Door County Tourism Zone Commission : Meeting Minutes

Home Page: Meeting Minutes

July 21, 2011 Door County Tourism Zone Executive Committee Minutes

DOOR COUNTY TOURISM ZONE COMMISSION
Executive Committee
Minutes of July 21, 2011 – 9:04 a.m.
Kerber, Rose & Associates/Sister Bay

ACTION ITEMS:
Nelson moved and Larson seconded to approve the agenda as submitted. Motion passed unanimously.

Nelson moved and Weddig seconded to approve both sets of June 16, 2011, minutes as amended. Motion passed unanimously.

Nelson moved and Skare seconded that the Commission should send a letter to the manager of the Catholic Diocese Retreat House with a permit application to collect room tax on their Chambers Island facility. Motion passed unanimously.

Starr moved and Larson seconded that Kirkland should start sending out the 2012 permits and Change of Information sheets, to be completed no later than the end of October. Motion passed unanimously.

Nelson moved to approve the reports and payables; Larson seconded. Motion passed 4 yeas, 1 nay.

Starr moved and Skare seconded that the Commission send a letter to UW-Madison, signed by the Chair, that the Tourism Zone Commission endorses the letter written by the DCEDC to support the Peninsular Agricultural Research Station and avoid cuts. Motion passed unanimously.

Starr moved and Larson seconded to adjourn. Motion passed unanimously.

Committee Members Present by Roll Call: Robert Kufrin/Chair, Dick Skare, Bob Starr, Jeff Larson, and Bryan Nelson.

Also in Attendance:
Kathy Kirkland, Administrative Assistant

Call to Order
Chair Bob Kufrin called the meeting to order at 9:04 a.m.

Approval of the Agenda
Nelson moved and Larson seconded to approve the agenda as submitted. All ayes.

Approval of June 16, 2011, Annual Meeting Minutes & the June 16, 2011, Commission Minutes
Larson noted in the Annual Meeting minutes, pg 1, li 46, it should be “looking for a vacation home.” In the Commission minutes, Nelson noted on pg 3, li 39, the acronym should be DCEDC. Nelson moved and Weddig seconded to approve both sets of minutes as amended. All ayes.

Kufrin noted that the Village of Egg Harbor, having gone over the $300,000 room tax collection threshold, has added Josh Van Lieshout, Village of Egg Harbor Administrator, as the newest commissioner. This brings more governmental experience to the Commission, which has added four other new members this year: Ahlswede, Forkert, Massey, and Statz.

Report from Kathy Kirkland on current activities, projects and permit issues.
Kufrin asked if the office mails full meeting packets to all town and village board presidents or chairs and the Mayor of Sturgeon Bay. Kirkland said that hasn’t been our practice; she felt the commissioners would be reporting or sharing the paperwork. Kufrin is concerned there’s no feedback; if the commissioners aren’t reporting or the town chair doesn’t see at least minutes, they’re not updated properly. Kufrin expects the commissioners to go to the town board meetings with some regularity. Weddig suggesting asking the various boards if they want packets. Kirkland will poll town/village clerks with a list of what’s available and ask them to check what documents they want monthly and whether they want them digitally or by mail. Larson put out the idea of a one-page executive summary. Starr felt the minutes do a good job of explaining what’s happening. Nelson did say that after 4+ years, his interaction at the board level has dropped; he does attend if there are questions, but he usually gives reports every second or third meeting. Skare is on Gibraltar’s board, so he gives a report every month. Kufrin stated that it’d be good for minutes to be disseminated because as the Commission starts suggesting updates or tweaks in the different agreements (looking to the end of these five-year agreements), it won’t come as a surprise when the documents arrive. The town/village boards will have seen the discussions and it may help them understand what’s going on. Skare talks about things a couple months ahead to keep them in the loop. Weddig said he likes that they can approve the Removed and Permitted property lists. Kirkland will poll municipalities to see what they want on a monthly basis.

Skare noted that there’s an issue in Gibraltar where the Catholic Diocese Retreat House is starting to do retreats on Chambers Island, so the town chair asked if they should be collecting room tax. Vande Castle did thorough research and said they do owe; Kufrin noted that the retreats do make money, and Skare said they are advertising them. Starr felt we should send a letter to the Diocese with a permit application and give our standing for their starting to collect room tax. Nelson moved to proceed with sending the letter; Skare seconded. All ayes. Skare will get contact information so Kirkland can send out a letter. Kufrin talked about exempt individuals, state and federal employees, sales tax exemptions; he still has to pay certain taxes even if he has his state form with him. Nelson brought up the Kangaroo Lake facilities where kids pay money to go the summer camp, which is done throughout the summer. It’s something like Brothers of Perpetual Care or Catholic Youth Adventures. Kirkland will send a similar letter to that group.

