| Comments |
RamblinWreck
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 563
View Park/Ride Count
|
They are already getting off easy, I don't care if they have to pay an extra $500,000. Good for the State of NJ for getting some money out of the park!
|
| 4/28/2005 6:05 PM |
|
5150
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 364
View Park/Ride Count
|
They don't. WE DO. Get it?
Good for the state of NJ?!? What did they do? If I remember correctly they've been quite the roller coaster opponent the last few years. This however is the NOT the state, it is the township that Jackson is in. Their politicians screwed up the town's economy, so where can they find some revenue? Oh, just tax the amusement park, they've got enough. (Last I checked Six Flags financial situation relatively sucked.) I thought Six Flags was in the business to MAKE MONEY by providing us, the thrill junkies, families, and amusement park lovers, with a a place to go. I don't think they built the place (moveable or not (he he)) to make sure the local school board officials had enough money so they wouldn't have to get summer jobs. Of course, then they could go to Great Adventure and pay $25.00* for parking.
I carry about a dozen parking passes with me, so this is not a personal problem, BUT what are they going to tax next that will affect me, or my friends. I remeber when this happened to Cedar Point, they just absorbed the extra cost. I don't think Six Flags would do that. The school board needs to take care of itself.
I hope Six Flags wipes the table with Jackson if this lawsuit comes to fruition. From a legal standpoint (It's my job!), I don't think the town has much of a chance if the park decides to fight. I believe the term "diminising returns" comes to mind.
*actually $11.50
|
| 4/29/2005 1:40 AM |
|
CHILLERLC1
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 8339
View Park/Ride Count
|
Fight it off Six Flags Great Adventure! New Jersey gets other dollars in tourism revenue from people going to this park.
|
| 4/29/2005 1:50 AM |
|
coasterlove
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 6476
View Park/Ride Count
|
I don't understand how or why a park that size could be considered "moveable" but they did win that legal battle so it doesn't matter whether anyone agrees with it or not. So regardless of that previous outcome, I don't see why local school officials should be able to try and have a bill passed that singles out one particular business.
|
| 4/29/2005 1:54 AM |
|
RamblinWreck
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 563
View Park/Ride Count
|
^That is why I said good for the government.
"“Only 15 percent of their park is taxed because they won a decision in about 1990 that classifies their amusement park as moveable and therefore not subject to full taxation,” Krakower said."
That is a bunch of legal BS, and they are just exploiting the system, and if 15% works out to 3 million, then the government is getting screwed out of $17 million annually, all because of some court-ruled technicality.
Besides, an extra $500,000 with 3 million guests works out to 16.7 cents a guest. It won't be THAT big of a deal.
This isn't about the communist safety regulations of NJ, this is about everyone paying their share of taxes. Oh, yes, just tax the amusement park. Perhaps they are a bit short of money because, oh, 85% is missing? Yes, SF is a business, and that means they pay taxes.
|
| 4/29/2005 5:43 PM |
|
coasterlove
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 6476
View Park/Ride Count
|
Let me clarify what I mean. I don't think it's right that the park is getting away with paying a lower percentage of taxes because of some weird ruling. I think someone should look into that and change that. I have a problem with a special exception made so their taxes will be so low but at the same time I don't think the school board should target one individual business. The problem is the tax ruling that was made, that's what should be fixed.
|
| 4/29/2005 6:59 PM |
|
ThunderDan
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 592
View Park/Ride Count
|
SFGA has to buy land in other parts of the state when they clear some more land on their own property to benefit their business (to which they pay taxes.) I think they do enough for the People's Republic of NJ. Jackson sure has allot of new Mc Mansions. Could this be why they want businesses in town to pay more?
|
| 4/30/2005 12:16 PM |
|
5150
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 364
View Park/Ride Count
|
When a government goes head hunting, just to find a lucrative business that they can exploit, it's a bit corrupt. Should the Wal-Marts in NJ pay a parking tax? They are a business. How about paying a parking tax at McDonald's? They are a business. Why single out Great Adventure? I think RamblinWreck's theory is a bit flawed. Here is why-
As far as legal BS goes, have you ever heard of a tax break? Happens all the time. Perfectly legal. I mentioned diminishing returns before. Let me explain...
If you give a break on parking fees: more people go to the park. They spend more money, SFGA makes more money, pay more tax to NJ.
If you raise the parking tax: Less people go to the park, SFGA makes less money, pay less tax to NJ.
Trickle down! Ta Daa! Simple isn't it?
|
| 4/30/2005 4:56 PM |
|
RamblinWreck
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 563
View Park/Ride Count
|
Wal mart doesn't charge to park in their lot, and something tells me that approx. an extra 50 cents per vehicle won't stop anyone from going to a park, or from buying food and souvenirs inside. Just a hunch.
|
| 5/1/2005 1:40 PM |
|
5150
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 364
View Park/Ride Count
|
It's not 50 cents...it's $1.50. See the story.
I don't think it will scare off anyone who comes to this site, but you would be very surprised at how that turns people off. You have to think a little larger scale. Percentage wise, an extra $1.50 will turn people away. I know "general public" that won't pay the current 10 bucks. If they raise to $11.50, do you think they are all of a sudden going to change their minds? Ahhh...I bet they will do it for the good of the school board. That's it.
Here's a thought. How about the people that agree with this: pay the tax and extra. (good cause, y'know) The people who don't: skip it.
|
| 5/2/2005 2:16 AM |
|
RamblinWreck
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 563
View Park/Ride Count
|
You are right about the $1.50, though I question where they came up with that figure.
As for turning people off, I doubt that $1.50 would turn anybody away, if it did, then no one would go to the park on account of the recent gas increases that are 25% higher than the past year. If $1.50 made a difference, even percentage wise, then I doubt anyone would ever buy a soda or pretzel at the park if the price goes up, or a season pass/ticket, because they go up too, someimtes within the year. Nottom line: if you are going to spend $40 to get in, an extra buck 50 won't make too much of a difference. That is, unless you are a tight-wad accountant. If anyone finds parking at $10 to be unreasonable, that's a shame because a measly $10 and a fiscal mindset is keeping them a way from a great park.
|
| 5/2/2005 6:39 PM |
|
More about News
Apr. 28th, 2005 -- The parking tax bill was written so narrowly that the law, if passed, would only apply to Six Flags Great Adventure. Local school officials are pushing for the bill to be passed because it would bring in an estimated $500,000 to their budget annually.