Advertising on transit shelters

[fsujax]

Looks like JTA needs some help. Get a hold your City Council member and tell them to support advertising on transit shelters! Can we please move into the 21st century!!

"JTA’s plan to put signs on its bus shelters has new support â€" and opposition. Council member Warren Jones is sponsoring legislation that would permit advertising on public transit shelters while Council member John Crescimbeni is sponsoring a bill that would prohibit advertising on pay phones and transit shelters."

[copperfiend]

Looks like JTA needs some help. Get a hold your City Council member and tell them to support advertising on transit shelters! Can we please move into the 21st 20th century!!

Fixed it

[copperfiend]

What I love about this is how the city wouldn't allow shelter ads but will allow a city bus to completely wrapped with a Hooters ad.

[Lunican]

Here is a Metro Jacksonville article on this topic:
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/content/view/531/

[Charles Hunter]

Heard a presentation by Bill Brinton and John Crescimbeni at a CPAC meeting the last time this came up (JC was not on Council, yet).  The position of the sign opponents is that advertising on bus shelters would open the door to unregulating all outdoor advertising.  A bus shelter ad would be an "off-site" sign, like any other billboard, so if you allow these in public right of way, how can you regulate my sign on private property?  They cited court cases from other cities where this apparently happened.  Brinton says he is a lawyer who spends much of his time defending cities against challenges to their sign ordinances.  Not being a lawyer myself, I can't say if his arguments are valid, or not.

Added on preview - he did say that the ads on buses were different from non-moving billboards (or shelter signs), because they move.  Same as the ads on top of taxis.

[mtraininjax]

How about it, I'm ready to see an Ad for the Gold Club along a downtown street, after all single mothers gotta make a living!

[TPC]

I support bus shelter advertising, it can help pay for the shelters and can help stimulate the local economy by giving advertising agencies some new work.

[lindab]

I see from the comments I'm in the minority here but why is advertising the only way to pay for bus shelters? What do you mean we "aren't grown up" if we don't like the idea?

Does the single advertiser who pays the city have sole rights over that particular shelter?  Can other people plaster garage sale ads, missing dog ads, easy credit ads on a shelter too? Who enforces that?

You point out that those classy shelters pictured are in progressive cities. Given Jacksonville's historic financial  problems could we would see similar shelters with a single tasteful ad or cheaper appearing and less costly versions? Would one ad per shelter be sufficient to pay or would there need to be multiple ads? What about in 5 years time when new ads are needed?

If a shelter is on someone's residential easement, essentially their front yard, will it have advertising too? Can a homeowner object?

[Joe]

Remember, there are also private companies who will build HUNDREDS of bus shelters for FREE as long as they are merely given advertizing rights. It seems like a fair trade-off, and a huge win-win for the city. I still can't believe city council hasn't done this yet. It's insane.

Regarding lindab's questions ... all the details would depend on the specific contracts signed by the city. If their general counsel is even halfway awake when they draft the agreement, they can ensure that the city has content control (so the shelters are pretty, and they aren't advertizing objectionable materials like hard liquor or abortions or whatever).

[Charles Hunter]

Regarding lindab's questions ... all the details would depend on the specific contracts signed by the city. If their general counsel is even halfway awake when they draft the agreement, they can ensure that the city has content control (so the shelters are pretty, and they aren't advertizing objectionable materials like hard liquor or abortions or whatever).

Aye, there's the rub.  Given the General Counsel's recent history - Shipyards, Courthouse, Waste Management, to name a few.  Heck, they may write a contract requiring objectionable ads!

[Deuce]

I was just thinking about this yesterday as I drove down Beach. I don't see any problem with allowing this and if the private company is willing to fund the installation and possible maintenance then it really is a win-win situation. As for legal issues that arise, if all these other cities are allowing it then surely they've figured out how to avoid the legal tussles that Bill Brinton and John Crescimbeni have raised.

why is advertising the only way to pay for bus shelters

It's not, but in these cash strapped times it's a great way to pay for them. Would you rather that we pay for them with our taxes?

Personally I don't think the issue here has anything to do with cost or maint or legal, but instead control. Those in the city who oppose this are doing so on the grounds that they want to control the advertising. They don't want to see ads for Victoria's secret, or Seagrams Gin, or reform of marijuana laws (actually appeared once in D.C.), or anything that offends their conservative sensibilities. Maybe I'm way wrong on this one. I'd rather be wrong here than right.

[urbanlibertarian]

Charles Hunter wrote " The position of the sign opponents is that advertising on bus shelters would open the door to unregulating all outdoor advertising."

IMO that door should be wide open.