County News
Marketing or management?
New tourism organization takes shape
As Prince Edward County’s new Destination Marketing Organization (DMO) begins to take shape in a process that has involved much stakeholder consultation, it took another step forward last Thursday at a special meeting of council. It was agreed that the inaugural DMO board of directors would have six members, with the understanding that number could grow as the DMO establishes itself. Council also directed the Clerk’s office to coordinate recruitment of a skills-based board, with consideration given for sector diversity. A bylaw to approve the new DMO, to be called ‘Visit the County’, will be brought forward for endorsement at the council meeting on May 24.
Coming out of the closed session part of the meeting was a motion made by Councillor Ernie Margetson that Council direct the Mayor and Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with StayPEC that acknowledges them as a stand-alone DMO eligible for MAT (Municipal Accommodation Tax) funds, up to December 31, 2024 only, in order to allow time to negotiate an integration with the new DMO. Council also approved the bylaw authorizing the Mayor and CAO to execute the MOU with StayPEC to be enacted at the May 24 council meeting.
Rebecca Lamb, Destination Development and Marketing Coordinator, walked through the key points of her report and the best next steps when it comes to tourism in Prince Edward County.
“The DMO needs to be considering the social, environmental and cultural impacts of all the decisions it makes, and it needs to make them in a way that is transparent and accountable, which will take some creative thinking,” said Lamb. “It will take commitment to collaborate, and it will take some capacity to be humble as it moves forward.”
Lamb said selection of the inaugural board of directors for the DMO would be based primarily on a candidate’s skills and abilities to fulfill the duties of the role, but also noted consideration must be given to ensuring a diverse representation of the tourism sectors and stakeholders. “These skills will be critical as the DMO establishes itself and navigates the inevitable governance challenges of its first year or so.” It was noted that recruitment for the inaugural board of directors would begin this week through the Clerk’s office and will involve a scoring matrix. A slate of candidates is anticipated to be presented at the May 24 council meeting, with the inaugural board having its first meeting in early June. Lamb reminded Council that the responsibility of tourism is going to be shared by all stakeholders. “Selecting directors for this board for the right fit to lead this next phase is what we need to do now in order to move forward with tourism in a holistic, mindful way,” she said.
The special council meeting saw a deputation by Cheryl Anderson representing the South Shore Joint Initiative, the Prince Edward Point Bird Observatory, and the Prince Edward County Field Naturalists. An audience comment from Helen Fearman was also received, which concurred with Anderson’s comments. Anderson said the aforementioned organizations had taken part in the DMO public consultations, noting continued concern for the fragile environment and the ecology of the County with proposed recommendations in the formulation of the DMO board. “We feel that the board should include environmental representation, representatives from Quinte Conservation, the County, the provincial parks and Indigenous stakeholder groups,” said Anderson. “We also feel that board members should also be able to demonstrate an understanding of the important important role of our natural heritage and what it plays in the sustainability of our County.”
Anderson felt the board would benefit from the experience and knowledge from at least one long-time County resident. “The DMO has an opportunity to manage the tourism industry allowing a great visitor experience and protecting the land and water that we all depend on. Our request is that the DMO board members are knowledgeable about our environment and ecology to help protect our unique and fragile County,” expressed Anderson. Fearman said the vulnerability and fragility of the County’s natural heritage must be emphasised. “The DMO board members must be acutely aware of the limited capacity of our small island and ensure that we don’t put any undue pressure on its capacity, in particular our limited water resources,” said Fearman.
While Councillor Stewart Bailey raised the point that board members should be County residents because “they would have a better idea by living here of what’s going on in the community”, Lamb said there would be a strong ask that predominantly full-time residents were represented on the board. There were some differences of opinion on what would constitute an ideal number of board members for the inaugural board. Councillor John Hirsch suggested his preference would be nine, or at least more than the seven that staff recommended. Councillor Bill Roberts noted inaugural boards were most effective when there were five to seven individuals, but said nine is a good number. “Starting small and building is a best practice,” said Roberts. Councillor Bill McMahon preferred nine over seven, Councillor Phil St-Jean supported seven, and Councillor Janice Maynard said she would prefer eight or nine.
Hirsch also noted that the report states board meetings don’t necessarily have to be open to the public. “I would have a very strong objection with board meetings not being open to the public, except for the usual closed circumstances we deal with at the municipal level,” said Hirsch. Councillors Kate MacNaughton, Bill Roberts and Phil St-Jean agreed. “Full transparency of board meetings, given the sensitivity of tourism in our community, it is critically important that this new DMO board, who ultimately will be responsible to the public and what happens in our community, be open and visible,” said St-Jean. He also said individuals or sector representation when selecting board members “wasn’t a good thing”, noting a number of councillors had been approached by various sectors wanting a seat at the table. “I think it’s most important, especially at the very beginning, that it be a skills-based board,” he said. “That’s what we need to focus on; we need to see the right people with the right skills, right now; that’s extremely important.”
Councillor Mike Harper said, “We don’t need tourism marketing, we need tourism management.” He said he wanted reassurance that this “doesn’t take a detour into the hardcore marketing instead of the management, which we all decided was our problem area and our challenge.”
Lamb said that is what was heard from stakeholders. “Provincial legislation dictates MAT funds must be spent on tourism marketing and product development, so how can we do that in a smart way while also achieving some of those other goals and objectives,” said Lamb. “Our main goal moving forward is tourism management.”
The April 14 Special Council meeting is available for viewing on the County’s YouTube channel (bit/.ly/LiveStreamPEC) with associated documentation available as part of the agenda package found on the County’s website. The Times background coverage on the DMO can be found at wellingtontimes.ca/background-on-tourism and wellingtontimes.ca/attracting-more-visitors.
It seems increasingly evident that this council wants to ‘have its cake and eat it too’ when it comes to the DMO. They are eager to get their hands on their stake of the MAT tax derived solely from the efforts of those directly involved in attracting and hosting visitors whilst at the same time trying all manner of ways to exert control over the other 50% that is meant to be for tourism “marketing”. It’s long past time for council to step up and publicly acknowledge once and for all that without tourists and the revenue they bring to local businesses the County would be a sad place indeed. Instead what do we have? A group of elected representatives bending over backwards to placate a vocal group of long term anti tourist residents by vilifying the very people who bring and spend their money here all in the name of ‘tourism management’.
Our local government idea for tourism management is to restrict and penalize visitors. Some have already stated they will not be returning to Prince Edward County. Council has mismanaged the tourism management plan.