Friday, May 30, 2008

Bad News For VBTA City Council Candidates: Tourism Return On Investment (ROI) Up

Just as we head towards our first-ever November City Council elections, the Virginia Beach Taxpayers Alliance (VBTA) got a kick in the crotch: the Return On Investment (ROI) for Tourism was up 4 cents on the dollar in 2007.

Arriving at the Convention and Visitors Bureau (CVB) offices yesterday morning for the TPPC meeting, Dr. Agarwal was sitting in the reception area. Now I know why. Copies of the annual Report should be made available at next Thursday's (June 5) Resort Advisory Commission (RAC) meeting. I'll be sure to get a copy and see if I can mine it for a follow-up post.

Last year the RAC was told the numbers were so good that the only way they could go was down in 2007. Total visitors did slip slightly, but increased spending by those who came brought up the ROI.

Now when VBTA Council candidates attack the Resort Area (a given), all their opponent has to do is point to the ROI.

UPDATE: the Report is available at Just go to the CVB's page and it's on the right hand side.


Anonymous said...

Surely this must be false, because everyone knows that Bob O'Connor's 7500 page "investigative report" on VNS proves that tourism loses money.

The VBTA remains clueless and out of touch on every issue except the fact that no one likes to pay taxes.

Avenging Archangel said...

Two glaring problems with the VNS report:

1. It assumes no tourists stay at hotels outside the Resort Area.

2. It assumes tourists don't spend a cent outside the Resort Area.

No, O'Connor's "Report" only aids the VBTA's demonization of the Resort Area.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, but apparently you fail to comprehend the truth when it is presented to you.

The CVD report includes all VISITORS to our city. The "income" counts everytime my Dad visits and stays at our house - and then when we eat out or whatever.

Family visitors have NOTHING to do with the CVD or the sham of taxdollars subsidized the oceanfront tourism business lobby.

Bob O'Conner shares FACTS regardin gthe RPOI of the Oceanfront.

The advocates for spending tax funds to subsidize tourism should be taken with a very large grain of salt.

The VBTA is far from clueless. We do our homework.


Anonymous said...

Sure you do. Anyone expect anyone else from the VNS (VBTA Mouthpiece)?

Anonymous said...

And why should I trust someone who doesn't think I should be able to get around at all? It's bad enough no nights or Weekends (I live on Route 25, off of Princess Anne near Providence)

Avenging Archangel said...


If your dad stays at your house, he wouldn't be paying Room Tax, so he's not counted in the Report.

As Dr. Agarwal explained to the CCO last Summer, there's no existing economic model for what VNS is trying to do. It isn't "fact" if no credible economist would churn it out.

Anonymous said...

Yeah Reid, another set of "facts" from the VBTA's Bob O'Connor:

"Let's move jobs closer to where people live" is his mantra (along with tele-commuting).

However, anytime the city attempts to work with private developers to do just that (like Town Center - with apartments and condos near offices and restaurants), the VBTA throws a fit.

And I am most certain that the VBTA will whole-heartedly support light rail which will spur development along the line to "move people to their jobs."

I agree with anon 2:15...the VBTA is a completely clueless irrelevant organization.

Mike Barrett said...

How could Bob O'Connor produce a 7,000 page report; he is always walking around under a dark cloud. And Reid's challenge to live where you work is hilarious; last time I knew, Reid lived in Sandbridge and worked in Portsmouth. Do as I say, not as I do seems to be his trademark.

Fact is, tourism and visitor development provides a fiscal dividend to this city, even after all expenses are deducted from the reveune. To keep this revenue stream healthy, the city does need to make strategic business investments to stimulate private investment which increases the revenue the city collects.

The VBTA's constant and unrelenting criticism of the fiscal dividend is the actual opposite of what you would expect rational citizens to do; that is, the best way to reduce the real estate tax tax is to increase the tax base.