Michigan Rolling in Dough? Gives Out Raises, Plus Millions in Tourism Subsidies
Two votes in the state Senate on Wednesday may cause residents to question how seriously lawmakers are treating the need to restrain government spending. The first vote was on a resolution rejecting a 3 percent pay hike for unionized state government employees. The total cost of the raise is $77 million. To be fair, a majority of Senators did vote to reject the pay hike, but not enough to attain the two-thirds supermajority required on such measures. (See previous post on this site.)
The second measure would spend $9.5 million on tourism subsidies in the form of advertisements paid for by taxpayers. The main beneficiaries of and lobbyists for this subsidy are the owners of big resort hotels. Yet they have explicitly rejected spending their own money to pay for the ads, as reported by the Mackinac Center's Michael LaFaive.
Specifically, the state tourism industry's own 2007-2011 strategic planning report, titled "Michigan Tourism Strategic Plan," contains this:
There is absolutely no industry support for a broad-based industry self-assessment approach . . . Without exception, representatives from a variety of tourism industry segments indicated their members and/or Boards would strongly oppose such an approach.
Senate Bill 619 authorizing the tourism subsidy passed the Senate with just one dissenting vote, Sen. Mickey Switalski, D-Roseville. Perhaps not coincidentally, Switalski was also the lone Democrat who voted to reject the pay hike.
Permission to reprint this blog post in whole or in part is hereby granted, provided that the author (or authors) and the Mackinac Center for Public Policy are properly cited. Permission to reprint any comments below is granted only for those comments written by Mackinac Center policy staff.
Problems with way tourism dollars spent
I dont begrudge the tourism campaign if it's actually productive but I question its effectiveness.
I do freelance writing for the tourism industry: specifically, I write about lakes. In the process of researching information and statistics on Michigan lakes, I'm amazed at my inability to find relevant information via search engine. It didn't used to be this way. I could search a common term and come up with page upon page of information. Now, everything appears to have been removed in favor of rolling it into those "award-winning websites", Michigan.gov or Michigan.org! If I research campgrounds, I end up with a difficult-to-navigate partial list at Michigan.gov, heavily weighted toward a few locations. If I look for cottages to rent or vacation rentals, I have the same problem.If Michigan were intentionally trying to discourage tourism they couldn't have done a better job! I almost believe that Michigan wants to keep secret our huge number of National Forest and State Forest campgrounds. Our State Parks also get short shrift. Half of our previously public lake information is now tied up in academic/university websites not easily accessed by the public, if at all. Perhaps the truth is, our DEQ-heavy state bureaucracies really ARE attempting to protect our public lands from visitors. If so, we have lost our only true tourism advantage-and our rights to fully utilize public lands.
Second, resort hotels advertise on websites that have a search engine presence.If I were an owner contemplating advertising dollars, this would be my least favorable expenditure, too. I could be advertising on a variety of websites that would come up on a search engine based on the attractions I wished to highlight: there are tons of golf course-related, boating-related, etc websites. My dollars would be better spent there and it would cost me considerably less that advertising dollars spent with the State. Believe me, these resort owners have researched what brings their clients in - and Michigan is doing it ALL WRONG!
Michigan lacks an on-line pfd travel magazine like most states have. Instead, they want to send you one in the mail. People dont want you to send them one-they want it now! They dont want to send their email address to get the resulting spam. Who is responsible for such a short-sighted decision? And who pays for all of that expensive glossy printing? Only the advertising they arent getting. Some states have well over 40 pages of high-color photos and text with hyperlinks to city websites,articles about specific attractions or even pages of suggestions of things of do in a specific region.Surprisingly, the tourism industry in those states is willing to pay for advertising in these on-line glossys. If I want a list and map of the public boat launches in a given area, I should be able to find that with a couple of clicks.
Michigan could do so much more to encourage tourism. But first they have to stop focusing on Ski Resorts and high-end tourism. More small dollars come in thru tourism than large ones - follow the money. Make our winter season more of an asset-it works for Park City Utah! Concentrate not just on downhill slopes, but snowmobile trails, cross-country skiing, ice fishing. Encourage the RV retirees to spend more time in Michigan with better access to pleasant campgrounds, winter hook-ups and possibly coupons obtained thru RV dealers for a second night free. Encourage family camping-more families need a week-end break at a campground only a hundred miles from home-or less.Focus on Canadian travelers more.
And, fix the roads! This really IS a priority-not high--speed rail to nowhere. Most tourists would be more likely to come experience a steam train tour. Cant we help out some of the small rail owners who could do that? A color-tour rail experience across the UP would likely be a big draw and inject vital dollars into the economy. Most visitors aren't going to fly in for the high-dollar week-end at one of the ski resorts: they're coming by car, pick-up truck and RV! I believe the Pure Michigan campaign has potential. But the potential isn't being realized. Big changes are needed to make the investment worth the money.