We will be meeting Forest Service personnel at the Shirley Site, a parking area on the dirt road that goes to O’Haver Lake. Drive south on Hwy 285 out of Poncha Springs, going up Poncha Pass, and take the right turn to O’Haver Lake. The Shirley Site is approximately 1.5 miles down the road, on the left where you would turn right to go to the lake. We can park in the Shirley Site lot, and Forest Service personnel will ferry us up to the work site on Silver Creek. Since more travel than usual is involved, the volunteer lunch after work will be moved back to 2:00pm behind the Salida Cafe and Roastery.

As usual, come prepared with water, gloves, long pants and sturdy boots. You might want to bring a snack if you get hungry before 2. Tools will be provided.

With the Arkansas River continuing it’s late season peak, it’s time for a fisherman to start getting creative about when and where to fish. For sure, once the river clears and drops, the fishing will be on fire. There are going to be hungry fish and lots of food flying and swimming around for them to eat. In the meantime, I headed off to Antero Reservoir the other day with a six weight rod and some salubrious company to chase after a few lunkers. After having had fun last week catching joeys in a small stream environment, it was time to enjoy the other end of the scale, with screaming reels, rods bent in half, and line backing seeing the light of day for the first time in a month of Sundays.

Antero is one of the jewels in the Colorado Division of Wildlife’s fishing crown. Back in 2002 it was drained completely during the drought year, but a succession of decent winter snow falls have seen the reservoir refilled and opened again to fishing a few years back. It must be said that flat water fishing is not my preferred style. Generally there is too much sitting around with nothing to do except doze, hydrate with barley pops, and let the mind wander onto important things. Should I really have gone to the office today? What would have happened if I’d had the cojones to ask that girl out in high school? Jeez, maybe the old man was right and I shouldn’t have dropped out of college. Then, all of a sudden, the bobber gives a little nudge, you set the hook, and putting all such futile musings aside, it’s game on.

There is no doubt Antero is a great place to go to tie into a big one. There is also no doubt it is not the place to go for those seeking solitude and serenity. But the fishing is great right now, the backdrop stunning and seeing that many fishermen out on the water having fun in one place makes you grateful they have somewhere to go, and are not wandering the streets wild eyed and gaunt, looking to throw a hook at anything fish-like that moves. This particular day we were blessed with one of the most superb days South Park will unveil this year I am sure. How many times do you venture over Trout Creek Pass and not find the wind blowing hard from about 11.00 am, with thunderheads looming all around? Not this day. As the video shows, the weather was perfect throughout. The fish were being cooperative also, and all around we were surrounded by happy fishermen floating on all manner of craft. From canoes and belly boats to high tech fizz boats, everyone was having a great time.

Antero is generally not the place to go if you want to throw dry flies. The water supports a tremendous variety of insect life, and while there was the odd fish hitting the surface, it is the nymphs that were doing the damage. For us, damsel fly patterns worked the best. Getting there early is the key, before the wind kicks up. There is something about being on the water in the early morning that is very soothing. Normally at that time your hard drive is occupied with the work day ahead, getting the kids organized and fed etc, so it is great to sit and enjoy the change of pace as the sun comes up and the day warms. Things were pretty quiet for a bit, but right around 9.30 the alarm clocks went off under water, and the fish showed up for their days work with great enthusiasm. All in all, a wonderful day.

A brief word about tail and belly hooking. It seems that ever since, a few weeks ago, I made disparaging remarks about someone’s propensity to hook fish anywhere but in the mouth, I have discovered the knack myself. So what can I say except: anyone can hook a fish in the mouth, it takes extra timing and finesse to get them in the side, and it is a good way to make an 18 inch fish feel like a 24 incher.

Within the administrative budget are fixed costs passed onto the organization by the county, such as general fund service and insurance as well as expenses such as legal. Also considered administrative expenses are meetings for community outreach, office supplies and “miscellaneous.” In the 2009 budget, administrative expenses total $8,250.

The following is a line by line explanation of the lion’s share of the budget: the marketing portion of the budget that totals $330,750. The following crib sheet is organized by line item description, total allocated, variance from 2008 budget and explanation.

