Month: May 2004

Seagull Musings Column for May 30, 2004

Ah yes, the age old question, “Will crime and Viagra sales increase if casino entertainment comes to Rockaway Beach? If what the Ole Seagull heard at a recent meeting is true, “that casino gambling is controlled by the ‘mafia,’” one could reasonably expect an increase in crime.

“But Seagull, who would believe something like that?” How about some of the same people who believed that the Branson Board of Aldermen was going to seriously address the issue of the expansion of the drinking of alcoholic beverages into theatres and attractions at their May 24, meeting?

The first casinos authorized by Missouri’s voters started operation in May of 1994. In the ten years they have been providing entertainment to Missouri residents and visitors, has there been any credible evidence presented by anyone that either the “mafia” or “organized crime” is controlling that entertainment? Indeed, the credible evidence would seem to suggest that Missouri’s casino entertainment industry is controlled very closely by the Missouri Gaming Commission, not the “mafia” or “organized crime.”

“Now hold on there Seagull, are you saying that there would be no increase in crime if casino entertainment came to Rockaway Beach?” No, not at all, but if there was any, he’d bet that, proportionately speaking, it would be about the same as the rate of increase in the sales of Viagra.

“Are you seriously comparing an increase in crime to increased sales of Viagra?” Why not, doesn’t it make as much sense as the Branson Board of Aldermen and the Branson Lakes Area Chamber of Commerce condemning the expansion of casino entertainment on family value grounds with one hand while supporting the expansion of the serving of alcoholic beverages into Branson’s family friendly theatres and attractions with the other?

“Not really.” Well let’s try it this way. If there is an increase of hundreds of thousands of visitors coming into the Branson Area and an increase in our areas permanent population for any reason, a casino in Rockaway Beach, Branson Landing etc., wouldn’t it be reasonable to expect a proportional increase in crime, church enrollment, traffic accidents, meals served at restaurants, heart attacks, sales of tickets to shows and attractions, rental of hotel rooms, increased retail sales including Viagra, etc?

“Well it sounds logical but wouldn’t the increase in crime be greater because of the type of people that casino entertainment brings in?” Not really. Send a survey team from the Chamber of Commerce to Tunica, Mississippi, to look at the average person being entertained in their casinos. An Ole Seagull would bet that they are the very types of people that Branson is spending millions of marketing dollars trying to attract.

In July of 2001, the Mark Twain Casino opened in LaGrange, Missouri. In a letter dated October 2, 2003, the Mayor of LaGrange, said, “There has been no increase in crime what so ever.”He went on to point out that “There are residential houses within one half block of the Casino and there has been no complaints filed against or about the casino” and that “we could not ask for better neighbors.”

Recently, in citing the justification for the expansion of the serving of alcohol into Branson’s theatres and attractions, one of the owners of a theatre serving alcohol said words to the effect that “we are just giving our customer what they want.” It is estimated that a casino in Rockaway Beach would provide an “additional attraction” that an estimated 3 million visitors a year would visit because it provides a form of entertainment that they want.

What’s more likely to cause someone to travel three to four hours to come to Branson, the serving of alcoholic beverages in theatres and attractions or the desire for casino entertainment? To an Ole Seagull the only “crime” he sees in this situation is Branson’s willingness to compromise its “family values,” in the alcohol situation while blithely ignoring the entertainment desires of an estimated three million visitors a year to our area. Now that we know what we are, can’t we at least renegotiate the price?

Gary Groman, a.k.a. “The Ole Seagull,” is an independent columnist and the editor of the Branson Courier. He may be reached by clicking here or by calling 417-339-4000.

Seagull Musings Column for May 23, 2004

It has been said that “An army travels on its stomach.” Ten years in the United States Marine Corps convinced an Ole Seagull that an “army’s” stomach travels best when that “army” is traveling on good roads. Is it any different for a destination city like Branson? It’s at its best when residents and visitors alike travel on good roads.

Many can remember how it was trying to get around Branson back in the late 80’s and early 90’s. Basically there was Highway 76, a poor imitation of what the Shepherd of the Hills Expressway is today, and some “secret back routes.” On most days during the season, it was difficult and frustrating for residents and visitors alike to get from point A to point B within Branson.

