The Biddeford City Council recently gave initial approval to a proposal that would allow advertising and sponsorship of parks and recreation facilities. In the interest of providing as many activities as possible for area youth, we believe this is a great idea and hope to see the council give it a full endorsement.
Nowadays, just about everything is sponsored ”“ particularly sports. Venues that host sporting events are no longer named after community leaders or renown players. They’re named after the financier, as is the case with the Verizon Wireless Arena in Manchester, N.H., Bank of America Pavilion in Boston and Gillette Stadium in Foxborough, Mass. It’s sad to see local names go by the wayside ”“ nobody wants to see Waterhouse Field in Biddeford renamed after, say, a bank ”“ but it’s better than seeing opportunities lost or fields closed.
The end result, which is giving area children a chance to play on city sports teams and enjoy other after-school recreation groups, certainly justifies the means here.
It’s a win for advertisers, too, who will have a chance to expand their reach to a very specific audience. Think of a pet store or veterinary hospital sponsoring the Biddeford Dog Park, and sporting good stores putting up banners on the baseball field fences.
Not all types of companies or organizations would be able to advertise, of course, and the strict policy proposed for this plan is actually the most important part. Its provisions are quite comprehensive: to ban all ads that promote items prohibited by law or city ordinance; are offensive to community standards or promote negative behavior or values; promote social, religious or political organizations; conflict with Recreation Department messages; or promote drugs, tobacco or alcohol.
These guidelines would eliminate the headaches of dealing with any advertisements that might be offensive or inappropriate.
Exposure to a few friendly advertising images ”“ local ones that might even direct you to products and businesses you never knew about ”“ is a small price to pay to keep recreation programs going strong for Biddeford children, if that’s what it takes.
Councilor Richard Rhames voiced opposition to the proposal, saying that funding parks and recreation programs is an “important function of government” that the city should be ashamed not to be able to fund. We see a more limited view of government’s role, and also acknowledge the reality that Biddeford cannot provide all things to all people. The roads are in rough shape, and the City Hall clock tower is in need of significant repairs ”“ and these things are certainly more of a common-sense priority for government tax dollars than providing programming.
The Biddeford school system has found that taxpayer dollars are not even enough to provide for all the desired educational programs and equipment, let alone recreational ones. That’s why a development director has been hired, to bring in money from corporate sponsors and alumni as a supplemental income. This approach is far from unprecedented, especially as people realize that city funds are limited and taxpayers can only bear so much of the load. We believe it would be far more of a shame for these recreational programs to end because the city refuses to try other funding mechanisms.
Ӣ Ӣ Ӣ
Today’s editorial was written by Managing Editor Kristen Schulze Muszynski on behalf of the Journal Tribune Editorial Board. Questions? Comments? Contact Kristen by calling 282-1535, ext. 322, or via email at kristenm@journaltribune.com.
Comments are not available on this story.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
