ent001500-032

KEITH ASMKGftTHl *|] downtown and other business people. LEE FISHER?? Mr. MliiwiitH on the question raised by HankKoveil. Seems to me li??|4 StfpP to ?║#t bask to??W clarify it* WhenI this formula wij# adopted* as 1 understand it* it 2sJi adopted by this *eenefc?? themselves the operators* _ ' ||p;^hu?╜2 Th*e i a ?╤?½ very hsisdnce of the weakness of the collection of that ,?╟ 44 " S3 tSt!.is'PSatt?╜u bteau*. It wa.n't up to thi. cowltto* S0 logi* back end bliss An ???╜?╜;* the owners themselves had done, 1 ?╟≤ Are raised t is/|S??etlW about four times at least in the two years. si^fv . If || fSflllillllllll 1 jjj efilTi' aSHkORTH# 4#1, IM me answer it this way* tee* ||?╜| W|gs ?║tf*l &ld is very true A?╜ thenformula was approved by the owners* Th?╜re sip-?╜?╜?√ß;?√ß'?√ß?√ß ?╟≤?╟≤ ?╟≤...9 _ ./ oBhasiijMfc.. 4 - -?√ß as ?╟? ..~- a A-.iMk^ik MeB.d*.eitaetik.*dk .-?√ß.A... shndfei, ?╜K^f a l^ctgof responeibi Igect responsibility of ,44f in enforcing the increase **?╟≤ is the ;the Hoard'of Directors of the Chamber of miserce ?? were net Ida* 1 don* t believe* because there had been -, wecange tawl w5thfthe cAners -?╟≤ with the owner level in the hotels n regard to increasing the formula ami the consensus of Jptnion of he Committee wo pet with the majority of the owners of the hotel* 4 es*' *80 not do anything afthis time until tveryoody get. .?╜?╟≤?╟≤?╟≤; 1 gt fjsMSks The point wasn?╟╓t.to increase the formula but to. collect ^hai the formula called ffer as approved. U KEITH kmMCmMt X didn?╟╓t Wean increase the formula* 1 meant to say "Inconii m ?╟≤ a.?· th# / Jjicirfi&scMl*! life FISHStl 1 added i*?╜ rep-. don?╟╓t think! the; e*d have been a e*uawfc if -nd?╟╓:mh# next month they wore billed for the hotel X- ddl adtieoe?? rooms ?╜?╜??% ?╜?╜#**%** ****?╜/ ??*rr * * :l : ?╟? ft MiiMiai rcoiss and if #i?╜ hid been practiced right fro?½ the s*??rt \\/until this day* Xvtlon?╟╓t thiWk there*d have been a eguawk?╜ fro?½ <iny I 5#a to do I. toll th. totol. that you ypurself approved /??* this? ! and the Cnareber backed of f?╜ answer efwiSi CahvlC'.d>LDCNf 1 Cjfci* . bhcked off was oh the advic and the News He??^Uaul?╜tion past three years KM thoug 4 re^evaulated scftedul?½* tive of the,hotels and 1 rep of rirectors a:rP?½ MPa the last three yea* that* Ktltb*'' The reason the CSMtfdNHf jl? of ttembers of the - Board of .Directors tie# and the budget committee in -the ii inadvisable at the tine to send thru always have* as you know a roprtsenta- H,,_jfs??n*atlve of the casinos on the Hoard ,11 theseV c<xanittees which have .-been fertoed in fM^ptCKt' l.o\09Wl#3P '%#y h '! - ?╟ú?╟╓ - ^ condition of /the^ia^ber* Bilpe nave been representatives ??f this group serving ?╜fe th* Committed and It has been tlhelr^??pinion that at time it should not be don#\ until an overfall evaluation had been completed, etc. How* from an Administrative standpoint^! not at liberty to bill* except under ilf direction of the people who serve on the 'Board of Directors- of the Chamber of Commerce and the people who govern this.