Room for Improvement: Cloudcroft's Tourism Investment Needs Better Service
Moving past tensions toward better results for the Village
[ANALYSIS]
A simmering conflict between Lodger's Tax Advisory Board Chair Karl Campbell and Cloudcroft's Mayor and Council finally erupted into public view at last Tuesday's Council meeting, offering residents a glimpse of the municipal discord brewing behind closed doors.
The Reader interviewed Campbell, Mayor Tim King, multiple Council trustees, Chamber of Commerce President Debra Spears, and other key stakeholders to understand where the Village's Lodger's Tax Fund stands today—the hard numbers and the frayed relationships.
Tourism Tax Basics (and the Recent Past)
The Village collects a 5% tax on overnight stays from any lodging including hotels and private short-term rentals, then reinvests those receipts to promote tourism and attract more visitors to the community.
Three key players manage this process: the Village Council, which has final authority over spending and manages tax collections; the Lodger's Tax Advisory Board (LTAB), which reviews funding requests and makes recommendations to the Council; and the Chamber of Commerce, which has historically received the bulk of annual funds.
Like many aspects of village operations, the management of this vital tourism program has been inconsistent and poorly executed in recent years. The Lodger's Tax Fund has been out of compliance with New Mexico statutes since 2018 due to the absence of a functioning Advisory Board.
This compliance issue surfaced at a June 2023 Council meeting when Gary Truex questioned the composition and activity of the Lodger's Tax Advisory Board. Mayor Bill Denney acknowledged that the Village had operated without such a board since before his tenure as trustee and mayor. Denney announced he would reconstitute the board.
The October 2023 Council meeting saw Mayor Denney secure confirmation of appointed members for the newly reconstituted volunteer board. After several meetings in early 2024, the board presented its fiscal year 2024-25 recommendations in April 2024:
Chamber of Commerce: $117,000;
Rails-to-Trails, $2,000;
Sacramento Pioneer Museum, $12,000;
Keep Cloudcroft Clean, $5,000;
and $16,400 to license software from Rentalscape, an online program to help the Village identify short-term rental properties, generate invoices, and collect taxes due.
The Council approved all the recommendations.
Following this approval, LTAB Chair Campbell sent an email to Mayor Craig Turner on August 1, 2024, outlining the Advisory Board's future role. Campbell wrote that the board had "walked into this process blind" with minimal support from village staff and no access to previous documentation including minutes, duties, appointments, or grant procedures. He announced the board would shift to "an oversight and consulting role only," transferring the operational aspects of the lodger's tax program to village staff.
Since that email, Campbell did not convene another LTAB meeting until May 22, 2025—an 11-month gap—though he continued sending detailed suggestions via email to the Village administration. His communications with the clerk responsible for the lodger's tax data consistently received non-committal responses.
Under former Mayor Turner's administration, the village office failed to perform essential functions. Quarterly reports to the state went unfiled, tracking spreadsheets remained outdated, collection systems for short-term rental taxes were nonexistent, and the $16,400 Rentalscape service sat unused. This administrative neglect left thousands of dollars in potential municipal revenue uncollected.
By year's end 2024, Mayor Turner had resigned abruptly, additional staff had departed, and substantial work remained abandoned.
A New Mayor Inherits a Mess
On December 17, 2024, the Council unanimously elevated first-year Trustee King to the role of mayor.
As documented in our earlier 2025 reporting, the village faced mounting pressure to conduct an audit, provide accurate financial reporting, hire new staff, and address critical water and fire safety issues. The Lodger's Tax program was not among the top priorities.
During this transition period, Campbell continued advocating for detailed ordinance changes, solutions to short-term rental tax collection problems, and updated financial reports.
Mayor King concentrated on two essential tasks: determining how much lodger's tax money had been collected to establish the available investment pool and understanding how the previous year's funds had been spent.
When the Chamber submitted invoices for approval, King requested supporting documentation before authorizing payments. Given the Village's history of incomplete record-keeping, the mayor wanted to understand what he was being asked to approve.
