By Guest Columnist Donna Joy
Sedona, AZ — With all the many news articles and posting going around Sedona, it is time to slow it down and think it through.
Research proves many of these are opinion based, not factual pertaining to the Sedona Chamber and the City of Sedona. Headlines such as “Sedona must repeal the 0.5% bed tax if no plans to spend on marketing” have created knee-jerk emotional reactions. There are different sources of these types of headlines feeding the misinformation campaign.
For any of you who know me, I’m not too fond of confusion, details matter, and misinformation hurts our community. When in doubt I research it and for that reason I repurposed DonnaJoys.com.
Research proves that Destination Marketing is much more than marketing — it’s destination management. This complex issue has many moving parts including planning, infrastructure, environment, education, and much more.
So what is Fact or Fiction in regard to Destination Marketing?
What is a Destination Marketing Organization (DMO), and who is supposed to be the DMO?
- Under state law Destination Marketing Organizations activity must be owned by a governmental agency (city or county).
- The DMO (Destination Marketing Organization) status is with the city or county. The city or county can then contract with others to provide DMO services.
- For Sedona, the Official Destination or DMO is the City of Sedona. The City of Sedona then contracted with the Sedona Chamber to represent the City of Sedona in Destination Marketing.
- The City of Sedona is the customer and the Chamber is a vendor.
Is the Sedona Chamber a good Destination Marketing vendor?
- In the January 2022 retreat, the Sedona City Council agreed to take a deep dive into the Chamber structure, programs, and funding. The workgroup of councilors was Ploog, Kinsella, and Lamkin.
- As a result of the “Deep Dive”, the City Council increased its understanding of the Chamber structure and membership.
- It was revealed that the Sedona Chamber was only marketing for its membership. That membership includes businesses throughout the State of Arizona and only 39% of Sedona tourism businesses. In some cases, the Chamber is advertising for the outside competition of tourism businesses including other destinations.
- This was viewed as an issue by some on Sedona City Council, because the funding was city money, so all city tourism businesses should benefit.
- Some on the Council saw this as a conflict of interest. They had repeated discussions with the Chamber to find a way to separate the Chamber activities (member-based) from the Tourism Bureau activities (representing all Sedona Tourism businesses).
- Retaining the combined Chamber/Tourism Bureau structure disqualifies the Chamber from being a government model DMO, Tourism, or Visitor Bureau. 71% of the members aren’t in Tourism and or in the tourism tax area.
Action taken by the City Council and the Chamber:
- The City Council notified the Sedona Chamber on January 11th, 2023 in the annual joint meeting between the City of Sedona and the Chamber of Commerce that the City would be moving to a “Fee for Service Contract” with the Chamber. That means the Chamber would no longer be managing the DMO; the City would. If the service matched the City’s needs, the city may hire the Chamber for those tasks. The current DMO contract with Chamber would not be renewed.
- On April 5, the Chamber informed the City that they would not be pursuing a new contract with the City.
- On April 12th, the City Council voted to officially establish the City as the DMO with the Arizona Office of Tourism (AOT). AOT is the Official Office of Tourism for the State of Arizona.
Benchmarking peer cities shows that cities similar to Sedona are self-managing the DMO, outsourcing by “fee for service” items as needed – exactly what the City Council agreed to in the April 12th meeting.
What did the Chamber get out of this long-term relationship?
- Records show that over the last ten years, the Sedona Chamber of Commerce has received in excess of $20 million dollars of public funding, along with other city services, as the City’s acting DMO.
- According to the Sedona Chamber’s 2020 tax return 89% of revenue came from the City of Sedona. The Chamber membership dues are less than $300K. The estimated City licensed Chamber members are only 15% of all businesses.
- The Chambers websites, Visitor’s Center, and assets were paid with public dollars through the City of Sedona. Those will all be retained by the Chamber.
What more does the Chamber want?
- The Chamber has requested the City of Sedona to rescind the 0.5% city bed tax (the 0.5% was increased in 2014, and the current estimate of annual revenue generated by the 0.5% is $1.28 million). Their position is that money belongs to the businesses and is basically a pass-through tax.
- The City Attorney, Kurt Christianson, explained that based upon ARS 9-500.06 law, it is a City Tax, not a pass-through tax. The Council has all rights to keep it in place.
The City Council agreed to move forward with a proper, fair, balanced, and transparent tourism policy. So why are we hearing so much misinformation and why is the Chamber keeping all the assets paid for by the public? The Chamber built its army and holdings from public dollars and that is well documented.
A headline like “City Joins Chamber in Promoting Tourism” is very misleading. With so much misinformation floating around we don’t know what the Chamber members really understand. Are they assuming false narratives?
It is time for the Sedona Community to move forward. Let’s collaborate, share knowledge, network, stop the drama, and be thankful for a new positive tourism policy and program. I’m grateful to the Sedona City Council; they are doing the right thing, what we elected them to do.
I am a neighbor and an unpaid community volunteer. Please visit my website DonnaJoys.com. The website has references, sources, documents, data, and benchmarks of peer cities’ tourism programs. Feel free to share and ask questions. Let’s move forward.
——————————————————
This is an advertisement
12 Comments
If all businesses wish to benefit from tourism marketing then one would think they would all desire to be chamber members so benefits are spread equally amongst them. If currently only 39% of businesses are truly the sole beneficiaries of tourism $ then there is obviously something wrong somewhere.
