(Washington, DC)  --  U.S. Rep. Steven C. LaTourette (R-Concord Township) has asked the head of the General Services Administration (GSA) to reconsider its plan to slash the government per-diem hotel rate in downtown Cleveland from $99 per night to $84 per night, saying the cut is too severe, does not reflect market trends and will make it impossible for local hotels to accommodate government travelers.

 LaTourette, the former chairman of the Subcommittee on Public Buildings which has oversight of GSA, said the agency sets the government rate for hotels across the country each year and plans to slash the Fiscal Year 2006 rate in Cleveland by $15.  The rate changes take effect on October 1, 2005.  The GSA is basing the reduction in rates in downtown Cleveland on a study conducted by Smith Travel Research, which was hired by GSA.

 “It’s going to be very hard for government workers to find this ridiculously low rate at downtown hotels, and this will prevent the city from attracting government travelers,” LaTourette said. “There seems to be a Smith Travel study showing that the reduction is justified, but that study contradicts other market data from Smith Travel and other travel experts.”

 LaTourette, who worked extensively with GSA Administrator Stephen A. Perry when he chaired the Public Buildings Subcommittee, said he called Perry this week to register his concern with the new per-diem rates and followed up with a letter at Perry’s request.  Congress cannot take action to stop the rates from taking effect, but LaTourette said it is possible for GSA to adjust the rates if warranted.  LaTourette has asked that rates be restored to at least the previous level of $99 per night.

 LaTourette said the change in per-diem rates has caused great concern for the Greater Cleveland Partnership and the Convention and Visitors Bureau.

 “The GSA has hotel rates for government travelers higher in Sandusky than in Cleveland, Columbus or Cincinnati, and that makes no sense to me,”  LaTourette said.  “I think GSA needs to take a second look at this.”