Think of the traffic and congestion problems we would have today without the expansion of Highway 248 to four lanes from Highway 65 to its junction with Shepherd of the Hills Expressway, the extension and improvement of Gretna Road, improvement of Shepherd of the Hills expressway, Epps Road, Roark Valley Road, Green Mountain Drive, etc. Thanks to the planning, coordination, and efforts of the City of Branson, MODOT, and Taney County, citizens and visitors alike travel on a road system that relieves traffic congestion, provides for the public safety, and enables Branson to service the large influx of visitors that are its economic life blood.

“But Seagull, there are days and weekends during the season when traffic is horrendous?” That’s true, but the good news is that, because of Branson’s transportation planning and infrastructure improvements, it happens so infrequently and that, on average, Branson’s citizens and visitors can get anywhere they want to go within Branson safely and conveniently.

The transportation infrastructure to put Branson in this enviable position is not without cost however and has cost the city tens of millions of dollars. The major source of these funds has been a one half percent retail sales Transportation Tax which has been collected over at least the last ten years. One obvious benefit of a retail sales tax, in a tourist destination city like Branson, is that it shifts the tax burden for the transportation infrastructure needed to service Branson tourists from the shoulders of local residents onto the shoulders of the tourists that infrastructure is designed to service.

Branson’s current Transportation Tax is set to expire in November of 2005 unless the voters of Branson extend the tax.The vote on that extension is set for August. “Why vote so far in advance?” Were an Ole Seagull to hazard a guess it would be a combination of timing the election so that it had the best chance of passage, provide time for resubmission to the voters if the tax fails, and, most important of all, to provide a continuous source of financing so that vital transportation infrastructure construction, maintenance, and planning continues unabated.

“So it won’t be a new tax, just the extension of an old one?” That’s right. “With all the roads etc. that Branson has built over the last ten years why do they need more money?” Does anyone really believe that as Branson expands to the west and the north that new roads, bridges and related infrastructure will not be required? What about the maintenance and improvement of the current transportation infrastructure? How much longer can Branson go without some form of effective public mass transportation?

“I’ve heard a rumor that they want to pass this tax extension for infrastructure improvements for Branson Landing?” Give an Ole Seagull a break, won’t the vast majority, if not all, of the public transportation infrastructure for Branson Landing be paid for by the bonds being issued to finance the public portion of Branson Landing?

It’s not a Branson Landing issue! It’s an issue of continuing to meet Branson’s expanding transportation needs during the coming decades.The good news is that in determining whether or not to extend the Transportation Tax, the community can actually look back over the last ten years and evaluate how their investment of the Transportation Tax has affected our community. Indeed, the chances are excellent, that this very day they will be driving over a road or bridge that was built because of it.

Gary Groman, a.k.a. “The Ole Seagull,” is an independent columnist and the editor of the Branson Courier. He may be reached by clicking here or by calling 417-339-4000.

Seagull Musings Column for May 16, 2004

At the outset the Ole Seagull would point out his basic belief that the “created” have no power or authority to change the laws of the “Creator.” The created either follow the laws of the Creator or live with the consequences of not doing so, not the least of which is being left to their own devices.

In this scenario, it is apparent that who or what the “Creator” is plays a critical role. To an Ole Seagull, even one in the winter of his years and with all his glaring faults, the obvious answer is contained within the words, “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” That “Creator” is God.

“Come on Seagull, do you really believe that God created everything?” Absolutely! Through the spring, summer, fall, and into the winter of his years, from the sun coming up every morning to its setting every evening, and all that naturally transpires in between, he has observed an orderliness to the universe that continually testifies of the certainty of God’s creation and His blessing.

“Next you’re going to tell us that you believe that “the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.” From an Ole Seagull’s perspective it sure beats the alternative of a Godless “inbreeding evolution” left to itself without God’s hand to direct it.

“Well, God didn’t create this country?” Actually He did. Relatively speaking, it just took a “few years” for Columbus, to “discover” that which God had created and which, at the time of his discovery, was occupied by “Native Americans” who had discovered it centuries before.

“Come on Seagull, what I meant is that God didn’t fight the Revolutionary War which established us as an independent nation or write the U.S. Constitution upon which its government is based.” As an Ole Seagull understands it, that war like all others before it and since, was fought by beings that God created as they exercised their option of free choice. In like manner the U.S. Constitution was written.

