Tuesday the Bay County Commissioners “balked” at the idea of giving the City of Panama City Beach $108,000 to fund lifeguards at Rick Seltzer Park because of the expense and liability concerns. Seriously?  I mean, come on.  We went through this last year, all the controversy, and we had 11 tourists that drown here on our beaches!  Pensacola has had 4 drownings in five years, Walton County had none last year, we had 11!  Eleven drownings in one year!  That’s more in one year than we’ve ever had!  How does this not deeply concern those in charge?

Today, a Letter to the Editor was published in the News Herald that’s quite good.  In fact, some of the above was sourced from it.  Read it here.

The writer goes on to say that one could make a worthy argument that safer beaches could, in fact, be used as a marketing ploy to help draw people to our area.  We want a WOW marketing campaign, how’s this for a nugget:  “Feel Safe on Panama City Beach” – that will draw families.  How does the bad press look when potential visitors hear about 11 people drowning in our waters in one year, as opposed to none in our neighboring Walton County, whom I might ad is our direct competition.  Are people scared of coming to our beaches?  Are our beaches deemed dangerous to tourists looking to come to our area?  State your opinion in the comments section.

I understand there are legal ramifications for everything and liability issues with every action we as a community make, but why aren’t we taking tourism and city officials from our neighboring areas out to lunch to pick their brains on how they are doing it.  This isn’t some novel idea that no one’s figured out how to do.  Communities are doing this, communities have been doing this for a long time, there is a formula that works, and we need to employ it in Panama City Beach.

The author of the article reminds us that Chairman Jerry Girvin backed away from supporting this Tuesday after receiving conflicting reports from lawyers concerning liabilities of the County.  What!?  So, find another lawyer, read the precedents he proposes and make a more informed decision.  Again, others are doing this, and the success is obviously apparent.

Commissioner Mike Thomas was concerned about the idea of spending $100k on something that primarily benefited tourists.  Yea, benefitted tourists LIVES.  100 grand to save a few lives is more than worth it – the good publicity we’d get off it alone would make it worth our while, saving lives would be icing on the cake.  Oh, and may I remind you that tourists are the lifeblood of our area?  We have NO industry here except tourism.  We scare them off, we’re screwed.

Notes from Today’s TDC Meeting

• Bed Taxes are up $117,000 thanks to back-taxes being collected.
• The Circus by the Sea is more than likely coming back.  Maybe it will draw more crowds next year.
• The CVB has a new interactive marketing manager coming on board.
• Rowe distributed estimates of costs of strategic plan proposals to board.  I’ll be asking for copies of those to post here soon.
• Mayor Gayle Oberst explained that Panama City Beach could not use bed taxes to fund lifeguards.  As one Marketing Committee member told me later, it’s a good thing we’re smarter than Walton county on that issue.  I have a lifeguard manifesto brewing; I’m sure it’ll come out any day now.
• The TDC’s market research firm, Klages, is up for contract renewal, and the board showed concern that the 2008 results were not worth the investment.  Tabled.  Marketing Research, tabled.

Now to the juicy stuff…

Spring Break is heating up quickly… Spring Break funding was tabled after Dan Rowe requested approval on the MTVu plan ($150K CVB, $100K co-op).

Chairman Andy Phillips and Marketing Committee Chairman Buddy Wilkes questioned whether the co-op could really raise $100K. Mr. Rowe believes so; however lodging leaders stepped up quickly and said that because of the exclusive booking deal MTVu has with Student City, they would not participate in that co-op.

Board member Mike Bennett suggests the funding should go into a different Spring Break program.  Dan Rowe suggested that if it’s not MTVu, then put the money in something other than Spring Break.  Jack Bishop said the Klages report proved the CVB should invest the $150,000 into Spring Break. (It’s getting good!)

Folks in the audience suggested that only the Boardwalk benefited from the 2008 Spring Break plan.  (It’s really getting good!)

There was a hint that there may be another Spring Break community workshop. The marketing committee will address the issue before the next TDC meeting on November 6.  (Don’t you think this is going to get good!?)

And More Utter Disregard for the Special Event Policy

The Board unanimously approved 2009 funding for the Panama City Beach Seafood, Wine, & Music Festival.  Wow.  Wasn’t even on the agenda.

