The city of Sedona and the Sedona Chamber of Commerce have had a long relationship dating back decades. But even the best of relationships often need a third party to lend some advice. 

In what has become an annual event, the Sedona City Council and staff as well as the chamber’s board and staff have met in early January to discuss the upcoming budget and goals for the following year. The two met on Jan. 16, and despite six hours of discussion, things for the most part are remaining status quo. 

This time, the meeting was lead by a facilitator, Nicole Lance, who helped keep the discussion flowing between the two groups.

“The meeting was positive and exciting for all of us,” Chamber President and CEO Jennifer Wesselhoff said afterwards. 

“I think it deepened the council/chamber tourism management partnership, which continues to benefit Sedona. We look forward to preparing a detailed Fiscal Year ’20 budget for council action and continuing a discussion of tourism-management best practices at future joint meetings.” 

“It is exciting to be close to completing the council/ chamber Sustainable Tourism Plan, also touched on at the meeting,” she said. 

“The process demonstrates that a Sedona-based, professionally managed tourism agency such as the chamber is perfectly positioned to listen to the community and partner with the city to make positive change.” 

As far as what the city took away from the meeting, City Manager Justin Clifton said the policy direction is to refine marketing strategies to maintain current levels of tourist activity but attempt to avoid growth. Included in future budgets and work plans will be the priorities from the Sustainable Tourism Plan. They will also propose ways to adjust the current contract to maintain necessary funding for these activities, with reference to industry standards, but without fixing the contract strictly to 55 percent of bed tax proceeds. 

While a host of topics were discussed during the meeting, one of the concerns from the city that was raised several times surrounded the question, “When is enough, enough in terms of tourism?” 

From that stemmed other topics such as the 55 percent bed tax and the ongoing Arizona Attorney General’s Office investigation into whether or not it violates the state’s gift clause. They also discussed whether marketing should cease for a year to reduce traffic and whether the city should require a request for proposals, also known as a RFP, to allow outside firms to bid on the chamber’s contract. 

Regarding the AG’s investigation, City Attorney Robert Pickels said the following day that the Attorney General’s Office has asked the city for a copy of the most recent Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, which won’t be ready for a couple of weeks — they indicated that they don’t mind waiting. 

“I don’t know what they might be looking for in the CAFR, but they did say that they are hoping to conclude the inquiry soon,” he said. 

“I tried to make it clear yesterday that I would prefer to see a fixed amount in the contract moving forward [opposed to the 55 percent bed tax]. I think that would resolve the AG’s concerns, and would be a fiscally responsible decision regardless of the outcome from the AG’s inquiry.” 

Ultimately, when a budget is presented by the chamber for council approval, Pickels said decisions will have to be made about amending the contract and the ordinance should the council want to make the change. Something that has been hanging over the chamber’s head for several years has been discussion of requiring a request for proposals, which the chamber has said it’s willing to take part in. Various members of council over the years 

have brought it up to ensure the city is getting as much bang for its buck, especially now that the chamber’s contract is worth more than $2 million. 

Opponents of that idea have said that an outside firm would cost even more and would not be able to do everything the chamber does under one roof. 

“I think what the chamber feels when it’s ‘RFP, RFP, RFP’ is that there’s no stability and possibly a lack of trust,” Clifton said. 

“A different framing goes back to the council’s point in what we’re hearing from our citizens is that if they felt better, it would be easier to be supportive.” 

“It’s all the same shades of the same conversation over and over again. Is the issue of a RFP a widely held matter of public opinion that would make a meaningful difference in the way we view the level of support in the community?” he asked. 

“Or is it an attempt to silence a vocal minority that will not be silenced? It could be the former and not the latter.” 

Wesselhoff said there is a feeling among the chamber, its board and the Sedona Lodging Council every time the topic of an RFP comes up. 

“We’re doing everything we can to be credible, to be strong in our integrity and be flexible when you ask or direct us to do something,” she said. 

“Yet I think there’s a feeling that any minute you’re going to pull the rug out from under us — whether that’s an RFP or a change of the contract with the 55 percent.” 

Wesselhoff said they put their credibility on the line when they asked the lodging industry to add 

an additional half-cent bed tax with the promise the amount given to the chamber in terms of the bed tax would be increased to 55 percent. In the end, she said it comes down to trust among everyone involved. 

“Maybe that’s the essence of what we’re getting to is that there doesn’t seem to be a strong feeling of trust,” Wesselhoff said. 

Later in the meeting the topic was again raised and each member of council agreed that at this time a RFP is not needed and that the topic will not come up among the seven of them in the foreseeable future. 

“I’m not going to push for a RFP because it would be a waste of time,” Vice Mayor John Martinez said.