Marketing Director, $45,000, down 2.9%. Through 2008, the “marketing director” had been an independent contractor, not an employee of the county. As an independent contractor, the marketing director pays their own health insurance, office expenses, and does not participate in any county funded benefits or vacation/sick days. For four years, the previous director had not had a raise; a cost of living increase had been approved in 2008 making last fees total $45,350.

Marketing Coordinator, $26,400, up 6.8%. Through October 2008, the marketing coordinator assisted the marketing director with implementing CCVB marketing tactics, providing fulfillment (which means sending out Visitor’s Guides to interested visitors who request them) and performed administrative functions such as taking minutes at meetings, properly posting notices of meetings, etc. Also an independent contractor, this position was funded in 2009 but it is unclear if it will be filled. The position had made $24,000 and received a cost of living increase to $24,720 in 2008.

VG Fulfillment, $5,000, net mail expense projected cut in half. When April Prout was hired as Marketing Coordinator in July 2008 she researched and got board approval to move fulfillment functions to Arkansas Valley Publishing (aka Mountain Mail). Prout estimated the cost for AVP to handle and pay bulk mail postage for sending out Visitor’s Guides would be $5,000 annually. This reflected a cost savings, since the Visitor’s Guides had been mailed at first class postage rates. This marks the first time this function has been outsourced.

VG Photos, $20,000, up 100%. Some of the best photography the CCVB uses is purchased from local photographers with the remainder of filler photos supplied by AVP. These photos are frequently also used for public relations purposes such as when writers and editors request photos to accompany stories in magazines and newspapers. The board doubled the photography budget from $10,000 in 2008 to $20,000 in ’09. Previously, the budget had increased more gradually: from $5,000 every two years, to $5,000 in 2006, $6,000 in 2007, and $10,000 in 2008.

Web consulting, $10,000 up 233.33%. This category has been used to hire of an independent contractor who specializes in web marketing to make recommendations on such things as search engine optimization and Google pay per click advertising and produce banner ads. The board increased this budget from $3,000 in 2008 to $10,000 in 2009. It is unclear if and or to whom this contract has been awarded.

Online marketing, $83,675, up 67.35% This category funds online, internet-based advertising campaigns, Google pay per click, online interactive brochures, direct database marketing, etc. over the past five years the CCVB, in keeping with trends in advertising and tourism marketing has steadily increased the percent of funds spent on online advertising while decreasing its spend with more traditional media such as print and radio. Search engine optimization, proposed at a budget of $4,000 has also been rolled into this category.

800#. $1,000, unchanged. Telephone bills to pay for a bank of toll-free phone numbers that are routed to either the Salida or Buena Vista Chambers of Commerce to respond in person to visitor inquiries.

Advertising Co-Op, $15,000. Unchanged. This is the amount of dollars allocated for 1:1 matching fund to support advertising local events. The CCVB allocated $19,000 to 10 organizations in 2009.

Offline marketing, $83,675, down 12%. This category is new in 2009 and reflects all advertising that is not internet based. The category used to clearly indicate how much money was spent on national advertising, regional advertising and winter marketing. This past fall, at the suggestion of then-CCVB chair Greg Ralph, the winter marketing category was eliminated on paper, though the board approved Ralph’s request to double winter marketing from $20,000 to $40,000. Therefore, advertising in support of Monarch, the leading driver of winter tourism, accounts for nearly half of the CCVB’s offline budget. Ralph, who also voted on the budget, is Monarch’s marketing director and a shareholder in the ski area.

Creative, 0, down $100%. Some $5,000 had been budgeted for the past five years to pay for professional graphic design for the annual visitor’s guide cover and print ads in the state vacation guide, and other regional print media, primarily focused in Front Range newspapers and magazines. With no budget, it is unclear how or who is creating art for the CCVB’s visitor’s guide cover and print media advertising.

PR Travel, $2,000, down 50%. This had paid for the CCVB contractor marketing director and coordinator to attend the annual Governor’s Conference on Tourism. Covered costs include registration, travel to/from the event as well as hotel charges and meals.

PR FAMs, $5,000, up 66%. FAMs are the industry term for familiarization trips, which is when – in this case, the CCVB, pays for meals, hotels and other expenses for writers and editors to visit the area in person.

