La Quinta completes sprinkler system

It has been that way a long time and some of the city employees knew about it. It was the homeless shelter all over again...without the tragedy.

City of Paris has been trying to shut them down since initial construction! I think the CITY should look their own facilities over. None of them meet code.

Who's signature is on the first certificate of occupancy?

Reno wrote:

City of Paris has been trying to shut them down since initial construction! I think the CITY should look their own facilities over. None of them meet code.

Can you tell us how each of the city facilities fail to meet code? I'd like to know what kind of dangers I face before I go into those buildings. No generalities, please. Specific violations with the relevant code references.

Reno wrote:

City of Paris has been trying to shut them down since initial construction! I think the CITY should look their own facilities over. None of them meet code.

By the way, why would the city want to shut down a source of revenue? That makes no sense.

ALF wrote:

<quoted text>
By the way, why would the city want to shut down a source of revenue? That makes no sense.

From what I hear and in my opinion they don't pay their hotel / motel tax until there is a threat of the taxing entities auctioning the place off. They consistently stay 90 days behind on their payments and cost the city and others the money to mail all the notices of late payments and stuff. Great commercial citizen we have there huh.

computer literate wrote:

<quoted text>From what I hear and in my opinion they don't pay their hotel / motel tax until there is a threat of the taxing entities auctioning the place off. They consistently stay 90 days behind on their payments and cost the city and others the money to mail all the notices of late payments and stuff. Great commercial citizen we have there huh.

I would suspect that when the taxes are collected, they more than pay for the minimal amount expended in postage. Great commercial citizen or not, it's still a revenue source, and the city gains nothing by closing it down.

ALF wrote:

<quoted text>
I would suspect that when the taxes are collected, they more than pay for the minimal amount expended in postage. Great commercial citizen or not, it's still a revenue source, and the city gains nothing by closing it down.

To whoever posted the "clueless" on the referenced post -- perhaps you might like to tell us which of the statements in that post is clueless. Is it that the taxes collected won't cover the postage expended for statements? Or that a hotel is not a revenue source for the city? Or that the city stands to gain by closing it down? Just curious as to what logic you're using. But I doubt you'll answer -- kind of like when I asked for specifics on the city facilities that are not up to code.

ALF wrote:

<quoted text>
I would suspect that when the taxes are collected, they more than pay for the minimal amount expended in postage. Great commercial citizen or not, it's still a revenue source, and the city gains nothing by closing it down.

How much would it cost to defend a lawsuit if they didn't close it, yet knew of problems if there were a fire? I dont recall debating if it was a revenue source, only pointed out that they are slow to pay in my opinion. They collect the tax and put it in their own account, earning interest on the governments money for 90 days until the government asks for it. Don't think we are talking about small change either. The hotel / motel tax would be in excess of $10 per room per night rented. The news report says it has 71 room, if only 1/3rd are rented every night X $10 tax each is over $200 per night, for the 90 day period it is over $20,000 that they get to hold on to and earn interest on. In addition to that, if it is like sales tax, they could keep something like 1% of the collections if they pay on time - this is considered as pay from the government for doing the work for them. So, that would be $200 that they would get to keep for doing nothing more than collecting the tax, putting it in their bank account for up to 90 days, filling out a little bit of paperwork and sending the money to the government. Now keep in mind that is if they only average 1/3 occupancy.
Stop reading more in to the post than what is actually there.

The City should have never allowed it to be opened up when there were code violations. Wonder how many of the City of Paris buildings--owned by City of Paris and occupied meet the codes?

They know how to cover their rears when something happens also. If the City of Paris had told LaQuinta they had to do these things, they would have had no choice but to do them. They could not have opened up without it. City drops the ball again.

ALF wrote:

<quoted text>
By the way, why would the city want to shut down a source of revenue? That makes no sense.

That has absolutely nothing to do with this. And should not. Sounds like an outside souce should come in and inspect all the buildings and I mean all of them--starting with the City of Paris, hospitals and clinics etc. All that are occupied and all that are supposed to comply.

Yes, check out City Hall, Courthouses etc. Check them all.

Restaurants too. Jailhouse etc.

What wrote:

<quoted text>
That has absolutely nothing to do with this. And should not. Sounds like an outside souce should come in and inspect all the buildings and I mean all of them--starting with the City of Paris, hospitals and clinics etc. All that are occupied and all that are supposed to comply.

Reno was the one that said the city wanted to shut them down. I just asked what was to be gained by it. You people are talking all over the map on this one.

Wow wrote:

Restaurants too. Jailhouse etc.

I take it you have a beef with City of Paris Code Enforcement. What did you get cited for?

ALF wrote:

<quoted text>
Reno was the one that said the city wanted to shut them down. I just asked what was to be gained by it. You people are talking all over the map on this one.

City of Paris seems to be stirring the pot. Let some go and make some do whatever. Cannot believe they were allowed to open up with code violations.

Question wrote:

<quoted text>
City of Paris seems to be stirring the pot. Let some go and make some do whatever. Cannot believe they were allowed to open up with code violations.

Could be you don't know all the circumstances.

If there would of been a fire there and people were hurt everyone on Topix would be saying the city should of done something. now the city has taken steps and people think they are stirring the pot

ALF wrote:

<quoted text>
I take it you have a beef with City of Paris Code Enforcement. What did you get cited for?

I have never been cited by the Paris Code Enforcement and I have no beef personally with them. I do believe they have done some wrongs according to what I have read.

Just responding to Post No. 2 from Reno. It triggered lots of thinking. Was just thinking out loud besides if they have nothing to hide then they would say "bring it on" and not respond like you did.

slim1026 wrote:

If there would of been a fire there and people were hurt everyone on Topix would be saying the city should of done something. now the city has taken steps and people think they are stirring the pot

Actually what I see on here is people are saying they still have some code enforcement they have not taken care of. If that is true, then they need to take care of their own stuff also.