Tourist Development Council Approves Activation of the 5th Cent Bed Tax

On Tuesday of this week the Escambia County Tourist Development Advisory Council voted 5-2 to recommend that the county levy the 5th cent of the bed tax on tourists.  This has been a hot-button topic that has consistently run into heavy opposition from hoteliers recently.

At Tuesday's meeting, the motion to recommend to the BCC the levying of the 5th cent was made by Jim Reeves and seconded by David Bear.  After discussions among the council, the vote was taken and by a 5-2 vote the measure to recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that they levy this fee on hotel and resort visitors passed. Those voting for the measure were Shirley Cronley, David Bear, Robert Bender, Nan Harper, and Ronnie Rivera.  The two members voting against were P.C. Wu and Jim Reeves.

The TDC will be requesting that the BCC levy the 5th cent immediately, but that the board put the proceeds from the 5th cent into a reserve account until such time as the county and the TDC iron out the most beneficial use of this new revenue to support tourism locally.

Most counties throughout Florida already levy 5 or 6 cents.  Escambia County, somewhat of an outlier, only levies 4 cents.

Each cent generates roughly $2.5 Million yearly in revenue that can be used for a variety of purposes that support tourism.  The lion's share of our 4 cents' worth of this revenue locally supports advertising our area to out-of-town markets.

For this to take effect, the Escambia Board of County Commissioners must schedule a public hearing and pass an ordinance authorizing this levy.  The measure must pass via a supermajority, with at least 4 commissioners supporting it,  in order for this levy to take effect.

I assume the public hearing will be scheduled in January.

Reason for the Pause, Part II

An analysis of requested information should clear up any questions raised by allegations that were brought to my attention Wednesday evening which led to my move to pull a funding item from last night's agenda....

In part I of this series I described the rationale for taking a pause on an agenda item from yesterday's meeting.

I asked my aide, Debbie Kenney, to make some inquiries of Visit Pensacola and Pensacola Sports Association so that I can run some other allegations to ground before we move ahead with the vote for an additional $2.3 Million to Visit Pensacola next month.

As I said to channel three and in the PNJ--I am just following up on information that was given to me.  Just allegations.  Hopefully, there is no substance to these allegations.....

I reiterated this position in a Friday interview on Pensacola's top-rated morning radio show, "Good Morning Pensacola" on 1370 WCOA.

Here's the Deal:   if I do not follow up on serious allegations from credible sources, then I am not doing my job, so I follow up on credible reports when I get them, and I get to the bottom of issues that are real.  Look no further than Newpoint schools and what happened there........ 

The below request was made today by my aide.  When I receive the information back, I'll hopefully have a better idea, before the next vote in April, about whether or not some things I have been told about these allocations of TDC monies are true or untrue.

Reason for the Pause, Part I

Sometimes a close examination of an allegation is good for all sides. Sometimes it proves there was no "there" there, other times it confirms allegations.  Occasionally  it serves to improve processes.  In any case, a thorough look is in order when seemingly alarming claims are made

At yesterday morning's agenda review session, I led the effort to pull a funding item from the agenda for this month so that I could investigate some issues that had been alleged having to do with the "process" of some purchases.

The board agreed and the item was dropped.

I described to the media and my peers on the BCC some of my concerns--the largest one being that according to a citizen with intimate knowledge of Visit Pensacola--a large-dollar purchase of a website domain name was made without proper authorization (from the full Visit Pensacola Board of Directors--in advance of the purchase)

I did confirm that to be true yesterday late in the evening--the board of Visit Pensacola neither authorized nor approved this purchase in advance as should have happened according to their bylaws and financial procedures documents.

The minutes from June 27th describe the purchase being disclosed to the full board after the fact. 

So far as I understand it--the purchase was questioned by the clerk's office, who in turn deferred to the County Administrator's office.

The County Administrator's office approved the purchase for reimbursement in September of 2018 (although the original purchase was made in early June of 2018).  I asked the following question yesterday:  "Was the authorization for the approval of this purchase reimbursement made with the understanding that the Visit Pensacola Board of Directors had voted to authorize this purchase in advance?"  and the answer was an unequivocal "Yes."

I'm told at least one Visit Pensacola board member was not happy about the way this purchase was done.

Nobody has told me yet, for sure,  if this purchase was ever officially ratified by a follow-on vote of the board--as should have occurred.  This action, if it did occur, is not reflected in the minutes.

So setting aside the size of the expenditure ($150,000.00 seems high to me-- but I'm not an expert in buying website domains) There is little doubt that the process here was badly flawed.

So if this was truly a time-sensitive issue--my question is why not call a special meeting?  Why not wait at least 3,5, or 7 days to do it right?  Why not write the contract stipulating the purchase is not valid until the Board of Directors approve the purchase?  Why the rush to spend this much money with no deliberations among the board of directors prior to the purchase?

And if the website was so important to acquire in such a rapid fashion, why has nothing been done with it--why is it not, at a minimum, at least directing traffic to the existing Visit Pensacola site right now?

Some other allegations were made about "multiple consultants and lobbyists" being engaged by these entities as well--with very generous monthly stipends.  This is all well and good, but I am requesting some information to see if what I am told squares with the reality of the situation with respect to several of these consultants, what they are doing, and for what purpose, and what sources of money is funding this.

I'm also going to ask about how these positions were advertised and whether or not RFP's or solicitations for these services were put out before the hires were made--or were these persons direct hires?

As I said in the PNJ--it is all probably nothing--I hope there is no larger issue other than this one obvious misfire with the website address purchase prior to board authorization.

But in our oversight capacity as commissioners--we have to take credible information seriously and we have to ask questions when irregularities (like the $150K Website Purchase without prior authorizations from the Board of Directors) are brought to our attention. 

I hope everyone gets this.

I mean, just imagine the alternative.  Imagine if we "didn't" follow up on allegations brought to our attention about potential issues with the expenditure of public monies?

WCOA Radio Interview This Morning: NFCU overpass, ECFR Firing, Bed Tax

Lot's of discussion this morning on WCOA:

--The Navy Federal Credit Union Overpass at 9-Mile Road--and the anger it is generating among residents in the district, and how this sudden initiative has been pushed through to this week's agenda

--The breaking news on ECFR Chief's dismissal

--Discussion of the allowable uses of Bed Tax revenue--in light of the Sunday editorial

Listen to the podcast HERE