Oak Harbor LTAC committee refines application scoring, keeps state reporting requirements

The Oak Harbor Lodging Tax Advisory Committee met Feb. 4 and discussed revisions to the city's Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) grant application, agreeing on several scoring and wording changes while leaving state-required reporting questions intact.

Committee members said the discussion was intended to make the application clearer and easier to score. Committee Chair (unnamed) opened the meeting by describing it as “more of a casual discussion about the application,” and members then reviewed individual questions and point values to reduce ambiguity for applicants.

The committee focused first on tightening language and reordering questions so reviewers see a project timeline earlier in the application. Members agreed to move the question asking applicants to “Describe the project activity, including a timeline of events with all important dates” to the front of the form so it “sets the stage” for reviewers before financial and marketing details are considered.

Members also discussed how to score the application’s shoulder‑season question. The existing draft gave 15 points to projects that target October through May; several members said that high point value penalized some summer events. One member argued that “if you want a great event and you want good weather, it’s not going to be in the shoulder seasons,” and the committee agreed to reduce the shoulder‑season point value from 15 to 5 so the criterion remains but has less weight.

On economic impact scoring, the committee recommended combining two closely related questions (economic investment and general benefit to the city) into a single 10‑point question framed to ask how the project would benefit the community of Oak Harbor. Committee member Margaret, who reviewed example applications from other cities, said some sample forms were “very lengthy and very confusing,” and supported streamlining to improve scoring consistency.

Members also recommended adding a new question asking applicants how their organization intends to become self‑sustaining or reduce long‑term reliance on LTAC funding. The committee discussed using a separate 10‑point item that would require applicants that repeatedly seek LTAC grants to describe plans for financial sustainability.

Several members raised practical concerns about measuring impact. A committee member who also serves on the Embrace board said the organization uses a commercially purchased cell‑phone dataset called Datafy and that such data are useful but imperfect: “We have data that will show that [a first‑time visitor] was here, ... it’s good data. It’s not always great data, but it tracks credit cards. I mean, it tracks a lot.” The committee agreed to keep the state‑required reporting fields that feed into the annual JLARC report — including counts of attendees and overnight stays — because those items cannot be removed from local reporting forms.

Committee members noted the LTAC program’s funding source is the hotel‑tax (the local “heads‑and‑beds” levy set in state law) and said the collection rate is set by state statute and cannot be changed locally. The group also discussed whether eligibility should be limited to activities inside the city limits; members concluded the application language should prioritize benefits to the Oak Harbor community but remain broad enough to allow events nearby that demonstrably benefit Oak Harbor (for example, a fair held just outside city boundaries).

There were no formal changes adopted by a recorded roll‑call vote at this meeting; instead, members reached agreement on the draft wording and point adjustments to be returned in revised form at the next application cycle. The chair said staff will compile the suggested edits and bring a revised application back to the committee ahead of the fall cycle, likely in August or September.

On procedural matters, the committee approved the meeting agenda and the previous meeting minutes by voice vote. The chair closed the meeting after a motion to adjourn.