Trinity County advisory board advances plan for countywide tourism development district, sets 3% assessment and nonprofit structure

The Trinity County advisory board reviewed and advanced the plan to form a countywide tourism development district and the nonprofit that would administer it, agreeing to a proposed 3% assessment rate (with a written option to raise the rate up to 5% over the district term) and asking staff and consultants to draft the initial management district plan for review at the next meeting.

The discussion matters because the assessment — if approved through a petition process that requires lodging-owner signatures representing over 50% of assessed value and later a public hearing — would create a new, ongoing revenue stream dedicated to tourism marketing and destination projects. Board members, county staff and the consultant walked through incorporation, tax-exemption steps, outreach strategy and a draft budget that uses a $200,000 example to show how funds might be allocated.

Consultant Katie, who led the presentation, outlined the corporation-formation timeline the group would follow if it chooses to form a new nonprofit: draft and approve articles of incorporation and bylaws, file with the California Secretary of State, submit IRS Form SS-4 to obtain an Employer Identification Number, prepare and file a federal tax-exempt application (the speaker said the IRS review typically takes five to 10 months), then obtain state tax-exempt recognition from the California Franchise Tax Board. Katie told the board the advisory will receive a draft management district plan to review before the petition phase.

Board members discussed governance and timing. The advisory endorsed starting the district-wide assessment at 3% and agreed to include language allowing the assessment to increase up to 5% during the five-year term; members also revised the draft to permit annual increases of up to 1 percentage point (the draft had originally proposed 0.5% per year). The board and consultant emphasized that final assessment rates and other parameters can still be adjusted through the management district plan up until the petition drive begins.

On outreach and the petition process, consultants said the stakeholder outreach and consensus-building work runs continuously through the formation timeline (roughly March through July in the presentation). The consultant said she would provide outreach materials — sample emails, surveys, FAQs and potential open-house/webinar formats — and recommended one-on-one meetings with lodging operators once contact data are available under an NDA the county must approve. The board discussed limits on information: they will receive contact lists but not the weighted-vote values for businesses; the consultant said the teams with NDA access will report back on progress toward the 50% petition threshold without disclosing individual weighted totals.

The draft management district plan presented several defined parameters: district name (Trinity County Tourism Development District), five-year term, countywide boundaries covering short-term lodging (those subject to the county TOT), and an illustrative $200,000 first-year budget. The example budget allocates 50% to sales and marketing, 24% to destination/attraction development, 20% to administration and advocacy, 4% contingency/reserve and 2% for county collection fees. The plan also lists potential services the district could fund, including advertising, trade-show attendance, PR and marketing collateral, small-scale destination improvements and project-based support for events and wayfinding.

Board members debated whether to route administration through an existing nonprofit or form a new nonprofit corporation. Several members said hiring a dedicated, paid tourism professional (rather than relying only on volunteers) would likely be necessary for effective program management; the consultant and members discussed options for an owners’ association or an arrangement where an existing nonprofit serves as fiscal agent and a separate district board directs spending.

The board took two formal actions. A motion to appoint an ad hoc advisory committee (the mover of the motion was not recorded in the available transcript) to work with staff and the consultant was made and approved by voice vote; the motion named the three volunteers to serve on the committee (the minutes list Leah Groves and Ryan Crockett among them). A separate motion to approve the minutes of the prior meeting was moved and approved by voice vote.

The advisory board closed by asking the consultant to circulate the initial draft management district plan and the lodger contact list obtained under NDA, to prepare outreach materials for one-on-one meetings, and to schedule the ad hoc committee to work on next steps. The consultant said she would also seek legal-analyst input on selected questions (for example, whether district funds may be passed to other event organizers in project-specific circumstances). The board scheduled future meetings and asked members to begin thinking of potential board members (including lodging operators and other community representatives) for the nonprofit that would oversee district funds.

Members emphasized that petition signatures will be “yes” only; lodging operators who do not sign do not register “no” on the petition, and the public hearing and protest period that follows mailed notice provides the formal opportunity to record opposition before the district takes effect. The consultant repeated that details in the management district plan — boundaries, assessment rate, term and services — must be final enough to present to lodging owners when seeking signatures.

The meeting concluded with the advisory committee appointments in place and direction to prepare the draft management district plan and outreach materials ahead of the next meeting.