Jennifer Vigil, CEO of Destination Panama City, explained the framework of the Tourist Development Tax to the commission. The tax would be an additional 5% on top of existing sales taxes and would primarily fund marketing and operational costs associated with tourism. Vigil emphasized the importance of educating both the commission and the public about the tax’s intended benefits and the mechanics of its implementation.

A significant part of the discussion revolved around whether the tax revenue would solely benefit Lynn Haven or be part of a broader tourism area. Vigil clarified that the city’s actions, particularly if it petitioned the county to extend the footprint of Destination Panama City, would determine the outcome. She advised against Lynn Haven forming its own destination marketing organization due to its limited hospitality infrastructure.

The commission also discussed the representation on the board if Lynn Haven joined the Destination Panama City footprint. Vigil noted that Lynn Haven would not have direct representation due to its limited hotel inventory compared to Panama City. The board representation is based on the volume of room nights, and Lynn Haven currently has only one hotel. However, a local restaurant owner or business representative could apply for board vacancies.

The financial implications of implementing a bed tax were also considered, with a commissioner noting that while hotels are subject to regular sales tax, the TDT would be an additional tax intended to enhance visibility and occupancy. Concerns were raised about perceptions of the tax among short-term rental operators, who may view it as a burden rather than a pass-through tax, despite it being collected from consumers.

The process for initiating the tax was outlined, noting that changes in legislation now require a referendum for any new tourist development tax. This means the community would need to vote on the tax, with suggestions made to align the referendum with upcoming elections, such as those in April 2027, to allow sufficient time for education and outreach efforts. The necessity of educating the public about how this tax functions was stressed, with emphasis on the importance of public understanding regarding the tax’s implications.

Concerns were raised about the geographical scope of the tax, with clarification that it would specifically impact residents within the city limits of Lynn Haven. The roles of organizations like the Bay County Chamber of Commerce in helping to educate citizens about the tax and its potential benefits were discussed, highlighting the need for collaboration to ensure residents are well-informed before any referendum takes place.

Discussion also touched on the potential for the TDT to attract more hotels and businesses to Lynn Haven. While the tax could serve as a positive selling point for potential developers, there was acknowledgment of potential opposition from existing businesses, particularly those in the short-term rental market. Challenges with tax collection from platforms like Airbnb were noted, as they have historically resisted detailed reporting of individual property taxes collected.

The commission considered the potential funding for local sports facilities and events. While the TDT revenue would not directly fund hotel developments, it could assist tournaments and events that bring visitors to the area, thereby improving local sports facilities and attracting more events and associated tourism.

A call for inclusivity in the decision-making process was made. This would ensure that all voices are heard before any decisions are finalized.