Month: April 2008

The list of challenges facing Branson as the 2008 tourist season starts, includes gas prices, rising prices for food and just about everything else, the general economy and its impact on the willingness of people to travel, localized flooding, etc. Yet, there is another challenge that is equally as important, the challenge of having a workforce that insures that visitors to Branson have an experience that will bring them back again.

Branson spends millions of dollars on marketing to bring people to Branson and entrepreneurs spend millions of dollars building lodging, restaurants, theatres, attractions, shopping and other facilities to meet the needs of those visitors while they are in Branson. In addition, the Branson area has a variety of outdoor activities from fly fishing to golf that should be the envy of any of her competitors. Yet at the end of the day, what will determine the ultimate success of Branson is the interface between the visitor and Branson’s workforce.

The first, and most obvious situation, is the actual one on one personal contact between a member of the Branson workforce and a visitor as that person provides a service directly to the visitor. That personal contact may come through serving a meal, checking someone in at a hotel, guiding on a fishing trip, ushering at a show, taking tickets at an attraction or anyone of a myriad of other activities where the experience the Branson visitor is going to have is directly related to a personal interaction with a member of Branson’s workforce.

The second and not so obvious situation is where there is no direct personal contact between a member of Branson’s workforce and visitors because the service provided is done so behind the scenes and generally requires no direct contact with visitors. These situations would involve cooks, food prep personnel, dishwashers, grounds keepers, maintenance personnel, and the many other services that generally do not involve personal interaction between the person providing the service and the visitor.

As an example, a Branson visitor and their family decide to eat at one of Branson’s fine restaurants. From the time they walk through the door until the time they leave, the experience they will have is not in the direct hands of the investors or owners, who may have spent hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars building the facility and a bundle more for its daily operating costs, it’s in the hands of Branson’s workforce.

From the greeter to the cashier taking the payment, the experience that the visitor has will, by direct or indirect contact, be influenced, either positively or negatively, by a member of Branson’s workforce. A cheerful competent server who is able to communicate with the visitor will more than likely generate a more pleasurable experience than one who is grouchy, not competent, or can’t communicate effectively with the visitor. If the visitor looks at their utensils and finds them dirty that sets the stage for an experience that would be different than if they were clean.

The adequacy of Branson’s workforce starts with having enough people to provide the level of services that Branson’s guests expect and will make them want to return. It’s not just a numbers game. The key words are “the level of services that Branson’s guests expect.”

If that doesn’t happen, for whatever reason, not a large enough workforce to provide the services, inadequate employee selection, training, or supervision etc., the millions spent on marketing and things for visitors to do when they get to Branson will have been spent in vain. At the end of the day, for most people, it is the quality and performance or Branson’s workforce that will determine the experience they have and whether or not they will return to Branson.

Just about every day, families separate each morning to go their separate ways for the day, to school, play, work or to do a myriad of other things and activities that occupy our day. The constant, so often taken for granted, is the presumption that, at the end of the day, the family will again come together. How different those morning separations would be if the family knew that one of them wasn’t going to return that night.

On August 3, 2004, James Turner, left his family and went to his job with the city of Branson’s Public Works Department. Although he had no way of knowing and no control over the events that were to unfold that day; he would not be returning to his family that night, or on any night.

On that same day Richard Toeneboehn left his family and went about his daily activities. Although he had no way of knowing it, his path would cross with that of James Turner later that day under circumstances over which he had complete control.

Unfortunately, because of the way he exercised that control, James Turner would not be returning to his family that night and both Toeneboehn and the workers working with Turner at the time will, more than likely, have the horrible results of Toeneboehn’s failure to do a simple thing forever inscribed in their memory. That simple thing was to slow down in a marked work zone or when there are workers, emergency responders, or police officers in plain view working at the side of the road.

The words used by Larry Vangilder, Director of Public Works for the city of Branson, at Toenebohen’s sentencing hearing, after he pled guilty to the Class D Felony of Involuntary Manslaughter in the 2nd Degree, provide a vivid account of what happened. Vangilder said, “On August 3, 2004, James Turner, one of our employees, and his fellow workers, some of whom are here today, were safely and responsibly fulfilling the duties of their jobs by weed eating on Gretna Road in the City of Branson. Work zone signage was in place. All workers, including James Turner, were wearing safety vests and personal protective equipment.”

Vangilder continues, “Without any warning, a car driven by the defendant [Toeneboehn] left the driving lanes of Gretna Road and tragically struck James, who was over 10 feet behind the curb. The impact threw him 40 feet through the air. As a result, James Turner died that day of his injuries and was taken from his family forever.” He also expressed his opinion that, “The manner in which Richard Toeneboehn was driving was clearly reckless, thoughtless and totally oblivious of our workers in a clearly marked work zone.