“If the U.S. Constitution, the document upon which our government is based, says there should be no prayer in schools, no nativity scenes on public property, that the Ten Commandments cannot be displayed in public buildings, Christmas should be called “Winter Solstice,” etc., shouldn’t that be the law of the land?” Absolutely, and if a frog had wings it should be able to fly but a frog doesn’t have wings and the Constitution contains no such language!

“Gotcha there Seagull, how about the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which says, among other things, ‘Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.’ ” Are we talking about the same First Amendment that Congress proposed, as part of the Bill of Rights on September 25, 1789? “That’s the one.” Was that same Congress still in session, not two months later, on November 16, 1789? “Sure it was.Why?”

On November 16, 1789, the First President of the United States, George Washington, issued a Thanksgiving Proclamation.In that proclamation he stated, “Whereas it is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor and whereas both Houses of Congress have by their joint committee requested me to ‘recommend to the People of the United States a day of public thanks-giving and prayer to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many single favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness.’ “

Can any reasonably thinking person really believe that the same Congress that encouraged the “people of the United States” to acknowledge “with grateful hearts the many single favors of Almighty God,” intended that the First Amendment they had proposed, not two months prior, be used as a tool to take prayer out of schools, remove the ten commandments from the walls of all public buildings etc.? It flies in the face of logic.

“Well, the Supreme Court of the United States says it does!” Is that the same “Supreme Court” that issued the Dred Scott Decision? “Ah, yeah I guess so. What was that decision about?” The fallibility of mans law and those who interpret it and a testimony to what can happen when the created change the laws of the Creator.

Gary Groman, a.k.a. “The Ole Seagull,” is an independent columnist and the editor of the Branson Courier. He may be reached by clicking here or by calling 417-339-4000.

Seagull Musings Column for May 9, 2004

At the close of a public meeting on April 29, 2004 Terry Dody, Branson’s City Administrator, was reported to have said words to the effect that “Senator Childers and Representative Wood didn’t ask the council their opinion regarding the legislation [SB 787] on countywide voting for gambling.” According to the report, he went on to point out that “Instead they worked with the Chamber and a few other businesses.”

In addition, the report indicates that Dody made it very clear in the meeting that “the city council and the city administrator are against this legislation.” It continued, “One hotel owner suggested that the city should have contacted those state leaders when they learned of the legislation that was being drafted. Terry said it was too late by then because the legislation had already been introduced for consideration to the House and Senate.”

“Hey Seagull, didn’t something like this happen in the past?” It sure did. It seems that the more things change the more they remain the same.

Back in 2001, the “Chamber” and “a few other businesses,” which the Ole Seagull called the “Secret Handshake Clique,” drafted a piece of legislation to impose a one percent general retail sales tax to be used for the marketing of Branson. ” The legislation was developed, snuck out of our community, and slipped through the legislature by the Secret Handshake Clique and selected chamber allies before most chamber or community members knew what was happening. That coupled with the obvious chamber bias of the legislation is why, to this day, some people within our community refer to the tax as “The Chamber Tax.”

“Doesn’t Branson need more marketing funds? In an Ole Seagulls opinion, it did then and it does now. “Then what’s the problem?” To paraphrase what Clara used to say in an old Wendy’s Ad, “Where’s the additional marketing funds?” Here it is over two and a half years after the “Chamber Tax” legislation was passed and not one additional dollar of marketing funds has been raised by that legislation to market our community.

The sad thing is that because of the Chamber Tax legislation itself, in an Ole Seagulls opinion, the voters have not really been given the opportunity to vote on whether or not they want to authorize the marketing tax. “Whoa now Seagull, didn’t the voters vote on the issue in February of 2002?” They sure did and it was turned down but the question is why was it turned down?

Was it turned down because the community did not support increased marketing funds to market Branson or because of other “chamber” related problems, perceptions, and issues caused in large part by the legislation itself? Is it possible that many of the voters couldn’t get past the obvious “chamber bias” of the legislation? Or, for whatever reason, lacked faith in the chamber and or its ability to effectively market Branson? Could some have had a problem with a non elected chamber controlled board of directors, managing upwards of ten million dollars of tax payer money with no accountability to any elected government entity, etc.

