Remember when City Hall lit up with the Rolling Stones logo to promote the band’s upcoming Vancouver concert?
An anonymous member of the public submitted a complaint to the city’s integrity commissioner, claiming that the stunt was a potential misuse of city property. They alleged it could be in violation of section 4.5 of the Code of Conduct bylaw, which states that “a member must not use, or permit the use of, city land, facilities, equipment, supplies, services, employees, or other resources for activities other than the business of the City, except in accordance with City policies permitting reasonable personal use.”
In a report released today, though, integrity commissioner Lisa Southern ruled that the big-lipped ad didn’t break any rules.
“I find the display of the Rolling Stones logo on City Hall was City business,” Southern summarizes in the report. “The circumstances around the event resulted in net revenue for the City and the promotion did not involve personal use of City property by the Respondent Councillors or Mayor Sim.”
It was the fifth she wrote in 2023, compared to one report in 2021 and two reports in 2022. Two of the reports produced this year concerned Mayor Ken Sim complaining about Councillor Christine Boyle.
In her report, Southern lays out the order of events: a promoter approached the Mayor’s office about the light show, and was then connected to the City Manager. The current Council has asked City staff to explore opportunities with “sponsorships, advertising, naming rights, and donations” (included as part of the 2024 Draft Operating Budget). Staff approved the proposal, and the promoter paid a $500 licensing fee, plus costs associated with the light display and power.
“The use of City administrative resources required to coordinate approval of the display was more than offset by the $500 paid,” the report reads. “While it was a small amount, there was net revenue for the city.”
Let’s pause here to consider the fact that, apparently, it only costs $500 to rent the outside of city hall for a one-off event. That’s prime real estate, baby! It costs more to get an influencer to pretend to love your meal kits on a 30-second Instagram story.
Clearly, City pricing plans are still in the works. After all, the 2024 Draft Budget doesn’t put a dollar figure on how much advertising and sponsorship might contribute to “incremental revenue,” noting it will be “reflected in the five-year financial outlook when it can be quantified.”
This is all in pursuit of keeping property tax increases low. This year will see a 7.5 per cent property tax raise—that’s about $100 more annually for a median condo owner (or $260 more for a median detached home), which is significantly less than the $660 increase the median renter will pay.
Southern noted in her analysis that “whether City Hall or other City property should be used for marketing purposes to generate revenue for the City is a policy question for Council and City staff… However, there is nothing in the Code of Conduct bylaw that prevents this type of activity, and therefore, there was no breach.”
Frankly, we should just let late-stage neo-liberalism run its course. The electorate chose a businessman to be our mayor, and his Council makes the rules. Everything is up for sale in the name of sweet, sweet (municipal) profit: our reputation, our buildings, our civic brand. Let London Drugs sponsor some initiatives. Mandate councillors to wear a Main Street Brewing cap in every photo. Magnify Aritzia ads and project them onto the clock tower for $5,000 per minute (bulk discounts available). Hell, there are four sides to the thing—how much can we charge for a 360-degree wrap-around deal?
If we’re really trying to raise some more cash, just flog the name of the whole building off to the highest bidder. Doom us to living with the Chip Wilson City Hall of Vancouver.
It wouldn’t be against the code of conduct. It would just be poetically, existentially, cringe.
It only costs $500 to advertise on Vancouver City Hall. Who's up next?
24
1
05.01.2024
Remember when City Hall lit up with the Rolling Stones logo to promote the band’s upcoming Vancouver concert?
An anonymous member of the public submitted a complaint to the city’s integrity commissioner, claiming that the stunt was a potential misuse of city property. They alleged it could be in violation of section 4.5 of the Code of Conduct bylaw, which states that “a member must not use, or permit the use of, city land, facilities, equipment, supplies, services, employees, or other resources for activities other than the business of the City, except in accordance with City policies permitting reasonable personal use.”
In a report released today, though, integrity commissioner Lisa Southern ruled that the big-lipped ad didn’t break any rules.
“I find the display of the Rolling Stones logo on City Hall was City business,” Southern summarizes in the report. “The circumstances around the event resulted in net revenue for the City and the........
© Georgia Straight
visit website
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Rami G Khouri
Mort Laitner
Donald Low
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
Nikkei Editorial
