Can anyone tell an Ole Seagull how the terms “promotion” and “tourism,” as used in the legislation authorizing the spending of tourism tax dollars for marketing, can be so broadly interpreted in Hollister and so restrictively interpreted in Branson? In Hollister the terms have been interpreted broadly enough to authorize the expenditure of tourism tax revenues to build sewer and water infrastructure.
Yet, at a meeting of the Branson Lakes Area Tourism Community Enhancement District (TECD), conducted on Sep. 18, they were interpreted so restrictively that an expense for banners promoting a new local event might not be appropriate because, among other things, the banners were to be displayed locally and were not considered “destination marketing.” Which interpretation is right?
In an Ole Seagull’s opinion, as most people commonly understand the use of the terms “promotion” and “tourism, the simple straight answer is, “Neither.” Hollister appears to be have gone beyond the scope of the “promotion” and “tourism” authorized in the legislation while, in practical terms, the TCED’s potentially extremely restrictive interpretation could prevent the use of tourism marketing funds for expenses where they are authorized. Some might ask, “Can’t the TCED be more restrictive than the law authorizes?” The answer is “Yes,” but why would they want to be?
Branson’s future does not lie in “buildings or things.” It lies in the effectiveness of how Branson is marketed. If Branson is marketed effectively the “buildings and things” will come naturally as a result. On the other hand “buildings and things,” without effective marketing, will naturally produce very little that is of benefit to either their owners or the community.
The Ole Seagull is getting on up in age and doesn’t get excited too often but this week, while attending a meeting of the TCED, was one of those times. The reason for the excitement was an idea presented to the board during a presentation by the Titanic’s Mary Kellogg on behalf of the CVB/District Marketing Committee.
The idea relates to an expansion on the “Ozark Mountain” brand from “Ozark Mountain Christmas” into “Ozark Mountain Spring” and encompasses the time span starting with the NAIA Division II Basketball Tournament in March until Memorial Day. It will tie all the events happening during that time frame into the brand, and will involve one or more new events of national significance designed, over time, to bring tens of thousands of people to Branson.
The idea is exciting on two fronts. One is the opportunity to have tens of thousands of people coming to the Ozarks during the normally slack Spring period. The second is the opportunity to market the area to those people while they are here in the area in an effort to get them to stay longer, spend more money while they are here, and to return for one of the other events that are part of Ozark Mountain Spring or later in the year for another festival, show, or activity, etc.
Although the TCED Board endorsed the concept and indicated a conditional willingness to support the effort with up to $150,000, the term “destination marketing” kept coming up as the board went over some of the individual items on the event’s tentative budget. On more than one occasion one of the board members used the term “destination marketing” as the gauge of whether or not an expense would be authorized using TCED Funds. A person listening could have got the impression that any local marketing expenses for banners, advertising expenses, etc. from TCED funds would not be appropriate and that the term “destination marketing” meant expenses for marketing outside of the Branson area. Oh, please say it isn’t so!
The specific wording authorizing the expenditure of the tourism tax collected by TCED specifically states it “shall be used by the board for marketing, advertising, and promotion of tourism, the administration thereof, and a reasonable reserve.” The enabling legislation contains no definition of the term “marketing,” “advertising,” “promotion,” or “tourism.” More importantly, the term “destination marketing” does not appear anywhere in the legislation.
Does it take a legal Solomon to read the enabling legislation and say, there is no such limitation except, obviously in the minds of those TCED board members who would attempt to impose such a limitation? Can anyone explain to an Ole Seagull why marketing to our visitors while they are in Branson, in an effort to enhance their Branson experience and encourage them to come back is not as important as the marketing done to get them to come to Branson in the first place? …He didn’t think so.