Those requests for more information led to some tense discussions, with the Chamber and Campbell expecting invoice approval based on the previous year's budget authorization, all of which were eventually paid. The only invoices outstanding from the original $117,000 are roughly $13,000 for invoices submitted for payment in April 2025, according to Chamber President Spears.
The situation became more complex due to blurred roles among the three parties. Campbell openly became an advocate for the Chamber, even advising them to resist the mayor's requests for financial documentation, including the Chamber's operating budget. Campbell considered these requests an overreach, counseling that the Chamber was not obligated to provide such data. This advocacy raised questions about Campbell's independence, particularly given his marriage to Chamber Vice President Laura Campbell.
While encouraging the Chamber to limit information sharing, Campbell simultaneously pressured the mayor to respond to his requests for data.
By February 2025, King informed Campbell that they had identified at least $168,000 in collections, with additional sources still being verified. The final tally exceeded $200,000. The mayor invested countless hours in this forensic investigation to track down improperly recorded 2024 funds—a herculean effort acknowledged by both the Council and Campbell.
King presented his research findings at the May Council meeting through a detailed story map timeline of the Lodger's Tax program developments. It makes for informative reading. Review it here: Lodgers-Tax-Timeline
King also discovered that the Rentalscape program had never been implemented under Turner's administration. "The Rentalscape service just didn't work out in terms of reporting or collecting," King explained.
This background set the stage for the heated exchange at May's Council meeting.
Campbell’s ‘Nuclear Option’
Frustration drove the confrontation. Campbell felt his emails were receiving inadequate and delayed responses.
The Council had their own grievances. Two weeks before the Council meeting, Campbell sent an email dated May 3, 2025, with the subject line "Nuclear Option." The message outlined perceived rules violations and demanded specific actions, warning that "the final step will be to make a visit to the district attorney."
Campbell openly admits this dramatic approach was intended to force action. His specific concerns included:
Lack of regular reporting on collections, expenditures, and enforcement actions to the Advisory Board
Failure to implement effective monitoring tools like Rentalscape to ensure short-term rental tax compliance
Apparent unauthorized commitments or consideration of fund allocation changes without Advisory Board review
Possible under-collection from multiple lodging operators currently advertising in the Village
Campbell told the Reader: "The only thing that I didn't do that I could have done was go to the district attorney and say, 'We're failing. Take away the program and fix it.' Honestly, I didn't want to go that far. I've done it before—it's not a bluff. But my goal was to prevent this Village from continuing to be mismanaged."
However, it's difficult to see how these administrative issues rise to the level warranting district attorney involvement. The Village operated without the legally required Advisory Board for years, yet none of these current issues suggest criminal misconduct. The confrontational, threatening tone of Campbell's email had a toxic effect: it undermined any possibility of a constructive working relationship. Building trust and cooperation with someone who threatens legal action is nearly impossible.
The Council Pushes Back
Trustee Tabitha Foster, for one, didn’t appreciate the threat of a “nuclear option.”
“We have uncovered years of neglected items in the Village office and doings and we have not hidden a single thing from the State of NM or the public. So you can’t threaten people who want the best for this Village, it’s just not a good look.”
Trustee Jim Maynard, a partner in the Grand Cloudcroft Hotel, addressed Campbell directly during the Tuesday evening Council meeting:
“We know the question. We know it's a mess. But as Timothy said several times, ‘If we don't get the budget up and working and we don't get our accounts reconciled, part of the accounts to reconcile is your lodger's tax money. When you say what's the plan, we're telling you the plan. You got to accept the plan, which is you got to let us work through the priorities that have been identified.”
“We are trying to move one step forward from what we inherited. We didn't ask for this mess; we inherited it. And Timothy, I can't brag on him enough for the countless hours that he's put in. None of us even knows about it —I don’t know when he got to sleep. But the good side of what we've just shown you is there's another $200,000 annually, more or less, out there. Yeehaw. That's a great thing.”