Special Event Side Note – Do you realize that 3.25 million dollars worth of lodging has to be brought in to raise $65K in bed taxes?

If PCBSWMF would have reported the need for $65,000 invested in the infrastructure at Frank Brown Park for next year’s event, that would be different.  PCBSWMF Promoter Jack Bishop stated that the event could not serve 30,000 attendees as reported by previous promoters. Hopefully PCBSWMF will use all $65K to improve the infrastructure.  We’ll see.

Speaking of we’ll see, we’ll see the full PCBSWMF report next month.  Hopefully that report will include exactly how and where the 2008 TDC investment was spent.

In the meantime, we sure would like to have other promoters comment here with your thoughts on the TDC’s Special Events “Policy.”

If I misinterpreted anyone’s comments from today’s meeting, please email me at lancaster.kirk@gmail.com, or even better yet, clarify your message right here in the comments section.

8 of the 9 board members were present for the special meeting that was called last Friday. Absent was Mike Nelson. Public attendance was probably the smallest it has been in the last year. It’s anyone’s guess whether this was due to the unusual scheduling of the meeting, a lack of public interest, or the public just agreeing with the priorities of the TDC/CVB as set out in the budget.

The board unanimously approved the FY 2009 budget which begins on October 1st. The budgets were accepted as proposed by staff and no motions were made suggesting any changes. Final approval will now be up to the Bay County Commission which is scheduled to take up the matter on Setember 16^th.

A few highlights:

College Spring Break: The budget provides for $250,000($150,000 CVB and $100,000 co-op) for College Spring Break marketing. President Rowe advised that a proposal has been received from mtvU to return. Considering the prior board discussion about whether the CVB should be in the college spring business and the promise of a public discussion that has never taken place, it is quite interesting that the budget for this controversial market segment has now actually been increased.

Sports Marketing: The budget allocates $32,500 to fund a feasibility study for the multi-use indoor facility previously discussed. Mayor Oberst took the opportunity to point out to the board that the bulk of the operating cost of Frank Brown Park is paid for by the City of Panama City Beach. She explained that the City spends about $3 million operating the park while only receiving $400,000 in income from the park.

Special Events: Although the Plan of Work explains that FY 2009 will be a transitional year, the CVB basically plans on providing the same funding as FY 2008. $160,000 in direct funding is included:

$15,000 Gulf Coast Charity Horse Show

$25,000 Emerald Coast Cruzin

$50,000 Wine & Seafood Festival (previously Indian Summer Festival)

$50,000 Grand Lagoon National Fishing Tournament

$10,000 4th of July Fireworks

$10,000 Seabreeze Jazz Festival

Only the Horse Show, EC Cruzin, and the Jazz Festival actually requested funding. I find the $100,000 for the Wine & Seafood Festival and the Grand Lagoon National to be especially disturbing due to the fact that their inaugural 2008 events have not even taken place yet.

Lifeguards: The budget provides no funding for them and no board member even brought up the subject.

Beach Trash: The subject of beach trash came up and some board members expressed their opinion that the blue barrels were unacceptable due to what our competitors were doing. President Rowe expressed his opinion that sufficient funds were not available and that it would be best to wait for a bed tax increase. Obviously this is just another example of the board deciding that advertising is more important. If they really felt it was important, they would reallocate funds now rather than waiting for a bed tax increase that may not be approved by the County Commission.

Public Comment

Kirk Lancaster (Marketing Committee member) expressed his opinion that the “Summer White Sale” was a failure and that that advertising should be brought in-house rather than continuing to use Y Partnership. Lancaster believes that bed tax revenues should be used to improve the visitor experience, not just advertise for the tourist businesses. He spoke specifically about the trash issue suggesting that the board provide for improved cleanup, recycling, and more ascetically-pleasing receptacles.

Charles Mason(owner of panamacitybeach.com) expressed his disappointment over how this special meeting was advertised and scheduled and referred to it as “old TDC style”. Mason also spoke on the beach trash issue. He suggested that at a minimum, funding should be provided for a pilot program.

-Bryan Durta

Perhaps this post isn’t necesary, but I feel it prudent to underscore Bryan’s comments and insight into the current actions of the TDC.

An interesting point is brought up, and that point is: why are we just now discussing the budget?