“Well, when it failed in February of 2002 why didn’t the community work together to develop new legislation correcting the problems and work to get it through the legislature. In an Ole Seagulls opinion the answer is pretty simple.It didn’t happen because the “Secret Handshake Clique,” “They,” “Them,” those who really wield the power in Branson, didn’t want it to.

“Why wouldn’t they want to?” Could it be because those who built the “chamber bias” into the legislation, were unwilling to give up the control that it provided and were willing, as ironic as it sounds, to “gamble” on a “shock and awe” campaign, at their time and choosing, to get both the tax passed and the control of its proceeds?

“Couldn’t something be done to force the issue?” Sure, if the County Commission rescinded their order establishing the Tourism Enhancement District things would get interesting very quickly. “Couldn’t the districts board of directors initiate action to dissolve the district?” They could but they won’t.

“Why?” They appear to be content to sit in their “little chamber controlled cocoon” playing with their bylaws, RFPs, contracts etc. while they wait for some “mystical omnipotent entity” to give them resources and direction. “Does that ‘mystical omnipotent entity’ have a name?” Surely that’s a rhetorical question? Isn’t it?

Gary Groman, a.k.a. “The Ole Seagull,” is an independent columnist and the editor of the Branson Courier. He may be reached by clicking here or by calling 417-339-4000.

Seagull Musings Column for May 2, 2004

As the Ole seagull was driving into Branson on the morning of Saturday, April 24, he tuned in Springfield talk Radio on KWTO, 560 AM.He caught the end of a phone conversation between the shows host and a caller identified as “Fred from Branson.” He was surprised on two counts.

First, he was surprised to hear the lilting melodious sound of one of his favorite radio personalities, Bonnie Bell, who does not normally host on Saturday mornings. Secondly, he was surprised because he thought he recognized the voice of the caller she was talking to and it wasn’t much of a “feat” to realize that the name he associated with the voice didn’t have a first name of Fred.

It was obvious that they were talking about Senator Doyle Childer’s legislation, SB 787. The “Current Bill Summary” for SB 787, as posted on the states official website for “House and Senate Joint Bill Tracing,” states that “if the voters of a city adjacent to a river other than the Missouri River or the Mississippi River approve the licensing of gambling boats within the city, then the voters of the county in which the city is located must subsequently approve the licensing of gambling boats within such city.”

One can therefore understand the surprise and confusion of the Ole Seagull when the Fred said words to the effect that the bill was about much more than gambling, “It was about the right of local people to vote about the major issues that affected them.”

As he heard those words the first thing that came to the Ole Seagulls mind was “How intentionally misleading could a statement be?” Saying that the very narrow scope of SB 787 is about the right of the people to vote on anything except the licensing of gambling boats is about as accurate as saying that the building of the Highroad solved Branson’s alleged ‘economic emergency’ and eliminated traffic congestion in Branson.”

“Come on Seagull, what’s the Highroad have to do with gambling in Rockaway Beach?” Do you mean besides the fact that if they do get gambling in Rockaway Beach everyone will be slapping themselves on their foreheads with the palm of their hands saying “why didn’t we build it east instead of west?”

“Get serious Seagull.” All right, because it appears that the same elitist, arrogant, political and deceitful, clout used to get the highroad and the legislation authorizing the one percent retail sales tax, that some call the “Chambers Tax” pushed through state government is being used in the Rockaway Beach situation.

“But Seagull, doesn’t SB 787 enjoy more popular support than the Highroad or the Chamber Tax legislation?” Like duh, what wouldn’t? “Well then, doesn’t that make it right?” No, it just makes it popular. “Well, doesn’t the majority rule?” Not really, “They” that determine what and who the majority is and, more importantly, when it should be heard, “rule.”

In the case of gambling in Rockaway Beach, “they” are confident that the vote will turn out their way so a county vote is all right, even desirable. In the case of the high road and the tax that some call the “Chambers Tax,” “they” were confident that a vote of all county residents wouldn’t go their way so a county vote was to be avoided at all costs. Does anyone seriously believe that “they” want everyone living in Taney County to vote about the major issues that affect them?

Well Fred, as misleading as the Ole Seagull believes your show boating statement was, whoever you are, may you always celebrate in cities of silver and may the roads that you travel be as traffic free as the highroad currently is. “Oh Fred, while we’re talking,” the Ole Seagull just has to ask, “Do you know a waitress named Mabel?”