This letter is in response to the City Council’s decision not to
authorize a rally on public property. The restaurants, bars, stores
and gas stations and other businesses will still do well.
Editor,
This letter is in response to the City Council’s decision not to authorize a rally on public property. The restaurants, bars, stores and gas stations and other businesses will still do well. The big losers will be the city and its taxpayers. Biker Designs stepped forward before the city-imposed deadline with a multi-page outline of how they could promote an ’06 rally. They offered to put up $300,000 in advance to cover costs. Add another $50,000 for city business licenses and a $350,000 offer was on the table. They offered the City Council whatever information they needed, including a more detailed proposal if they could have just a couple of days. Given the strength of their proposal and their cash-up-front offer, it was foolish not to agree.
Free Lance readers might be wondering at this point how the taxpayer is the loser. Well, significant levels of law enforcement will now be required to police streets 24/7 over that weekend with no income to the city. At the very least, the city is looking at overtime costs for its officers. There may be additional costs if mutual aid does not occur. Even with mutual aid, there may be food and hotel costs for the officers involved. There is a cost if citations are issued, both to input them into the system and for the officers’ time to defend them if people come back into town to contest them. The city doesn’t keep any of the citation money. If anyone gets arrested, there are court and jail costs.
Attendance estimates range from 10,000 to 40,000 people downtown over the course of the weekend. Knowing this, is the city going to set up extra trash containers? Are they going to bring in port-a-potties? Depending on the actual number of bikes that roll into town, the city is looking at the possibility of a huge hit to its general fund at a time when the city has reduced its operating budget and cut department sizes.
The city and others attacked HIRC for its inability to pay the ’05 bill. A group stepped up with a plan, a proven financial and event promotion background, a commitment of local logistical support to run an ’06 rally and Councilmembers Emerson, Valdivia and Johnson basically said “no thank you.”
The council has really put Chief Miller in a difficult, no-win situation. He’s now under pressure to develop a plan that is unlikely to “guarantee public safety” as has been quoted. The cost to the city may be less than last year’s $360,000, but there really isn’t a savings when you have expenditures without income. The correct term is deficit spending when your expenses exceed your income.
John Loyd, Hollister