We had all summer with little or almost no activity regarding public TDC meetings.  It seems that there was ample time to discuss these issues and more.  Is there a reason the TDC meetings come virtually to a halt during the summer months?  This is the time we need to be discussing everything and making changes on the fly as needed.

Additionally, why were we notified at 4pm on Friday, before a long holiday weekend that first thing Tuesday after Labor Day a special meeting would be held to discuss such important matters.  Is the TDC incapable of scheduling meetings in advance?  Or, is this done intentionally so as to keep public attendance low and allow the TDC to make decisions with little or no public scritiny?

As far as the distribution for the budget document goes, I’ve never seen this document before I was forwarded it from Bryan.

What about improving our sports facilities or implementing a lifeguard system.  The county was able to move quickly in actuating a ticket system for those that swim during red flags, which should help, but Panama City Beach has yet to make a move to improve the safety of our beaches.  Tourists from around country now think of our beach in a similar manner as those that swam in the imagined shark-infested waters of the Jaws-era.  We need to wash ourselves of this image and reinstill security in the minds of those that not only visit here, but those that would like to visit here.  As Bryan mentioned, do we know how many tourists we are losing because they are flat out scared to swim in our waters?  I understand being cheap (or frugal, depending on if you want to be positive or negative about this), but THIS IS NOT SOMETHING WE CAN IGNORE ANY LONGER.  Is our City incapable of coming together and making a decision?  I know the mayor is opposed to using money from the general fund, but what about bed tax money?  When will this be discussed?  When are we going to look at what our competition is doing and do the same?  This is common business practice.  You see what your competition is doing that’s working and you do it also, only better.  duh.

Oh, right, improving our sports facilities.  What’s up with that?  Why are we scoffing at the opportunity to expand our tourist base?   Don Schumacher of Don Schumacher & Associates, Inc. recommended at the last TDC meeting that we expand our existing sports facilities.  He cited that the only reason we were still competetive is that we have a beach, but that soon that would not be enough to stay in game.  He recommended adding 4 to 8 more baseball/softball fields and a large indoor multi-purpose facility that could be used for basketball, cheerleading competitions, and myriad other indoor sporting events.  The facility could also be used for trade shows and conferences.  The estimated cost would be $20 million but would result in an estimated annual economic impact of around $30 million.  During the meeting before mentioned, Chairman Andy Phillips requested that  Schumacher provide an estimated cost of a feasibility study for a project of this magnitude.  Has this been done?

Another interesting point that has been brought up is that locals strongly oppose a bed tax increase.  Can I ask why?  Again, we have to look at what our competition is doing.  If our competition is doing something that we are not, that gives them a competitive advantage, again, we not only look like idiots, we ARE idiots.  Why can’t we move on this?  Why don’t we raise our bed tax.  We are at 3%, Walton County is at 4%, we need to be at 5% at least.  We want to compete?  We need more money.

Bryan is growing concerned that we are seeing more and more the TDC acting the way is did two years ago.  We need to see action, we need to see decisions made.  We can’t afford to sit back on our heels and allow our competition to continue passing us by.

Please share your comments on the opinion by leaving a comment below.  Let your voice be heard!

As Jason posted, a special meeting of the TDC/CVB board has been called for Tuesday, September 2^nd at 9:00 AM. Based on the Agenda and an August 29^th letter from President Dan Rowe to the Board, I believe the board will actually vote on the FY 2009 budget on Tuesday rather than just discuss it. It is so amazing that the “New” TDC now appears to be engaging in a budget process that has been basically closed to public knowledge or input. During Tuesday’s meeting, I hope that the board explains the following:

1. Why is the board scheduled to “Consider for Approval” the FY 2009 budget at the same meeting when it is being publicly discussed for the first time? While I understand that the budget needs to be presented to the County Commission for approval by the end of September, I have no idea why the CVB has waited till the last minute to schedule the first and apparently last public meetings on the subject?

2. Why has the special meeting been scheduled on the first business day after the holiday weekend? And why was it announced just one business day before taking place?

Check after the break for more shenanigans!

3. How has the proposed budget been distributed to the public and tourist industry for input? I just received a copy of it Friday afternoon. Based on my open public record requests, I believe that this was the first time that the budget was actually distributed.

