Bright Banners, Slick City Slogan... Where's the Money?

Last December I suggested that the Chamber of Commerce and Lake Area Improvement Corporation might spend the ensuing months studying the impact of their new slogan and marketing campaign for Madison. Given the expenditure of public dollars on these efforts, surely some solid data collection and analysis would be in order.

While no official impact studies have made the press, Tuesday's MDL offers some data we may interpret as the first indication of the short-term impact of the new Madison marketing campaign. Tucked away in a report on the Monday City Commission meeting lies Commissioner Jerry Johnson's revelation that revenue from the city's 1% bed-board-and-booze tax is down 3% for the first half of 2007 [Chuck Clement, "City Keeps Chamber Funding at Current Level," Madison Daily Leader, 2007.08.21]. Hmm... didn't expect that.*

Now hold your horses. The marketing campaign has only been going for a year. It is easy to imagine other factors that might have mitigated any immediate tourism gains from the marketing campaign, like slower personal income growth and higher gas prices (although various boosters around the country insist that gas prices shouldn't decrease Americans' travel plans).

But this decline in tax revenues is the only hard data we've seen, and on face, it doesn't look good. While the commissioners aver that their decision to deny the Chamber's request for a 30% increase in tax support from the city is no "reflection on the Chamber's work in the community," it remains logical to wonder if the commissioners might have been hoping for better results. Their denial of the funding does make sense: the city's contribution to the Chamber comes from the 3B tax, so if that revenue goes down, so should the Chamber's cut.**

Given this immediate downturn, the Chamber and LAIC will surely be crunching numbers looking for the sunny side of the slogan and banners. The Madville Times looks forward to the long-term studies that will demonstrate the effectiveness of our city marketing.

*I also didn't expect the City Commission to discuss its funding of the Chamber at its August 20 meeting. The agenda for Monday's meeting certainly doesn't mention the Chamber. The only item close is "Personnel."

**On a side note, it occurs to me to ask when the Chamber of Commerce decided to ask for tax money. As a business organization and free-market booster, the casual observer might think Chambers of Commerce would make it a point of pride to operate solely by member contributions, without any handouts from government (for example, see the Chambers in Las Cruces, NM, and Baytown, TX). And if the Chamber does receive tax dollars, does it then became at least partially a public entity, obligated to serve all businesses in the community, not just its dues-paying members?