OBAR survey mixed on tax and Nags Head plan
While the Outer Banks Association of Realtors has not taken a position on Nags Head’s beach nourishment plan or a one percent occupancy tax increase, its membership expressed its opinion on both in a survey released Friday.
The Realtors group has endorsed beach nourishment in general, and the survey showed members strongly agreeing. But responses were mixed on questions about the Nags Head proposal and the occupancy tax.
Seventy-one percent of the members surveyed approved or strongly approved of beach nourishment, with 45.3 percent expressing strong approval. Eighteen percent either disapproved or strongly disapproved, with the remainder taking a neutral position.
Opinions on Nags Head’s plan were not as clear-cut. Slightly more than 50 percent approved of the plan to use $20 million from the Dare County Shoreline Management Fund and borrow $16 million to be paid back over five years with an additional 1 percent on the occupancy tax.
But only 19.5 percent of the respondents strongly approved of Nags Head’s efforts, while 27 percent were opposed and 22 percent were neutral.
Using a county-wide occupancy tax increase of one percent to finance the Nags Head project generated considerable opposition among the members, with 52 percent supporting it and 38 percent against it.
Members appeared to be well informed on nourishment, with less than one percent claiming no knowledge of the concept. They were less familiar with Nag Head’s plan, with 58 percent saying yes and 27.9 percent saying somewhat.
Results of the survey were based on about 350 responses.
The Dare County Board of Commissioners will have to approve how money from the shoreline management fund will be used. Meanwhile, the Shoreline Management Commission, made up of representatives of the county and the six towns, is trying to reach a consensus on a recommendation to the board.
The General Assembly will have to authorize the one percent increase in the occupancy tax.
See what people are saying:
Join the discussion:
RDS says:
Who runs that now? Their site hasn’t been updated since ’08. Is it the same people pushing the NH project? I thought Cahoon or Sadler was also OBAR chair? Can we see how the questions were posed?
Russ Lay says:
RDS: The OBAR site is quite current with a full list of board and committee members. Also, the article clearly states OBAR took no position on the Nags Head project. Google OBAR and you should be able to find it.
Selena K says:
To RDS–I typically agree with you 100% in your commenting, but Sadler is simply a member of OBAR because she is a licensed Realtor in our market. I don’t believe she sits on any committee. Cahoon has no affiliation with OBAR at all, to our knowledge.
The OBAR site is very up to date. Those of us who actually make a living as Realtors rely on it and our MLS site all day, every day. Our technology is excellently maintained because OBAR has a top-notch staff.
OBAR’s COO is Toni Parker, an experienced Board of Realtors manager and very smart businesswoman–in fact, she is the most well-suited, knowledgeable person for the job that we’ve had in years.
I can assure you that NOT ALL Realtors in OBAR are for BN. I again urge everyone not to lump all Realtors together in this debate–read the survey results. Out of the (measly) 350 respondents, at least 18% were against or strongly against BN at all.
Some of us Realtors are adamantly opposed to BN. A survey is just that–a poll that shows the majority opinion.
RDS says:
Ah yes, I was following the links to the minutes. My bad. Another question, would OBAR be willing to self-tax as this is in their long- and short-term financial interest?
Maybe they each contribute part of their commissions to the effort? There’s a vast amount of money there, more than is needed for the project.
Bob O says:
I would suggest that an occupancy tax is a tax on real estate rentals. The more tax a visitor pays, the less rent they can pay. Rental companies charge commission on rent – we don’t earn commission on tax, although we collect and forward it.
Every home that rents generates more tax revenue than it costs to provide the services it receives. Our community has benefited for years from this equation, and it’s a big part of the reason that Dare County can provide the services that it provides, i.e. new schools, hospital, major recreation programs.
RDS says:
We have a trend here: Nags Head pushes nourishment, but will they chip in from their general fund? No. Will they do an assessment now to prime the pump? No. OBAR pushes nourishment, but will they chip in from their massive collective take? No. Chamber pushes nourishment, but will they chip in from their dues/programs? No.
Who among these direct beneficiaries of nourishment will be the first to take the high road and assume some of the risk themselves? Many are holding their breath…
Ray says:
Good points, RDS. The Dare County Visitors Bureau chipped in $1 million over 10 years ago for the Army Corps. of Engineers study that said it would take 4 times as much sand to do the jobs as Nags Head’s engineer wants to use; and it would only last about 3 years as opposed to Nags Head’s prediction of 10 years. So, it’s no wonder the Visitors Bureau isn’t playing ball anymore…and, it’s not because they don’t have buccos of money which they essentially waste every year by over-promoting the Outer Banks….
Bob O says:
Where do you think the money that is in the fund came from? About 25% was collected in Nags Head. We’ve also invested over five years in getting permits, and over $850,000.
That 25% holds true for all of these occupancy funds, including the other 3% that is distributed to the towns and the county, and the 1% that goes to the Tourist Bureau.
And Ray, are you saying you trust the Corps projections fully? They used a 33% efficiency factor because they counted on only dredging in the winter.
If Nags Head chipped in by raising their ad valorem rate, it would negatively affect the other towns and the county on the distribution of sales and occupancy tax. As it stands, Nags Head generates more tax than it gets back, and has for a long time. What is the economic concern with using occupancy tax? It affects the fewest residents of any tax we have.
RDS says:
Perhaps a concern with using the O-tax is that while you contribute 25%, you want 100%.
This is a good point: Under your plan, Nags Head will pull 36 million in 2010 dollars.
Then, in 10 years (according to your projection), the fund will have 60 million.
That 60 is available to be split by FIVE other communities, so 12 million each, but in 2020 dollars.
What will those actually be worth as inflation devalues the dollar? …
If we go by previous inflation rates, the deal you offer is that Nags Head will receive 36 million now, and in 10 years, each of the towns will receive 3.6 million (adjusted dollars) each. (43.2 mil, at 28% devaluation of the 60 million, divided five ways.)
Avon MMA says:
C’mon dude:
Every town chips in more than they get back.
What you spent to push this project has nothing to do with if it’s a good project.
If this is such a good idea, why hasn’t anyone ponied up some dolares? You guys were the first to try to grab the whole pie, you were like a frenzy man, then Tine and OBAR whined that everyone else wanted their share too? NH was first in with both hands.
RDS says:
Bad math, sorry, for Nags Head to pull out 36 million now, that will mean each other town gets 8.6 million (adjusted) in 2020.