Landrieu vs Carter Peterson over tourism taxing district

29th May 2012   ·   0 Comments

By Christopher Tidmore
Contributing Writer

According to sources, what could be construed as true gamesmanship recently took place between the Chairwoman of the State Democratic Party Karen Carter Peterson and the Mayor of New Orleans Mitch Landrieu. And, according to those same sources, the exercise may have left some proverbial scars that could have long-term political consequences.

The irony is that Karen Carter Peterson and Mitch Landrieu have been typically seen as close political allies over the years, rarely disagreeing, and both usually working in concert on all issues New Orleans. During her term in the House, Speaker Pro Tem Carter Peterson was often the lead sponsor on legislation for Lt. Governor Landrieu.

But they did disagree when it came to the hotels and the tourism industry versus residents of the Downtown area over a special taxing district focusing on the New Orleans tourism epicenter. The Hospitality Zone proposal for the CBD, French Quarter, and parts of the Marigny would have put taxes on hotel and service bills to fund the city’s tourism marketing organizations.

The mayor and his allies had shepherded the bill through the legislature, until Carter Peterson amended the Senate version to reduce the share of new hospitality taxes that the tourism marketing organizations would have received from 66 percent to 50 percent. Moreover, the amendment em­powered the City Council to gain primary control over a special fund for enhancing city services and maintaining infrastructure im­provements paid for primarily by the convention center.

Also, included in the changes were Senatorial mandates that the services-maintenance fund would be increased from one-third to 40 percent of the new re­venue, which in­creased the percent hotel occupancy tax by 1.75 per­cent. And, a 10 percent tax allocation was also earmarked to the French Quarter Manage­ment District, a state that focuses on quality of life and infrastructure, in Peterson’s proposal, but in the original bill had no funding allocated.

The tourism industry supposedly went berserk, by all accounts. And, they were not alone. Mayor Mitch Landrieu, who had measured his comments up to that point, pulled the bill from consideration, calling the changes nonsensical “from a governing perspective”.

Carol Allen, President of The Vieux Carré Property Owners, Residents and Associates disagreed strongly with the mayor’s attitude, and thought that Carter Peterson’s changes were reasonable from a resident standpoint. “Our state legislators produced amendments that would have achieved the same results desired by our opponents; the only thing that changed was the process. Although we are disappointed in the refusal of some to accept the transparency and fairness issues provided by the amendments we remain committed to achieving that goal. We do not understand why there was opposition to this provision. The fact that so many diverse opinions came together on principle over politics inspires us to continue our efforts for the betterment of the entire city of New Orleans. We ask all citizens and community organizations to join us in requesting the mayor to support transparency and work with us on the many challenges that we face.”

She noted that Carter Peterson was hardly alone in desired amendments. The Senator had the support of City Council­members Stacy Head, Jackie Clarkson, and Kristen Palmer.

Convention and Visitors Bureau Chairman Melvin Rodrigue argued in a press release, though, that the amendments “effectively killed this very important marketing and infrastructure initiative” and “undermined the rationale” of the Convention Center’s proposal to invest $30 million in French Quarter and downtown infrastructure. Essentially, the Mayor was counting votes in the Senate, and support when the taxing district would go before the voters later this year (had it passed). The changes would have doomed it to an early referendum demise.

That the mayor, with his long ties to the tourism industry would disagree with the senator, with her connections to the neighborhood and preservationist groups, is not shocking on such a piece of legislation.

But, that these two allies were fighting so publicly means only one thing to a noted political insider with connections to both.

“Karen is looking to the future. Having just won the [Demo­cratic] Chairmanship, she is laying the groundwork for her political future in New Orleans. She won’t run against Mitch, but a spat with the mayor which puts her on both the sides of wealthy, mainly white residents in the Quarter and Downtown, as well as empowering neighborhood organizations with connections in the African-Ameri­can community is a win-win move for her.”

“When Karen won the Chair­man­ship over Buddy Leach, people thought that the Landrieus finally had an ally at the Party HQ,” said the source who asked not to be named. “Perhaps they still do, but Karen signaled to the mayor that she is a player, not a subordinate.”

Still, the demise of the bill effectively ends a year’s worth of work by the mayor attempting to get the tourism industry to support Downtown infrastructure im­prove­ments that could have had an impact prior to the 2013 Superbowl. Now, the road, sidewalk, and atmospheric repairs and upgrades may be delayed for years.

This article was originally published in the May 28, 2012 print edition of The Louisiana Weekly newspaper