BY KEVIN HOLSAPPLE
Los Alamos
Member Lodgers’ Tax Advisory Board

Councilors,

Here are comments and questions that I request that you address concerning agenda item AGR1163-25 on tonight’s Council agenda:

Contract for General Services, Agreement No. AGR26-05 with Global Vista Technologies, Inc. dba Destination IQ, in the Amount Not to Exceed $1,483,100, plus Applicable Gross Receipts Tax, for the Purpose of Tourism Marketing Services for a Term of Three Years

1.  As an Lodgers’ Tax Advisory Board (LTAB) member, I have had very limited exposure or opportunity to provide input into the agreement or selection of the contractor.  This is contrary to my understanding of the advisory purpose of the LTAB as detailed in our work plan. If Lodger Tax funds are used to fund any part of the contract, please be aware that the LTAB has not reviewed the agreement nor had any opportunity to provide a recommendation to the Council for these expenditures. This follows a pattern of bypassing the LTAB.  The September LTAB meeting was canceled once again.

2.  Question: Who was on the evaluation team, and what was any experience on the evaluation team pertaining to destination marketing?

3. Although the agreement includes a provision requiring “Methods for tracking visitation and visitor spending data, including, but not limited to, geofencing and mobile location tracking,” there is no corresponding metric clearly defined in the agreement.  Our visitor and tourism activity metrics need to shift from simply measuring visitor counts, clicks, and website visits to demonstrating the economic contribution in terms of Visitor Spending (Direct Expenditures) as the fundamental indicator of economic benefits.  There needs to be a metric in the agreement concerning direct visitor expenditures.  It is more important than any of the metrics presented.

4.  I like that DestinationIQ marketing materials express a belief that “Tourism thrives when destinations put locals first, building stronger communities, authentic experiences, and long-term stability for visitors,” and in “the importance of local business and community involvement in tourism promotion activities,” but none of this comes through strongly in the work required in the agreement.  I think this is a serious shortcoming – an example of how LTAB involvement may have greatly improved what is being proposed.

Question you should ask DestinationIQ tonight: “Specifically, how will your work embody your stated belief that ‘Tourism thrives when destinations put locals first, building stronger communities, authentic experiences, and long-term stability for visitors,’ and engage and involve local business participation?”

I suspect this may be presented as another case of being backed into a corner, where a decision needs to be rubber-stamped, but I would encourage you to refer the agreement to the LTAB for consideration, enhancement, and recommendation to the Council in accordance with our work plan.