When it comes to marketing a state for tourists, like sports you’re either in the game or you’re not. Washington State is currently out of the game, but we’re getting closer.
In July 2011 the state tourism office was shut down due to budget constraints. Meanwhile, our surrounding states (and main competitors) expanded their tourism marketing. California and British Columbia each now have budgets exceeding $50 million. Oregon spends more than $12 million to lure visitors. Idaho is just over $7 million. Any of the 50 U.S. state spend more than Washington does to attract visitors.
Why do states invest in tourism promotion? Because it makes good business sense. Michigan recently invested $30 million in their tourism efforts and created 10,000 new jobs and $43.5 million in tax revenues. Conversely in 1993 Colorado eliminated its tourism office. Research showed that Colorado’s domestic visitor market plunged 30% within two years, representing a loss of over $1.4 billion in tourism revenue annually. Recognizing they were ‘out of the game’ and it was affecting their economy, the state starting funding a state tourism program some seven years later. But we can’t afford to wait seven years.
Tourism means jobs, new tax revenues and affects all regions of Washington. Tourism is the fourth largest industry in the state with nearly 154,000 jobs. Visitors spent $16.9 billion in 2012, generating more than $1.0 billion in state and local taxes. Visitors also reduce our tax load. According to research conducted by Dean Runyan Associates of Portland, Washington families pay $400 less in taxes because of revenues generated by out-of-state visitors.
As the state tourism office closed the tourism industry formed the Washington Tourism Alliance (WTA) to move tourism forward. A primary focus has been to educate legislators, policy makers and business leaders of the importance of tourism for our economy, jobs and quality of life. We’ve been looking at the ways other states fund their tourism efforts. A favored model being considered involves having tourism industry sectors pay assessments that are pooled together to market the state. That’s how they do it in California and their program has been very successful. Getting industry support takes time (California took five years to pass their funding model).
The good news is that with the recently completed legislative session, the Governor and legislators agreed to provide WTA $1.0 million in ‘bridge’ funding until a more stable funding source is developed. This funding will cover website costs, postage to mail an industry funded visitor guide, a toll-free call center, research and international marketing for two years. This is a two year allocation, which means about $500,000 a year. Considering the average state tourism budget exceeds $14 million, it’s small change, but it’s a start in the right direction.
If Washington state wants to be in the tourism game, we need to support an industry developed and industry driven tourism marketing program. Otherwise we will strike out.
I’ll keep you posted on the long range funding efforts in future blogs.
Travel and Tourism Today 