Month: May 2008

After a long and careful process, the Branson Board of Aldermen has unanimously decided to offer the position of City Administrator to Dean Kruitof, who is currently serving as the Deputy City Administrator in Fort Smith, AR. Mayor Raeanne Presley made the announcement on Tuesday morning, May 20 during the Branson Board of Alderman’s work session meeting.

In making the short announcement the Mayor said that Kruitof was pleased and that they are now negotiating with him as to finalization of a contract. She went on to say that although the details have not been worked out yet she is hopeful that they will be worked out within a week and that Kruitof will be on board in about a month.

Cutline using picture from partners in progress that we used last week:

Cutline: Pictured last week at the Partners in Progress Meeting in Hollister, Dean Kruitof is the man in the middle. To his left is the other finalist for the job, Dan Galloway and to his right, Rick Ziegenfuss, Hollister City Administrator.

Most of the residents along the southern end of Lake Shore Drive will soon have the city of Hollister as their immediate “back door” neighbor to the west. In fact, if the two voluntary annexations that the Hollister Board of Aldermen approved on their first reading at their May 15 meeting are not removed from the consent agenda for the board’s next meeting there will automatically be a large number of lots and homes, on the southern end of Lake Shore drive that will immediately be surrounded to the west and the north by the city of Hollister.

During a public hearing on May 15, the petition for the voluntary annexation into the city of Hollister of approximately 27 acres of land owned by Empire Electric, was presented by Doug Tiemann, Pickett Ray & Silver, a development firm headquartered in St. Peters, MO with a local office in Branson. According to their web site, Mike Rankin is their Director of Business Development. Rankin used to be the Director of Economic Development for the City of Branson prior to leaving that post in the spring of 2007 and has extensive experience in economic development not only in Branson but in other areas. There were no other public participants in the hearing.

The 27 acres being annexed is actually under water, the land underneath Lake Taneycomo, and runs from basically the middle of the lake to the eastern edge of the Lake from a point between East Highway 76 and Taneycomo upstream from Coon Creek, downstream along the Lake Taneycomo Bank for about 4,700 feet. In general terms, the northern end would be at the northern end of the fourth lot up from the intersection of S. Fork and Lake Shore Drive which is a western extension of the north line of the Davis Addition.

As soon as that public hearing was closed Tiemann presented a second petition for the voluntary annexation of 6.76 acres of land on the west side of Lake Shore Drive at another public hearing. The eligibility of this land for voluntary annexation into Hollister is totally dependent on the Hollister Board of Aldermen approving the voluntary annexation of the Empire Electric Land into the city of Hollister as that is what provides the contiguity necessary for voluntary annexation.

The 6.76 acres to be voluntarily annexed is currently under the jurisdiction of Taney County and is owned by Ahmed A. Salama who had previously tried to get county approval for development of land he owns in that area. The northern boundary of the Empire annexation coincides with the northern boundary of the northern lot line in the Davis Addition which is owned by Ahmed A. Salama and is part of this annexation.

After the two public hearings the Hollister Board of Aldermen unanimously approved both voluntary annexation requests and they will become final without further comment at the board’s next meeting if not removed from the consent agenda for further discussion. If approved, all the lots bordered to the west by the annexation of the Empire Electric Land will still be in Taney County except for Salama’s lot which will be part of the city of Hollister because of its voluntary annexation. It will also open the road for the voluntary annexation of any other land that is contiguous to the Salama’s lot such as the land immediately to the north or immediately east, across Lake Shore Drive, from the property.

There’s a good chance that those attending one of the shows starring Dave “Elvis” Ehlert at the historic Owens Theatre in downtown Branson might hear the Elvis hit “Don’t Be Cruel” during the performance, but, according to Ehlert, in spite of recent comments to the contrary, one thing that they will not be hearing during the show is anything that can even remotely be construed to relate to be a sales gimmick or spiel for time share or vacation club sales. The comments surfaced at a May 6 work session meeting of the Branson Board of Aldermen, during a discussion of a proposed ordinance change designed to control the solicitation of tourists on the public sidewalks of downtown Branson by vacation clubs and time share sales personnel.