In an Ole Seagull’s opinion, based on the facts as stated above, it is inconceivable to him that James Turner would not still be with us but for the reckless actions of Toeneboehn and his failure to simply slow down while going through a work zone. One can only wonder what a difference there would be in the lives of the Turner family, the workers present at the time of the incident, Toeneboehn and his family if he had.

Please, slow down while going through work zones or whenever workers, emergency response personnel or law enforcement officers are visible on the side of the road.

Most of those who take the time to read an opinion column in a newspaper, this one or otherwise, are not the type of “Baa, Baa” people who will blindly follow the opinion of the columnist like a sheep. Rather, among other things, most will evaluate what they are reading and, based on their own life’s experiences and interests, decide if it’s an issue they are interested in and what, if any, credence they wish to give the opinion.

To an Ole Seagull, the job of the opinion columnist is to honestly express his opinion in the hopes that it will generate discussion within the community about that topic. His columns, as is the case of the vast majority of columns written by opinion columnists, are what they are, simply the opinion of the columnist

An opinion column is not a treatise intending to fairly cover both sides of an issue nor is it necessarily balanced, fair, or unbiased. It is hopefully, a column about a topic the columnist cares, knows, and feels passionately about, written in a manner that will be interesting to the reader. Is it necessarily something that most people will agree with? No, but in the vast majority of cases, it will be something that virtually everyone will either agree or disagree with and for good reason to them.

Those reasons might be based on the readers belief that “He’s wrong,” “He’s biased,” “He didn’t include these facts which would have resulted in a different answer,” “He always writes about this topic,” “He didn’t tell the whole story,” or “This just isn’t fair,” etc. And, depending on the situation they could be right. Why, because, at the end of the day an opinion column is but the opinion of the columnist, nothing more, nothing less.

From an Ole Seagull’s perspective, whether people agree or disagree with his columns is not really important. What is important is that he has done his best to express honest opinions and make sure that the column contains the basis upon which those opinions are based so that they may be evaluated by the readers for whatever purpose.

Previously the Ole Seagull has pointed out that he has, on occasion, been questioned about what qualifications he possesses that qualify him to his write his opinions and why anyone should pay any attention to them. In order, the answers are “only his life’s experience” and “they shouldn’t unless, one way or the other, they have evaluated those opinions and find them useful in their own decision making process.”

Even if he could spew forth a list of qualifications, in the final analysis it would be a useless act and a waste of time. Abraham Lincoln said it best when he said, “If the end brings me out all right, what’s said against me won’t amount to anything. If the end brings me out wrong, ten angels swearing I was right would make no difference.”

The answer to the question, “When does $140, 732 actually equal ($87, 268) and 50 percent of $100 equal zero is, “When reality is applied to the Branson Landing TIF.” This issue came up in the excellently moderated political debate on KOMC, 100.1 FM between the candidates for Alderman in Ward 3, Jack Purvis and Chris Bohinc. For the record, this is not an endorsement of either candidate; it is a discussion of what was said regarding the Branson Landing TIF during that debate.

For those who will say, “But you only quote Purvis and not Bohinc, the Ole Seagull will simply say, “In terms of the topic of this column, you are absolutely right.” During the debate Bohinc readily admitted that she was just beginning to learn about TIFs and said nothing that would materially contribute to this column. Purvis, on the other hand not only proclaimed his experience and specifically mentioned the hundreds of hours he has spent studying the Branson Landing, but made the very statements about TIFs that are the basis of this column.

When the moderator asked a question about Branson’s current use of Tax Increment Financing (TIF) in Branson, Purvis expressed his opinion about a recent educational session on TIFs presented by the Branson School District (District) at the Branson High School. He said, “We recently had an expert, that came to town and went out to the high school. He was here to try to enlighten us on TIFs.” Purvis went on to say, “He talked all around the subject” and “the whole discussion was in relationship to the schools.”

During the debate while discussing the presentation, Purvis said, “When I asked how much income is generated in the Branson TIF District the expert did not know. I’m no expert but the information is a matter of public record from the Taney County Collectors office. The school revenues at the Landing development, before the TIF to the school was $56, 630.” He went on to point out, “After the Branson Landing development the revenue to the school was $140,732, up 242 percent.”

And what a picture book story it would be if the reality of the situation ended there, but it doesn’t. Purvis also said that Branson Landing created 1500 new jobs. As a general rule, jobs attract people who generally have families. Is it unreasonable to believe that some of those families are going to have children that require an education? Currently, in the District, it requires about $5,700 in local funding each year for each child to provide that education.