Kirkland is sending mailings to permit holders and, on Lensert’s suggestion, making it an “opt-out” rather than having each person reply. The “opt-out” phrase was confusing and sounded like permission to opt out of tax collection. Kufrin suggested just sending a permit that has no expiration date along with a copy of their current information; if there’s something needs to be changed, they can send back the copy. Rather than wait until October, consensus was that the new permits and notices should starting going out now, while people are here in the summertime. Kufrin suggested sending a portion each time to get them all done by the end of October. Kirkland can send most by e-mail without a problem. Starr so moved; Larson seconded. All ayes.

Discussion on the Door County Visitor Bureau Marketing Efforts
Starr said it’s becoming clear how consumers are accessing Door County information: the shift is to social media instead of the websites. He was concerned at first because visits are down, not rising to expectations, but social media visits are up massively. He goes to the bottom line: how much revenue’s coming in? Is that reflected from the social media? Nelson said we have figures only through May, about 13-14% gets collected through May. Kufrin updated the graphs; one graph shows cumulative percentage of tax dollars. How important are the months? For the first six months of the year, there’s only 25% of activity; July and August are the critical months. The last four months represent another 25%.

Kufrin’s concern is that he hasn’t seen a change in the marketing reports that they’re doing anything different to take advantage of social media; all trends are down from a year ago but the money is still being spent the same. The DCVB say the websites are down 1%; Kufrin’s figures show they’re down 6% and unique visits are down 7%. Are they not calculating correctly? If all activity is down and traffic is down, room tax is down, are they doing anything different at all? Larson’s concern is more the report presentation; it doesn’t tell the whole story. They should have highlights each month regarding what they’ve done; what’s unique. Nelson reminded that the categories in the report were mutually agreed upon a couple years ago, but that was before social media appeared and now the mobile website. Starr felt a more complete report is given verbally at the meetings. Kufrin’s dilemma, looked at some factors year over year, many figures are down. The Commission doesn’t get a clear response back that “we’re trying something different, we’re monetizing the Facebook hits, etc.” Unless the June report is substantially up, we need to look at adjusting the budget and projections; May indicators suggest that business won’t be up. Weddig agreed; we’d be hard-pressed to hit the 3% over last year.

Nelson is still concerned with eBrains. It’s all about engaging web visitors, which seems to be becoming less important; why can’t they shift resources? He’s never gotten a good handle on what eBrains does and their claims. Kufrin has gone over the University of Texas/Austin report several times with them, trying to fill in gaps in the numbers and assumptions regarding what it means. If the Commission is responsible for oversight, he wants to be clear about the marketing and know that they’re being responsive to a changing environment. He doesn’t feel a sense of their concern. Starr reminded that tourism is subject to a lot of factors beyond their control; it’s down 4% and he said he expected it’d be down more. The weather has been bad, consumer confidence is low; economic bad news shows up in tourism. All that’s being said is valid, but we don’t want the DCVB to react or change constantly when they may be doing the best with what they have. He gives them some latitude. Kufrin agrees, but isn’t confident about they’re thinking about or trying to do differently. Kufrin has asked the question 10 times in the last year; it should be the No. 1 item in the report. Weddig wants to know if this same conversation happens at the DCVB board/staff levels. Kufrin said if the stats are wrong (0.2% opposed to 6%), they won’t convey any urgency. Larson still believes the website is more important than social media; Starr questions whether social media is effective to business development. Nelson restated that we have veto power over the budget and activities, but we don’t have full oversight. Starr said we should have reasonable expectations of our contracted entity. Skare felt they should engage a couple of DCVB Board members and ask. Nelson brought up establishing a tradition of having members attend their board and vice versa; Kufrin asked Steve Hellman about it, but Kufrin’s reluctant to attend without an invitation. Nelson suggested that Kufrin and Hellman talk about cross-attendance as observers; Starr added that Moneypenny should be asked for his opinion. Kufrin will call Hellman.

