||| BY MATTHEW GILBERT, theORCASONIAN OP-ED REPORTER |||
In Part 1 on the future of the SJC Visitors Bureau, I had planned to include the thoughts of each candidate vying to represent Orcas Island on the County Council – Justin Paulsen and Rick Hughes – since one of them will likely play a significant role in its evolving fate. However, the length and substance of their responses regarding both the future of the VB specifically and the impact of tourism in general (with the recently released Destination Management Plan and subsequent blowback as backdrops deserved to stand alone. Here they are:
Rick Hughes
Rick Hughes
When it comes to independent destination marketing entities such as the San Juan Islands Visitors Bureau (SJIVB), I believe it would be a misstep for the county to absorb or operate it. Because of the additional cost, staffing required, potential conflict of interest, and oversight responsibility, having an independent third-party entity following direction from the county and an approved Destination Management plan is the best way to protect our county and support tourism-related businesses.
Secondly, the County should conduct a wide and inclusive RFP (request for proposal) process reaching out to other marketing agencies to give them an opportunity to compete to be the destination marketing organization for San Juan County.
Thirdly, the decision regarding the Visitors Bureau is a complex one that affects many individuals, businesses, and the incorporated town of Friday Harbor. In the SJIVB’s existing contract, they receive funding from the Lodging Tax (administered by the Lodging Tax AdvisoryCommittee/LTAC), which in turn provides operational money to the Lopez, San Juan, and Orcas
chambers of commerce. The town of Friday Harbor pays a separate sum to the SJIVB for their marketing. An entity acting independently on behalf of San Juan County would be better capable of being more fair and agile, therefore, more efficient.
As for whether or not the county should scale down its efforts to promote the islands and focus more on mitigation of impacts, such as those referenced in the recently completed tourismplan, the ferries are currently doing a fine job of scaling down tourist numbers and dollars. For instance, San Juan Island was down 15% in estimated revenue for 2024. Regardless of the ferry issue, many islanders, chambers of commerce, and businesses devoted time to providing feedback on the Preliminary Draft Destination Management Plan (DMP). The draft received over 900 comments spanning many topics including “defining island capacity, addressing affordability and transportation, reconsidering destination marketing efforts, protecting property rights,” and many more.
I especially appreciate the ideas on addressing island affordability and completely agree with the strong opposition for introducing any new fees or taxes for residents. I support the need to protect the island environment and our quality of life while balancing the needs of tourism. I would be supportive of funding to mitigate the negative impacts of tourism and improving core infrastructure for islanders (dog parks, restrooms, walking paths, garbage cans, etc.) using lodging tax funds.
# # # # #
Justin Paulsen
Justin Paulsen
The DMP was an attempt by the County to create a document that it has been attempting for decades. Its release for review by the public was premature. As a result, the feedback from the public was extremely negative and the useable takeaways from it were of limited use.
When it was released, I provided public comment on the document, which indicated that muchof the data and information in the early part of the document was useful, but that the document went too far into proposing policies which needed far more vetting and discussion. I do expect the document to be a reference point for future destination management discussions, but any policy discussion will require a new, fresh look.
With regard to the pending renewal of the VB contract, I believe that given the delays in getting the current contract settled, and the absence of a thorough and inclusive re-examination of “how” we want to look at tourism going forward, I would propose that the Council grant a one-year extension. My qualification to this would be that we need to immediately bring a stakeholders group together to start talking about what tourism planning should look like for the next 3 – 5 years.
That stakeholder group should include not just tourism-related businesses but also those in our community who have raised concerns and who represent adjacent interests (e.g., the Land Bank, housing leaders, childcare, etc.). Tourism is a major economic driver in our county and an industry that offers many positive tangential supports. That said, we must be cognizant of the impacts and preventing degradation of place. This is not just a consideration for tourism but a part of planning generally throughout the county. There are limits to everything that, frankly, I’d rather we not test.
I do believe that we need to begin to shift priority away from promotion (tourism increase). San Juan County will always be a place that draws the interest of people from around the world. In that way, tourism is part of our basic fabric. We should focus on fostering tourism that connects people with what is important to us – what draws and keeps us here – highlighting our natural environment and focused on education and experience. I’ve talked with many in the hospitality industry who would be more than happy to simply operate a sustainable, reliable business not focused on growth.
The Visitors Bureau can and should be part of helping us, as a county, shift our tourism focus. It offers our county and their members far more than just promotion. They add expertise in tracking visitor behavior, monitoring and predicting economic trends, and are uniquely qualified to engage outside our community, drawing in information that can help us mitigate and even avoid unintended consequences from over-tourism.
I do not believe that San Juan County should take over in-house management of tourism-related activity. Our government structure has plenty of work to do with limited staff and budget, and we need to focus our core energy on what we are mandated to do. The County Council can and should set the priorities and identify the desired focus for the VB in the operating contract, and that strategy should be guided by stakeholders (as identified above.)
I also believe that to really drill down into this conversation even further, there should be a discussion of LTAC goals, funding, and priorities. I believe the county has opportunities to be far more impactful with those monies and in a way that not only improves the tourism experience but also builds on the direct needs of residents in a way that we have not been doing thus far.
# # # # #
If you have questions or comments for the candidates on this or any issue, they can be reached here:
Justin Paulsen (justin@paulsen4council.com / (360) 201-1366)
Rick Hughes (hughesforcouncil@gmail.com / (360) 472-0253)
What a refreshing change to have an election with TWO well qualified and competent candidates to choose between!