As previously mentioned, I just received the proposed budget Friday afternoon. While this last minute distribution has not allowed for a complete review, I would like to point out some things that I have noticed:

1. The CVB budget is down slightly from $4,100,449 to $3,891,605.

2. The CVB’s marketing will concentrate on the message “there’s always something ‘fun’ going on in PCB.” Value will also be a major theme.

3. It does not appear that any funds are being allocated for improving the facilities needed for our key sports markets(softball and baseball). I guess they are relying on getting the bed tax increased rather than reallocating advertising funds now. I would suggest the County Commission reject any requested tax increase since I do not believe the current board can reasonably prioritize spending.

4. It does not appear that any funds are being allocated to implement a lifeguard program. More irresponsible prioritization. The number of deaths this season seems to clearly show that signs and flags are not working. I sure hope the plan is not to use lifeguards as a bargaining chip with the proposed tax increase. The TDC/CVB really needs to get out and interview the Destin/South Walton tourist and find out how many tourists we are losing due to our refusal to deal with the issue. We need to find out why the people who know about PCB but choose to go somewhere else do so.

5. The “Summer White Sale”-like targeted campaign of last-minute advertising “with strong calls to actions” will be expanded year-round. After years of the CVB working on brand advertising to expand our traditional customer base, it now appear that the CVB will mainly concentrate on the type of advertising that had been traditionally paid for by the businesses themselves.

6. Other than College Spring Break and Family Spring Break, the advertising campaigns will target adults 35-54.

7. The Winter Campaign is also designed to target adults 35-54. While I agree that we need to do more to other short-visit tourists to supplement our winter residents, it appears that little is being done to retain our current winter residents who generally do not fit into this targeted demographic.

8. The CVB will bring mtvU back for 2009 College Spring Break at a cost of $150,000. A change will be that database marketing will be used to encourage return visitation from these visitors. I believe that encouraging a party atmosphere on Front Beach Road all year is not consistent with attracting the visitors that PCB needs to grow and survive Are first-time families who encounter young adults jumping out in front of cars to dance and impede traffic on a summer evening likely to come back? I think not.  Then again, maybe the traffic delay provide learning time for parents to answer questions from their young children concerning the prominent advertising for ez-whips, pipes, and XXX movies on Front Beach Rd.  “Mommy, what is a XXX movie?”

9. Family spring and the Summer campaigns will concentrate solely on our traditional drive markets (GA/AL/TN/FL). Why are we concentrating on those people who already know about us and are more likely to come just for a few days? What about all the Midwest and Eastern visitors who are more likely to stay for an entire week during the high season. We need to realize that we are now a condo market that needs week-long visitors and quit doing so much to cater to weekend hotel business.

10. The budget narrative claims “FY 2009 is a transitional year in the way the CVB handles the promotion of Special events on Panama City Beach. The new strategy is for the CVB to mount a year-round campaign that highlights the multitude of events occurring on the beach and limit the amount of direct funding.” However, there is still $160,000 budgeted for Sponsorships and Advertising Support down from $172,450 in the current year. It doesn’t sound like much of a transition. No information has been provided on what events will receive support, nor has the CVB followed the special event policy that the board decided to reinstate earlier this year. According to the policy, there is a procedure for the Marketing Committee and Board to consider which events will receive funding. No such meetings have taken place publicly.

11. Unlike the Family spring and Summer programs, the CVB will also target the Midwest and Canada for September-December travel.

12. Personal expense will increase from $311,730 to $685,121. Obviously a large portion of this increase relates to positions that were vacant for most of FY 2008.

I made a big mistake when I supported the “other 96%” in their successful overthrow of the “old” TDC. While I still disagree with many things the “old” board did (especially the wrongful firing of Bob Warren), the “new” TDC has not followed through on their campaign platform. I strongly believe that desperate, last-minute advertising to people who already know about PCB is not what we should be spending our limited governmental funds on when there are so many other worthwhile opportunities. And we should also ensure that all expenditures are designed to benefit 100% of the industry. The proposed budget isn’t even based on the input or needs of the “other 96%”.

-Bryan Durta

“Do you think a ticket system will help deter people from entering dangerous waters on Panama City Beach?” This was the latest pcbdaily poll trying to determine whether this would be an effective deterrence strategy and help reduce drownings in our warm gulf waters.

There wasn’t exactly a colossal difference between those who voted for the ticket strategy and those who voted against officers being empowered to ticket those ignoring the flag warning system. The poll ended with 55% voting for and 45% voting against.

