12/09/1974 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

- I ". '. '.' ~ iCouncilwoman Beal asked how much money the Association was requesting. Mr. Kays I called attention to the budget included in the report and projections of expenditures , for the next three years (totaling $65,000 for 1975; $60,000 for 1976; and $57,000 ~ for 1977). 'He said that any allocation from room tax funds would be a commitment only, I ~ use of that money would be contingent upon the Association's success in obtaining founda~! tion support. Association money on hand would.be kept for emergency purposes. Mr.Kays ' said it was felt after the Council had requested a report on status of the Association that the Council now should either reaffirm its interest or the Association should be 'disbanded so'far as efforts toward planning for a facility were concerned. If the 'Council was interested in supporting the building, the Association then requested per- 'mission to apply for the necessary funds from the Room Tax Allocation Committee. . : Councilman Murray asked about items in the projected expenditures for salaries. He ex-" !pressed concern about the amounts requested, particularly the continuing use of i architects' fees, and making a three-year commitment. Mr. Kays said a salary for a , director had not been set because there was not yet agreement on specific duties of ; the position. However, enough was allowed to provide for a directo! and whatever i office help would be necessary. He added that expenditures for the next six months : probably would go for architects' expenses. He said the three-year approach was used !because it was felt it would take that long to update financial feasibility study, ; getting to the pr i va te -sector for funds, etc., and taking into consideration the I I present economic si tua~_ion. _____'_.~' __ _, , ... , . ...._ I. P'''' __ ,__ .-__ .." " Manager suggested that a breakdown of room tax revenues and allocations might be de- . , \ e sirable if the Council was to act favorably on this request, That would provide in- \ formation wi th regard to the wide variety of acti vi ties which had been funded through I those revenues since dropping the auditorium commitment and which would be denied funds \ if this commitment were to be made. He expressed concern too about the necessity for some understanding of funding operation and mainte~ance of the facility should it be : built, he felt that should be considered even before the fund raising was started. (Mr. Kays said the position of the Association at this time was that'it needed to know : whether the Council wished the Association to pursue the goal of having an auditorium ; facility. The largest expense faced right now, he said, would be for architects. He : added that the Association had about $54,000 on hand from shows presented over the past : few years. I Councilman McDonald was in favor of the request. He noted that the robm tax monies \ 1 were originally to be earmarked for an auditorium and said he thought it was understood ' ithat operation of the facility would be under deficit financing.. He ffdt the community' was still interested in having an auditorium, that bond issue for its construction was rejected by the voters only because of dissatisfaction with its proposed location at that time. Manager said he raised the question of use of room tax funds because the concept had been changed from the original plan of bein~ more or less self-supporting which woula appear to have allowed room tax revenues to have successfully covered the deficit. Catherine Lauris, member of the Association, noted that financial study be- e ~. fore the bond election gave three estimates under three different concepts. Even wi th I the convention center, she said, an annual deficit of $50,000 was estimated, and that : I 'was the figure the room tax committee received. She said one reason operating money , r was needed now was to revise those estimates because the concept had changed qui te a bi t. l 'Councilman Keller left the meeting. I I . I Councilwoman Beal thought it had always been obvious that room tax revenues were to be I 1 used primarily for support of an auditorium. Also that the Jarvis report had taken : \', into consideration defici t operation of the facili ty and that, the room tax funds would I ~be used to assist in the operation. She added that she thought the community wanted , I the facility but rejected the bond issue mainly because they did not want to use tax I I money fQr its construction. I I I Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mrs. Campbell to refer the request of the I I Auditorium Association to the Room Tax Allocation Committee with the note that the Council believed the Association should have a commitment I for a portion of Joom .tax revenues. In seconding the motion Mrs. Campbell said she hesitated because of the commitment being r _ I. made and the fact that new.Council members would be taking office in January. She ex- e ;' pressed concern about the ,amount of mone.y be asked, saying she would like to see' the i Association pledge their own funds for 'at least 30% of the proposed budget and ask the , Allocation Committee for the other 70%. I : Councilman Murray wasn't fully in support of the dO.llar figure or the three~year commit- I i ment.., And he didn't want to see the Council go on .record for '~undying obligation" to , the Auditorium Association on the basis that that was the reaso~. for passage of the room~; ..---,;....... .. ~.'-- .........-- ..~_.~.- --- ..~ ---.- ~----.....-.....~.., _....-..._.~..-.. ....____ ___'_"_"__~__"_""""-"...~n.._~._______~_ .~___ ..~.~~ 4\4 12/9/74 - 7