Visitor Surveys, $5,000, n/a. Starting in 2006 the board decided it was interested in market research to better understand the visitors that come to the area, their motivations, and provide baseline data against which CCVB performance could be judged and marketing courses altered if data so indicated. The board had decided professional, independent research should be conducted every two years. The CCVB had budgeted to do an economic impact study of four key events in 2008 but despite going through the full bid review process, the project was killed by the Board of County Commissioners. The Board voted to conduct its own surveys and thus budgeted less for this category.

Event Sponsorship, $30,000, eliminated. This category is another instance of the board rolling several historic categories into one. This fund was used to support the Bootstraps, Underwriting and new Niche grant categories in support of tourism-boosting events and initiatives. Though budgeted, in January, the board subsequently decided to eliminate this category and the grant subcategories within it.

It is unclear how the CCVB intends to allocate the resulting $62,400 resulting from the apparent elimination of the marketing coordinator position, eliminating $26,000 in funding in support of grass roots events and initiatives, and who/where the $10,000 for web consulting services has or will be awarded.

One can only imagine that the need for this tax has arisen from poor planning, administration and operations of the pool. The failed new pipeline was a massive net loss to the city, (though it has received a grant of $1,500,000 to have the water line replaced) as well as the new roof and structural improvements. It’s not surprising to see the City propose a funding source for the loss, however this is not the best means of doing so.

From the City website, the 2008 expected revenue from pool operations is $260,000 and the cost to operate the pool is $450,000 for an ANNUAL operating loss of $190,000. Originally, the City had proposed a $2.00 charge per room night. Why now the $4.82 per night proposal?

Perhaps the City is thinking that it will cover the annual operating loss of $190,000 and THEN WHAT? Well, the City 2008 budget contemplates the construction of an addition to the pool, presumably a recreation center that will cost $3,500,000 in 2009. It can certainly expect to have operational losses on this facility as well, perhaps as much as $300-400,000 per year. What better way to cover this cost than to charge it to unsuspecting visitors?

The City’s position is that visitors to the community itself are by far the largest user group of the pool. If this is true then why on City letterhead does Trish Bews, write as follows for the 2008 budget:

Department Purpose
“The stated mission of the Salida Recreation and Aquatic Center is to provide excellence in recreation, education, and fitness to enhance the quality of life in our community.”… “Being City-funded, our recreation programs are geared toward locals.”

2007 Department Accomplishments
Too many to list, but all are community oriented.

Hence, the City is contradicting itself as to the purpose and use of the pool.

The City also believes that visitors to town just will not notice an “extra” charge of $4.82 to their hotel bill. I can assure you that they most certainly will. Mixing a flat fee and a percentage tax charge to bills will bring scrutiny to visitor charges and create anger that will modify behavior.

Visitors just do not come to the Valley to swim in the pool, which as far as “Hot Springs” go is a complete farce. When the pool was closed for repairs, there was no drop in visits or CCVB revenue from the lodging tax. The pool is not an attraction that brings in visitors; it is merely an amenity to the town of Salida residents.

Hence, users of the pool should pay any negative cash flow from operations, meaning the community should pay through the existing sales tax of the town/county, which appear to contribute 80% of the operating revenue for the City.

Citizens should scrutinize the costs of operating the pool carefully. The relative utility of the pool and the proposed recreational building appear to be dubious at best given current City finances. City finances are in serious jeopardy given the current national economic situation and the likely rescission of contract by the purchaser of the Vandaveer property.

Taxing visitors for community projects sets a poor precedent and opens the door to further misuse of taxing privilege by the government. If this tax is approved, where does the process end?

Presently, Chaffee County visitors enjoy the best bang for the buck on outdoor activities. This valley offers the widest range and best quality of sports in any season. It also has the best price point by far. In winter, a skier can spend four days at Monarch, stay and eat in town, for what a day would cost at many of the other state ski areas. At Monarch, we intend to be price-sensitive and keep our end of the bargain in offering a great value for the recreation we provide. We simply ask that the City do the same.

Bob Nicolls
Monarch Ski Area

As proposed by City Council, Measure 2B asks voters to approve a $4.82 occupancy tax per room night. The estimated $550,000 to $600,000 in revenues generated by the tax would be allocated to the Salida Hot Springs Aquatic Center, trails and other recreational and cultural amenities, specifically the SteamPlant Theater and Event Center.