Well, those that voted for, got their way, sort of. The enforcable area only includes the unincorporated area of Panama City Beach.

Yesterday, at the regular Bay County Commission meeting, an emergency addition to the agenda included Sheriff Frank McKeithen’s plea to allow his officers to enforce their warnings to those swimming under red flag conditions. Before yesterday, sheriff deputies could warn people of the dangers, but had no way to enforce their warnings.

This has been a topic of debate for the last two weeks, coming up in various meetings and being discussed on the radio. Many beleive that this is an infringement on their right to swim in the Gulf if they want to. Some beleive that this is giving too much control to officers and that it is sure to be abused.

Others argue (and this is where I’m at) that when it comes to the point of endangering others, something has to be done. Sometimes our right to do things has to be infringed upon to protect us from ourselves. I mean, seriously, is the speed limit on Back Beach Road infringing on my right to go 90 mph if I want to? What if I’m late, I should be able to go as fast as I need to in order to get to a meeting on time, right? Wrong! My going 90 mph on Back Beach Road doesn’t affect only me, it affects others. I’m endangering others by traveling faster than others on the same road.

When you swim in double red flag conditions, or even red flag conditions, you, at that point, are not affecting only yourself, you are affecting those that will have to rescue you when you fall victim to a current stronger than you. “I’m a strong swimmer, I can handle swimming in conditions that most other people can’t.” Who cares? I’m a strong swimmer too, but what if the ocean is just a little stronger? Then someone else is going to have to risk their life to rescue me. It’s not worth it.

“Well, I’m not asking anyone to rescue me, I’m not asking anyone to endager themselves for me,” you may say. When it comes to the point of you needing rescuing, a capable rescuer in their right mind isn’t going to just let you drown.

With the labor day holiday coming up, it was stressed how important it was to get this passed, especially in light of the current tropical storm situation that may be bearing down on us in the next couple of days.

The ordinance was specific to note that surfers with a surf board leashed to their ankle were exempt from any fines or warnings as they have often played an integral role in rescues and are often the strongest swimmers in the water. Fines may range from $10 to $500 and in the most extreme and belligerent of circumstances, officers may have the authority to arrest.

Click here to download the ordinance.

I can see the justification now – “I’ve come 5 hours to see this beach, and I’m gonna swim whether some flag says I can or not. I paid for this trip, I should be able to swim.” The problem here, you see, is not that the “evil” police or safety patrol wants to spoil your fun, its that THE WATER IS NOT SAFE. This is nobody’s fault. This should be taken with a grain of salt. Whining and complaining about it is just as useful and crying when a baseball game gets rained out.

“The locals all know about the flags and how they work, and many of them swim. Then when the tourists come in, that know little about how it works, they see the locals swimming and figure its ok to get in.” One beach resident and business owner said today.

Do the tourists not know about it, or are they just choosing to ignore it?

In the shade behind the Ocean Towers Condominiums a Georgia man with his two sons said, “We know about the flags, we’re pretty much staying out. I’ll let the boys play at the [water's] edge, but that’s about it.”

At every public beach access point, a sign is posted that explains the Beach Warning Flag system and spells out what each color flag means. It reads:

• Double Red Flag: Water Closed to Public
• Single Red Flag: High Hazard
• Yellow Flag: Medium Hazard
• Green Flag: Low Hazard
• Purple Flag: Dangerous Marine Life

Also a sign is displayed that says no lifeguard on duty, swim at own risk.

So far this year 10 people have drowned in our waters, according to the article in the News Herald this morning, including one man this morning. Is that a record breaker for our area? What is the most for one tourist year in Panama City Beach?

Maybe the media is spending too much time talking about the deaths, and not enough time on how to prevent them. I’ll start.

DO NOT ENTER THE WATER IF A RED FLAG OR DOUBLE RED FLAGS ARE FLYING. Why? BECAUSE YOU COULD DIE.

A little bold? Possibly, but are people listening? If you think you are strong enough to swim out of it, think again. I’d be willing to bet that all 10 that have lost their lives thought they were strong enough to “handle” the waters and that the double red flag conditions didn’t apply to them.

Again, I’ll reiterate what the flags mean.

WATER CLOSED TO PUBLIC – DO NOT GET IN THE WATER!!!

