Laserfiche WebLink
8 <br /> <br />REPORT <br />: RESTRUCTING AGREEMENT FOR CHARLOTTESVILLE <br />ALBEMARLE CONVENTION AND VISITORS BUREAU <br /> <br /> Mr. Mark Shore, Director for the Charlottesville Albemarle Convention and <br />Vis itors Bureau, said that the agreement was looked at as part of the Bureau's strategic <br />planning process. Mr. Shore said the major changes include: a revision of the <br />City/County funding formula and insertion of a number of reporting and accountability <br />requ irements applicable to CACVB; and redefinition of CACVB's governing board, <br />expanding the membership from three to eleven members (but eliminating the Tourism <br />Council). Mr. Shore said the funding is based on 30% of the hotel tax collected. He said <br />the goa l is to put $5.8 million back into the community. Mr. Shore said the City receives <br />$1.4 million annually from visitors from local taxes, $1.4 million from the lodging tax, <br />and $1.2 million from the meals tax. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lynch said he would like to make a chang e in the agreement, clarifying that <br />the CACVB must meet the ROI requirement every year. He said he is not sure the ROI is <br />well defined regarding performance measures. <br /> <br /> Mr. Shore noted this was a typographical error in the agreement. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schilling asked what the County's current lodging tax is, and Mr. Shore said it <br />is capped by the state at 5%. He said the agreement is based on the first 5%. <br /> Ms. Richards said she understood that increasing the lodging tax to 6% would <br />help the City support the CACVB, b ut realizes it is not doing that. <br /> <br /> Mr. Shore said the increase to 6% allowed the City to be able to make the 30% <br />jump more comfortably. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schilling asked if there are any issues with the County agreeing to the <br />changes. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox asked what happens if the County does not agree. <br /> <br /> Mr. O'Connell said he thinks any issues are fairly small and any changes may be <br />some small language changes. He said the County's budget was written as though the <br />agreement was in place. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox asked about the City investin g more than the County, and Mr. Shore said <br />that is reflective of the tax trend. He said the agreement equalizes the City on 30% of the <br />lodging tax. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati moved the ordinance authorizing the CACVB agreement, as <br />amended by Mr. Lynch, and Ms. Richar ds seconded the motion. Mr. Caravati said his <br />motion is made with the assumption that Albemarle County agrees to the funding. <br /> <br /> Mr. Shore said the County's budget is based on the formula in the agreement. <br /> <br />APPROPRIATION <br />: $1,430 - PAYMENT IN LIEU OF SIDEW ALK <br /> <br /> Mr. Schilling said he visited the property and has concerns about the process. He <br />said he asked for more information, but is not sure his questions have been adequately <br />addressed. He said he also has questions about the dollar value and said it see ms very <br />low. He said he does not have enough information to say the policy is clear and he <br />cannot support it. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tolbert said that the policy is that when it is impractical to build a sidewalk, <br />the property owner can make a payment in lieu of building one. He said in the past these <br />funds have come in as miscellaneous revenue to the CIP account. He said the funds are <br />now being appropriated. He said this sidewalk was deemed to be impractical. He said <br />there was no request to put any money in to widen t he street. <br /> <br />