|
|
|
Tourism Districts Cope with Consolidation
State budget woes force may to do more with less
|
Business New Haven
9/15/2003
By: Karen Singer
|
The state legislature’s decision last month to consolidate the number of tourism districts in the state from 11 to five came as welcome news to Karolyn Kirchgesler, executive director of the New Haven Convention & Visitors Bureau (NHCVB).
Kirchgesler and her counterparts had feared all 11 existing districts might be scrapped as a cost-cutting measure during the budget debate in favor of a single statewide tourism bureaucracy in the nation’s third-smallest state.
But the lawmakers’ consolidation of 11 districts into five, based on a proposal Kirchgesler and others advocated, means greater responsibility and fewer funds.
"It definitely will be a challenge, with increasingly less money to market a bigger region with 19 towns," says Kirchgesler.
In the new configuration, the greater New Haven district loses five of the 15 towns in its previous service area -Ansonia, Derby, Shelton, Trumbull and Prospect - but gains nine others; Branford, Guilford, Madison, Clinton, Killingworth, Durham, Middlefield, Wallingford and Cheshire.
The funding structure also changes under the new system, from a system based on percentage of a six-percent tax on hotel rooms to a flat rate of $950,000 per district per year.
"Now, there’s no opportunity to grow the budget by increasing hotel receipts," Kirchgesler says, adding she expects the first of 12 monthly budget disbursements to arrive next month.
Even so, the greater New Haven district is in a better position than those with higher annual budgets and more hotels and attractions.
"The highest [annual budget] we worked with was $1.2 million, so for us it hasn’t been as big a change as will be for those with more towns to [service]," Kirchgesler says. "Clearly our district and Coastal Fairfield are the smallest from a geographical standpoint. But Fairfield had a much higher budget and is experiencing a much greater reduction."
The new configuration and fee structure, however, will necessitate some changes in the way the NHCVB operates, including seeking outside funding sources.
"At this point we are looking at a variety of options," Kirchgesler says. "Now there might have to be a charge to hotels for our convention meetings or group business leads. We’re also looking at membership fees or fees for advertising in our publications."
The goal is to ensure that "We can market to the same depth that we have previously," adds Stephen J. Nigro, general manager of the New Haven Hotel and past president of the Connecticut Lodging Association. Participation in trade shows and creation of "quality literature," he notes, have been especially helpful marketing tools.
Regional convention and visitors bureaus in Connecticut are charged with stimulating visits to attractions and overnight stays within the municipalities they serve.
Meanwhile, working with a greater number of municipalities is nothing new to the NHVCB, according to Kirchgesler, because the organization always has been "strategic in marketing" outside its boundaries.
"We’ve already promoted Thimble Islands, for example, and now they’re an official part of [the New Haven tourism district]," Kirchgesler says. "Each of towns we’re merging with has its own regional flavor."
To get a renewed taste of those flavors, Kirchgesler and her staff have started meeting with town officials. So far, she reports, the feedback is "very positive."
More meetings are needed, she adds, before decisions on operational changes are finalized.
|
Go FirstGo PreviousGo
NextGo LastGo
to Index
|
|
