Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Arcata council asks staff to investigate Visit Arcada website redesign as chamber and staff weigh costs
Summary
Council authorized staff to investigate options for redesigning the city-owned Visit Arcada website and to return with an RFP if appropriate, while some council members urged waiting for an economic strategic plan; staff estimated costs between $25,000 and $50,000.
The Arcata City Council on April 1 instructed staff to investigate options for redesigning and updating the Visit Arcada tourism website and to return with a request for proposals if appropriate. Council discussion centered on timing, cost and whether the city or outside partners should run tourism promotion.
Council members expressed mixed views: some urged pausing until the city's economic strategic plan is finished in late June or early July to align any redesign with broader promotion strategy; others said the current site is failing and the city should move sooner. "I think our Instagram does pretty well for the city and it's just the website is is not doing as well," one council member said; another called $25,000 a small part of the work but noted chamber estimates nearer $50,000.
The city manager told the council that the chamber and downtown businesses had characterized the Visit Arcada site as one of the county's weakest tourism sites and that staff intended to pursue informal solicitation and seek partner funding from lodging or other local partners. Web developer Crystal Henson, speaking in public comment, urged leveraging the existing WordPress site and focusing on content and maintenance as a low-cost alternative to a full redesign: "You can spend a lot of money on a new website, but if the content isn't solid, then you're just throwing bad money after good," she said.
Council member Atkins moved to have staff investigate options and bring RFPs back after the strategic plan; council member Schaefer seconded and the motion passed by voice vote. Staff said any contract or spending would return to council for approval before execution.
