Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board establishes working group to study other communities’ tourism approaches amid Open Meetings Act guidance
Summary
The board approved a short‑term working group to research tourism practices in similarly sized communities; members were named and staff and the board’s attorney reminded members about Open Meetings Act limits on informal sharing and rolling quorums.
The Lodgers Tax Advisory Board formed a monthly working group on July 15 to research tourism plans used by communities of comparable size and to return recommendations for the board’s 2026 work plan.
Board members volunteered and staff identified likely participants; those named for the working group during the meeting included Kevin, David Hampton, Georgia Strickfadden and Jennifer Armstrong. The board’s stated expectation is for the working group to meet monthly for five months and to provide monthly updates to LTAB and a final report by early December.
The group’s scope prompted debate among members about whether the approach — which would scan other communities for ideas — was sufficiently substantive to advance the county’s strategic‑plan implementation. One board member said the working group described in the agenda packet felt too limited and suggested a charter or broader task force might better support actionable recommendations.
The board’s attorney cautioned about informal communication outside noticed meetings. “Please make sure that you just send them to the chair and Ellen so we can just prevent any kind of rolling quorum issues,” the attorney said, reminding members that sharing material broadly by email could create an unintended public‑meeting obligation. Later in the meeting the attorney clarified that a board communication submitted during the meeting could be included in the minutes as a report but that substantive discussion on non‑noticed items should be reserved for properly agendized meetings.
Staff and the chair said the working group was intended to be a limited research body to produce information the full board could evaluate; members agreed to provide suggested public contacts or businesses for the group to consult. The meeting record did not show a formal roll‑call vote to create the working group; members discussed membership and next steps and staff said the group would begin meeting and report back to the full board.