“So the apples are on the tree. We just got to go pick them. But it's got to be in the sequence that Timothy has identified. Where do you put the energy of the Village? If you mess up and lose the grants we worked so hard to get, we will go back 20 years.”
“It can't be that we just beat the heck out of each other every time we talk about lodger’s stuff. It's got to go to bed. We've got plenty of money in the bank. We're hiring third-party people to help straighten our accounts and budget. The lodger’s tax, we'll get to it. But you're not the first thing we'll take care of. Sorry. You’ve not even heard what I’ve said.”
When Campbell claimed he had been listening, Maynard replied, "You really haven't because you keep hammering away."
When asked whether his actions achieved their intended effect, Campbell told the Reader:
“Personally, yes. My wife texted me, "Carl, sit down and shut up!" But I couldn't. What needed to be said hadn't been said. Everyone was just giving lip service, the same as the last year and a half. I pushed, pissed some people off, and got results. I found out they went to the state and did a mea culpa to avoid what I called the "nuclear option." I was going to drop the hammer if they didn't communicate or take action.”
Yet that spin overlooks key facts: the state investigation was triggered by an anonymous complaint filed in Fall 2023, not his recent advocacy.
When village officials met with the Office of the State Auditor (OSA), they demonstrated progress in resolving quarterly reporting deficiencies from Turner's administration and received positive feedback. The village officials proactively disclosed potentially problematic expenditures from the previous year—specifically event funding that might violate lodger tax rules—and requested a compliance opinion. They await the state's response.
The reality is straightforward: Mayor King identified available funds for allocation, the Council committed to improving program administration, and the remaining challenges involve optimal fund investment and repairing damaged working relationships.
Everyone would benefit from less confrontation and more cooperation.
Investing Tourism Dollars: Weak Process, Blurred Roles
The Village now faces the task of allocating approximately $200,000 for tourism promotion efforts.
This allocation process may be contributing to ongoing tensions.
Historically, the Village has awarded most funds to the Chamber of Commerce. This practice may change.
In the view of Trustee Foster,
“The process is being looked at and will eventually be overhauled to be more comprehensive. I think it is a mess and there has never really been (in my time) a good award process…Lodger's tax promotes tourism for the entire Village of Cloudcroft, all businesses, not just a select few.”
“We have missed our mark in the past with how and who we are marketing to. We need to start promoting our outdoor rec, our proximity to National Parks, and our beautiful mountains, not just events held during the summer. We have failed our local businesses by not bringing in tourism during the winter months when our local businesses need those tourists' dollars the most.”
“So we are going to work to change that and to start marketing Cloudcroft as a four-season area. We can and must do better for our Village and the businesses that survive off of tourism.”
Compounding the problem, Chamber officials and Campbell consistently refer to the Chamber as the village's "designated marketing organization" (DMO), as Campbell stated in a February 18th email. When the Reader requested documentation of this designation, neither the Village nor the Chamber could produce such an agreement.
State regulations reveal that villages are not required to have a DMO for tourism spending, nor must they channel funds through a DMO. The DMO designation only matters for New Mexico Tourism Board grants supporting cooperative marketing campaigns under the New Mexico TRUE brand—which the Chamber pursues independently through a $33,000 state agreement, according to Chamber President Spears.
The critical issue is whether officials incorrectly assume the Village must automatically channel tourism dollars through the Chamber. Such an assumption would prevent the Village from issuing Requests for Proposals (RFPs), allowing multiple parties to compete for tourism budget management. Chamber President Spears acknowledged to the Reader that the Chamber has no exclusive rights and must compete with other applicants.
That may be what happens this year.
Tourism drives the village economy, and supporting its health is essential for local businesses.
Rather than maintaining the status quo, this Council has demonstrated a willingness to review and improve existing processes. Like any business, the administration wants to ensure invested funds generate strong returns, focusing on measurable results.
