HomeMy WebLinkAbout110724 email - LTAC concernsALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
Dear LTAC Board Members,
As a representative of multiple applicant organizations as well as a Jefferson County citizen, I am reaching out to express my concerns regarding recent developments in the 2025 funding
cycle. I understand that the October meeting's cancellation was outside the LTAC Board's control and was directed by the Board of County Commissioners. However, I feel compelled to
address several issues that have created frustration and uncertainty to many tourism stakeholders.
DISCUSSION re:New Priorities for 2025 LTAC Funding Cycle
As someone who has been very involved in the LTAC process the last few years, the introduction of "new priorities" for the 2025 funding cycle is troubling, particularly given that these
priorities were neither discussed nor presented to anyone prior to the the Request for Proposals being approved by LTAC Board or the public notice..
DISCUSSION re: LTAC Process
It was also discussed during the September 23 BOCC meeting that the designation of a DMO could now be included in proposals within the LTAC application cycle. This presents two overlapping
issues that have further complicated the LTAC process. Instead of fostering collaboration and transparency, this method of top-down decision-making limits valuable input and leaves
many stakeholders—including the LTAC board—disenfranchised. Expediency appears to be prioritized over fairness, which ultimately harms the process and does not serve the best interests
of the applicants or our community/county at large.
The short turnaround for this year’s funding cycle (Sept 3–Oct 4) was challenging enough, but the priorities introduced during the BOCC meeting left applicants with just two weeks to
revise their submissions. This last-minute adjustment caused confusion and unclear expectations under which applicants were originally operating as they completed their applications.
RFP Scoring Sheet
Moreover, while I had suggested implementing a scoring system of some kind to prior LTAC Chairs Eisenhour and then Brotherton after last year's award cycle and even provided examples
of other municipalities processes, as a way to improve transparency and fairness to applicants, yet this scoring system is skewed to elevate the Public Facilities District (PFD) as
a top ranked choice.
DISCUSSION re: Extending RFP Deadline
Additionally, I respectfully urge the Board to consider the implications of extending the deadline for this cycle. Besides the fact that 16 applications were received within the given
deadline, due to the October meeting's cancellation, the timeline has already been delayed. Another postponement, potentially leading to a decision in December or later due to the holidays,
would make it very challenging for organizations to plan their budgets effectively. The sudden cancellation of the October meeting, especially with many applicants prepared to present,
added considerable disruption. Having received notice of the cancellation within an hour of the scheduled start time, many were left feeling their efforts to prepare and engage were
undervalued.
In closing, I appreciate the hard work that the LTAC Board invests in this important process, but I hope that these concerns will be taken into consideration for greater clarity and
consistency in future funding cycles.
Thank you for your attention and for your ongoing service to our community.
Jessie Short