"the City of Ketchum has added 2,000 employees to its workforce since the Ketchum Housing Department was established."
2,000 people is more than half the population of Ketchum. When and where are these people?
Of course 'no' to another 2% housing tax. That makes us the highest tax of all Ski Resorts. We are already exclusive enough as hard as it is to get here.
Perry, as a business owner in Ketchum I am deeply offended at the assumption that for-profit businesses are rolling in money.
Operating a business in Ketchum is nail biting at its best. Surviving slack can be heart stopping. You want to talk about housing insecurity? The owner of every business in Ketchum risks losing everything they own by the fickleness of our economy, the City's actions and the flightyness of our second home owners.
This is not for the faint of heart.
We operate businesses here because we like the lifestyle and close friends we have created in the mountains, not because there are big bucks to make.
Of course! We have many local business owners like you, Johnny Gs, Lefty’s etc. but we also have massive companies like SVC, regional/national banks, gas station conglomerates, hotels and real estate businesses owned by people who rarely if ever come to Ketchum and who don’t see the community of Ketchum as you do. To them it’s just a place to extract money from.
I say enough is enough…let’s finish the current work…Ketchum is fundamentally changing before our eyes…the city is a current mess..more taxes no way! The city has proven they are not capable of running current capital projects ( the roads), and having tax dollars to subsidize for profit businesses is wrong! Go Perry!
I don't know as much about these issues as some but I'm willing to learn and willing to attend meetings. In general what the city of Ketchum has allowed to happen to the character of downtown is a travesty ... and to install a housing project in downtown ketchum for the lowest paid workers is tone deaf. These are low income, often ethnic, persons - who are they to join for a sense of community in Ketchum? Bill Gates? Jamie Lee Curtis? Tom Hanks? Where are they to shop for basic necessities ... Atkinson's? With Ketchum real estate garnering such a high price, building low income housing smack dab in the center is a ludacris use of resources when we have a bus system and Hailey/Bellevue so very close. As for taxpayers subsidising anything for the multi-billionaire owners of Sun Valley Co., I'd call that a local government failure but it's too obvious for it not to be on purpose at the expense of the unknowing. Is the goal of Ketchum officials to make Sun Valley "accessible" to all? Why? Not everyone will want to come to Ketchum/Sun Valley because is difficult to get to ... therefore we will have more limited resources than most ski resort towns ... therefore everything will be more expensive ... therefore not everyone can afford it ... therefore (back to the beginning) not everyone will want to come here. I know that doesn't make SV Co's bottom line balloon even further but that's a company goal that certainly isn't in line with long-time or even shorter time residents who came here for something not easily accessible, special, and were willing to pay the price. Making it then accessible to everyone completely ignores basic supply and demand and letting the market drive the result. When politicians get involved they keep themselves employed by their "projects to solve" everything but much more often than not things that go against free market and supply and demand result in disaster and worthlessness down the road.
One of the things I find fascinating is the willful ignorance of the City Council. It is like they work for the staff rather than the staff working for the people. The Council has never compelled the Housing staff to survey employers about what their workforce needs are, how many of what kind of workers they need, what the impediments are, and what they are doing to solve those impediments (e.g., housing). Likewise, they have never surveyed the workforce about why they choose to work in Ketchum, how long they plan to stay, where they want to live, etc., etc. These seem like such basic things that not to do them has to be intentional. But what is the intention?
The truth of the matter is that not until Covid did we even look at trying to "solve" the problems of private business being successful or profitable. Lots of people want to live here and try to start a business - we don't have enough year round residents to make every business solvent - therefore many of them will discover it isn't profitable and we will have 20 restaurants instead of 25. Is it the job of City Council to make sure private businesses here are profitable? That's ridiculous and frankly a mindset of socialism. Let each business discover their own recipe for success - how much to pay their staff for example - how much to charge for goods and services - these are not novel concepts. The only reason for stepping in is, again, to boost the multi-billionaire owners of the resort and provide more services here to entice more tourists. Also, will City Council acknowledge that the country's economy is especially challenging right now ... and it may not be the best time to be trying to use the current market as the benchmark to make long-term decisions that the rest of us pay for?
If a LOT initiative is put on a ballot AT ANYTIME, the restrictions of how it is to be collected and used have to be rock solid.
