Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVPCMinutes_2011_08_291 Promotions Committee Meeting Minutes – August 29, 2011 City Hall Present: Victoria Blatchford, Anthony Sutton, Jameson Berreth, Jerry Miller, Amy Einspahr, Leah Brink, Didem Koroglu, Tom Jones, Tom Richter, Deb Garbers and Bridgit Burghardt. Chairperson Blatchford called the meeting to order at 12:23 p. Agenda additions: Blatchford requested to add 2012 budget request as 3a. Jones motioned to approve the agenda, Miller seconded. Motion carries. July 25 Minutes: Miller motioned to approve, Einspahr seconded. Motion Carries. Financials: Einspahr motioned to approve, Koroglu seconded. Discussion: Blatchford mentioned the third b tax information was missing. Burghardt explained we have not received updated information; it will be included next month. Einspahr questioned the Jason DeRulo concert post evaluation numbers, as to why only 3,000 people attended. Sutton explained it was held at the end of the semester and some students have big tests before finals. Ideally it would have been held on a weekend to keep students in Brookings. Brink questioned if most in attendance were students? Yes. Einspahr added the return on investment was lower, wonder if there are better events for a better draw. 2012 Budget Update: Sutton informed the committee at the August 23rd City Council meeting Council Member Thorpe motioned to reallocate $15,000 from the Visitor Promotions Committee and allocate to DBI. The council talked through a number of scenarios, but the motion was made to reallocate from VPC to DBI. Blatchford questioned where the Business Development District was at in their planning? Garbers explained a small portion, if the tax is passed, would be implemented for 2012. Richter added the Swiftel operating budget was cut to balance the budget. Richter mentioned the council will again discuss the budget tomorrow night. Blatchford questioned if there would be comment taken during the special meeting? Sutton responded he was not sure if there will be comment taken. Sutton mentioned the city manager had asked for some information from DBI but had not received it. They are in the process of getting him the information. If they do that, they will get the funds. Brink questioned if it was clear what DBI would use the funds for? No. Miller mentioned sales tax drive the city, what DBI does is important. They were instrumental in the downtown streetscape. Burghardt will resend the Visitor Promotions 2012 budget request to the committee. Branding Update: Koroglu informed the committee she would not be continuing as the brand manager. It has been a great opportunity. The marketing plan is in place. We are starting to see the brand, it’s becoming tangible. Two projects have not been completed over the summer, the movie theatre advertising and the billboards still need to be updated. TV Productions produces the ads for the theatre and Koroglu has spoken with them regarding advertisements. Completed projects include the hotel binders and ice cream coupons. We do not yet have numbers regarding the ice cream coupons. Blatchford informed the committee there is a quick survey on the back of the coupon. Brink questioned if staff knows the customer should be completing the survey? Garbers responded they have been told, but we do not work with their employees. 2 Koroglu continued, the program with the Children’s Museum, partnered with CVB and the Children’s Museum to offer a free return ticket to children on field trips. Information regarding return on investment for May and June was included in the packet. On average, 3.06 people are coming per ticket. Next year, hope to find more partners for a program like this. Koroglu pointed out the city vehicles have been branded. This was a partnership with the city. Good visual for $2,500. People are seeing the brand all over town. Internet Web Presence: began with brookingssd.com as the portal page. We need to look at how we present ourselves, look at how we can improve our message. The information on the BEDC page has been updated. The City and Chamber sites have both gone live. There have been a number of discussions regarding the best way to attract visitors to Brookings. On April 28 Koroglu presented a suggestion for the use of branding dollars to the Chamber board, with a goal to enhance the visitor portion of the web site. The Chamber board motioned to form a task force of board members and staff to work on this project. On July 14 a group of community members who are involved in aspects of our visitor industry on a daily basis, met to discuss ways a website could accomplish this goal . The group identified who the website visitor is and what information they would be looking for. From that discussion, 13 different visitor groups or segments were identified, each with their own specific needs or information they would be accessing. The goal is to provide a visitor friendly look with easy to navigate tabs make the site easy to navigate and ultimately help attract visitors to Brookings. Based on all of the information, we are proposing a user friendly visitors landing page accessible through the Chamber or brookingssd.com website. The landing page would be under the visitors tab on the Chamber site. Koroglu added we need to write the content well. This is a work in progress and need to add key words. Blatchford mentioned the next step is request to be on the September