Legislature adds general‑fund support to Guam Visitors Bureau as tourist-attraction revenue lags

The Committee of the Whole reviewed the Guam Visitors Bureau (GVB) appropriation for fiscal year 2026 and heard from OFB budget staff that the visitor-attraction fund (TAF) is tracking millions of dollars below projections. For FY26, OFB’s budget presentation lists a $3,245,571 appropriation from the general fund and $25,727,166 from the tourist-attraction fund, for a combined GVB total of $28,972,737.

“Total amount being appropriated from the general fund is $3,245,571,” said Mr. Guerrero, the OFB budget director, and he told senators the tourist‑attraction fund is currently tracking roughly $6 million to $7 million below the projection used to build the FY26 budget. That shortfall prompted the inclusion of a general‑fund subsidy in the bill to maintain GVB’s FY25 spending level.

Senators pressed OFB and the budget director on how the shortfall will be handled. Senator Talahi and others voiced concern about using general‑fund money to backfill tourism funding while other agencies—especially Parks and Recreation, which manages beaches and public parks—face limited resources.

OFB described two common approaches if a special fund is short: the allotting agency may limit releases from the special fund to the amount actually collected and rely on the general fund for any gap, or agencies may continue paying allotted amounts out of the special fund during the year and let the general fund cover a shortfall at fiscal year end. Budget staff said the bill keeps GVB’s total near FY25 levels and that OFB and BBMR will manage allotments and releases as collections and cashflow dictate.

Why it matters: Tourism receipts support a set of programs and services funded by the tourist‑attraction fund. A persistent shortfall in TAF collections can push lawmakers to decide whether to use one‑time general‑fund support, reduce program levels, or restrict allotments. Several senators said they want clearer plans tying additional general‑fund subsidies to specific outcomes and to avoid diverting money from public‑safety or parks operations.

Next steps: Committee members asked to have GVB and related agency officials appear before the panel to explain the FY26 program-level choices and how they will use both TAF and any general‑fund support. The committee recessed for lunch and scheduled GVB officials to appear in the Committee of the Whole for follow-up discussion.

Ending: OFB’s presentation left senators with clear figures but open questions about how TAF volatility will affect service levels around the island. Lawmakers asked for more analysis and a plan from GVB and the budget office before final enactment.