Pima County established an independent team to evaluate The Metropolitan Tucson Convention and Visitor's Bureau ("MTCVB") performance. The County announced last week that it will implement the result so this review.
The team, led by a consultant, issued its report last year (July 27, 2011). Though, admittedly, the report is a bit dated, it does point to some of the problems that we perceive between Oro Valley and MTCVB.
MTCVB is funded by Pima County, the City of Tucson, and the Town of Oro Valley, . Both Pima County and the City of Tucson have done "performance audits." Oro Valley has funded MTCVB using the "blind faith","they are doing a great job", "let's think regionally", "no audit needed here" audit approach.
The County's report does not evaluate the success of MTCVB. It looks at MTCVB's operations and its relationship with its constituents.
Many people from Tucson and Pima County provided input in the study. No one from Oro Valley did. Clearly, the study consultant did not think Oro Valley's input would be valuable to the study. In fact, Oro Valley is mentioned only twice in the 124-page document. Fact is: Oro Valley is a the "small dog" in relation to its fellow members.
The study has implications for Oro Valley, since any changes that will impact our town.
In our prior postings about MTCVB, we have observed both a lack of accountability and a lack of demonstrable performance in relation to Oro Valley from MTCVB. This report validates our comments. The following are some the "Key Observations" from pages 8 and 9 of the report:
- There exists a perception with governments that the MTCVB views itself with an apparent sense of entitlement.
- MTCVB has a complacent attitude in dealing with government and is not partnering with officials to produce greater performance results through funding development.
- Last year the MTCVB booked for the community about $170 million in visitor spending principally from new conventions, sports and leisure tourism bookings [Note: There is no support for the dollar estimate provided in the report].
- MTCVB is capable of producing much more with performance productivity recommendations provided throughout this audit.
- MTCVB does not consistently provide transparency, accountability and a focus in communicating out to stakeholders and to the community its performance productivity, including future goals to be achieved. Also missing is the return-on-investment from major marketing initiatives.
- The MTCVB Board of Directors is not fully engaged, energized or pro-active in representing the stakeholder community.
- Developing a standardized model agreement format that can be applied for each jurisdiction (report page 23)
- Creating MTCVB performance measures based on third party independent validation (report page 25)
- Developing a true brand identity with strong community collaboration from its stakeholders and partners. (report page 40)
- Developing a Marketing Plan in a team effort with strong stakeholder input, beginning in early planning stages (report Page 44)
- Providing funding partners with a comprehensive understanding of what is to be produced as well as the anticipated goal based results (report page 45)
- Drafting a new mission statement (report page 49)
- MTCVB should work more closely with its funding partners, like Oro Valley, to develop its plans.
- These plans should include specifically, agreed-upon targets
- MTCVB should provide more concrete proof of the results of its efforts.
Our final takeaway is that Oro Valley has to be serious about its involvement with MTCVB. We are funding it. We are counting on it to bring room bookings to Oro Valley. We are counting on MTCVB to brings swim meets to our new Aquatic Center, as they have promised. It is important to us. Active Oro Valley involvement on the part of Oro Valley is imperative, especially as MTCVB makes changes to accommodate the "big dog."
---
4 comments:
New leadership is needed at MTCVB ~ at a lower pay rate. Why will our elected leaders (including OV) not act? We pay taxes to a criminal enterprise (check out the payment of your tax dollars to "consultants") namely Pima Community College AND a declared entitled elite at MTCVB. It is time to bring out the pitchforks.
FACT CHECK: The performance audit of MTCVB requested by Pima County was concluded in the late summer of 2010. An elected official from the Town of Oro Valley had NOT been seated previously on the MTCVB Board, unlike elected officials representing the City of Tucson and the Pima County Board of Supervisors. Council Member Snider was appointed to the MTCVB Board in September 2010 and attended her first meeting in October 2010. The issues cited in the audit arose prior to Council Member Snider’s board membership. Your statement, “We certainly hope that the report's observation that MTCVB board members are not engaged does not apply to the Oro Valley representative on the MTCVB Board, Council Member Mary Snider. We hope that Council Member Snider is '...fully engaged, energized or pro-active...' in representing Oro Valley to MTCVB, and not simply a blind advocate for MTCVB to Oro Valley, as she has been" reflects that you did not verify the facts before making accusations about Council Member Snider’s Board conduct. In addition,this posting is dated July 16, 2012. Three weeks earlier, at the June 20, 2012 Council meeting, newly-elected Council Member Brendan Burns was unanimously approved by Mayor and Council to be the 2012-2013 Council liaison to MTCVB and therefore replaces Council Member Snider on the MTCVB Board. Council Member Burns voted to approve a three-year contract with MTCVB (5 in favor, 2 opposed-- Garner, Zinkin). It is hoped that Burns' board membership will continue to provide the leadership and oversight that began with Council Member Snider’s tenure.
---
Greetings,
The date of the study report is July 21, 2011, so member Snider was on the Board for a full nine months prior to the study's completion.
Jay D is correct. Brendan Burns is now the liaison to MTCVB. I have updated the posting to reflect this.
---
Thank you for keeping this blog on track Jay D, ......now about those pitchforks.
Post a Comment