Ulster County legislators spar over travel‑guide contract after questions about $100K total project cost

Ulster County Ways and Means members spent a prolonged portion of their May 15 meeting debating a proposed contract to print the county travel guide and whether the full project cost had been disclosed to the committee.

The director of tourism defended the contract and explained the project is supported by I Love New York matching funds. The director said the printing contract with Catamount Color is for $50,720 (contract figure cited during the meeting) and described the matching program: "I love New York... they're going to give us $59,000. We have to match that money in order to get it." The director added that design and production fees are lower than past contracts and that photography and content created for the guide are reused year‑round in digital promotions.

Several legislators pressed for a single, total project cost that would show how printing, design, distribution and related advertising combine. Committee members cited line items including a Flint Media contract (contracted design/advertising; figures discussed included a maximum contract number around $7,675), Catamount Color printing (figures cited around $5,720 in some materials), and distribution/advertising services contracted to CTM and others that, when combined, were described by some as producing a county out‑of‑pocket cost in the six figures. One legislator summarized: the total project cost could be "approximately anywhere between $100,000 to $111,000 depending if you do this additional $10,000 worth of photography." That same legislator added that I Love New York matching funds reduce the county’s net out‑of‑pocket cost.

Skeptics asked for a definitive accounting of the end‑to‑end cost. "I want to know when I walk out the door, how much am I going to pay for that?" one legislator asked, urging staff to present one consolidated total rather than separate line items. Supporters argued the project is a core tourism tool, cited long‑standing industry practice, and warned that cancelling or delaying the guide would prevent advertisers from receiving promised deliverables and could disrupt distribution for the season.

The committee paused, sought immediate staff clarification on the currently reported numbers, and allowed members to change previously taken votes; after the reconsideration the travel‑guide motion carried on a revote with members allowed to change their votes on the floor. Several members said they still wanted a summary showing the total net cost to the county and planned a follow‑up resolution requiring total cost disclosure for future projects.

Outcome: The travel‑guide printing contract and associated motion carried after members were allowed to change their votes on the floor; committee members requested a single accounting of total project cost going forward.