OUCH!!! That's the name of the egregious, unfair, confusing and discriminatory Occupancy Tax enacted in secrecy against Yates County property owners. That it was even pending was unknown to most of those who were to be affected, and therefore unknown to their prospective tenants planning 2008 vacations as well. Essentially, property owners received no notice of any public hearings or opportunities to input or complain, or to suggest better alternative strategies. On December 5 and 6, 2007, some (but not all!) property owners throughout Yates County learned, when they opened their mailboxes, that Yates County wanted 4% of the rent on their cottages, and gave them 10 days to comply. "Register, pay up, or risk $1000 fine AND/or a year in jail." The letter from the Yates County Treasurer Bonnie Percy (315-536-5192) announced, not Seasons Greetings, but this new tax. “OUCH!” they said, “Happy Holidays to you too!” This Occupancy Tax, or OUCH-pancy tax, on cottage rentals quickly became known as the “OUCH-tax.” See YatesOUCHtax Law in both summary form as well as the complete law.

IT ISN'T ALL ABOUT MONEY: It is about criminalizing errors of process and procedure, for something worth perhaps a few hundred dollars! It is about very confusing registration forms which can easily entrap the unwary. Even unsuspecting owners who think they are not subject to the tax, but who have guests stay for free, could be deemed to have received a “consideration,” such as gifts, services or exchange visits and be in violation and at risk. With such interference and imposed burdens by government, can anyone doubt that this is just the first round in beginning even more regulation of and intrusion into individual properties and the peace of landowners? Fearsome possibilities are mentioned in the Position Statement.

IT IS ABOUT INHERENT UNFAIRNESS, such as redefining cottages as hotels or motels, applying the tax discriminately against certain property owners like those on lakes,and not against others such as campgrounds, about the potential seizure of property without due process, of allowing harassment by government such as potential middle of the night examination of records, of apparently compelling self-incrimination and much more. The County Treasurer can require the owner/operator to file a bond in the amount of the County Treasurer’s choosing, or a deposit of securities, which can be sold by the County Treasurer without notice, without trial. And it also appears that if the victims don’t pay what the County thinks they should pay, then the County Treasurer can issue a warrant, directed to the Yates County Sheriff "...to levy upon and sell the real and personal property ...” If the County says it mailed a notice to you, it is considered “presumptive evidence of receipt.” They say they mailed it; you say you didn’t get it in your roadside mailbox, and they are right, regardless. These commercial laws don’t work when individuals who aren’t regularly in the business are targeted. They probably don't work fairly for business either. Whatever happened to civil rights? Whatever happened to common courtesy? Whatever happened to government "of the peopl? by the people? for the people?"

ILLOGICAL DEFENSE OFFERED: One of the most illogical defenses of the Occupancy Tax is that it “won’t cost the property owner anything; it is renters who will have to pay the tax.” Oh, really? And who is being burdened with the paperwork of processing and remitting the tax? Who is being burdened with keeping records? With taking on the liability and risk of $1000 fine AND/or a year in jail for an error in collecting the tax? Whose property is being disadvantaged and rentals lost by having to charge an occupancy tax when other properties being rented on the SAME lake just across the county line don’t have to collect such a tax? Who might need to hire a $1000 accountant to file reports, or an attorney to defend their civil rights? THE PROPERTY OWNERS! Most property owners who do rent need to do so to pay their outlandish property taxes, but can’t even make enough to pay the property tax, let alone the expense of renting. This OUCH-tax is almost like a ‘tax on a tax.’

DAMAGE TO TOURISM: Yates County, for which tourism is said to be its biggest "industry," is expected to be damaged by the short-sighted vision of its Legislature. Not only will Yates County lose most of the Occupancy Tax it hoped to reap, but it will lose far more than that amount in money those tourists would have spent in Yates County! The future impact will likely be even worse than the initial year numbers will show, as prior renters don’t return, but rent elsewhere. What a way to drive people away! Oh, sure, then the legislature will ask for more tax money to try to attract people back after they’ve been driven away!