HIGH HAZARD – High Surf and/or Strong Currents

MEDIUM HAZARD – Moderate Surf and/or Strong Currents

LOW HAZARD – Calm Condition, Exercise Caution

DANGEROUS MARINE LIFE

People, this isn’t to ruin your fun, this is to save your life.

An issue currently at debate is whether we should ticket beach goers that ignore warnings and enter the water despite red flag and double red flag conditions.

Walton County has been doing it for years and they don’t seem to have as many drownings as we do. Direct correlation? Hard to say. Does it help? I would think so.

Anything that is going to cost money will deter some people. It will never deter all, but it may help. In addition it could be another source of revenue for our county or city.

Sheriff Frank McKeithen said in a statement emailed the News Herald, printed in today’s paper, that the people that enter the water during dangerous conditions are not only endangering themselves, but endangering the officers, beach workers, or bystanders that may end up having to save them. Obvious point, Sheriff, but very good nonetheless. We need to do what we can to not only keep our tourists safe (despite themselves), but our officers and other locals that risk their lives to save others.

With 2 drownings on Wednesday locals are getting fired up again, but the city seems unwilling to make a move. The same article this morning quoted Beach Police Maj. David Humphreys as saying that a ticket system will not work. He said that he’s concerned that stopping people to give them tickets may take away time that the officers have to warn others that may “listen”. Maj., how long does it take your officers to write a ticket? I would submit that warning some could take considerably longer than just writing a ticket.

True, a ticket will not deter all, but it will deter some.

I’ve started a poll and placed it on the upper right (in the sidebar). The question is: Do you think a ticket system will help deter some from entering dangerous waters on Panama City Beach?

I voted yes.

Well, the Panama City Beach City Council decided that we need lifeguards, but they don’t know how they will pay for it yet.

Mike Hudson, a resident of Panama City Beach, started a beach rescue service – Bay Medical Center EMS Surf Rescue Unit. His team put together a lifeguard program proposal with was the topic of discussion Thursday’s meeting.

After discussion is was decided that they would push through an already approved budget item to hire lifeguards at the City Pier. They also decided that they will put pressure on Bay County for them to follow suit with similar lifeguard placement actions. As part of discussion it was decided that they would update the existing ordinances that require beach service vendors to be lifeguard trained and update equipment that may be more suitable for current lifeguard needs.

The new proposal was based on a proposal that Hudson put together a few years ago that served as the base structure of the Okaloosa lifeguard program. The estimated start up would be around $600,000 with an annual cost of $500,000. This would fund around 30 seasonal lifeguards and 10 evenly spaced lifeguard towers in addition to a “roving” lifeguard patrol to monitor beaches that are not close to the towers.

Three options for funding were discussed – funds from the CRA, TDC money, money from the City. All three had significant resistance from members of the council and audience. The issue will be in discussion at the July 24 meeting.

Ok, so the big question is, lifeguards on Panama City Beach – everyone else is doing it, why aren’t we? Local officials have argued that the cost is too much and the liability is too great. What!!?? What is everyone else doing? I should quantify “everyone else.”

As reported by the News Herald’s Ed Offley (great article Ed!) lifeguards can be found on the east coast from Jacksonville to Miami and on the Gulf Coast from Sarasota to Naples, not to mention most of the Panhandle has lifeguards posted on the beaches, including Walton County and Destin. As reported, the 43 miles of shoreline in Gulf County doesn’t have any issues with rip currents as it is protected in large part by Cape San Blas.

Bay County has the largest tourist population in the Panhandle counties, according to the article, and is the last hold out when it comes to lifeguarding our beaches.

Walton County’s lifeguard program costs a little over $800,000 a year to fund, and that pays for everything from supplies to salaries to an advertising/awareness campaign to inform tourists of the dangers of swimming in the water and the roles the lifeguards play to help increase safety.

Walton County has a 4% bed tax and funds the lifeguard program from those monies. We have a 3% bed tax and are considered “cheap”. At the strategic planning meeting I attended, it was discussed that we need to increase our bed tax. Some competing tourist destinations are charging twice what we are, and we need the extra money for our skimpy marketing budget. Furthermore, we could use an increase in bed tax funds to fund a lifeguard program. I’m not sure that we are losing that many tourists from this lack so far, but if we don’t get caught up, we will.