Weddig felt it has become easier for DCVB Board members to become complacent; they’re not depending on membership as they were, and the local associations are falling into the same trap. Kufrin noted that his charts show that all years collections are almost identical re: room tax collected by June; if June’s down, it’s hard to catch up. Larson noted that July is a five-weekend month; Wedding said it’s five Fridays/Saturdays/Sundays which hasn’t happened in about a century. Starr said if we’re down by -4.3% by the end of June, it could become down -5% (Starr). Weddig would be satisfied if 2011 were flat. Kufrin noted if the cumulative for June puts us down to down -5% or -7%, we won’t make it up through end of the year. Nelson noted that we could have a good fall. The heat wave helps drive people out of the city.

Weddig wanted to see where the DCVB is looking down the road. He’s disappointed the mobile site is taking so long. Kufrin said people have made vacation decisions some time ago, but is there something going on with the DCVB such as running ads in the paper now, “come up here” trying to influence last-minute decisions? Starr recalled the old “air-conditioned Door County” tagline. Nelson felt they should be looking back toward traditional media. Kufrin ultimately felt that Denis, Jarosh, and Moneypenny should be able to articulate what eBrains/Geiger are doing and have a coherent discussion on their plans. We need a big picture view and learn what they’re telling the consultants to do.

Larson commended Jarosh for his attitude about the travel writers; Nelson felt his enthusiasm and reporting is tangible. Jarosh has the tone he’d like to see from the others. Starr looks to the innkeepers to answer the question because they’re best to evaluate the performance. Weddig said it’s hard to get an honest opinion when his staff asks, “Where did you find us?” Very few are referrals or word of mouth. Nelson felt it’s overwhelmingly Internet, usually DCVB but could be Classic Door County or Baileys Harbor.com. Kufrin will talk to Moneypenny next week and express that the information we’re getting and responses on declining figures is less than what the Commission needs; we’re not sure what they’re doing in respect to declines and what’s offsetting it. Skare asked about the DCVB reserve fund for emergencies…when does that click in? When it’s a 100-degree week in Chicago, is that what the fund is for?

Weddig wondered if the DCVB will be dropping the amount paid to eBrains. Kufrin said that, according to Moneypenny, the DCVB should already be working on next year’s budget, performance indicators, and paths/objectives for the Strategic Conversation. If everything’s down at this point in the year, he would suggest the next year’s budget has to be different. Their marketing has been to drive people to the website because it’s the portal to connect to everything up here. If that’s declining, what’re they doing? For example, in the Top 10 sources for this month’s report, Facebook isn’t one of the Top 10. If Facebook doesn’t get them to the websites, what’s the value? Nelson said the current national figures show that 50% of people are using mobile devices as opposed to laptop/desktops for the Internet. Kufrin said whether it’s mobile or desktop, if the search engines of Google, Bing, etc. are used, it should show up. The Top 10 doesn’t reflect mobile apps. Nelson felt that may be a metrics/measuring problem.

Consideration of Approving Reports and Payables plus Receipts to Date
Nelson moved to approve the reports and payables; Larson seconded. Kufrin is concerned about the check to the DCVB; we didn’t receive quarterly reports in 2010 as we were supposed to, and we haven’t received any to date this year. When the Commission modified the agreement and switched to paying directly instead of reimbursements, part of the agreement was getting quarterly financials. We didn’t get 2010’s until the end of 2010; that’s not the reporting schedule they’d committed to, and now Moneypenny says there are audit anomalies. Kufrin’s not sure what it means. Starr asked if they provide monthly statements; no, they don’t. Kufrin talked to Moneypenny early in the year about trying to wrap up the audit, get the quarterlies out. There’s no reason to wait for the audit for a quarterly report; Kufrin didn’t need to tie the quarterlies to the audit. Nelson felt that’s valid; he wouldn’t want to withhold the May check, but it should be communicated that there’s a split vote. Weddig said if the DCVB is reporting monthly to its own Board, just send it to us, too; he would feel comfortable having Kerber Rose look it over if the DCVB didn’t want it disseminated widely.

Kufrin said in the past, Moneypenny made the presentation and we’ve agreed it’s a bottom-line budget; they have so much money and a plan. There are big ticket items, and if they need to reduce one item and apply it to something else, that’s fine. But if we were seeing quarterly reports, we’d have a sense that they’d made the adjustments; that was part of our agreement. He’s concerned we’re approving payments when the DCVB is not living up to their contractual agreement. Starr asked if we’ve gotten copies of the audit. Kufrin said not in a timely manner. He wants to see a differentiation between the marketing budget and the membership budget. Section 5(b) reads: “The Commission shall distribute the 66% share of the monthly room tax revenues collected to the Bureau subject to the following conditions: first that the Bureau provide the Commission with quarterly financial statements in sufficient detail as determined by the Commission; second provide the Commission with a copy of the Bureau’s annual audit and, third, that the Commission has sufficient cash reserves to pay the current and next month’s estimated expenses.”

