Woodward, Okla. — 1.  FAIRNESS & TRANSPARENCY THROUGH CONSISTENCY.

In the past there have been some questions and concerns about the Woodward Tourism Board’s fairness toward the many different organizations that approach them for funding.  One way to avoid these questions is by treating all the organizations the same.  I don’t mean giving everyone the same amount of money, but my making everyone follow the same rules and treating them consistently.

For example, the tourism bureau has an actual funding request form for those requesting more than $2,500 (organizations are supposed to write a letter with specific information included if the request is for less).  However, the board has been quite lax in actually ensuring that organizations fill out the form or include all the right information in their letters before considering the requests.

Without requiring these documents be in order, it’s easy to see where some could mistakenly assume favoritism from the board.  For example, during the last meeting the Northwest Passage Pageant received less than its requested amount even though the correct form was filled out in detail, while the Plains Indians and Pioneers Museum received more than what it was hoping for but didn't fill out the form at all.

But if the tourism board were more strict and required ALL organizations to provide ALL the right documents before considering ANY request, then this will help remove doubts about fairness and ease concerns about favoritism.

In addition, during the board's most recent meeting, tourism bureau Executive Director Jim Curtiss explained to Sally Miller with the Northwest Passage Pageant that the board was attempting to be more transparent with its grants by earmarking what the funds they award should be spent toward.  For the pageant this meant the $2,800 it was granted can only be spent toward advertising. 

However, as the board went on to award an additional $7,500 to the Elks Rodeo Committee and $9,000 to the Plains Indians and Pioneers Museum, no such restrictions or earmarking was made. 

The board should be consistent in its treatment to requesting agencies.  Not only for fairness but also for transparency. 

It will be a lot easier to keep track of whether or not the pageant spends its grant toward tourism purposes than it will be for either the Elks or the museum because of the earmarking.  Miller was told the pageant must provide receipts showing that they've spent at least $2,800 in advertising, otherwise they don't receive the full grant.

No such similar stipulations were made for the Elks or the museum, which could potentially make it more difficult to tell whether their grants are going toward true tourism promotional costs.  Because they aren't being made to spend the money on one specific item, such as advertising, the Elks and museum could potentially argue that anything they do promotes tourism.  In fact the Elks have done just this, as they stated in their most recent request that part of their money goes to making donations to organizations that volunteer during rodeo week.  But I would like to know how giving the FFA a couple hundred dollars for helping to cook during the Chuck Wagon Cook-off actually helps put people in our motels?  This is something the tourism board should have asked but didn't.

However, they wouldn't have to ask this question if they were consistent in setting earmarks for their grants, such as they did with the first $7,500 awarded to the Elks during the April tourism meeting which was earmarked for green fees for an Elks golf tournament held at Boiling Springs Golf Course.



2. NO ALLOCATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION.

But more than just asking organizations to provide the right documents, the tourism board should require each organization making a request to have a representative present at the meeting where that request is being considered. 

This is just common sense. 

The board members often have questions about requests (usually because the actual request form has not been filled out). But without anyone there representing the organization, they have no way to get the answers they want. 

In the past, the board has approved some funding requests anyway.  However, they have gotten better at tabling these requests until someone is available to answer their questions.  Most recently, in both June and July they tabled a request from the Woodward Arts Theatre because the theater's executive director T. Z. Wright was not in attendance. 

But they should make it clear to ALL agencies that a request will NOT be considered, much less awarded, UNLESS a representative attends to not only answer any questions, but simply to back up the request. 

I don't understand how if the grant money is really important to an organization and will really affect its ability to offer programming that someone isn't attending the meetings in the first place to do everything they can to persuade the board to give them the money.  To me if it isn't worth the time for organization officials to attend the meetings, then it the money can't be that vital to them.

3. NOT OVERCOMMITTING.

In the recent budget process, Curtiss told the tourism board that there was already $101,000 encumbered in grants to others, while the total grant budget is set at $120,000.  This has already led to some confusion about how much the board really has open to award in grants this year.  As Curtiss noted in the most recent tourism board meeting, the $101,000 figure was more of a guideline than something written in stone.  However, there is some unnecessary assumptions that organizations will continue to get the same funding year after year.  This is not an effective way to operate because those organizations quickly become dependent on that funding and then begin to practically demand that they receive the same funding year after year. (At least it seemed to me that the Elks were demanding that they receive $15,000 from tourism again this year when they said in their most recent request, "not any more, not any less.") This obviously quickly limits the tourism board's ability to look for new tourism opportunities, when they can only barely fund the same commitments year after year.  These include commitments that the tourism board has no control over, although they should, because in attracting events to Woodward, Curtiss is making promises of up to $10,000 for 3 years at a time without any input from the tourism board (just ask him about the proposal to get the Oklahoma High School Rodeo Association championships to be held in Woodward).  I think there should be some more scrutiny on how much Curtiss can promise to attract events, but he definitely shouldn't be able to promise grant money without the tourism board's approval.  But the board should also set some policies that just because an organization receives a certain amount of money one year doesn't mean that they should expect to receive it again the next year and the next.  They are improving in this area as the Northwest Passage Pageant recently received only $2,800 this year instead of the $3,500 it received for the 2 previous years.  But that's just the first step. If they keep it up, maybe they won't get overcommitted again and have to stop handing out grants in the third quarter like they did this past year.  Ideally, I think the tourism grants should be viewed as stimulus money, a boost for to help the organization requesting money to grow whatever tourism event they are sponsoring so that it can become successful and hopefully self-supporting. Because if we're not giving $15,000 to the highly successful Elks Rodeo year after year then maybe we can start new events that might appeal to that portion (however small) of our citizenry that doesn't necessarily enjoy watching men ride animals they probably shouldn't be riding.  Maybe we can get things like a film festival, so that people can see the full-length independent movie that was recently filmed in Vici.



4. APPOINT A TREASURER.

 With all the questions about how much money the board actually has to award in grants and other issues with going over its budget this previous Fiscal Year, it would be a good idea if the board were to appoint a treasurer to keep track of the grants it is awarding.  This isn't just my idea.  Curtiss brought the issue up at this most recent July meeting, asking for someone to volunteer.  I was extremely disappointed when no one stepped up to the plate and was then disgusted to hear their excuses.  They told Curtiss, "you do such a good job already" and "you deal with these numbers everyday."  However, Curtiss doesn't deal with those numbers, which is why he is rarely able to answer specific questions about the tourism department budget referring questions to City Treasurer Doug Haines instead.  And it's not like it would be difficult for someone to step up and be a treasurer.  All they have to do is put a sheet of paper on the wall and write down the amount of the grants they award as those grants are awarded and then compare that with their total grant budget to find out how much they actually have left.  This is information that the board members have asked for in the past from Curtiss and he wasn't able to provide because no one has done the simplest thing of taking pen to paper. 



Rowynn Ricks is the assistant editor of the Woodward News.  She can be reached for comment at reporter1@woodwardnews.net.