Voters will once again decide a 3% increase in Springfield’s hotel/motel license tax to help pay for a new convention and event center.
City Council voted unanimously Monday night to put the issue on the April ballot – but this time the tax increase would sunset after 35 years.
The City of Springfield surveyed residents after the tax increase failed in November, and 44% said they would support a ballot measure if it included a sunset provision.
Visit Springfield President and CEO Mark Hecquet told council the city is losing an estimated $125,000 a day by not having a facility that can attract large events. He said it’s not about a building, it’s creating demand for Springfield, which then benefits residents.
“A strong visitor economy helps pay for our city’s priorities,” he said. “It reduces pressures on our local taxpayers, supports our local jobs and keeps our small businesses healthy.”
City Manager David Cameron said, this time, they need to do a better job of letting people know that it’s not just about a new convention center. The city is also working to solve problems like stormwater, crime, homelessness, public transit, animal control and noise.
“I think it’s important that we share this in our messaging,” he said. “This is not a yes only project. This is not a yes convention center; yes, the art museum; yes, the new shiny thing. It’s yes and the priorities that the council has established.”
And he said they need to talk about what they’re doing to address those priorities and how a new convention center would help boost sales tax revenue for things like public safety.
Cameron said one concern raised by citizens is that money from the city’s general fund would be used to pay for the project. He said they’ll ask council to consider utilizing existing hotel motel tax for any shortfalls in a convention and event center’s operating expenses to make sure that they do not affect general fund dollars.
The city moved quickly to place the 3% tax increase on the November ballot to try to secure $30 million in state funds for the project that were included in a list of restricted items in the FY26 budget. Cameron said there’s been no threat that the money will be reappropriated, “but considering all the things that are taking place with funding in the state, things that are being discussed, it would be a big time risk of any kind just to take to not try to address it now.”
Councilman Craig Hosmer said sometimes people say he’s against economic development. But he said he’s in favor of broad-based economic development, and this project, he believes, will help everybody.
