Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVPCMinutes_2008_06_02Promotions Committee Meeting Minutes – June 2, 2008 City Hall Present: Victoria Blatchford, Rod Schaefer, Bob Johnson, Tom Jones, Amy Einspahr, Lynn Darnall, Jeff Weldon, Al Heuton, Bridgit Burghardt, Deb Garbers, Doris Roden and Tom Richter. Absent Jerry Miller, Chris Daugaard, and Zeno Wicks III • Blatchford called the meeting to order and called for any agenda changes. • Presentation: Scott Peterson– Special American Society of Mammoligists Conventions-June 20-24, 2008-Request $10,000 There will be a number of events. Convention participants and their families will be in Brookings. Question into how the group worked with CVB? Garbers answered CVB committed hotel rooms and hospitality room to be paid directly to the hotel. Also gave them $300 for their budget. This commitment was made at least a year ago. • Attendance: 1625 • Out of town: 95%-1544 (81 local ) • 1st person lodging: 100x $104=$10,400x4 nights=$41,600 • 2nd person lodging: 100x $40=$4,000x4 nights=$16,000 • Commuters: 744x $40= $29,760 • $41,600+16,000 +29,760 =$87,360 x 1.8=$157,248 estimated impact • Local retention: 81x$10=$810x4=$3,240 • April 28th Minutes: Schaefer moved to approve. Einspahr seconded. Motion carries. • Financials: Einspahr moved to approve. Jones seconded. Question into if the funds awarded to the Summit League and if they are being used? Heuton answered not at this time, they are still in the account. Question into the report, wondering why if the UPC Concert did not happen, and no funds were used, why is it still listed on the sheet? Burghardt answered it is on the sheet just for reporting purposes. No funds were ever sent to the event. Motion carries. • Voting on American Society of Mammoligists-June 20-24, 2008-Request: $10,000 Blatchford mentioned she thought the Convention Funds transferred to CVB were to be used to attract new conventions. There was no direction of how the funds are to be used. Garbers explained the process regarding conventions. Work with the different entities in order to negotiate prices to get the most use out of funds. Einspahr expressed that it is the CVB job to handle this sort of thing and to let her do it. Einspahr motioned to refer the application to CVB. Johnson seconded. Johnson added that he understood when transferred funds to CVB, they were to be used as CVB sees fit. Einspahr questioned if the convention will be back? Peterson answered its not likely. Blatchford asked that at the next meeting, Garbers give an update on the funds and how they are used. Motion carries. • Application and Criteria Review: Burghardt presented to the Committee the current applications and criteria being used, and proposed changes to both. Johnson questioned if an event was at the country club, is it not eligible for funds? If something during the event is held in Brookings, would they be eligible? Weldon answered that nothing associated with the cost of the event can be held outside of town is eligible, would have to handle almost as two events. Johnson questioned if the applicant could specify what the funds would be used for, and if that part was taking place in town? Blatchford specify what city facilities will be using-if these are outside of Brookings, ineligible. Question where quality of life fits into the new criteria? Einspahr added past judgments focused on community not just city. Regarding the ineligible applicants, question into if you can bid political conventions? Heuton added it would discourage anyone who wants to campaign. Conventions endorse a candidate. We do not tell groups what they can and can not use the money for. Schaefer mentioned there is a difference between a rally and a convention. Johnson suggested maybe ask City Attorney what we should say. Heuton mentioned possibly listing political conventions to eligible programs. Heuton explained that if someone wanted to run for Governor and applied for funds, they would not be eligible. Blatchford questioned leaving it the way it is, or change individuals to promotion. If a political party would like to come in, they will contact the CVB, having individual in the criteria is good so we know they are not eligible. If someone wants funds, they have to come and apply and the committee can decide then what to do with the application. Questioned which funding source does this address? This addresses the Third B tax. When the Third B tax started, it was in the CVB, now it is separate. Weldon offered to check where the funds come from regarding the CVB. Einspahr questioned if the proposed criteria, fits the Student funds? Student funds are used to keep college kids in Brookings. Each event is looked at separately, student events and quality of life events keep people in town. Question if the students need a separate application. If this is a competitive process and based off the criteria, it is easy to say what gets funds, and economic impact is part of process. Need to encourage use of Student funds, each year allocate dollars to the student funds. It’s good to have input from student representatives, the committee as a whole makes the award decision. Weldon questioned if this is something in writing? Questioned if the Student funds are not used, do the funds go back in the general fund? The Student funds are a restricted account, like the Swiftel Center funds. Question into how the student representatives are appointed? When the Third B tax vote happened there was an agreement made regarding the number of representatives and specific dollar amounts. Heuton question if students should have a separate application, should we have separate application for all types of funds? Einspahr mentioned the students are a different ballgame. Heuton expressed the City Resolution says economic impact and out of town. Regarding Quality of Life events, it is difficult to prove economic impact. Question if quality of life is mostly for locals? Heuton added it is in the City Resolution, need to follow that to the letter that is the intent of the Council. Could go to council and ask for more latitude, but probably will not change unless state law changes. The Resolution does not make room for quality of life. Believe it was intended that quality of life events be one use of funds. Garbers added that in some cities, the City Council handles the