PDC 91-02 Water Theme Park Beeler Canyon
{(
~
1 of 5
AGEN~~ti~~~8~~ i.-='~ h~3, 1;9 ~
G
CITY OF POW A Y
REV I SED
TO:
Honorable Mayor-and Members of the City Council
3ames L. Bowerso~, City Manager~
Reba Wright-Quast1er, Director of Planning
FROM:
INITIATED BY:
Services
Iv
Planningp
PR03ECT
PLANNER:
Stephen A. Streeter, Assistant Director of
DATE:
3uly 25, 1991
MANDATORY
ACTION DATE:
Not applicable
SUB3ECT:
Predeve10pment Conference (PDC) 91-02 - Water Theme
Park on the McLauchlan property in Beeler Canyon,
Bryant L. Morris Development/Raging Waters,
Applicant. co.
APN: 323-091-01, 323-100-04, 325-01-02
Some clarification is provided on the water use and some additional
material is provided about the fiscal impact of a water theme park.
Staff has done some preliminary research on establishing an
admissions or amusement tax on admissions to the park.
DISCUSSION
Water use is anticipated to be 111 htil'ldred cubic feet per day
(GCFD) per day or about 83,000 gallons per day (GPD). The water
demand is divided
into three categories:
ACTION:
7-25-91 #3
2 of 5
Agenda Report
.July 25, 1991
Page 2
GPD
€CFD
Pool make-up water -
treated well water
Irrigation demand -
reclaimed water. source
Domestic water demand
Total
26,180
35
41 , 140
15,858
83, 178
55
21.2
111.2
Note: One €CFQ equals 748 gallons of water.
FISCAL IMPACT
The applicant projects gross sales of $7 million ($3.5 million from
admissions and $3.5 million from sales of food, drinks, clothing
and souvenirs) in the first year of operation. Revenues to the
city would include sales tax equal to all of tkc tal{ il"lel"'cfI.el"lt 01"1
plepcl"'t) taxes al"l~ tke f~ll one percent of tke 36.61"1 pel cent 3alG3
taN fe~ a ~~ejee~ i~ the gross sa1es.($35,OOO). The property tax
increment would go to the Redevelopment Agency since the p~oposed
site is located in the redevelopment project area. The property
tax is estimated to be $150,000 per year. This figure will be
estimated more closely once the full land and improvement costs are
developed as part of a business plan. Comparable figures are not
available for the San Dimas location since the land is leased from
the County of Los Angeles with the county collecting a percentage
of gross revenues.
In addition, staff is looking into establishing an admissions or
amusement tax on admissions to the park. Each one percent of the
proposed tax would raise approximately $35,000. A survey of five
other cities with this type of tax and the procedure for
implementation are discussed in the attachment.
.JLB:RWQ:SAS:pcm
Attachment:
Study of Admissions Tax
REPORT\3PDC9102.AGN
7-25-91 #3
-(
3 of 5
l
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF POWAY
TO:
FROM:
INITIATED BY:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
John Fitch, Assistant City Manager
Peggy Stewart, Oirector of Administrative Services
Peter Moote, Senior ~anagement Analyst~~
July 19, 1991
Studv of Admissions Tax
ABSTRACT
The Administrative Services department has conducted a survey of cities with
ordinances which provide for the collection of a city tax on admission charges
to amusement parks and/or events, The survey was conducted to provide
preliminary information in the event the Council wishes to consider a ballot
measure in the future which would provide for an admissions tax in Poway.
Such a tax would be applicable to any type of water amusement park.
BACKGROUND
As a general law City, Poway is permitted to levy admissions taxes which are
specifically permitted under the "municipal affairs" authority of the Govern-
ment Code (S 37100.5). Historically, admissions taxes have been collected
from consumers by operators on behalf of Cities for attendance at events
including horse racing, sports events, concerts, circuses, movies, museums,
skating rinks, and other exhibitions and performances. The revenue collected
may be used for general municipal purposes and assists to offset the cost of
providing municipal services to such businesses or events.
In order to withstand a test of the court, an ordinance establishing an
admissions tax must be applied at a uniform rate to all businesses which
charge admission. Further, the ordinance should confirm that the admissions
tax revenue is to be used to pay for public services provided to the business-
es taxed. As admissions taxes have been successfully challenged in court
under speci ficci rcumstances, it is recommended that the City Attorney revi ew
the matter in more detail. A paper on the "Validity of Admission Taxes _
United Artists v. City of Monclair" is attached for reference.
FIND INGS
Five cities have been identified to date whjch have established an admissions
tax. Following is a summary of the provisions of each:
CITY
TAX RATE
APPLICATION
Cerritos
6% of Ticket Value,
including season
tickets/
subscriptions
Collected from operator for all events
for which admission is charged excepting
those sponsored by educational and non-
profit organizations/corporations or
qualified political events.
7-25-91 #3
4 of 5
Admissions Tax
Page 2
Del Mar
10% of Ticket Value.
No minimum or
maximum
Inglewood
Flat rate of $ .45
for admission to
horse racing or any
event costing less
than $10, and $. 55
for events costing
$10 or more
Monclair
6% of admission cost
or the integrated
sales tax rate of
the County (all state
and local taxes),
which ever is greater
Pasadena
Collected from operator utilizing audito-
rium for an enterprise. Does not apply to
fairgrounds or race track as both are
'~tate owned and operated. City collects
estimate of tax in advance in the form of
a deposit which is reconciled after event.
Collected for admission to horse racing,
or any admission collected for a live
sporting, theatrical, contest or pres-
entation of any kind. Note: If any
portion of attending group (ie, children
under 3) is charged $1 of less, the tax
is $. 20 per admission).
Collected when admission is paid for
the right/privilege of being admitted
to any premises. Note: Admittance by
"free pass" to any premises for the
purpose of attending any event is taxed
$ .25 per admittance. Exemptions to the
tax include events with a qualified
charitable or non-profit purpose.
Flat rate of $ .05
for admission cost up
to $1, plus $ .05
for each additional
$1 (or fraction over
the additional $1)
up to a maximum of
$ .50 per admission
In addition, the admissions tax ordinances typically include language stipu-
lating payment .schedules, which are often quarterly, and grant the city the
right to audit related operator records, charge late fees, and establish bond
or deposit requirements.
Applies exclusively to admission to the
Rose Bowl. Note: Free or reduced
admittance is taxed at an amount equal
to that paid by another person receiving
similar accommodations/services excepting
the media/press.
Cities in California known to have water amusement parks were also contacted
to determine if an admissions tax was levied. No water parks in at least the
region south of and including Los Angeles County are currently collecting an
admissions tax.
FISCAL IMPACT
At the time of preparation of this report, as estimate of gross ticket
revenues of a water amusement park could not be obtained.
7-25-91 #3
5 of 5
Admissions Tax
Page 3
Costs associated with the requisite ballot measure (passes by 2/3 vote) would
be nominal if submitted under the general election; the closest takin9 place
in November 1992. If submitted under the June 1991 (possibly March 1992)
primary election, the cost of the measure is estimated at $5,750. Should a
special election.be utilized, the measure would cost approximately $57,500.
7-25-91 #3