Proposal: Change structure of ‘Coliseum’ tax

Dear DAR Editor:

This letter is in response to the editorial published in the Saturday, July 11, 2020, edition of the DAR.

I lived here when the (Black River) Coliseum was financed and built. The statements in the editorial that “No tax was created for the sole purpose of constructing the Black River Coliseum” and “It was not created to fund the construction of the Coliseum, so it did not end when that project was paid for” are both technically correct, and profoundly misleading. The sales tax increase voted on at the time was 100% marketed and sold to the voters as a tax to build the Coliseum. That was the complete focus of all the public meetings and promotions to get the tax approved. I hope your editorial did not cause anyone who lived here then to question their memory, because I assure you, my memory for the events is fine, and so, I suspect, are the memories of many others who also voted for the tax. The technical aspects of the wording of the tax were available to all, just like the mice type fine print in every end user license agreement you click on, but were glossed over and minimized. So please stop trying to tell me that I am laboring under a “misconception” when the tax increase is discussed. I know what I was told and how it was marketed. It was sold as a Coliseum Tax and a Coliseum Tax it remains.

That being said, I know the city’s financial problems are real, and many of them are due to circumstances beyond the city’s control. I believe Mark Massingham has done a commendable job in a difficult situation and I know we are still paying for mistakes and missteps from the “professional” city manager he replaced. You, and the city, correctly state that the funds generated by the Coliseum Tax are for use for capital improvements and purchases, not for operations.

May I offer a proposal? Since we the citizens voted to establish the tax, we should also have the power to amend the tax. The city needs to submit a ballot proposal to change the Coliseum Tax from a capital fund to a general revenue tax and let the voters decide. If the proposal passes, the funds can then be used to meet whatever needs the city management believes to be most important or urgent be they for capital expenditures or operations. If the City decides it needs a new City Hall, the funds can be used for that. If it decides that other, more pressing needs have to be addressed, the funds can go for that. If we take the strings off the Coliseum Tax there should be no need to go to the voters asking for more money for either operations or capital improvements for many, many, many years. If the City wants more money for operations, let it spend less on capital improvements, and vice versa.

Dennis Keeling

Poplar Bluff