Earlier today, Mayor Chuck Rose and interim City Administrator Mike Copp met with the lodging community to discuss the measure. At the time, Rose and Copp, citing the opinion of legal counsel, said there was no way to withdraw the question from the ballot. Information came to light later in the day, researched by the Colorado Hotel and Lodging Association, causing the city’s law firm, Leavenworth and Karp, to acknowledge that state statute “does provide that the city council could withdraw the ballot question no later than 25 days prior to the Nov. 4 election.”

However, County Clerk Joyce Reno said she had already ordered the November ballot and that 2B cannot physically be removed. Therefore, if council were to pass a resolution to withdraw 2B from the ballot, the net result would be votes cast on the measure would simply not be counted. The deadline for Council to pass such a resolution would be Oct. 10.

The lodging community intends to lead the effort to lobby city council to pass the necessary resolution to withdraw the occupancy tax question at the next regularly scheduled council meeting on Oct. 6.

In exchange for withdrawing the current occupancy tax measure from the ballot, de facto Salida lodging industry leader Don Jackson is proposing that lodgers create a committee to work with city council to “create an opportunity to address (the city’s) priorities and come up with a solution that we can all support.”

The reason 2B doesn’t enjoy the lodgers support is their contention that basic assumptions were flawed, that lodgers’ input wasn’t sought, and that the new tax would make Salida’s lodging tax disproportionately high, in fact among the highest in the state.

Market analysis
Statistics from the statewide lodging association demonstrate that the proposed occupancy tax would propel Salida to among the top three destinations with the highest total percent tax on lodging in the state; second only to Pagosa Springs and higher than even Denver. Jackson contends the flat tax (the city isn’t able to charge a percentage tax) unfairly discriminates against smaller motels with lower average base rates and will have an exaggerated affect in the off-season, when occupancy rates are already weak.

Who uses the pool?
The city contends the pool is a visitor attraction and that the lodgers would benefit most from its improvement. Jackson, whose Super 8 Motel is directly across the street from the pool, respectfully disagreed. The pool “does not draw visitors in appreciable numbers,” Jackson said. “If the pool didn’t exist it would not affect occupancy.” A chorus of lodgers chimed in in agreement with their own stories of how little interest there is among their guests in using the city pool.

Steve Office of Thomas House Bed and Breakfast followed up that the cost to run the pool should be borne by the user and that visitors shouldn’t be forced to pay for something they may or may not use.

Lack of input
Sitting squarely on the hot seat fielding lodgers’ questions and criticism for nearly 90 minutes today, Mayor Rose conceded the city’s decision process with respect to the occupancy tax question was flawed.

Rose explained that when council was contemplating its revenue raising options for Salidans top three concerns – affordable housing, roads, and the pool – there was no full-time city administrator, and the city was understaffed.

Rose explained the pool had an operating deficit of $198,000 last year and is a “substandard facility” and that simply isn’t an acceptable situation.

Salida Chamber of Commerce Executive Director John Englebrecht, whose office is next door to the pool, estimated that 10 people per week come into the chamber office to complain about the “deplorable situation” at the pool.

Rose said a fiscal enhancement study conducted by Councilman Hugh Young identified a variety of funding options for roads and the pool including the occupancy tax.

But Rose put the onus of responsibility for the occupancy tax being on the ballot solidly back on the lodgers saying, “You should have been paying attention” and challenging them to form a lodging association and “bring a solution” to city council.

Some lodgers said that the occupancy tax, as first proposed at $2 per room, while not great, was supportable. For most, it seems the flash point came when the proposed occupancy fee was inexplicably raised to $4.82.

In solidarity with the lodgers at today’s meeting were representatives of Monarch Mountain, Pinon Real Estate and Frosty Roe, president of the Land Trust of the Upper Arkansas.

Roe predicted that while the occupancy tax would be most felt by the local innkeepers the trickle down effect would also negatively impact restaurants, retailers, rafters and other businesses. Roe worries that belt-tightening by businesses impacted by the occupancy tax could negatively impact the Land Trust’s revenue stream from its Common Cents for Conservation voluntary donation program. The program’s top two contributors are the Super 8 and Monarch Mountain.