|
Selling Out
Naming rights to
Miami parks may soon be sold to the highest bidder
By
Angie Hargot
 |
|
Bayfront Park could soon bear a corporate name. Photo by
Richard M. Brooks |
Just after Columbus Children’s Hospital changed its name to
Nationwide Children’s Hospital in exchange for a $50 million
donation, it announced plans to rename its new emergency room and
trauma center after Ohio-based retailer Abercrombie & Fitch for
$10 million.
It was that second exchange that prompted parents, doctors and
activist groups to protest because they believed the clothing
company built its global empire marketing sex to teens.
The city of Miami may soon face similar controversy if the City
Commission moves forward with a plan to sell naming rights to its
public parks — an idea that’s already garnered criticism in other
cities throughout the nation.
Although commissioners acknowledged the dangers of allowing public
land to bear corporate names last Thursday, they unanimously
approved on first reading an ordinance that would establish
policies for corporate sponsorship of the city’s regional parks —
those larger than 75 acres, or that attract visitors from all over
South Florida.
That means public spaces such as Bicentennial Park, Bayfront Park
and Grapeland Water Park, or their facilities, could soon bear the
names of clothing retailers, car manufacturers or other
corporations if the commission approves it on second reading,
which could be as soon as March 27.
“Money speaks,” said Parks and Recreation Department Director
Ernest Burkeen, who would be the first city official involved in
naming negotiations.
Although the commission would likely have to approve any new name,
the ordinance would allow city officials to sell naming rights for
some parks and recreational facilities to corporate sponsors,
which could include Nike, Adidas and Ford Motor Company, if they
fund park programs or the construction of new amenities.
For
Sale
by City
“I understand [the funding troubles], but want to share with you
the slippery slope that this could put us on,” said
Gene
Tinnie, chairman of the Virginia Key Park Trust
Board of Trustees. “What’s happening with budget cuts is the
private sector is becoming more of a
player. Names of heroes should be on those buildings.”
“Even before we get to the point of naming the building, there
would have to be a discussion,” said District 5 Commissioner
Michelle Spence-Jones, who sponsored the item. “Those kinds of
funds will allow you to do whatever you want to do” as far as
parks programming and projects.
Although such brands as Nike or Reebok may seem ideal sponsors for
youth sports facilities, some activists are not so sure.
“It’s very troubling that we are selling our public space to
corporate interests,” said Susan Lynn, director of the
Boston-based nonprofit Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood.
Lynn was influential in the movement against the Abercrombie &
Fitch
Trauma
Center, her organization’s first sustained fight against the sale
of naming rights to corporations.
“Schools, parks and hospitals used to be named after heroes,” she
said. “Now they’re for sale to the highest corporate bidder.”
Whether they are aware of it or not, struggling municipalities
being wooed with the promise of millions of dollars inadvertently
subject their citizens to heavy marketing campaigns, which, she
said, are loosely akin to brainwashing.
“It’s to extend the reach of the brand, to integrate the brand
into the fabric of society,” she said. “If [sponsorships] were
truly philanthropic, ask them if they will donate the money
without the naming rights.”
According to the proposed ordinance, a review committee would be
established to judge compliance with a naming rights policy. It
also would determine if a particular company is eligible for
sponsorship. Police-regulated businesses, faith-based and
political organizations, and companies whose business is
“substantially derived from the sale of alcohol, tobacco, firearms
or adult use” would not be eligible.
So while we may not see a Marlboro Community Swimming Pool anytime
soon,
Lynn
said alternatives could be just as damaging.
“One of the things that [allowing corporate sponsorship] does is
the city is endorsing that company — its labor practices and its
production practices,” she said.
Although Spence-Jones asked officials, according to city
documents, to consult “with the communities in the areas
surrounding the regional parks regarding companies interested in
the naming rights,” no poll has been conducted in
Miami.
Jumping in the iPool
Public opinion polls taken in cities that proposed similar
measures, however, show that citizens are mostly split on the
issue.
For example, a 2005 poll conducted through telephone, public and
Internet-based surveys found that
Vancouver citizens generally did not support selling corporate
naming rights.
“There was agreement that individual naming was generally regarded
more favorably than corporate naming,” according to
Vancouver
city documents. “There was considerable resistance to renaming
existing facilities, and there was general discomfort with
corporate logos associated with public buildings.”
As a result, the city of
Vancouver
opted to sell corporate naming rights, without logos, mostly to
interior spaces in limited facilities.
In 2006, San Francisco residents and activists rejected the mere
idea of using corporate dollars to fund a
projected $80 million deficit for
operating
the Golden Gate Bridge, even without selling the naming rights. A
McBridge, they argued, could soon follow. In light of its
unpopularity, city officials rejected the option in 2007 in favor
of other forms of revenue, such as increased tolls.
Massachusetts citizens are still at odds over the idea of selling
naming rights since the notion first came before their lawmakers
in 2003. That proposed legislation would have sold the naming
rights to parks, including those with historically significant
names such as Walden Woods, made famous by Henry David Thoreau.
Massachusetts would have been the first state to draft such
legislation, but public criticism stalled the plans within a year.
However, in mid-2007, Citizens Bank purchased the
naming
rights to Lancaster’s 16-field
Massachusetts Youth Soccer Association Complex.
The
finished building, called Citizens Bank Fields at Progin Park,
houses youth and league soccer facilities, and came with an
approximately $9.5 million price tag. The deal, which, in effect,
set the precedent for selling naming rights to youth sports
facilities, experienced its share of ire from residents and
activist groups.
Yet, even as outrage continues over the corporate branding of
public facilities, many cities still need money to fill waning
municipal coffers.
A stipulation in the
Miami ordinance states that money generated from selling a park’s
name would be spent on programming in that park. It also
stipulates that no budgetary cuts would occur because of the extra
revenue generated from the sponsorship.
“This gives us an opportunity to raise money for our parks and our
children,” Spence-Jones said.
“We need to start thinking outside of the box” in terms of
funding, Commission Chair Joe Sanchez said, adding a warning of
his own: “There’s a big difference between if [community activist]
Charles Cutler wants to donate $1 million or if the Ford Motor
Company wants to rename a park.”
Commissioner Marc Sarnoff, who provided copies of a New York
Times article about the
Columbus hospital to commissioners as a warning that such a
measure could create similar problems, said the commission should
have the final say in determining which companies put their names
on park facilities.
The Price of a McPark
“We have four good facilities that will be able to attract
corporate sponsorship” from companies such as “Nike or Adidas,”
Burkeen noted.
But Sanchez cautioned him. “On the first negotiated name, don’t
sell yourself short, because those that come after” will offer the
city less negotiating leverage, he warned.
“What we’re doing here is easy money,” Commissioner Tomas Regalado
said. “Each January, Fortune 500 companies assess naming
grants and have scouts searching for target audiences.” For the
company, it means “having a permanent name that parents and kids
see twice a day,” he said.
To rename a nonregional park, commissioners would have to amend
the ordinance.
“Let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater” just yet,
Sanchez said.
Sarnoff noted that a corporate sponsorship doesn’t necessarily
need to be gaudy.
“There can be a huge sign or a small plaque,” Sarnoff said.
“Everything is taste.”
But according to
Lynn, the city ultimately could pay a much higher price than the
corporations.
“Marketing is a factor in so many of the mental and health
problems in childhood today,”
Lynn said, including “eating disorders, sexualization, the erosion
of creative play and underage alcohol and tobacco use. …
Municipalities should not be tools for corporations.”
Comments? E-mail
angie@miamisunpost.com |
