You are here: Archive » Poker Run economic impact report grossly overstates spectator count; staff report to focus on sustainability. March, 2011.

Poker Run economic impact report grossly overstates spectator count; staff report to focus on sustainability.

The principal specific matter before us on January 11, 2011 was the staff recommendation originating from the Poker Run economic impact of report that had been deferred from the December 21, 2010 meeting.

I want to make one observation about the economic impact report. I believe it grossly overstated the economic benefits of the Poker Run. I take serious issue with the estimate of the number of spectators, which was the starting point for the economic impact report. The staff report (No. 11-017) estimated the 2010 attendance at 9,000, while the 2009 figure was put at 8,500 locals and 5,900 out-of-town visitors. The 2009 estimate seems inconsistent with the Downtown BIA pedestrian counts of that weekend (Pedestrian Traffic Counts in Downtown Kingston! August, 2009). By coincidence, the pedestrian counts were done at the corner of Ontario and Clarence by Mac’s Milk from Monday, August 3 2009 through Sunday, August 9, four times a day: in the morning (0945 - 1120); over lunch (1145 - 1320); in the mid- afternoon (1415 - 1550), and in the early evening (1815 – 1950).

Pedestrians were counted for a 15-minute period, and the total was extrapolated to an hourly figure. The totals for the Friday and Saturday (the Poker Run weekend) were 3,052 and 3,572 respectively. When the lowest counts are subtracted to allow for normal regular pedestrian traffic in order to provide a unique Poker Run visitor count, the total Poker Run count over both days is 4,768. I do not believe that these hourly counts can support the 2009 event estimate of 14,300. Therefore the economic impact estimate needs to be recalculated for a lower attendance number, with the same ratio of local and out-of-town visitors. That ratio is important, because a 2001 KEDCO study of tourist spending showed that an out-of-town visitor staying overnight was likely to spend three or four times as much as a tourist just stopping on the way to somewhere else. A more accurate estimate of spending is not therefore just a simple calculation as a percentage by which the total visitor number is reduced.

If the 2009 attendance estimate indeed was in error by as much as 100%, what was the error factor in the 2010 estimate, which already acknowledged a smaller attendance level ? Properly calculated, the economic impact of the 2010 Poker Run will doubtless be significantly reduced. Working with a more realistic estimate might help reduce some of the emotional heat that is part of the discussion about the Poker Run.

The overall issue before us on January 11 was the larger question of sustainability. In past debates supporters of the Poker Run had complained that their event was being singled out, while there were many less high profile activities that caused greater environmental damage. The Hutchison/Neill amendment to the staff recommendation, as tabled, called for staff to draft a policy framework by which all events that were seeking support of municipally-owned facilities could be evaluated across each of the four pillars of sustainability: economic, social cultural and environmental. First the amendment was itself amended. Subsequently the staff recommendation was amended to remove any specific reference to the Poker Run. The intent was indeed to arrive at a framework for analysis that could be used across the board for all events.

If we are indeed to become Canada’s most sustainable community, what was being proposed was a necessary step. Sustainability as we have defined it has four major components, and decisions cannot be made on the basis of isolating one only. I believe that as finally adopted, the decision of council marks a major step forward.

In my view it is most unfortunate that each step was contested, with members of council recorded a vote in opposition on each of the various votes. (The votes were all recorded, so when the minutes are adopted, who voted how will be there for all to see.) Clearly those who believe in sustainability will have to continue their advocacy.


^ Top

Previous page: Eric Folsom selected as Kingston's first Poet Laureate ! March, 2011.
Next page: Bill Glover's 2007 – 2010 Council record