Kufrin felt if Moneypenny is unsure what we’d like to see on a quarterly, have him say, “Here’s two versions, which one do you like?” Previous, it was budget versus spent. Would we have seen the anomalies if we’d been seeing quarterlies? We’re eight months into the year before previous year’s audit is complete. Weddig reiterated that he wants to know what they’re telling the Board. Nelson felt there might be a bad sentence in the management letter and Moneypenny wants a chance to explain it. Kufrin said if that happens in a municipality, you give people the audit and have an answer to the management letter addressing any negatives and stating the reasons and/or how they will be fixed. Nelson wanted to make sure Moneypenny knows it was a split vote on paying the DCVB. Starr would want Moneypenny to know about the lengthy discussion on lack of reports, and that things are going to get more serious if the DCVB doesn’t begin regular reporting. Larson said we’re not asking them to do more work, just give what the DCVB Board gets monthly. Kufrin said initially the DCVB had issues getting its accounting organized; he’d hoped they’d been settled a long time ago. Starr felt the DCVB financials should go to Lensert for her interpretation. Weddig agreed. Nelson felt we just need to see income and expenditures. Question called: passed 4 yeas, Kufrin nay.

Consideration of a Resolution Supporting Continued Funding of the Peninsular Agricultural Research Station
Kufrin noted in packet materials about the Peninsular Agricultural Research Station, which will suffer a substantial reduction in funding and could lead to its closure. The DCEDC is trying to get letters from various groups to uphold the funding. The hope is that a lot of support will avoid the $125,000 cut. Kufrin’s impression is that if the station stopped for six months or a year, it won’t be maintained. Weddig asked if the cut was specific for this station or was it an across-the-board chop; it was not specific. Starr said the University of Wisconsin system is getting less funding from the State and just looked at general ways to cut; they assumed the Peninsular Agricultural Research Station duties could be merged into the facility outside of Madison. Kufrin’s asked that the Executive Committee approve some form of a resolution to urge against cutting the funding; if that station goes away, the support for cherry/apple/buy local ag tourism will suffer. Starr moved that the Commission send a letter to UW-Madison signed by the Chair that the Tourism Zone Commission endorses the letter written by the DCEDC to support the Peninsular Agricultural Research Station and avoid cuts. Kufrin felt time is of the essence. Skare seconded. All ayes.

Discussion on Actions for Intergovernmental Agreement, Bylaws, Entity Agreement, and any compliance changes to be signed/renewed by January 1, 2012
Nelson revisited the idea of having alternate Commission/Executive Committee meetings. He felt it might be creating two classes of representation. He felt it should be inclusive, a full Commission meeting every time, even if the meetings are every other month or eight a year. (Kirkland reminded that checks must be approved/signed monthly.) He also felt there should be term limits for officers; it’s a good thing to change management now and then. Kufrin said many organizations have a vice-chair that moves up to chair, and that’s certainly viable. Commission officers have barely changed since the beginning. He had hoped the Executive Committee would serve as a training ground for future leadership; get people more involved. Skare and Nelson felt the Executive Committee should meet if there’s immediate action required; ad hoc motions between meetings. Kufrin said it will be placed on the agenda for the August meeting. The committee was originally created because of quorum issues at full Commission meetings. Starr said if he weren’t on the Executive Committee, he would say, “I want an executive committee,” a smaller group, more educated about the inner workings, that could then come to the Commission with recommendations. Kufrin understands Nelson’s point but we do have to redo all the agreements, local ordinances, making sure everything is edited to match. Trying to engage the entire Board to all the detailed tasks would be challenging at best. Larson felt there should be an ad hoc committee for that; Starr would rather ask members about the regularity of meetings. Larson felt there should be term limits for the Executive Committee as well as officers. Kufrin said the ad hoc committee for the updates on the legal agreements will be this Executive Committee, which has the expertise and background on the agreements.

Adjournment
Starr moved and Larson second to adjourn. All ayes. The meeting adjourned at 11:30 a.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Kathy Kirkland
Administrative Assistant

View all from: 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007