The original LOT (Tourist Tax), when proposed to the Idaho State Legislature by 5 resort cities in the late 70's "to create a property tax relief fund for the impact of the increased cost of services necessary for the influx of tourists without burdening the local residents" was turned down, it was because to was too loosely written and they feared, would be abused. They were right!
It was the Idaho Supreme Court who allowed resort cities (population of 10,000 or less) to enact it. After that it didn't take long in Ketchum, to go down the rabbit hole from a tourist sales tax, collecting from bed and booze only, to a sales tax for all which included collection from everything but groceries. Next thing you knew the local residents were paying into the tourist tax, not getting relief from it! This was and still is, the opposite of the intent.
As for the use of the LOT tax, that too has been expanded over the years to promote, increase and give relief to tourists and SVC, trickle down economics being the mantra. Once again, not a tax relief to locals as intended.
When you see the LOT on a ballot, beware that while the propaganda to vote "yes" is very compelling, it is most likely not included in the actual ordinance language. Once passed, the use can be skewed. Sometimes bait and switch, sometimes just poor writing/planning with the opportunity for the intent to be lost.
P.S. Didn't we just pass a LOT for housing a year ago?
Perry, you wrote in your public comment: “ You make it sound so innocuous. You package something people don’t want, more Bluebirds, with something they do want—fire consolidation. ”
Is this a prediction? Or do you have knowledge that packaging the tax with fire consolidation is something the city is planning to do? I hope they do not do that.
I would be surprised if they don't. Packaging works.
In May 2022 they asked the voters to add housing to the original LOT and it failed. So in May 2023 they packaged it with air service, a county wide issue and got all the cities to put it on the ballot, it passed.
Good info Anne. But in this case they would be creating a false choice by packaging a public safety issue with a lodging tax. It is highly unethical. They would be held accountable under Idaho Statutes.
Ketchum cannot house every person who thinks they want to live here. We don’t have the infrastructure of schools, hospital,post office, parking, groceries,buses, etc… check out the plan they have expecting 11,000 more people living here by 2030?
"the City of Ketchum has added 2,000 employees to its workforce since the Ketchum Housing Department was established."
2,000 people is more than half the population of Ketchum. When and where are these people?
Of course 'no' to another 2% housing tax. That makes us the highest tax of all Ski Resorts. We are already exclusive enough as hard as it is to get here.
Perry, as a business owner in Ketchum I am deeply offended at the assumption that for-profit businesses are rolling in money.
Operating a business in Ketchum is nail biting at its best. Surviving slack can be heart stopping. You want to talk about housing insecurity? The owner of every business in Ketchum risks losing everything they own by the fickleness of our economy, the City's actions and the flightyness of our second home owners.
This is not for the faint of heart.
We operate businesses here because we like the lifestyle and close friends we have created in the mountains, not because there are big bucks to make.
Of course! We have many local business owners like you, Johnny Gs, Lefty’s etc. but we also have massive companies like SVC, regional/national banks, gas station conglomerates, hotels and real estate businesses owned by people who rarely if ever come to Ketchum and who don’t see the community of Ketchum as you do. To them it’s just a place to extract money from.
Totally see your point of view.
Thanks for clarifying.
...while receiving additional subsidies provided by local taxpayers and the present city council.
I say enough is enough…let’s finish the current work…Ketchum is fundamentally changing before our eyes…the city is a current mess..more taxes no way! The city has proven they are not capable of running current capital projects ( the roads), and having tax dollars to subsidize for profit businesses is wrong! Go Perry!
I don't know as much about these issues as some but I'm willing to learn and willing to attend meetings. In general what the city of Ketchum has allowed to happen to the character of downtown is a travesty ... and to install a housing project in downtown ketchum for the lowest paid workers is tone deaf. These are low income, often ethnic, persons - who are they to join for a sense of community in Ketchum? Bill Gates? Jamie Lee Curtis? Tom Hanks? Where are they to shop for basic necessities ... Atkinson's? With Ketchum real estate garnering such a high price, building low income housing smack dab in the center is a ludacris use of resources when we have a bus system and Hailey/Bellevue so very close. As for taxpayers subsidising anything for the multi-billionaire owners of Sun Valley Co., I'd call that a local government failure but it's too obvious for it not to be on purpose at the expense of the unknowing. Is the goal of Ketchum officials to make Sun Valley "accessible" to all? Why? Not everyone will want to come to Ketchum/Sun Valley because is difficult to get to ... therefore we will have more limited resources than most ski resort towns ... therefore everything will be more expensive ... therefore not everyone can afford it ... therefore (back to the beginning) not everyone will want to come here. I know that doesn't make SV Co's bottom line balloon even further but that's a company goal that certainly isn't in line with long-time or even shorter time residents who came here for something not easily accessible, special, and were willing to pay the price. Making it then accessible to everyone completely ignores basic supply and demand and letting the market drive the result. When politicians get involved they keep themselves employed by their "projects to solve" everything but much more often than not things that go against free market and supply and demand result in disaster and worthlessness down the road.