During March/April ETC Institute, a professional survey, planning and technology company from Olathe, Kansas, conducted and analyzed a detailed community survey for the City of Branson. According to Chris Tatham of ETC, during his overview of the report given at the May 12 meeting of the Branson Board of Aldermen, its purpose was to evaluate the satisfaction of the city’s residents and businesses with the delivery of major city services and to help determine priorities for the community as part of the City’s ongoing planning process. Two different surveys were conducted, one for residents and another for businesses.

In terms of the residents survey, Tatham said that the process involved the mailing of a six-page survey to a random sample of 1,200 households in the city with a follow up phone call made to those receiving the survey about seven days after mailing. He said that of the households that received the survey 309 completed it by phone and 259 returned it by mail for a total of 568 completed surveys. He pointed out that the results for the random sample of 568 households has a 95% level of confidence.

One thing that particularly impressed Tatham was the fact that 88 % of the residents surveyed were proud that they lived in Branson and that it made very little difference whether they lived in Branson for less than five years or more than 20 years. He also complimented the city on the fact that 78 % of the residents who had contacted the City of Branson with a question, problem or reported they were either “very satisfied” or “satisfied” with the way they were treated by City employees.

The report also indicated that in general Residents were generally satisfied with the overall quality of services provided by the City of Branson. Major categories of city services with the highest satisfaction, based upon the combined percentage of “very satisfied” and “satisfied” responses indicates resident satisfaction with the overall quality of fire service (90%), police service (78%), and City parks and recreation programs and facilities services (74%).

About 81% of residents who had contacted the City of Branson with a question, problem or complaint in the past year reported they were either “very satisfied” or “satisfied” with how easy the City was to contact. In the same vein, 78% of residents who had contacted the City of Branson with a question, problem or complaint during the past year reported they were either “very satisfied” or “satisfied” with the way they were treated by City employees

About 92% of the residents surveyed rated Branson as an “excellent” or a “good” place to live and 89% of residents surveyed rated Branson as an “excellent” or a “good” place to raise children. Not surprisingly, the survey also indicates that the vast majority of Branson’s residents, 82%, feels safe and 71% are satisfied with its quality of life.

In some areas the survey indicated that residents were less satisfied. Those areas primarily involved drop off recycling, the condition of neighborhood streets, code enforcement, and communications. Interestingly, the survey showed that more residents get their information about the City of Branson from the Branson Daily Independent than they do from radio, television, or other newspapers.

In concluding his report, Tatham suggested that the study is not an end all but rather a guide that can be used by the city as it plans for and sets its priorities for the future. The complete survey is available on the city’s website at www.cityofbranson.org.

Furnished Courtesy of the Branson Daily Independent.

The solicitation of tourists on the public sidewalks of downtown Branson by vacation clubs and time share sales personnel may lead to a change in the Branson Municipal code (BMC) to help control the problem. In introducing the item for discussion at the work session meeting of the Branson Board of Alderman held on May 6, Paul D. Link, Branson’s City Attorney, said, “There has been some downtown businesses that have issued some complaints recently about some vacation club sales and time shares, that kind of business, getting a lot of locations in downtown Branson and soliciting people on the sidewalk.”

Link said that it’s not necessarily selling product on the sidewalk. He pointed out that some sales people approach people when they get out of their cars and saying, “Hey have you got your tickets yet for this weekend or I’ve got free tickets for you and enticing people to come back into the four corners of their store to sell them stuff.”

Link stressed that the complaints were not necessarily from citizens or tourists shopping in the downtown area but were from business owners saying it’s creating an environment of a lot of solicitations out on the sidewalk. Branson Police Sergeant Sean Barnwell indicated that the issue has been a concern since the fall of 2006 and pointed out that investigative efforts thus far have revealed no substantive violations of current BMC ordinances relating to solicitation.

