Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tourism topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council debates $5,000 tourism-fund request for private seasonal "Miracle" attraction; discussion continued
Summary
A local business seeking $5,000 from Effingham's hotel-motel (tourism) fund presented visitor and social-media metrics that its seasonal 'Miracle' attraction drew thousands of visitors; council split over whether tourism funds should support an apparently profitable private venture and deferred a decision for further discussion.
Michael Brummer, representing the applicant, asked the City Council to approve $5,000 in tourism funds to support "Miracle Weepenny," saying the business invested roughly $25,000 and more than 500 volunteer hours to convert a downtown cocktail bar into a seasonal Christmas attraction.
"In just 4 weeks, we have welcomed over 6,000 guests," Brummer told the council, adding that the enterprise was on pace to serve more than 12,000 people by year-end and that more than 25% of guests came from more than 30 miles away.
Tourism staff said the applicant applied to the tourism advisory board, which recommended $1,000 by a 6–3 vote; the applicant declined that smaller award and asked council for $5,000. Brummer and supporters told the council the event drives outside visitation, overnight stays and spillover spending at hotels, restaurants and shops.
Several council members questioned whether tourism funds — which are generally intended to support "heads and beds" and seed-stage projects — should be used for a profitable, privately owned business that already reported significant attendance. One council member said the fund is limited and cautioned about setting precedent for awarding money to any business that decorates for the holidays.
Other council members and commenters argued the available hotel-motel budget is underused and that projects that demonstrably bring visitors to town merit support. "Each project is different and stands on its own merits," one council member said, noting the tourism board and council can judge whether a particular event creates visitation.
Because there was no consensus, the council asked staff to bring the item back for further discussion at a subsequent meeting so members can review additional data and the board's recommendation before a final vote.
