Editorial: They think the price is right

Friday, Jan. 18, 2002 | 4:33 a.m.

Two months ago Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman said he was negotiating with Beefeater Gin to be a pitchman for the company. Goodman said any proceeds he received would be used for city government programs. Two weeks ago the Las Vegas City Council decided to research the feasibility of leasing the city seal to an Internet casino, an idea sponsored by Goodman. Last week the City Council decided to up the ante, directing its staff to explore the possibility of selling advertising space on public buildings -- including City Hall.

Does anyone else notice a trend here? Instead of behaving like a city government -- sticking to finding ways to improve parks, streets and our quality of life -- the mayor and City Council are in danger of looking like they're partners in a marketing and advertising agency.

The City Council contends that it needs to be innovative and find areas where it can make money to pay for needed government services. And the City Council believes selling advertising space on public buildings could help in those efforts. Betsy Fretwell, the assistant city manager, noted that City Hall and its parking garage face U.S. 95, making it an ideal location for advertising.

Advertising on public buses and bus shelters can be found elsewhere, but the National League of Cities says it doesn't know of any other city that offers advertising on public buildings. There is a reason why no one else is doing it -- it's wrong to use government buildings as billboards. One of government's basic roles is to regulate businesses. How can the city possibly enter into a money-making venture with a company that it's supposed to regulate? Government regulators could feel pressured to go easy on a company and look the other way if they're financial partners.

Plus it's just unseemly to put advertising on government buildings. Imagine if the U.S. Treasury Department decided to offset some of its expenses by allowing H&R Block to place advertising on the Treasury Building in Washington, D.C. Here in Southern Nevada, Hoover Dam has quite a bit of available space: Think of all the advertising that could be displayed there. City Hall really is no different than other government buildings and structures. Public facilities are there for all the people, and they're not to be confused as a government endorsement for specific consumer products. Selling advertising on public buildings also makes it look like the government is up for sale. And from an aesthetic point of view, the plan is a loser, too. Billboards already clutter the roadways. Local governments should be restricting where billboards and advertising go, not finding another way to allow for their proliferation.

Another concern, one that was raised during the City Council's meeting last week, is the prospect of risque or objectionable advertising going up. Government can't restrict free speech, so that could mean advertising for strip joints and outcall services. It's possible that the city could get around this by contracting out the advertising service to a private company, which then could limit what's advertised. But it's unclear if such a scheme, which would keep government out of making the day-to-day decisions on what advertising could be displayed, could withstand a legal challenge. "It could be a gold mine, but it has to be balanced with First Amendment concerns," Goodman said, "and it can't embarrass the city." The mayor shouldn't worry himself about embarrassment -- that line was crossed a long time ago when the city first started talking about selling its city seal to an Internet gambling outfit -- an enterprise, by the way, that is illegal.

The City Council should stop this nonsense and put an end to further exploration of these initiatives. Otherwise, Las Vegas city government will be in the tawdry business of selling the city's good name to the highest bidder.