Alderwoman Chris Bohinc asked if the people being solicited actually got free tickets without having to go to a vacation club or time share presentation or open house. Sergeant Barnwell stated, “There is only one show that I am aware of that they give actually free tickets to and that’s the Owens Theatre downtown. I haven’t been to it but it’s my understanding that there’s a sales gimmick involved in the show so you’ll either hear the speal going somewhere else or during the show.”

Bohinc said that she and her husband routinely walk through the downtown and are solicited about 100 percent of the time. She said she believed that they are solicited so often is because the people doing the solicitation work primarily for commission and that there is such a large turnover that the solicitors don’t know that they have been solicited before. Alderwoman Sandra Williams said that a lot of the complaints that she has received have come from those businesses in the downtown area not involved with vacation club or time share sales. Those businesses reported complaints from people coming into their businesses complaining about being solicited on the public sidewalks by vacation club or time share sales personnel.

Link said that in an effort to provide a solution for the problem it was proposed that a new definition for the term “Solicit” be added to the BMC. If the definition is adopted as proposed it would read, “Means to initiate contact with a member of the public by the offer of any free or discounted goods or services in exchange for any action on the part of that member of the general public.”

Subsection 26-67 of the Branson Municipal Code (BMC) makes it unlawful “to solicit when either the solicitor or the person being solicited is located on public property.” In addition it makes it unlawful to solicit when either the solicitor or the person being solicited is located within ten feet of the doorway to any business, 20 feet of a public toilet; 20 feet of an automated teller machine, or 20 feet of a pay telephone.

There was no discussion about the fact that the new definition actually applies to all of Branson, not just the downtown, and substantially reduces the scope of the term “solicit” as it is normally defined. It was suggested that the proposed ordinance be circulated for input from the businesses in the downtown area.

Furnished Courtesy of the Branson Daily Independent.

Amid all the glowing reports of a billion dollar in retail sales and that the bookings at the Branson Convention Center are ahead of what was programmed there appears to be a “Caution Light” starting to blink. At the April 29 meeting of the city of Branson s Budget and Finance committee it was reported that the 12 month rolling average for Branson’s primary revenue stream remained flat and that the Branson Convention Center had a $651,861 operating loss during the period of October 2007 through March 2008.

Information relating to the trend of the 12 month rolling average of the city’s 1% Sales Tax was presented by John Petty, President, District Offices, LLC. The trend of the city’s 1% city sales tax collected outside of Branson Landing and Branson Hills has remained flat over the 12 month rolling period. The discussion about the report indicates that the 1% city sales tax, collected from areas other than Branson Landing and Branson Hills, is the primary source of revenue that the city uses to meet its current operational needs.

Petty said that while the collection of the tax in Branson Landing and Branson Hills is trending up it is “bubble revenue.” He explained his use of the term “bubble revenue” as revenue that is, for the most part, not available to the city for current operational needs because it is used to pay off the Tax Increment Financing (TIF) bonds used to finance the projects. Petty pointed out that 100 percent of the tax collected from Branson Landing and 50 percent of the tax from Branson Hills goes to pay TIF debt.

Branson Mayor Raeanne Presley, while thankfully acknowledging the trend of growth at Branson Landing and Branson Hills, again reiterated that 100 percent of the tax collected at Branson Landing and 50 percent of the tax collected at Branson Hills does not come back to the city. In terms of the city’s primary revenue generator to meet the city’s current operational needs, the 1% city sales tax collected outside of the TIF districts, she said, “Sales tax, across the board for the city are flat so there’s the story.”

In analyzing the data being presented, Alderman Stephen Marshall said that there’s a belief in town that because Branson Landing is doing so well that the that the incremental revenue has gone up in those areas outside the TIF Districts and that’s not happened. Frank Schoneboom, Acting City Administrator, agreed saying, “That data suggests that you are absolutely right.” Marshall continued, “There are folks that look at all this data that includes Branson Landing taxes etc. which is what we have been talking about here for months. It shows a fictitious increase in taxes because the taxes are going out to pay for the bonds.” Petty added, “It’s like looking across into your neighbor’s yard and saying, “My landscaping looks great.’”

