When will it stop? Just about the time one thinks that it is impossible for the City of Branson’s unelected leadership to get any more arrogant or heavy handed with its citizens or businesses it manages to exceed expectations and achieve the seemingly impossible. It gives one pause to wonder; where is Branson’s elected leadership, its Board of Aldermen and Mayor, while stuff like this is going on?
Recently a “To Whom It May Concern” letter, from, the City of Branson, signed by Paul D. Link, the city attorney, was mailed to a lot of the City of Branson’s businesses paying the city’s tourism tax. The letter demanded that the businesses furnish the city with “a complete and accurate list identifying all persons, firms, corporations, agents or entities whomsoever that engages in the sale, transfer, conveyance, exchange, barter, or by any means whatsoever for admission, rooms, meals, services, etc. to your establishment.” Said another way, the letter said “Send us a list of your customers.”
At the outset, the demands verbiage, “all persons,” “whomsoever,” and “by any means whatsoever,” creates a scope of applicability so broad that is an impossible condition to meet. Issues relating to that aside however, what was the justification for this intrusive demand on Branson’s private businesses?
Surely it’s a matter of national security or something of that importance isn’t it? Well not quite. The letter continues, “City Code requires that you provide this information so that a determination can be made on the amount of Tourism Tax that should be collected and remitted.”
Now there’s a scary thought, the City of Branson actually having laws on its books that permits it to use a general mailing to invade the privacy of Branson’s businesses and demand their customer lists. If that is the case what’s next, a letter to all the building supply stores demanding similar records to help the City of Branson enforce its various laws pertaining to everything from tax collection, to building permits, inspections, etc.
On Jun. 5, the Ole Seagull sent an email to Terry Dody, Branson’s city administrator, asking for, among other things, the “The specific section number of the City Code that requires businesses to provide “a complete and accurate list identifying all persons, firms, corporations, agents or entities whomsoever that engages in the sale, transfer, conveyance, exchange, barter, or by any means whatsoever for admission, rooms, meals, services, etc. to their establishments.” On Jun. 6, Dody replied saying, “Read Article VI. Tourism Tax in the Branson City Code, looking first at Sec. 82-151 ‘Definition’ and particularly the definitions of ‘Sale and Sales’ and ‘Sale at Retail’, and then read Sec. 82-157 ‘Examination of books and records.'”
On Jun.7, the Ole Seagull did just that. He could find no such requirement in the sections to which Dody referred and for good reason, it wasn’t there!
The sections to which referred contain requirements for businesses making “sales” subject to the City of Branson’s tourism tax to make their books and records available to the city during reasonable times during business hours for audit and to furnish reasonably sufficient work space, lighting, and working conditions for the conduct of the audits. They are pretty standard audit requirements but contain no authorization for the City of Branson to use a mass mailing to require Branson businesses to send their customer lists to the city so that, in an Ole Seagull’s opinion, it can go through them on a “fishing expedition” to determine the tourism tax compliance of the businesses on the lists.
“Be still, be still, my beating heart;” it gets worse. The letter continues, “Compliance with this request overrides any concerns you have about divulging names of those you do business with.” Oh really and exactly how does compliance with the city’s demand “override” or even address the concerns that the businesses it is trying to coerce the information from might have? Through what omnipotent power does the writer of the letter profess to know the concerns of the businesses he is addressing?
Did the letter address any concerns, let alone the obvious concerns that most prudent businesses might have, such as potential legal exposure from furnishing the information to the city or how the City of Branson might use the information? Is it unreasonable for any business receiving the letter to have concerns that if the city used the information in the same arrogant overbearing manner in which it is attempting to coerce information from them that it could impact on the business relationships they have with their customers or, of equal importance, on Branson’s reputation within the tourism industry?
The last sentence of the city’s demand to its businesses reads “Be advised and govern yourself accordingly.” Would it be unreasonable for an Ole Seagull to ask Branson’s elected leadership, its Board of Aldermen and Mayor, to “please” exert influence on Branson’s unelected leaders to heed its own admonition and reconsider their demands before the situation escalates much farther? He prays not.