Thanks for this information and clarifying the work the Chamber performed and why the City Council was asking questions. Yes, the bed tax is City revenue and they can use as they see fit. Taking on the Destination Marketing Organization (DMO) function under City direction is clearly how most other communities are managing this function in the State as it allows better control and accountability.
I would agree that it is time to stop all the drama and get to work defining what the vision is for the Sedona brand and at what level this will be marketed to those that visit the area. Clearly, levels of visitation and the type of visitors that come to our community are critical to maintaining a sustainable community that keeps residents here. We also need to continue to mitigate the problems that are associated with over visitation of our special community. And thanks to all the residents that continue to ask questions to make the community stronger and better for future generations.
Donna Joys statements are 100% accurate. Finally the public now knows and will listen not to Stevie but Donna.
No matter how you shake it or bake it there will now be two groups promoting tourism — the city and the Chamber! Which means we are going to have twice as many tourists clogging up our town.
As a resident of Sedona are you…………
Dining, getting coffee or takeout in one of over 100 restaurants everyday?
Shopping in our 3 grocery stores in a regular basis?
Picking up your prescriptions and buying cosmetics, health/body care, utilizing the photo department of our 2 drugstores consistently?
Buying art from local artists in over 35 of our galleries?
Utilizing our dozens of tour companies to explore Sedona?
Buying tshirts, souvenirs, crystals, clothing, toys, and jewelry at our 150+retail stores?
Utilizing our 20 day spas for massages, facials or body treatments?
Getting gas at one of our 4 gas stations daily?
Shipping packages from our 2 shipping stores?
Staying at one of the 25+ lodging establishments?
Contacting a local realtor to buy property because you fell in love with Sedona?
Paying for a daily parking pass at a local trail head?
Renting bikes, Segway’s, Jeeps or ATV’s?
Wine tasting at one our 5 wine tasting/ spirit establishments consistently?
Contributing to weekly devotions at one of our dozens of worship establishments?
If you answered no, to any of these questions, then you are not supporting the local businesses which are vital to our economy. All of the above entities bring tax dollars into the Sedona economy.
Our tourists can answer “ yes” to all of the above questions, there by supporting the quality of life you enjoy in Sedona’s affluent community.
Strongly disagree with this, Debra. In fact, the number of tourists are diminishing quality of life in Sedona. In the last election I voted to downgrade tourism as the economic driver in our community. I want to see OTHER types of businesses replace the tourism businesses that have degraded our quality of life. In order to do this, the city council must take action to set policies that encourage other types of local businesses instead of constantly handing over millions of dollars to the Chamber of Commerce.
I don’t want to rent a jeep, pay for a daily parking pass, pay $25 for a hamburger, etc. etc. The reason these are the businesses that exist is because of myopic and misguided policies and actions by former city councils that over-emphasized tourism and neglected to pay attention to other kinds of businesses and other kinds of community needs.
I am very glad the city is moving in a new direction.
I spend most of my money on businesses in the VOC.
Too much of a hassle deal with 179 traffic going Uptown or West Sedona. Used to shop at Natural Grocers weekly and get take out at Vespa a couple of times a week, former Javelina Cantina regulars but weekend traffic is off putting. I work full time so I have to join the masses on the weekends.
It’s just much easier for us drive to VOC versus go to Sedona. Do I want eat at El Rincon weekly? Yes. Do I want to deal with weekend traffic going there..not so much.
So now we get take out 4 days a week from restaurants in the VOC, go to Ace there and shop weekly at Clarks.
Sedona needs balance. A balance between residents and tourists. Just as much as business profits on tourists, concerns about residents quality of life is equally if not more important for a balanced community.
An easy indicator of quality of life for residents AND tourists is bumper to bumper traffic. Nobody, nobody wants to be stuck in bumper to bumper traffic.
Amazing research and explanation. Thank you for breaking this down for the community Donna!
I agree with Cassie! Very well-researched informative article. Thank, Donna, for this presentation!
Did you read that dona is now being sued by the city along with several others .call it Karma. Let’s hope she spends a ton of money on attorneys for her malicious assault on city employees and counsel people. keep up the great work Dona. The city of Sedona is suing six Sedona residents for filing what it states are baseless liens against the members of the previous Sedona City Council, the city attorney, the city’s magistrate judge and the city’s senior code enforcement officer.
According to the city’s complaint, on June 3, 2022, Shelley Evans entered a notice of distress of bond with the Coconino County Recorder’s Office on behalf of Donna Joy Varney, Alissa and Charles Tyler, Gayle Baingo and Theresa Vos against Mayor Sandy Moriarty, Vice Mayor Scott Jablow, City Council members Kathy Kinsella, Tom Lamkin, Holli Ploog, Jon Thompson and Jessica Williamson and City Attorney Kurt Christianson.
The notice alleged that these officials had committed 141 violations of the U.S. Constitution by distressing the claimants’ property rights, misleading the people, acting outside their oaths of office and engaging in “conspiracy against the rights of citizens.”
The notice purported to create a commercial lien against the performance bonds posted by the city on behalf of these officials and demanded $11.2 million in payment for these violations.
On July 15, 2022, Evans reportedly filed an almost identical notice of distress against Magistrate Judge Paul Schlegel and code enforcement officer Brian Armstrong on her own behalf, alleging that they distressed her property and libeled her and demanding $1.1 million in payment for 111 alleged constitutional violations.
Stevie is now calling the pot black. how silly