By ALLEN MCPHEETERS

Hi! I’m Allen McPheeters, executive director of the Voter Interests Project. We keep Island County voters informed about local government, candidates, and ballot measures — from cemetery districts up to our 10th District legislators. When the Whidbey News-Times invited me to write a column, I thought it would be a wonderful chance to share what we’re seeing.

The Island County commissioners are once again accepting applications for tourism promotion grants. This year’s call for applications said something I don’t recall having seen before: This program aims to support and promote the tourism economy and regenerative tourism in Island County.

What is regenerative tourism? We’ve heard this term in presentations by the Island County Joint Tourism Board for years. In April 2023, Sherrye Wyatt (then the marketing manager for the tourism board) described it this way: Regenerative tourism is when a visitor travels with a mindset to leave a destination better than it was before they arrived.

Regenerative tourism — along with the related concept of “transformational travel” — has been a major focus of the tourism board since at least 2021. That year, it spent $30,000 on consulting services from the Transformational Travel Council.

What these terms really mean is hard to tell from the board’s website. The regenerative tourism page consists of two TTC quotes and four vague bullet points, none mentioning tourism. One bullet point says, “A holistic approach to the well-being of the entire ecosystem.” Another starts by saying regenerative tourism is “not anti-growth.” What does any of that mean for attracting visitors?

The transformational travel page is even less informative, saying merely “Transformational Travel Can Inspire Change, Be Transformative, Travelers Create the Transformation.” What is being transformed and what it’s being transformed into are not explained.

Another page, the Destination Regeneration Plan, goes into more detail. But it, too, is a word salad — platitudes with little connection to growing tourism. Of eight “end-state goals,” only two mention people who are not already living here: “We attract and cultivate diverse voices and perspectives” and “We embrace all who come here, regardless of how long they stay.”

This muddled approach shows up in the board’s public statements, which are sometimes at odds with encouraging tourism. In April 2023, Wyatt told the Oak Harbor City Council that during and after COVID: “There was a lot of activity with tourism. People were concerned, why can’t we get a table at a restaurant… Locals here were feeling a little overwhelmed.”

Wyatt didn’t say who was making this complaint, but it doesn’t sound like someone in tourism. Were restaurant owners telling her they were getting too much business? And it raises a basic question: Does the board see growth in tourism as a problem instead of a goal?

In response, she reached out to TTC, who put her on the regenerative travel idea: that tourism should preserve and improve the islands for residents, that it should create richer visitor experiences “where they stay longer and do something in the community. They get to know the people here.” And that they could “harness tourism’s power to be a force for good.” She said: “And what that looks like is: They’re planting Garry Oak trees, they’re picking up trash on the beach on July 5th. … They’re really like part of this place because they love it and they want those invitations and an opportunity.”

I suppose there’s a market for that sort of thing, but I wonder how large it is. Shouldn’t the board try to maximize tourism overall before catering to niche markets?

She also made this point: “We worked with – for the first time, really – Sound Water Stewards and Whidbey Camano Land Trust, Leave No Trace… working with nonprofits that are already doing really good work that maybe visitors could help them do that work. Maybe visitors could contribute some of their time. There’s even an overnight stay platform called Kind Traveller where a visitor books and makes a contribution to the nonprofit of choice of that lodging.”

In other words, the tourism board is acting as a fundraising and volunteer recruitment platform for environmental groups that have little or nothing to do with tourism.

Wyatt left the organization in January 2024. Her replacement, Inge Morascini, seems to share this focus. As the News-Times reported in December 2024 (Number of tourists down, dollars up), Morascini told the Oak Harbor City Council, “But to us what we’re trying to do is attract a public that looks, feels and tastes like we do.”

I’m not sure how Morascini figures out whether a public “tastes” like we do – and I don’t know that I want to find out. It reminds me of “This Is Spinal Tap.” When a journalist notes the band is playing much smaller venues:

Marty: Does this mean the popularity of the group is waning?

Ian: No, not at all. I just think that their appeal is becoming more selective.

If I ran a tourism-dependent business in Island County, I’d be worried about my appeal becoming more selective. The News-Times opened its story this way: The year 2024 saw fewer tourists on Whidbey than the average, but those people spent more money than normal, according to Morascini.

Wouldn’t fewer tourists signal failure? In the short term, having those people spend more money than normal sounds good, but how much more? The article says: “Between 2004 and 2023, tourism revenue has grown by nearly 53%. “

Over 20 years, that’s less than 2.5% per year — hardly impressive. I’m more interested in whether the revenue increased in 2024, since fewer people came.

A focus on fuzzy abstractions, reducing tourists and promoting environmental nonprofits sounds like a tourism board that has gone off the rails.

This has not gone unnoticed. At the Island County Commissioners’ work session of July 2, Commissioner Jill Johnson (R-Oak Harbor) proposed restructuring the tourism board with stronger oversight and greater public participation. (Read Johnson’s memo at voterinterests.com/johnson-memo.)

Island County depends on tourism. If our tourism board is more interested in social engineering than attracting visitors, businesses and voters should be concerned. Commissioner Johnson’s proposal is not just welcome — it’s overdue.

Allen McPheeters is the executive director of the Voter Interests Project, a nonpartisan organization that informs the public about the actions of local government and political candidates. He is a former chair of the Island County Republican Party and works for a provider of business intelligence software to large law firms.