Mic drop. You nailed it.
One of the things I find fascinating is the willful ignorance of the City Council. It is like they work for the staff rather than the staff working for the people. The Council has never compelled the Housing staff to survey employers about what their workforce needs are, how many of what kind of workers they need, what the impediments are, and what they are doing to solve those impediments (e.g., housing). Likewise, they have never surveyed the workforce about why they choose to work in Ketchum, how long they plan to stay, where they want to live, etc., etc. These seem like such basic things that not to do them has to be intentional. But what is the intention?
The truth of the matter is that not until Covid did we even look at trying to "solve" the problems of private business being successful or profitable. Lots of people want to live here and try to start a business - we don't have enough year round residents to make every business solvent - therefore many of them will discover it isn't profitable and we will have 20 restaurants instead of 25. Is it the job of City Council to make sure private businesses here are profitable? That's ridiculous and frankly a mindset of socialism. Let each business discover their own recipe for success - how much to pay their staff for example - how much to charge for goods and services - these are not novel concepts. The only reason for stepping in is, again, to boost the multi-billionaire owners of the resort and provide more services here to entice more tourists. Also, will City Council acknowledge that the country's economy is especially challenging right now ... and it may not be the best time to be trying to use the current market as the benchmark to make long-term decisions that the rest of us pay for?
If a LOT initiative is put on a ballot AT ANYTIME, the restrictions of how it is to be collected and used have to be rock solid.
The original LOT (Tourist Tax), when proposed to the Idaho State Legislature by 5 resort cities in the late 70's "to create a property tax relief fund for the impact of the increased cost of services necessary for the influx of tourists without burdening the local residents" was turned down, it was because to was too loosely written and they feared, would be abused. They were right!
It was the Idaho Supreme Court who allowed resort cities (population of 10,000 or less) to enact it. After that it didn't take long in Ketchum, to go down the rabbit hole from a tourist sales tax, collecting from bed and booze only, to a sales tax for all which included collection from everything but groceries. Next thing you knew the local residents were paying into the tourist tax, not getting relief from it! This was and still is, the opposite of the intent.
As for the use of the LOT tax, that too has been expanded over the years to promote, increase and give relief to tourists and SVC, trickle down economics being the mantra. Once again, not a tax relief to locals as intended.
When you see the LOT on a ballot, beware that while the propaganda to vote "yes" is very compelling, it is most likely not included in the actual ordinance language. Once passed, the use can be skewed. Sometimes bait and switch, sometimes just poor writing/planning with the opportunity for the intent to be lost.
P.S. Didn't we just pass a LOT for housing a year ago?
Perry, you wrote in your public comment: “ You make it sound so innocuous. You package something people don’t want, more Bluebirds, with something they do want—fire consolidation. ”
Is this a prediction? Or do you have knowledge that packaging the tax with fire consolidation is something the city is planning to do? I hope they do not do that.
you get extra credit for reading to the end.
It is not a prediction--they were contemplating doing it. And they still may. We will find out at the August 19th meeting.
Keep us posted on this matter. Upon careful review, I doubt these leaders would do something that corrupt.
I would be surprised if they don't. Packaging works.
In May 2022 they asked the voters to add housing to the original LOT and it failed. So in May 2023 they packaged it with air service, a county wide issue and got all the cities to put it on the ballot, it passed.
Good info Anne. But in this case they would be creating a false choice by packaging a public safety issue with a lodging tax. It is highly unethical. They would be held accountable under Idaho Statutes.
https://www.mtexpress.com/news/blaine_county/housing-study-details-blaine-county-affordability-gap/article_895977b8-4aa7-11ef-b524-b7986139861f.html#comments
Ketchum cannot house every person who thinks they want to live here. We don’t have the infrastructure of schools, hospital,post office, parking, groceries,buses, etc… check out the plan they have expecting 11,000 more people living here by 2030?