Mariposa supervisors pause visitor services change after broad public push to keep in‑person center

Mariposa County supervisors on May 12 heard a staff recommendation to award the county’s visitor services contract to Yosemite Foothills, the lowest‑cost proposer, but after extensive public comment the board directed staff to extend the existing contract and return with a revised request for proposals designed with local stakeholders.

Lee Westerlund, assistant county administrative officer, told the board the county received three proposals: Adventure Mariposa at $249,000 per year, the Chamber of Commerce at $209,000, and Yosemite Foothills at $180,000. Westerlund said staff recommended Yosemite Foothills because the proposal emphasized community engagement, social media and a comprehensive online calendar while meeting the county’s evaluation criteria and purchasing policy (purchases above $60,000 are subject to competitive solicitation under the county purchasing policy amended in 2023).

Why it matters: Tourism is Mariposa County’s primary economic driver and the existing visitor center staff say they convert walk‑in visitors into overnight stays and local spending. Dozens of speakers — including lodging and downtown business owners, Chamber leaders, the tourism bureau director and volunteer organizers — told supervisors that the current Mariposa County Visitor Center handles roughly 23,000 walk‑in visits a year, offers restroom and parking capacity, provides emergency traveler assistance, and delivers measurable transient‑occupancy tax revenue.

Supporters warned that a shift to a predominantly digital model could undermine real‑time assistance for visitors who arrive without reception, do not speak English, or need help during road closures and wildfire evacuations. "An in‑person visitor center creates something a primarily digital startup simply cannot replicate, and that is the human connection and trusted local guidance," said Laurie Dixon, Mariposa County Chamber of Commerce secretary and local business owner.

Tourism partners urged a hybrid approach rather than an abrupt switch. Jonathan Farrington, executive director of the Yosemite Mariposa County Tourism Bureau, said his office maintains major online infrastructure and is willing to partner with whichever contractor is chosen; he warned that duplicate efforts can dilute results and that paid promotion and mapping tools require sustained investment.

Several small business owners and event producers echoed concerns about downtown parking and ADA access at a proposed alternative location. "We have a visitor center, bathrooms and a parking lot — I caution you about ever unraveling that," said Brenda Ostero, a resident with destination management experience.

Board action and next steps: After hearing public comment and questioning staff about KPIs, ADA compliance and contingency plans, supervisors did not immediately award a new contract. Instead the board directed staff to work with the Chamber to bring back an extension to the current contract (so services continue through the upcoming season) and to reconvene a stakeholder group — including the tourism bureau, Chamber representatives, local business owners and proponents of digital modernization — to draft a revised RFP for board review before release. The board asked that any future contract be anchored to a January 1 start to avoid mid‑season transitions.

What was not decided: The board did not vote to award the visitor services contract to any proposer on May 12. Staff emphasized the recommendation to the board was Yosemite Foothills, but the board chose to pause and consult further.

The board asked staff to return with contract‑extension options and a revised RFP timeline that would allow a final transition, if any, in the off‑season. Supervisors said they want the RFP to explicitly protect baseline in‑person requirements (parking, restrooms, ADA access, hours/staffing) while including measurable online‑marketing deliverables.

The board expects staff to return with proposed contract terms and an RFP draft for review at a future meeting; no final award date was set.