Franklin Tourism Commission refines draft survey to prioritize tourism investments

The Franklin Tourism Commission spent its Feb. 19 meeting focused largely on a draft survey designed to set the commission's strategic investment priorities for tourism.

Commissioners said the questionnaire is intended to capture a ranked list of projects and program types so the commission can present clear priorities to Engage Franklin, city staff and potential partners. Commissioners discussed five broad categories in question one: creating or expanding annual signature events; investing in marketing and visitor-technology services; promoting nature- and outdoor-based tourism; developing visitor infrastructure such as kiosks or a visitor center; and growing new tourism attractions (sports, festivals, conference space).

The commission's discussion centered on refining language so respondents understand what each option means and whether advertising costs should be embedded in marketing-technology items. Commissioners repeatedly emphasized the distinction between one-time infrastructure costs and ongoing subscription fees for software or geofencing advertising. Mark Wiley (commission member, representing Engage Franklin coordination topics) said the group should make it clear that technology choices often require monthly subscriptions and advertising budgets in addition to set-up fees.

Members debated whether the survey should ask respondents to force-rank items or allow selecting up to three options; several commissioners suggested both approaches can help validate priorities but warned forced ranking can fatigue respondents. Commissioners asked staff to include free-form fields where respondents can write in specific ideas (for example, birding events, sports tournaments or EV charging stations) and to add clarifying prompts about expected outcomes, such as whether a choice aims primarily to increase overnight stays.

Technology and distribution also drew sustained attention. Commissioners discussed mobile apps, kiosks, QR-code signage and leveraging airport or regional marketing to reach visitors. Several commissioners noted that technology alone will not produce results without an inventory of marketable attractions to advertise: "You can't just advertise 'Franklin' — you have to advertise something to prompt a trip," one commissioner said during the discussion (unattributed in the record). The group discussed adding language to the survey that asks whether respondents think advertising should be regional, digital or tied to partner campaigns run by Engage Franklin.

Commissioners agreed to send the draft to Engage Franklin for technical feedback on feasibility and market targeting and to return a revised survey at the next commission meeting. John (staff member) and Mark agreed to retool several questions and bring a revised version back for the March meeting.

The commission did not take a formal vote on the survey text at this meeting; the discussion served as direction to staff to revise language, add clarifying fields, and solicit Engage Franklin's input before broad distribution.

The group also explored a range of small and large investments that could be raised in the survey, including electronic visitor kiosks, an updated tourism app, geofencing advertising tied to events, and amenities for electric vehicles. Commissioners repeatedly asked for cost and ROI estimates to accompany any prioritization, recommending that staff or Engage Franklin supply feasibility studies before the commission endorses major capital commitments.