Better Housekeeping: A Path to Improvement
Several concrete steps could improve this dysfunctional process:
Enhanced Collection and Reporting: Establish proper reporting and collection systems with active LTAB help. It is estimated that as much as 50% of the short-term rentals are not paying the bed tax. Simply ensuring that these owners are aware of their tax obligations may increase compliance dramatically. Procedures for informing and collecting information don’t have to be complex. It’s a small village. LTAB can send them a letter. Provide them with a convenient online payment option.
Improved Investment Analysis: Develop sharper investment analysis and measurement of tourism spending. The LTAB should craft a Request for Proposal (RFP) process that clearly defines criteria, objectives, procedures, responsibilities, and reporting expectations for the village and fund recipients, preferably through an online application system. Submit this framework to the Council for approval, allowing the LTAB to handle work that staff lack the bandwidth to perform.
Strategic Fund Allocation: Award funds to the most capable organizations. Create separate RFPs for creative messaging and graphics. Another for specialized media buying services. Even one for event production. The successful Lumberjack Day weekend is produced by a private company, not the Chamber, proving this model works.
The Village also doesn't need to allocate all funds immediately. The LTAB can meet monthly and make piecemeal recommendations after they have time to fully explore options. Why rush through it?
The Chamber may not currently be the best option for managing the lion share’s of the Village's tourism budget. By its own admission, they have new staff and are still "learning how to do things." At a minimum, the Village should explore all possibilities rather than rubber-stamping one organization to handle 77% of the allocated funds because "that's how we've always done it."
Collaborative Leadership: The Village operates with limited resources and volunteer leadership. Every Council member balances village responsibilities with day jobs and businesses yet dedicates substantial weekly hours to public service. Rather than expecting the currently understaffed village office to handle everything, committees like the LTAB could take the initiative—generating ideas, researching options, drafting proposals, implementing solutions. Can the LTAB do more?
Too often, "That's the way we've always done things" means "Here's a shortcut." The Village has seen where that path leads.
After years of chaos caused by poor management, it may be time for meaningful change.
The LTAB boasts impressive members, including Julie Bragg, Brianna Jonnes, and Lauren Groesbeck. At Thursday's LTAB meeting, the trio asked pointed questions about streamlining all lodgers' tax processes and urged a special meeting soon to help develop them. More importantly, the three redirected the conversation.
Unfortunately, since Campbell did not call a public board meeting for 11 months, these smart voices weren’t heard in crucial conversations until now.
It's difficult to imagine how an LTAB chair who threatens village officials with a "nuclear option" can regain the trust and independence that role demands. Perhaps it's time to refresh the relationships between Village, LTAB, and the Chamber—unburdened by past conflicts—to forge respectful, productive partnerships.
Thank you to our sponsor, Ski Cloudcroft:
Pizza and Summer Tubing start July Fourth at Ski Cloudcroft!
Do You Want to Make a Difference in the Village?
Cloudcroft is run by volunteer leaders, for better or worse.
Leadership Cloudcroft is a new initiative designed to address an old problem in Cloudcroft: developing volunteer leaders who are prepared to take charge.
Leadership Cloudcroft aims to help cultivate the next generation of community champions to address our mountain village's unique challenges by identifying and preparing community leaders who are prepared to take charge in volunteer, civic, business, and community roles.
Now, with at least one Trustee position with no incumbent running for re-election, is a good time to run for office. If that is something you are considering doing, the Leadership Cloudcroft program is a great way to help prepare you to serve and let voters know you are committed.
Graduates will receive a certificate, $100, and a hearty handshake.
Wow! Great analysis, Chris and Hannah! What a mess. Thank goodness for local journalism!
Really informative article. Clearly we owe measurable appreciation to Mayor Tim King & the Village Trustees for hatcheting their way through a jungle of regulatory and paperwork overgrowth.
The consistent criticisms of Karl Campbell, however, seem unfair to me. I've worked with Karl on committee. I've never seen him flustered, much less "toxic". I suspect a year plus of suggested actions & requested responses might cause any leader to resort to a "nuclear" memo. And, why berating him for going 11 months without a meeting when he was awaiting the Council's research before his committee could proceed🤔?