If we assume that only 40 new children came into the Branson schools as the result of Branson Landing that would cost the District $228,000 per year. According to Purvis, the District would get $140,732 for a shortfall of $87, 268 per year. Over a period of ten years that would be a shortfall of $872,680. Where does the additional money to make up the shortfall caused by the TIF development come from? The real estate taxes paid by the owners of the residential and commercial property not covered by the Branson Landing, or some other, TIF.

When it comes to the sales tax aspect of the Branson Landing TIF, Purvis said that only 50 percent of the sales tax revenues goes to pay off the TIF and that “The rest of the 50 percent goes back to the city of Branson.” Well, that’s sure the way the state statute envisioned it and the way it works at Branson Hills and a lot of other TIFs, but it’s not the way it works with the Branson Landing TIF. According to information received from the city of Branson, 100 percent of the city-imposed sales taxes collected at Branson Landing are assigned to pay back the TIF bonds.

Some might ask, “Hey wait a minute, does that mean that the city is getting nothing in sales tax revenues from Branson Landing for the tens of millions it has invested in Branson Landing?” Surely they mean it as a rhetorical question, don’t they?

Ironically, even as Branson is seemingly trying to evolve away from the history, heritage, and the type of entertainment that attracts millions to it every year, at least one other “Branson wannabee” appears interested in emulating that very thing. Well sort of.

The good folks in Houston County, Alabama are in the process of investing hundreds of millions of dollars to launch a new 776 acre country entertainment Mecca allegedly based on the same country entertainment and business paradigm that has made Branson so successful. An article entitled, “Country music resort similar to Branson, Mo. planned for county” by Lance Griffin, appearing in the Dothan Eagle on Feb. 25, reports that the Houston County Commission has signed an agreement with Ronnie Gilley Properties, LLC for the development of Country Crossing, a project that will become a national tourist destination.

According to the agreement the project is intended “to consist of all the attractions and venues found in destinations like Branson, Missouri.” The article goes on to report that one of the principals in the project said that the only comparison that can be made to Country Crossing is Branson, Missouri because of the great demand for a family oriented venue. That same person said, “Branson has flourished despite its extremely remote location.”

The article further reports Country Crossing’s Developer Ronnie Gilley as saying that he believes Country Crossing could surpass the ‘star power’ of Branson, Mo and that it is a well-created myth that top-level country music artists perform in Branson.” What’s this “myth” stuff? The article states that country music artist George Jones introduced the proposed project as “The most important new entertainment development resort in the country.”

Is it a myth or has that same George Jones appeared at the Grand Palace in Branson, Missouri in the not too distant past? Have not some of the other artists mentioned in association with the project also appeared in Branson at the Grand Palace and other venues? With seven million visitors a year coming to Branson, Jones filled how many out of the 4,000 seats in the Grand Place?

That aside however, the project is moving forward. In fact, at 6:33 p.m. on March 13, the web site of the Dothan Eagle reported, “About 776 acres of land just off Highway 231 South near West Smithville Road and State Highway 109 will be the site of the proposed Country Crossing development. Developer Ronnie Gilley confirmed the deal to the Dothan Eagle at 5:30 p.m. Thursday after the final contract was signed.” Gilley indicated that he hopes that construction can start within 90 days.

Is the project competition for Branson? In the general sense that any other destination is “Yes” but in terms of direct competition “Not a chance.” Why? Branson’s family entertainment industry has been developing for over a century and thanks to pioneers like the Snadon, Mabe, Pressley, and Herschend families, to mention just a few, it is more than a trite label or marketing ploy, it is part of our very spirit and who we are.

Just before the Houston County Commission made the agreement for the project, it introduced and unanimously passed new regulations for charitable bingo in Houston County. Under the new regulations electronic bingo would be allowed in Houston County only under certain requirements, including at least $2 million in liability insurance, on-site security, and the inclusion of other entertainment related developments such as restaurants, hotels, dinner theaters and a venue seating no less than 3,144 for entertainment purposes. For all practical purposes the “electronic bingo machines” are very similar to slot machines in both looks and results.

To an Ole Seagull that says volumes about just how committed the county and the project are to family entertainment and what the project is really intended to be. It might end up being a Bingo for them with gambling and entertainment but, from its very inception, that is what it will be and that’s not what brings millions of visitors to Branson. At least for now, Branson is still that special place with that special spirit that can’t be built or developed but can be lost if those to whom the gift is given don’t cherish and protect it.