A question for Lago Vista City Council.

I am a member of the Chamber of Commerce, and I believe it is important to disclose that openly. My membership would not change the standards I apply to any organization requesting taxpayer dollars. Yes, I could support using general fund dollars to purchase services from the Chamber, but only if those services serve a lawful public purpose and provide a clear benefit to the broader community. Any agreement should be in writing and clearly define the services being purchased, the amount being paid, expected results, reporting requirements, and how performance will be evaluated. Before approving an expenditure, Council should determine whether the service is necessary, whether the cost is reasonable, and whether the same service could be provided more effectively or economically through another arrangement. I would not support unrestricted operating subsidies, automatic annual contributions, or payments without measurable expectations. General fund dollars should never be used simply to circumvent the legal restrictions on Hotel Occupancy Tax funds. I value the Chamber’s role in supporting local businesses and encouraging economic activity. But supporting our business community and protecting taxpayer dollars are not mutually exclusive. I would hold the Chamber to the same standards as any other organization receiving taxpayer dollars. There must be a lawful public purpose, a clear agreement, financial accountability, and real value for Lago Vista residents.

Written by the candidate

I don't think this has to be a CityversusChamber question. This has been a difficult year for both, and I think we need to rebuild some trust. The Chamber is working through how it sustains itself and serves our businesses, while the City is working through how public dollars can be used appropriately and documented. From the conversations I've had with Chamber leadership, I believe there is a genuine desire to make the relationship work. I share that desire. There is also a reality we shouldn't ignore: the Chamber doesn't have unlimited time to figure this out. Without a workable funding path, we could very realistically find ourselves without a Chamber. I don't think we should be casual about that possibility or assume that rebuilding one later would be easy. Would I support simply giving the Chamber additional General Fund dollars to cover its operations? No. Would I consider using General Fund dollars for clearly defined work that advances a strategic purpose for the City and that the Chamber is well positioned to provide? Yes, I would consider it. Those are two very different things. And I think the words "strategic purpose" matter. We need to decide what Lago Vista actually wants to accomplish with economic development and tourism. We haven't done enough of that. Without a clear strategy, the City, Chamber and now our EDC are each trying to find their part without stepping on the others' toes. I think the Chamber has the potential to be an important part of that picture. It knows our businesses, brings people together and can do things the City shouldn't necessarily be trying to do itself. HOT funds should be used for eligible tourism purposes, with the results documented. The EDC should have room to do the economicdevelopment work it was created to do. And if there is work the City needs beyond that, let's identify it, decide who is best equipped to do it and determine what it's worth. But we also need to recognize that our longterm planning and the Chamber's immediate situation are happening at the same time. We may need to work on both tracks—address what is immediately in front of us while building the strategy that prevents us from being right back here next year. I don't want to start with, “How much money should we give the Chamber?” I'd rather start with, "What are we trying to accomplish for Lago Vista, and what do we risk losing if we do nothing?” Then define the work, choose the right partner, establish what we expect in return and use the right funding source. I want our Chamber to succeed. I also have a responsibility to our taxpayers. I believe there is a path that respects both, but finding it is going to require some trust, some grace on both sides, and a willingness to work together.