USE OF PROCEEDS: It looks like half of the proceeds are going to the general "slush" fund of Yates County, and about half to spend on promoting tourism, including through the Chamber of Commerce. You want to promote tourism? Here's one answer for starters: DON'T HIT THE TOURISTS WITH AN OCCUPANCY TAX! It's a "no-brainer." And there is a deep silence on who will decide when and how those tourism-targeted funds will be spent. Also take a look at News, about the lack of good stewardship of tourism dollars which was evident in a recent news story about the embezzlement of $54,000 at the Finger Lakes Tourism Alliance. We wish we had more confidence that the OUCH-tax money collected (half for tourism dollars?) would actually be used well to grow tourism. But how can it be used well by the same people who think what is needed is an Occupancy Tax against tourists?

SOME PROPERTY OWNERS GATHERED TOGETHER and developed a Position Statement, including 10 objections, such as lack of sufficient legal notice, a competitive burden compared to nearby Ontario County, the expense, difficulty and personal risk associated with the reporting requirements, a potential adverse impact on property values, negative impact on and likely acceleration of conversion of residential properties to corporate and developer takeover, escalating interference in private property rights, mean-spirited threats including disproportionate fines and even jail, and questionable stewardship of tourism funds and that responsibility. That Position Statement closed with the words:

“We ask the Yates County Legislature to repeal a poorly considered and offensive tax. We hope that other property owners will consider these matters to be so serious and intrusive that they will join with us in petition, including those who have not yet been impacted but have the vision to see the writing on the wall.”

More than a dozen specific suggestions were made to the Yates County Legislature, and presented on February 5th, including a call to repeal and decriminalize the Occupancy Tax. The Position Statement was followed by a confirming letter to the Legislature. Neither the Position Statement nor the confirming letter has even been acknowledged or answered by the County.

ADVOCACY ALLIANCE: the initial group expanded to become an Advocacy Alliance, joined by members of the lodging community who had been telling both the County AND its own Chamber of Commerce that an Occupancy Tax would be harmful to Yates County. They also received virtually no support from the Chamber of Commerce of which they are members; is it because the Chamber or its affiliates stand to receive funds under this Law?

LAWSUIT FILED: Five times over five weeks, one or more members of the OUCH group went to the Legislature or to its Finance or Occupancy Tax Implementation meetings, presenting a Position Statement and requesting a delay in implementing the law this season against cottage owners -- all to no avail. Finally, on March 11th, with Harris Beach as attorneys, five plaintiff members of the YatesOUCHtax Advocacy Alliance filed a Lawsuit against Yates County and its Treasurer, on grounds which include unconstitutionality. The County Legislature had ignored every attempt to reconcile these matters. As a result, the lawsuit was filed to annul the OUCH-tax. Also in the NEWS section of this website are the newspaper articles following the announcement of the filing of the lawsuit. Finally, on April 30, the County filed its response to the lawsuit, which content is also under the Lawsuit tab, on County Defense

PETITIONS: The YatesOUCHtax Advocacy Alliance has received over 700 signed petitions from property owners in Yates County asking for the repeal and decriminalization of the Occupancy Tax. This time, the legislature did react, and its chairman, Robert Multer, accused the YatesOUCHtax Advocacy Alliance of delivering 135 duplicate petitions. That is absolutely untrue! See under News tab a letter to the editor. Is this going to be the operating mode of the legislature -- to accuse citizen activist groups of "stuffing the ballot box?" We are committed to putting the truth forward on this and all matters. Look for more detail under "petitions." More Petitions continue to be received and delivered, and petitioners are posted on this website. A "No Bed Tax" lawn sign campaign is also well under way too, but lately signs are being stolen, yet another example of the pressure against freedom of speech in Yates County. On Memorial Day weekend, thousands of flyers about the OUCH tax were distributed to inform lake property owners what their legislature had done to them.

ACTION CONTINUES TO BE NEEDED: The Occupancy Tax should never have been levied against individual properties, but the Yates County Legislature, apparently unable to control its own spending, has so far refused to admit the inappropriateness of its actions, or its negative effect on tourism, to repeal or to apologize. Now it is up to the responsible citizens of Yates County to make their voices heard. See the Call to Action from the YatesOUCHtax Steering Committee. Keep visiting this website for information and updates, to offer comments and ideas, and eventually to vote out of office those who perpetrated this e-GREED-ous tax against the people of Yates County.

flwebhost.com