City Council Agenda
Regular Meeting
August 7, 2007
VII. Consent Calendar
These matters include routine financial and administrative actions, which are usually approved by a single majority vote. Individual items may be removed from Consent by a member of the Council or the public for discussion and action.
D. Consideration of a Resolution entering into a Destination Marketing Agreement with Jeff Burghardt, President, Anda/Burghardt Advertising, Inc. for Economic Revitalization and Destination Marketing services in an amount not to exceed $60,000 for Economic Revitalization and $125,000 for Destination Marketing.
COMMENTS:
• City expenditures for tourism include, $125,000 for “Destination Marketing,” $60,000 for “Economic Revitalization,” “Economic Development and Marketing Director,” and $108,376/year for Monterey County Convention and Visitors Bureau (MCCVB) “marketing services.” Note: MCCVB figure is for FY 2006/07; anticipate higher cost for FY 2007/08.
• Total City Tourism Budget FY 2007/08: $293,376 annually. $308,600 budgeted for “Marketing and Economic Revitalization” per Adopted Budget.
• For context, compare $308,600 annually for "Marketing and Economic Revitalization" (FY 2007/08) vs. total department expenditures (FY 2007/08), as follows:
$ 308,445 Legal
$ 313,101 Information Services/Network Management
$ 328,574 Building Maintenance Services
$ 457,661 Forest, Parks and Beach
$ 13,094,894 TOTAL EXPENDITURES (FY 2007/08)
(Source: CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA CALIFORNIA ADOPTED BUDGET FISCAL YEARS 2007/08 THROUGH 2009/10)
• Never in the history of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea has the City had record amounts for our annual budget (FY 2007/08 $13,094,894), Reserve Funds ($ 9.6 million), “marketing and economic revitalization” aka tourism promotion ($ 308,600). Yet from residents’ perspective, never has the City had a closed community center (Scout House) AND a cultural center which is no longer a “community center” (Sunset Center) AND a closed and publicly inaccessible National Register of Historic Places building (Flanders Mansion) AND a dilapidated and unkempt Forest Theater property AND an unused and non-maintained city park (Rio Park) AND poor streets, roads and avenues AND only now being rectified “flunked” fire hydrants and water lines AND an unfunded and non-existent tree and forest program for our senescent urbanized forest.
• Question: Does this state of affairs reflect a City Council and City Administration striving to honor the city credo, namely that “THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA is hereby determined to be primarily, a residential City” (Ordinance No. 96, 1929) or does it reflect a City Council and City Administration consumed in a vicious cycle of insatiable greed for greed’s sake?
REFERENCES:
City Council Minutes
Regular meeting
July 3, 2007
X. RESOLUTIONS
X.B. Consideration of a Resolution authorizing the City Administrator to enter into a consulting agreement with Anda/Burghardt for the position of Economic Development and Marketing Director in an amount of $60,000 annually.
Council Member ROSE moved approval of the concept of a revised combined consulting agreement with Anda/Burghardt for the positions of Economic Development and Marketing Director with a required clear division of labor between the two positions for accounting purposes and measurement of results, seconded by Council Member TALMAGE and carried by the following roll call:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: HAZDOVAC, ROSE, TALMAGE
& McCLOUD
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: CUNNINGHAM
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
City Council Minutes
Regular meeting
September 12, 2006
VII. CONSENT CALENDAR
H. Consideration of a Resolution entering into an agreement with the Monterey County Convention and Visitors Bureau (MCCVB) for marketing services in an amount not to exceed $108,376 for Fiscal Year 2006-07.
3 comments:
To an outside observer of Carmel government it would look as if nothing gets done unless Mayor McCloud gives it her personal attention. If it is unimportant to her and she doesn't bother to follow up, it falls through the cracks. It is not her job to micromanage but it appears that she needs to control everything personally - sometimes in the most minute detail. Staff morale seems so depressed that any but the most routine steps are put off until the mayor signs off on them through the city administrator. Actually, even routine projects have apparently gotten staff members in trouble because McCloud wasn't consulted or she or a friend didn't like the result. Since the record seems to show that she is not a multi-tasker, lots of things seem not to get done that were easily taken care of historically.
City expenditures are rising but deferred maintenance etc. is not being caught up. Instead the city council spends money unwisely or adds to the city's already excessive reserves instead of utilizing them as intended. Money is spent to bring in more of the wrong kind of tourists but is not spent to improve things that would improve the lives of the people, who live in Carmel.
By now the record has made it clear that the city council led by Mayor McCloud has little or no interest in maintaining what has made Carmel unique or in doing or funding anything that will benefit residents unless it also helps business and tourism. Anything else seems to be regarded as a financial drain on money that could be spent to make Carmel another Solvang. Community and cultural centers (Sunset, Scout House) cost money to maintain but don't enhance tourism. If a building is listed on a register of historic places but doesn't attract tourists, what good is it? If an historic theater doesn't bring in tourist dollars, why spend any more money on it? If a city park is merely preserving openspace get rid of it. Don't waste money to maintain it. What is the point of spending money for leadership for the Fire Department? Who cares if morale tanked and equipment including hydrants is no longer adequate? It's cheaper to contract leadership from another city that doesn't even share a common border - from officers who don't even know Carmel and its fire service at all, a city whose fire chief says he is already overworked taking care of his own city. Such things don't impact business and tourism directly. Only the residents stand to lose. Why spend money to maintain and revive our urbanized forest? There are still plenty of trees. The tourists won't notice a difference for a long time. When one of the old or diseased trees on city property, that should have been removed and replaced long ago, falls it will probably only damage the home or car of a resident so if any money at all is spent on trees it should be restricted to the commercial area where the tourists are most likely to notice. Why do Carmel's voters support a mayor and city council members, who treat them as, at best, second class citizens?
Post a Comment