applications. Roden added she was on the council during the time this was being discussed, there was some concern regarding one person allocating all of the funds. Heuton suggested we need to go back to the City Resolution that is our direction. Blatchford added Resolution 83-04 set up allocation of funds. Heuton explained we will work on applications, for the different funds. Johnson if separate application, applicant decides where funds come from. Heuton added we need clear criteria; help decide what application the organization should fill out. Richter questioned if a concert is quality of life or impact, and what the Uncle Sam Jam is classified as? He would argue they are the same thing. There is no definite line of what is what. Heuton added the council wants impact and out of town. It is a little more difficult to monitor quality of life. Blatchford added that during the May 06 Council Meeting, 83-04 allocation discussed the BEDC, Chamber, CVB, nothing about the students. Johnson questioned if it is Burghardt’s job to decide where the money should come from. Heuton suggested a check box on the application, all done with same form. Burghardt brought up the post event evaluation form and questioned how to handle not receiving the criteria in the required time frame. Roden suggested going by the thirty days until have criteria changed. Discussion into extending the timeline from 30 to 60 days, it is difficult to get the form returned within thirty days. Still have bills coming in after thirty days. This came up because the Wrestling Association did not return their post evaluation form in time. Johnson asked for an extension for the association. Johnson added the event organizers are volunteers and it is difficult for everyone to get together. Blatchford added we need to hold them accountable. Johnson suggested maximum 90 days with written permission. Richter added when the committee agreed to fund, they made the commitement the funds would be there. Blatchford questioned if we could move this to the next meeting. Will take the criteria and applications back and make changes and bring back to the next meeting. Will add the criteria/application and also the Wrestling Association to the June 30th agenda. Blatchford expressed concern regarding switching to quarterly applications and how that will be handled. Weldon suggested telling them when get application, when it will be handled. Question into how to give notice of the change? Will we have to give public notice? Weldon questioned if ever had problem with event not happening after 75% is paid? Einspahr added some need the funds ahead of time for promotion of the event. Question if there are secure measures in place, could be easy form of fraud. Suggested out of town applicants provide references. If there is concern, could ask for references during the presentation at the meeting. • Event Bid Process: Burghardt gave an overview of what could be expected during the bid process. Heuton added there are costs involved in the bid process. Johnson mentioned that conventions are handled by a bid process. We do not want to get involved in the bid process; we want local organizations to apply to have the event. Heuton questioned what a sports commission does? Johnson explained they facilitate events, they handle everything. A sports commission works with other organizations to put on tournaments. Heuton questioned if tournament applications would be handled by the sports commission? Commission goes to an association and asks theme to host an event and for their efforts, give them funding. Richter added help incentivize a group to have an event, get funds from this group to help reduce the risk. Questioned if go after event or convention, need funds to go out and get event. When you give $10,000 to basketball tournament, might have funds to get it here. Blatchford added that is why we need marketing solicitation package, a bid package. We want tournaments; put money at table to get them. All events apply for what they need. Blatchford added if they need more money, they can come back. Garbers added if we want new events, we need to provide support. Johnson suggested the commission go to the organization and encourage them to apply for funds from Promotions. Heuton expressed concern that the organizations do not apply for funds for things like comp rooms, hospitality rooms. Johnson suggested that it is the organizations responsibility to include what they need for the event. Heuton questioned how the application process would work? Do they apply for money up front to bid, and then apply for additional funds after they are awarded the tournament? Organizations have funds to put up the front money; they can get it back in the application. Generally there is no cost to bid; tournaments are not a bid process. Richter added there are exceptions to the rule. Willie Mac heard about promotions, but did not have time to apply. They requested to have the programs printed. Need to have some funds available for things like that. State Gymnastics, got money for the events, but did not include sufficient funds for the hospitality room. Heuton added it is all part of the process, outside of the application. Blatchford added we want to make the process easier. The sports commission can not be formed until we have our ducks in a row. Blatchford motioned to change the name from bid process to tournament process. Einspahr seconded. Motion carries. • 2009 Budget: Einspahr questioned if extra funds are needed in marketing? Blatchford added this will be a change in what we have been funding, more focused. Question into hosting program for tournaments? Those funds are intended to be used for things like hospitality room during state tournaments and that sort of thing. Concern the ball will get dropped for those types of things that are expected. That would be something the sports commission would take ownership of. It will take a while for the Sports Commission to get organized, need to plan for the tournaments coming up. Blatchford motioned to add the budget discussion to the June 30th meeting. Johnson seconded. Motion carries. • Branding Discussion: Blatchford motioned to move add the branding discussion to the June 30th meeting. Schaefer seconded. Motion carries. •Motion to adjourn by Schaefer, seconded by Einspahr. Meeting adjourned at 2:52pm.