A new low(e): Ads proposed for Minneapolis parks
Wednesday, May 28, 2008 at 2:42 pm
- 8 Comments
Bus windows and skyways get covered in ads; are public parks next? Minneapolis taxpayers could soon be greeted at their city parks by banners advertising a national home improvement chain that has no stores in the city proper. Lowe’s says it’s willing to donate $90,000 in goods and services to six parks. The string attached: Lowe’s wants to hang 8-foot by 2-foot banners proclaiming “This area brought to you in part by Lowe’s” in outdoor locations such as Loring Park as well as smaller signs near donated equipment reading: “These products and more are available at Lowe’s.” (You can see a larger rendition of the 8-x-2 banner by clicking on the image at top.)
The Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board’s Administration and Finance Committee voted last week to send the proposal to the full board next week, although Commissioner Mary Merrill Anderson, a former Minneapolis park superintendent, acknowledged, “We’re holding our nose.” Commissioner Annie Young abstained, saying she’d read about Lowe’s troubles and thus recognized the company’s need for a marketing boost, but “I really don’t want an 8 ft by 2 ft banner outdoors.” Commissioner Scott Vreeland questioned the Lowe’s approach of targeting parks in certain zip codes. “I don’t know if anyone actually goes to Lowe’s in Minneapolis. It’s kind of a funny demographic. I’ve never been to a Lowe’s,” Vreeland said. “If I walk into Matthews Park, and it says, ‘This area brought to you by Lowe’s,’ that bugs me. Because this area is brought to us by taxpayers.”
Several commissioners said sponsorships were the wave of the future and Minneapolis simply needs a policy for cutting deals. No policy is in place yet; Lowe’s would be an exception, or perhaps the first drip in a coming flood. “Home Depot and other stores that haven’t requested this are going to go ‘Hey, me too!’” warned Commissioner Carol Kummer. “Thinking about how beautiful the parks look, we sure don’t need them cluttered up with corporate signage. If they get really jerky about it, tell them to take their 90 thou and go to …” She trailed off but another commissioner filled in the sentence with the name of another park district: “Three Rivers.” General Manager Don Siggelkow, who is asking the board whether staff should continue negotiations with Lowe’s corporate marketing department, said Lowe’s was already seeking similar arrangements around the area.
8 Comments
Comment posted May 28, 2008 @ 5:38 pm
Here’s the stupid thing … … the closest Lowe’s to Minneapolis is in West St. Friggin’ Paul. That’s 14 miles away from my south Minneapolis abode.
I realize some of our parks are suburban magnets, but criminey, if you’re going to enable this abortion, shouldn’t you at least ask them to do business in your city.
This really, really sucks. If it goes through, another reason to abolish the Park Board.
Comment posted May 28, 2008 @ 9:56 pm
More lack of foresight and planning This typifies the current way of operating at the Minneapolis Park Board. It’s all react, not planning for the future and developing a comprehensive approach.
If there’s going to be advertising — and I fervently hope there won’t be — they need to develop a policy before ANY commitments are made. Otherwise it’ll be just flailing around, as has been the case with their efforts at “development” — see Fuji Ya site and proposal to harness the falls for the Crown Hydro company.
But I’d rather see a Park Commissioner walking around with some company’s logo on their back than see a banner at Loring Park!
Comment posted May 29, 2008 @ 11:10 am
‘HARNESS’ the ‘falls’ for Crown Hydro? Hardly…. DOWN RIVER: Using the word ‘harness’ is an example of the hysteric language comng from those who have no idea of how LITTLE WATER Crown Hydro would BORROW.
This momrng (Thu 5/29) the River is running at 12,950 cubic feet per second.
(About 10 days ago it was over 25,000 c.f.s.).
CROWN HYDRO can operate with 150 c.f.s BORROWED from the River – and would be licensed to take up to 1,000
c.f.s.
1,000 c.f.s would be .07722 percent of the currentflow.
150 c.f.s would be POINT ZERO ONE ONE FIVE EIGHT
THREE of the River – or one one hundreth of ONE PERCENT.
“Harnessing?”
Don’t join the crazies who refuse to understand how SMALL a plant Crown Hydro would be. We need every single watt of GREEN energy we can get, without damaging the environment.
Thank you – Rob Brown, public info for for Crown Hydro
robbrown123@gmail.com
Comment posted May 29, 2008 @ 10:15 pm
Crown Hydro & river flow “1,000 c.f.s would be .07722 percent of the current flow.” says Rob Brown, PR person for Crown Hydro.
Just a quick glance shows that if current flow is 12,000cfs and Crown Hydro would take 1,000cfs that is about 1/12, or about 8% of the river.
So your numbers look to be about 100 times off the true figures.
Sure makes one wonder about all the other figures you give, to back the claim that this won’t do any harm to our river.
Comment posted May 28, 2008 @ 12:38 pm
Here's the stupid thing … … the closest Lowe's to Minneapolis is in West St. Friggin' Paul. That's 14 miles away from my south Minneapolis abode.
I realize some of our parks are suburban magnets, but criminey, if you're going to enable this abortion, shouldn't you at least ask them to do business in your city.
This really, really sucks. If it goes through, another reason to abolish the Park Board.
Comment posted May 28, 2008 @ 4:56 pm
More lack of foresight and planning This typifies the current way of operating at the Minneapolis Park Board. It's all react, not planning for the future and developing a comprehensive approach.
If there's going to be advertising — and I fervently hope there won't be — they need to develop a policy before ANY commitments are made. Otherwise it'll be just flailing around, as has been the case with their efforts at “development” — see Fuji Ya site and proposal to harness the falls for the Crown Hydro company.
But I'd rather see a Park Commissioner walking around with some company's logo on their back than see a banner at Loring Park!
Comment posted May 29, 2008 @ 6:10 am
'HARNESS' the 'falls' for Crown Hydro? Hardly…. DOWN RIVER: Using the word 'harness' is an example of the hysteric language comng from those who have no idea of how LITTLE WATER Crown Hydro would BORROW.
This momrng (Thu 5/29) the River is running at 12,950 cubic feet per second.
(About 10 days ago it was over 25,000 c.f.s.).
CROWN HYDRO can operate with 150 c.f.s BORROWED from the River – and would be licensed to take up to 1,000
c.f.s.
1,000 c.f.s would be .07722 percent of the currentflow.
150 c.f.s would be POINT ZERO ONE ONE FIVE EIGHT
THREE of the River – or one one hundreth of ONE PERCENT.
“Harnessing?”
Don't join the crazies who refuse to understand how SMALL a plant Crown Hydro would be. We need every single watt of GREEN energy we can get, without damaging the environment.
Thank you – Rob Brown, public info for for Crown Hydro
Comment posted May 29, 2008 @ 5:15 pm
Crown Hydro & river flow “1,000 c.f.s would be .07722 percent of the current flow.” says Rob Brown, PR person for Crown Hydro.
Just a quick glance shows that if current flow is 12,000cfs and Crown Hydro would take 1,000cfs that is about 1/12, or about 8% of the river.
So your numbers look to be about 100 times off the true figures.
Sure makes one wonder about all the other figures you give, to back the claim that this won't do any harm to our river.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
