More than 30 years after Fayetteville voters established the Advertising and Promotion Commission and a tax on restaurant food and hotels to support its mission, one would think the intricacies of doing its work would be figured out. One would also be wrong.
That may change next month when commission members are scheduled to debate policies about how to distribute commission money for events that draw visitors to Fayetteville. The commission needs this debate and a resolution that provides clear guidance for future decisions.
Last week, observers got a sample of just how contentious the issue can become.
The commission had about $95,000 ready to dole out to organizations planning local events. Over the years, the list of events in the biennial rounds of funding has represented everything from a massive motorcycle rally to gay pride observances.
As it has before, the University of Arkansas sought money for specific events. A private event organizer, All Sports Productions, also sought money. Other events arise from nonprofit organizations.
Before the commission voted, Commissioner Matthew Petty, who is also a city alderman, made an impassioned plea against giving money to the university to support hosting NCAA tournaments for baseball, gymnastics and cross country track. He cited the university’s $75.6 million annual athletic budget.
“The university doesn’t need the money. I think this is just about how (they) can cut costs,” Petty said.
Likewise, Petty and Hannah Withers objected to a $13,000 grant to All Sports, which puts on the annual Joe Martin Stage Race for cyclists and the Tri-Sport Kid’s Triathlon.
In a world where many public bodies simply rubber stamp what’s put before them, we appreciate the debate over how this public money should be allocated. Yet we’re still convinced the commission can and should establish a clear definition of the kinds of events to receive money. This debate shouldn’t happen with every round of funding.
We dispute the contention the commission should establish a form of means testing that excludes applicants who might have other sources of money.
The purpose of this tax is to draw people to town so they can spend their money in local restaurants, hotels and retail shops. We’re talking about events that could just as easily be planned and executed elsewhere. If local incentive money would make a difference in drawing an event to town, what does it matter if organizers have other sources of revenue available? The key is getting it to Fayetteville.
Secondly, some of the money should also be devoted to providing start-up money for new local ventures that will hopefully blossom into successful operations that can stand on their own. Commission money should not simply become an annual allocation to shore up an event lacking enough support to be self-sufficient.
Does it draw people to Fayetteville who spend money and does it represent the kinds of events that make Fayetteville attractive to those visitors immediately and in the future? That’s the guiding question.
This doesn’t mean the UA should receive commission support for Razorback football games or similar events that would happen on campus regardless. But if the UA is trying to host a three-day all-star sports event and local sponsorship will help seal the deal, that’s a good investment of advertising and promotion tax revenue.
Opinion, Pages 5 on 12/23/2013