Summer is wrapping up, and in a state where tourism is the second-largest industry, we pay close attention to the success of our various efforts to draw tourists here for one last blast of fun and taxable spending before the leaves and the snow begin their race to the ground. We should pay even closer attention to the success of an event like the South Dakota State Fair, which the state subsidized last year to the tune of $1,000,000 last year, only to see a decline in attendance from 210,000 for the 2004 event to 158,000 at the month-early 2005 event. A tad disappointed, the state reduced the subsidy, handing the State Fair a meager (please read that adjective with sarcasm, thank you) $750,000 to keep the event afloat this year.
Now the State Fair has made efforts to improve over last year's performance. The fair moved back to the traditional Labor Day weekend and shortened its run to five days. But as a demonstration of its lack of confidence (either in its actual performance or in its ability to generate instant spin), the State Fair officials are refusing to release any attendance numbers until two weeks after the fair ends. Says State Fair manager Susan Hayward in the Huron Plainsman, "The No. 1 reason the attendance figures will not be released is because they are no indication of how well the fair is doing." Hayward complains that "sometimes the press relies heavily on the attendance figures as a measuring stick on how the fair is doing."
So the number of people attending an event is not a measure of an event's success? State Fair officials are certainly bucking conventional wisdom here. The Lifelight Christian music festival in Sioux Falls just wrapped up its three-day run, and event coordinators Mike Samp and Nathan Schock offered the media attendance estimates each day, rain or shine, from the 50,000 who braved the logistical nightmare of Friday's rain and mud, to Saturday's rebound to 93,000 concertgoers losing flip-flops in the mud, to Sunday's 120,000 who came for partly sunny skies and the Newsboys and set a one-day attendance record for Lifelight. Across the border, the Minnesota State Fair posts as the second "Quicklink" on its home page a chart comparing daily attendance between last year's fair and this year's. These successful events don't hesitate to make attendance numbers public, even though neither is supported by public money. (The Minnesota State Fair has received no public funding of any kind since 1949.)
Fair manager Hayward can likely make a strong argument that the State Fair is more than a revenue-generator. The fair is the "state tournament" for 4-H-ers who compete in a diverse array of fun and practical events. The fair brings families and friends together for an enjoyable traditional event, sort of a South Dakota family reunion. We certainly shouldn't judge the success of every aspect of our culture in terms of numbers and dollars. However, when $750,000 of state tax dollars are involved, taxpayers are entitled to ask for practical policy results. The state doesn't spend $750,000 on the state debate, football, or basketball tournaments that Secretary mentions (in today's Argus editorial) in justifying state funding for the fair. When the state throws that much money at a project, it expects a return on that investment.
To claim that attendance numbers aren't a measure of the fair's success defies good business sense. Success in tourism is increased visitor numbers. Visitors equal dollars and good word-of-mouth. Visitors are votes, people signaling their support of an event with their wheels and their wallets. As a publicly funded event, the State Fair has an obligation to inform its stockholders (us taxpayers) of the results our money is producing. To keep those numbers hidden, even for a couple weeks, smacks of little kids who see they are falling a step or two behind in a game and whiningly declare, "We're not racing!" Even if the attendance numbers aren't good, the State Fair should deal straightforwardly with us and conduct its business as openly as possible.
Just wait until next year, when attendance is up they'll post news releases touting their numbers.
ReplyDeleteAll in all, $750,000 isn't a lot of money for an event of that scale, but when it is tax money, there does need to be some level of accountability.
Are any state lawmakers questioning the lack of numbers being released?
Update from the Department of Revenue: Retail sales and tax revenue generated at the State Fair were down significantly from 2005:
ReplyDelete"The latest figures available show the 2006 event raised $52,392.95 in total tax revenues, down from the previous year when tax revenues reached $66,696.95. Of the $52,392.95 collected this year, $28,121.55 was state sales tax, $14,239.44 was municipal sales tax, $2,990.74 was municipal gross receipts tax, and $7,041.22 was state tourism tax.
"Gross sales for the 2006 South Dakota State Fair totaled $711,972.18, down from 2005 gross sales of $897,856.93."
Remember the $750,000 subsidy the state poured into the fair this year? For every $14 of support it received from Pierre, the fair generated less than $1 of tax revenue. Arguably, the state would have generated the same financial boost for Huron if Governor Rounds had taken the state checkbook to downtown Huron and started handing out payments directly to passersby.
As a vendor at the SD State Fair, I beleive that people in the state started once a again to take pride in the event this year. I believe their was a rebirth in pride at this years fair. I also believe that attendence figures at most events in this state tend to be overinflated. 120,000 in a single day at a Christan music festival in one day in Souix Falls? I find that hard to believe. I also think that in years past attendance figures were highly inflated at the SD State Fair, but this year I think it was an honest assement. To lose an event such as SD State Fair only means that people in the state are not willing to take pride in preserving and working on improving something that is good for the state. Also the idea of moving it to Souix Falls? Give me break, that fairgorunds could not handle the camping or the livestock expositions in the current facilites without many millions of dollars of improvement. The liestock building could not hold the shows, and they are falling part. Also no dorm facilities for 4-H'er etc. Also I believe support that was reignited this year by 4-H, FFA etc would wane due to the distances for many to travel and lack of camp grounds and such. What about it SD show some pride! if the legsilature would quit messing with the dates and give managment some backing, this fiar will grow. IN 2005 yoou had katerina hit adn that hit every event of this kind in the country. This year, we ahd 5 solid days ina new and improved format. Also gas prices werea hell of lot higher in 2005 that in 2006, so that helped things out a lot. GIve it a chacne and it will grow if legislators take pride and support an event that has long hisotry of sucess in Huron. Back the SD State fair.
ReplyDeleteA comment about the state fair. No media in this state goes out of there way to promote the state fair. Teh statlegislature do notprovide enough money in advertsing dollars t the sate fair to advertise it sate wide either. I saw one tv station and a it's reproter there on the last day of the fair and I was there 24/7 as a vendor/particpant. No radio station was there either. Media is missing a big opportuntiy to not only help promote the stae fair but to identify with the event. Media is always negative and little on the upside of this event. SOuth Dakota needs tourism not only from outstate but from instate. Take away the fair from Huron and you are killing what is left in a community that has suffered a lot of loss in recent years. The 2006 fair made signicant strides to those who attended and needs the support of the media and the legislature to grow. Don't let every thing end up in Souix falls, there is lot more to South Dakota than that city.
ReplyDeleteKatrina? Um, in 2005, Katrina hit at the end of August. The South Dakota State Fair took place at the beginning of August.
ReplyDeleteAn earlier commenter says there's a lot more to South Dakota than "that city," Sioux Falls. I agree wholeheartedly. And the state should work to promote tourism all around the state to help spread the wealth. However, does the state pour $750,000 into any other tourist event? Every tourist event, and every business in the state, has to reach a certain level of business viability. And if tourist event isn't good enough to draw enough tourist dollars to keep it afloat, well, that tourist event needs to change.
ReplyDelete