When analyzing the operational report for the Branson Convention Center submitted by Hilton Corporation, the city’s contract convention center manager, the report was categorized as sloppy with incorrect dates etc. The trend indicated by Petty’s presentation was one of reported expenses exceeding reported revenues for each month since Oct. 2007 with a year to date loss of $651,861 for the six month period.

One of the foundational documents used to support the building of the convention center in downtown Branson was a study entitled, “Feasibility Analysis of the Proposed Branson Downtown Exhibition and Convention Center Study,” (CS&L Study) that was received by the city of Branson during Feb. 2003. That study estimated that the convention center would have an annual net operating deficit of $530,000 per year in a stabilized year of operation. Although the losses for the first six months of this year are more than estimated for the whole year in that report it should be pointed out that, as the study used the term, a “stabilized year” was assumed to be the normal operation of the facility that would occur by the fifth year of operation.

Various members of the committee had questions relating to aspects of the report relating to food and beverages costs, labor costs, marketing, not staying within the parameters of the budget that Hilton had submitted, the operation of the laundry, etc. There was no representative of Hilton present at the meeting and the questions were not resolved. Mayor Presley said, “I suggest that we get the new guy in here. He should be on board within a week or two.” Hilton is currently in the process of bringing a new General Manager on board to replace the General Manager that recently retired.

Furnished Courtesy of the Branson Daily Independent.

Ethical issues including “conflict of interest” may soon be addressed in an ethics policy for the city of Branson. In talking about the development of an ethics policy at the board of alderman’s April 22 work session Branson Mayor Raeanne Presley said, “I think the public really wants to know” and suggested that it would be nice if the board could come up with an ethics and conflict of interest policy that they could all agree on.

City Attorney Paul D. Link said, “The general rule on ethics is that if you as an alderman stand to make a financial gain on something then you should abstain from voting.” He pointed out that the law in Missouri has changed. An alderman can just abstain without stating a reason and the vote doesn’t count as a “Yes” or “No,” just an abstention. He reiterated that if an alderman thought there would be a financial gain to them personally they should abstain.

Link continued, “A lot of this ethics is a gut feeling or a perception.” He used a hypothetical of an alderman who had a fishing buddy that he went fishing with every weekend saying that if something relating to the buddy comes before the board that the alderman should consider abstaining. Link said that, although it’s not a legal conflict that would cause the alderman to have to abstain, that it would be a good idea to abstain “just because of the perception that you are kind of in the bag on that particular vote.”

Alderman Bob McDowell asked Link if it was correct that if an alderman is going to abstain from voting that they should also abstain from any discussion on the matter. Link responded by saying that was a gray area. Branson Mayor Raeanne Presley said, “If you were going to abstain because of financial interests then I think you should.”On the other hand she said, “If you had decided to abstain just because of perception then you probably would be fine.”

Link concurred saying, “I think that if you are going to abstain from a vote because of a financial condition that you should abstain from the conversation.” His rationale was that if an alderman was going to argue a position to get the rest of the board to vote a certain way the conflict is there whether or not they actually vote on the issue. More than one alderman ascribed to the opinion, “That happens at the planning and zoning commission all the time.”

Alderman Stephen Marshall pointed out the fact that some people in the community are saying that when it comes to the convention center that he is in a conflict of interest position and asked, “What conflict of interest?” Link replied, “Stephen, I don’t know that there is a direct financial conflict. I think what they are arguing there is more of that secondary thing I talked about.”

Link continued, “Some people have a perceived conflict. I’m not saying that there is one or there isn’t one. I think that the argument that I’ve heard is that they view you as if you say anything negative about the convention center or the Hilton Hotel that you are basically trying to rundown your competition because they are the chief competition in this area for your hotel.” He again reiterated that he wasn’t saying it was a legal conflict of interest or not.

Mayor Pressley suggested that that as part of the process of developing a more complete set of ethic and conflict of interest guidelines that a public work session would be held.

Furnished Courtesy of the Branson Daily Independent.