Councilman Lance Jack had an interesting approach to the CCTB's funding request at the last city council meeting during his questioning of the CCTB's executive director Cinnamon Wheeler-Smith about the purposes to which the funding would be put. (Just a reminder that I do serve on the board of the CCTB).
Several times he questioned if the CCTB was the best vehicle for promoting the city and whether it was a good idea for the city to put all its "tourism eggs" in one basket. He said several times that he was not advocating removing funding for the CCTB but was playing devils advocate as to whether the city should look at some other methods of promoting tourism in the area.
I could understand him questioning the uses to which the funding would be put, as that was the purpose of the Convention and Tourism Bureau's presentation. However, revisitng whether the revised CCTB is the best organization to do so doesn't make much sense. The council made that decision after looking at several options and decided to go with the CCTB so bringing up a re-examination of whether it is the best choice seems a bit precipitate.
Several times he questioned if the CCTB was the best vehicle for promoting the city and whether it was a good idea for the city to put all its "tourism eggs" in one basket. He said several times that he was not advocating removing funding for the CCTB but was playing devils advocate as to whether the city should look at some other methods of promoting tourism in the area.
I could understand him questioning the uses to which the funding would be put, as that was the purpose of the Convention and Tourism Bureau's presentation. However, revisitng whether the revised CCTB is the best organization to do so doesn't make much sense. The council made that decision after looking at several options and decided to go with the CCTB so bringing up a re-examination of whether it is the best choice seems a bit precipitate.
No comments:
Post a Comment