He says he will have no choice but to close the gambling portion of his business if this tax ordinance is passed. Ruston will loose the current tax income ($30,000 in 2007) and about 40 people will be laid off. Mr. Farbe notes he has struggled to make this business profitable (these taxes are based on gross receipts, not profit), especially in this current economy where "entertainment" dollars are scarce.
Mr. Farbe has called each Ruston council member, asking to talk to them face to face to try to work something out. Only Council Member Hedrick has called him back.
The council has scheduled a first reading of this ordinance for next Monday. That usually means there will be a second reading at the next regular meeting two weeks later, when the vote will be taken. They can suspend their rules and vote on the issue Monday if they choose.
No public comment is allowed before these types of actions. There is two minutes per person allowed at the end of the meeting after all business has concluded. Contact information for your council members is listed to the right on this page. These council members have often said residents can contact them at home to express their opinions, but they discourage too much discussion at the meetings.
The Tacoma Weekly has an article on this issue that was published on May 15, 2008.
16 comments:
I just don't understand the logic of this council. Steve Fabre has run a clean business since he opened. Does no one remember what was there before? The psychedelic paint job, loud punk rock bands and kids all over the neighborhood sporting their studs and piercings.
Of all the businesses that have gone through that location the Casino/Cafe is the cleanest and most well run business so far and this council is hell bent on running the much needed revenue out of town. 30k and all the lost jobs in todays economy outta here because these guys "can".
Isn't there something in the oath of office that requires fiscal responsibility?
Hats off to the council, I'm glad gambling will be out of Town, and welcome the down town hookers and gangsters. It's about time the Town of Ruston gets a real first hand view of what Tacoma can bring. Maybe old Coles will re-establish the biker bar and then it will be really fun. Revenue? Tickets and fines.
Sure, bring back Coles from the time when the fire dispatch operator would voice the irony of "man down at Coles".
Have the council investigate the taxes not paid by legal types working from home. Also see about taxing the home counseling going on too. That should be a pile for what they charge per hour. Investigate that anonymous mail box on 54th that uses a Ruston address too.
Is arson for profit taxable?
As a business owner I am finding it harder ana harder to be in business. Every year taxes go up, by the time we have covered all the various forms of tax and paid out operating expenses there is not alot left over. Obviously those on the council that are wanting to impose this large increase have never been in business for themselves and have not idea what it takes to run a business.
from the 1st posting, "logic of this council" pleeeease. The only 'logic' this wrecking crew has ever is LOGISTICS, ie: making Ruston part of Tacoma. Not new news.
Resonsibility to oath of office, same joke.
Lots of Luck, your are going to (no,NOW)need it. Looks like a very nice firetruck Tacoma will be getting!
Love and best wishes, Porkchop
The council has every right to tax the casino out of business. Ruston doesn't need revenue from a satanic source. Their workers can find jobs at the Tribal Casinos. That's what happens when you sue a church and the town newspaper!
You have every right to your opinion, but a couple of factual corrections are needed for the last comment. Mr. Farbe did not sue the "town newsletter". The Ruston Connection is no more the town newsletter than this is town blog. Their newsletter represents the editors own opinions, not the official position of the town. They tend to be very narrow in their focus and only provide information that supports that narrow focus.
The second correction is to the concept that the council has the right to deliberately tax a business with the intent of closing it. Such action is against the law and I sincerely hope that our elected leaders are not putting Ruston at risk from something so blatantly illegal.
There in lyes the problem with our ability to have factual conversations. Mis-information runs amok and divisions are entrenched without seeking the facts. I do not believe labeling a business as a "satanic source" of revenues has a legal precidence to tax them out of existance. I admit I could be wrong and I am open to dialoge on the subject.
Sorry pro-council....who won those lawsuits? And at what cost to our town?
I'm not surprised to hear such a nasty-minded, hateful comment from a pro-council supporter. We certainly can't accuse those people of caring for the good of all. The cost to the town has hardly started and that comment shows why. The town needs a show of interest by all residents to survive.
I've heard a rumor that people are going to picket the houses and businesses of our council members so they know we do care and they see what it's like to have their personal and professional lives impacted, especially since we can't comment at meetings. Has anyone else heard that? TNT, are you listening?
Say when!
So really, this is your vision for Ruston - Casinos and bars?
The gambling tax rate should rise incrementally and in conjunction with inflation and our towns cost of supporting the establishment.
You need to really think beyond bars and casinos if you want a healthy vibrant community. The casino requires town resources and you are extremely short sighted if you think the $30k is adequate for the services that are expended. How often are our police called to that establishment - better yet - how many times do they patrol that establishment? More importantly - at what cost?
The $30,000 in income is probably no where near the expenses the town incurs supporting it.
Get all your facts before you start (Karen) Picketting a council members home.
You're going to find that police calls to the casino are no more than any other business - they have their own security force. That can be confirmed by the police chief. There is now way the casino impacts town services as much as the tax they currently pay.
The council is not asking to keep up with inflation. They want to increase the tax by 700%! The current tax is ALREADY incremental.
Quote here from pro-council
"how many times do they patrol that establishment? More importantly - at what cost?"
Indeed, and at what cost do the police patrol the street and alley behind your house. Please include the gas station at 51st and Pearl as they sell lottery tickets. Damned gamblers anyway. You are not one to ask anyone for facts when you don't include anything but opinions and vague allegations.
Let's not forget the Ruston Inn who historically and continually over serve the clientel....but those are typically locals so let's not point fingers. Let's stop the B.S. and call a spade a spade! Someone in the current administration or is in the inner circle of the current administration, is morally perfect and laws mean nothing to them. This type of argument is what is keeping our Town in constant litigation! I'm so Bloody tired of it all! Picketing...I'm all for it! Bring on the press, the cameras and the lawsuits!
Besides making fun of my name (great way to make your point), I have to respond to a couple of points from the "So really, this is your vision for Ruston - Casinos and bars?" comment.
For the record, I'm not involved in any discussions about picketing council member’s homes. Believe it or not, there are other people in Ruston besides me who are concerned about the legalities of the current council’s actions. Since most of the council will not speak to me, maybe I’d join in just to get my voice heard.
The issue is not what any of us individually want for our future. Any “vision” should be built on consensus, by listening to each other and deciding together what we want for the future. Then we change our zoning codes to accomplish that vision into the future, not retroactively try to enforce it.
It is illegal and unethical to force someone out of business because some of us changed our minds and decided we no longer “like” it. It’s not a matter of whose “vision” is better; this is a matter of fairness. Fairness is much more important to me (even for a business that I don’t personally participate in) than my personal preferences. It’s that fairness that will do more to build this community and make it attractive than whether or not we have a casino in town.
Post a Comment