi;; be a fitting place for the GOP.
September 13th, 2007 at 6:23 pm
This hotel purchase is an example of too much power concentrated in hands that are not accountable to voters and taxpayers. This was brought to the Council by an unelected city manager and presented in an untimely fashion to the community. Not only are priorities misplaced, the economic analysis, due diligence and estimates of future performance are minimal or non-existent.
No competent business person would ever enter into this transaction in this fashion. Why would a business person say they voted for it “against their better judgement”. What judgement should elected leaders be using if not “best” judgment?
While we all hope for the hotel’s success, this project demonstrates in real time two key principles:
1) Government has no business operating in the private sector.
2) Unelected and unaccountable government officials should not be given the power to make key decisions.
I for one feel that a system that allows only half of the elected representatives (and against the strong conviction of the other half) to make a decision with barely two days of public disclosure (very few citizens even knew about), is a system that needs changed. Do I have an agenda? YES - Change the form of government that allows this to happen.
September 13th, 2007 at 7:14 pm
I have to agree with Mr. Howley, on the hotel purchase. I believe the council made a colossal mistake at the cost of us the tax payer that essentially was influenced by our “non accountable” city manager. The winner of the whole deal was the hotel management firm. This is just another reason why I believe we need Change in Decatur. Change for the better. If we had the Alderman system with a Strong Mayor, I would have to say this deal probably won’t have gone through. What I wonder is who did our appointed leader “city manager” converse with on this issue to determine that this was a good deal? I am no way an expert in the Hotel industry. However I would think that if this was a good deal there would have been no problem getting a company to purchase the Hotel and keep it as a Hotel. Evidently our appointed leader “city manager “must be more knowledgeable about the subject than the experts in this industry. I hope our city leaders can pull a rabbit out of there hat on this one. One thing that really gets me on the votes is that one council person said they are voting for this against their better judgment. It is my strong belief that all people voted into office be it State, Federal, County or Local government, they are obligated to use their better judgment. In my opinion going against your better judgment is an indication that there is an influence happening and not independent thinking. When holding office, independent thinking comes from getting a consensus of the people you represent, and I don’t think any of those who voted for this deal “ and a few other deals” are in touch with the citizens of Decatur. Just another example of why we need Alderman elected by districts that would represent our neighbor hoods.
Comment by Brian Burcham
September 14th, 2007 at 12:39 am
Paul Osborne loves spending Other People’s Money. His puppet council seem more than willing to join him in his compulsive, expensive expenditures. It’s time to say NO more!
September 14th, 2007 at 8:24 am
Brian, I agree about the “better judgement” philosophy. That was my question from the very start. I just couldn’t believe he said it like that. I’m sure he or someone he know reads these blogs, I wonder if he would tell us just what he meant by ” I’m voting for this against my better judgement.” I doubt that he will. Maybe it was a slip of the tongue about a back roon deal.
September 14th, 2007 at 8:43 am
I still think we should just move the law enforcement center there. More room for both the county and city police…More room for holding cells…More room for expansion.
September 14th, 2007 at 10:00 am
I heard some religious organization was going to purchase the property. If this happened there would be no tax assessment and the city would lose millions over the years. So the city jumped in and bought it and will turn around and sell it to someone (I guess) who will run it as a hotel and thus pay taxes. I know it’s a stretch but it makes a little sense.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:02 am
As former Mayor your public comments on any matter should be encouraged, and I might say they are welcomed. I could not agree with you more. This is very risky business to spend that kind of money on a distressed business and a depreciating asset. But it is even riskier government to make the purchase with three members voting aye, three members voting nay, and one shamelessly dithering council member voting against his better judgment.
September 14th, 2007 at 12:36 pm
This Hotel Purchase stinks to High Heaven which anyone with minimum common sense knows?
How many other Cities in our area purchase and operate Private businessess?
May our City Council purchase a failing Restuarant or Water Park minus Public input as well?
Who is zooming who?
Something stinks in Decatur and the odor is increasing!…while our City Coffers are being depleted by purchasing failed businesses?
C’mon!Do they think we Decaturites are that stupid?
Are we?…
September 14th, 2007 at 3:04 pm
You have 3 council members and a mayor who are quite eager to carry water for the city manager on any issue. This hotel deal was so fishy that one of those four barely had the stomach to utter the yes word. He had to preface his vote with a disclaimer that does indeed cast a shadow over the dealings of this city. What a disgrace for him and the taxpayers that he had to admit that it was not his judgement that he was using to cast his lot.
September 14th, 2007 at 5:06 pm
I have to disagree with Mr Daniels and Mr Burcham. In no manner can they say the hotel purchase would not occur if we had a strong mayor/aldermatic government. A strong mayor and aldermen seeing the same information placed in front of them by the mayors administrative assistant (in Decaturs Mayor/council form called a city manager)could just as easily made the same decision. Lets be reasonable in our claims guys, the 21 member council you are proposing is not going to be able to cut our taxes in half, put a chicken in every pot or find the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, they may make many of the same decisions the current council made. They are going to look at the information presented to them, and in my opinion vote 11 to 10 to buy the hotel. If you can make outragous claims so can I. Also, you might as well both sign the same letter if you are going to use all the same catch phrases and buzz words.
September 14th, 2007 at 8:38 pm
Mr. Payton, first of all I said that it probably wouldn’t have gone through. “I did make a typo and said won’t” I don’t see anywhere in my post, nor have I ever claimed at anytime an Alderman system would cut our taxes in half. Don’t put words in my mouth. If you are going to say I said something get it right. I prefer my chicken fried, and we all know there is no pot of gold at the end of a rain bow. You made no mention on the matter that a 21 member council would give the citizens of Decatur better representation. I draft my own letters with my own opinions. The only catch phrase or buzz words I use are Change Decatur. Look forward to hear from you soon
September 14th, 2007 at 8:58 pm
Steve Payton…….Good for you, finally someone is here to tell us why the deciding vote was passed by a vote :against his better judgement”.
September 15th, 2007 at 7:01 am
This “Letter” speaks to a current problem, but allows for discussion on other pending problems.
For the commentor, who advocates a “Change In the FORM of City Governmeent.” I might suggest, you cooperate with the current “form” of City Government, as your father did, quite successfully I might add, all his life. That would be NEW, to our chosen form of City Government.
September 15th, 2007 at 12:40 pm
The effort to change the city government will probably succeed because people think the city isn’t going in the right direction. The groups trying to get the government changed is going about this the right way and have allowed enough time to get the signatures in place. I don’t know if this will be a better form of government, but the current one hasn’t been listening for quite a while.
September 17th, 2007 at 4:48 am
I offer this: A caution, in the form of information.
Our current FORM of City Government, may be “corrupt?” However, only a person seeking a “more easily corruptable FORM of City Government,” would follow the petitioner’s request.
If we are to “change” anything, please, let the change be for the better?
September 18th, 2007 at 8:21 pm
I support the Alderman form,therefore I will reluctantly vote against it?
Wha?
I’m for it but I will vote against it or I’m against it and I’ll vote for it?
It just depends…?…on What?$
Who is zooming who and for how much??