agenda for the Chamber board and give them an update. Koroglu mentioned we have a lot more to do and the budget is not getting bigger. There are still expenses that will come out of this year’s budget, including: $5,000 for the Chamber sign, $15,000 for the website, $3,600 for the Movie ads and $2,500 for the billboard redesign. The marketing plan includes “must dos” for next year and the total cost for those is $44,000. This includes the community guide, branded merchandise, ice cream coupons, billboard updates, Children’s Museum ticket program, movie theatre ads and hotel binders. Miller questioned if the $44,000 includes a contracted position? Blatchford responded no, nor does it provide for new initiatives. Brink questioned if the research says a brand manager is essential? Koroglu explained based on experience, people do this on a full-time base. All entities do marketing and need someone with marketing experience. Blatchford added there is a significant amount of money invested towards visitors. Sutton added we need to push forward and do more. Staying the same is not acceptable. Need to think about what is best for the investment. Brink added a large amount has been invested in this project and we do not want to see it flop. Discussion included a possible brand manager to be a fulltime position, with key entities being Chamber, CVB, VPC, City and BEDC. They would share this person, with the person responsible for the marketing dollars. Richter mentioned this will be a tough sell as most groups are funded in some way with city funds. There needs to be more discussion. Miller questioned when the brand contract is up? Blatchford responded it ended in July. Blatchford added these entities do not have a fulltime person doing marketing. Koroglu mentioned this was in North Stars recommendations, they saw how fragmented we were. 3 Blatchford explained Visitor Promotions does not have the funds to fund a person. Blatchford offered to start the conversation with the different entities. Garbers mentioned if this person is to work with all entities, they will get pulled in all different directions by each entity. Koroglu responded this is a hard position, not ideal, but the funds have to come from somewhere. Garbers added if position was an employee of one of the entities, it might help. Miller questioned who would employee this person? Garbers mentioned if it was under the CVB, we have to get approval through the Chamber board. Blatchford reiterated she will start the conversations and will bring back to the committee in September. We do not want to lose momentum. Convention Report: Garbers reported the tournament funds are depleted. We received the Wildlife Convention as an emergency convention due to the flooding in Pierre. Everything secured with VPC funds is above what could have been done through CVB. The events at the bottom of the report in red are events that are coming but funds have not been committed. We are watching the budget discussions closely. If the funding stops, we stop. We can’t commit funds we do not have. This is the best tournament activity in 15 years. Blatchford mentioned the Businesses Development meetings and questioned if a sports commission is needed or if the focus should be conventions? Garbers responded they have only had one meeting and the top recommendation would be Sun-Tue. convention recruitment. The committee meets again tomorrow and will make recommendations to the council. Hoteliers want to focus on what will make them money. Richter added sports are up substantially, with sports being mainly weekend business. More business will drive a need for more hotels, making the weekday business more of an issue. Richter added more discussion is needed regarding adequate convention space. Third Year Funding Policy: Richter mentioned some groups look at the funds as sponsorships and some events rely heavily on sponsorships. Jones questioned if he was talking about supercross and rodeo? Richter responded yes. Miller asked if he was afraid they will not come back? Richter responded yes, maybe they will. Three years is not very long. Garbers mentioned this opens the door for those that are profitable. If not profitable, plug into the media program. If profitable and they need the funding, the application will come back to the committee. Blatchford explained this will allow us to focus on new events. Blatchford mentioned she likes how the policy reads now, if it’s a good event and need funding, it’s sent back our way. Blatchford questioned if this causes the application to not fit within the quarterly cycle, questioned if the committee is ok to review applications monthly? Committee was ok with reviewing monthly. Sutton questioned if we should revise the last sentence to say SDSU student funds? Garbers mentioned student fund application should stay with the committee. Blatchford added they will still be accepted monthly. Sutton motioned to approve the policy with the last sentence to read SDSU student funds, Brink seconded. Miller questioned when the policy becomes effective? Burghardt responded in previous discussion we said the policy is retroactive and effective January 1st. Burghardt questioned if the committee would like the policy to be sent along with a letter to previous applicants? Committee feels this would be best. Burghardt will draft a letter. Motion carries. Berreth motioned to adjourn, Sutton seconded. Meeting adjourned at 2:05p.