Arizona law costing the state millions

The numbers are not good for the Arizona meetings industry. Earlier this month, Gov. Jan Brewer signed a controversial bill into law that requires law enforcement officials to ask for papers from anyone they suspect is in the country illegally. In the two weeks since the bill’s passage, 26 conventions have pulled out of the state, costing Arizona an estimated $6 to $10 million in revenue, according to the Arizona Hotel and Lodging Association. Dozens of high-profile public figures and leaders have called for travel boycotts against the state, potentially costing the state millions more in tourism dollars.

The mood among planners is mixed. On one hand, they don’t want to hurt the industry by supporting boycotts. On the other hand, they don’t want to offend their convention attendees, many of whom have their own concerns and personal feelings regarding the new law, which will go into effect a little more than two months from now. “Thoughts seem to be across the board,” says Laura Norfolk, president of Fusion Meetings and Events. “Those that I have talked to about it are frustrated. Most meetings are still down from 2007/2008 numbers, and the industry is still recovering from the economic recession and negative press of 2009. We should all be doing everything to help the meetings industry rather than negatively impact it,” she adds.

Faith-based groups have made strong statements against the bill. The National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference endorsed a boycott. Other groups have spoken out in opposition; among them are Sojourners, U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Unitarian Universalist Association and Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Grand Canyon Synod. Seven Arizona religious leaders, including Catholic, Methodist and Episcopal representatives, lobbied Capitol Hill this week for comprehensive immigration reform. The leaders seek to delay the implementation of the law to give Congress more time to make changes.

Mennonite Church USA has several binding contracts in place for its 2013 convention scheduled for Phoenix, but church leaders are weighing the reaction to the law.

“We want all parts of Mennonite Church USA to feel welcome at convention locations,” says Rachel Swartzendruber Miller, director of convention planning for Mennonite Church USA. “Our national convention is meant to be a reunion of Mennonite brothers and sisters from across the country, representing many ethnicities. This bill does not send a welcoming message.”

The organization is in talks with the city and will make a decision at the end of the year. “The question we will be grappling with is, ‘Will we be helping the situation by refusing to meet in Phoenix to show that we are resisting this unjust law? Or, is God calling us to face this injustice by being a present witness of healing and hope in the Phoenix community?’” Miller says.

Loretta Lowe, CMP, says the decision about whether to move forward with an event in the state would have to depend on the group. “The stakeholders and organizational mission have always got to guide our decision-making,” she says.

“Most people I know in the industry are completely against the idea of using a tourism boycott as a form of political expression,” Lowe says. “Hotels, restaurants, event facilities and so many have already been hurt by the recession and the anti-meetings sentiment of the AIG effect, they are really very, very afraid that driving business away will have devastating impact on those service professionals who are trying to earn a living.”

The city of Los Angeles announced that it will boycott the state if the law is not repealed, which could cost Arizona as much as $52 million in investments and contracts for airport, harbor and trucking services. This week, the Republican National Committee’s site-selection committee recommended Tampa as the site of the 2012 Republican National Convention. Phoenix was one of three finalists for the convention. When asked if the new law hurt Phoenix’s chances to host the event, RNC Chairman Michael Steele said no. “It was a business decision,” he said.