Measures M & N easily win
Original post made on Nov 7, 2007
Read the full story here Web Link posted Tuesday, November 6, 2007, 11:08 PM
on Nov 7, 2007 at 8:26 am
Raising the hotel tax from 10% to 12% is one way to boost revenues. However, increasing the number of hotels allows the city to widen its tax base instead of just hiking the tax on the same small population of people. Hope this doesn't spark a vicious cycle where fewer people stay at Palo Alto hotels, more Palo Alto hotels close, and we have to keep increasing the tax to keep revenue neutral.
on Nov 7, 2007 at 8:30 am
More hotels=more traffic. Is this what the city wants?
City leaders and neighborhood leaders are constantly whining about too much traffic.
City needs to decide soon which way it wants to go--you cannot have vistors/shoppers/tourists without traffic
on Nov 7, 2007 at 10:25 am
Well, I voted against the tax increase precisely for the reasons stated by Casey. People won't want to shop or stay here if it's cheaper to go to Menlo Park, Los Altos, or Mountain View, all of which are close by and have lovely downtowns. So fewer car trips can be achieved afterall, with the price that eventually will be paid for with a less vibrant community.
(As it is, when we have guests from out of town, they rarely stay in Palo Alto hotels because we already have an expensive zip code. They just get in their rental cars and *drive* to tour Stanford's campus.)