 |
Nov 3rd 2009
VICTORY
Prop D Defeated
No New Billboards |
"No New Billboards!" is the message heard tonight from the voting booth and from the hearts of San Franciscans as they defeated Proposition D. The privately crafted, pro-billboard measure was decisively defeated at the polls today (54% voted no).
he commonsense values of ordinary San Franciscans prevail as we reaffirm our civic pride and sense of place as a world-class city.
San Francisco Beautiful, which led the opposition to Prop D, has consistently held that new blight will only add to existing blight. The effects of digital billboards along Mid-Market Street would offset any of the purported community benefits of Proposition D.
The initiative failed despite the impressive endorsements received early in the campaign as well as having outspent opponents 20 to one.
To many public policy observers, the "D" in Prop D might as well stand for "desperation" -- desperation to confront problems that have plagued Mid-Market Street for decades. Voters are telling our elected officials they won't settle for short-sighted, symbolic solutions to very real problems facing Mid-Market area and our city as a whole.
Tonight's result amplifies our City's historic aversion to excessive commercialization. On previous ballots, San Franciscans voted to block new billboards (Prop G in 2002 and Prop. K in 2007).
Likewise, Proposition E passed tonight by a wide margin (57 to 43), thus prohibiting any additional advertising on public property. San Francisco Beautiful had been the prime supporter of this initiative.
Tonight San Francisco voters remove all doubt - they will tolerate no new billboards. San Francisco Beautiful will continue to articulate that mandate. Maybe City Hall will finally hear the message: No New Billboards.
Milo F. Hanke
President of the Board
www.NoNewBillboards.org
 |
San Francisco Beautiful board members Chris Charles and Byron Rodriguez watch from an iPhone as votes come in. |
 |
Chandra Friese and San Francisco Beautiful board members Peter Fortune, Milo Hanke, Bob Friese and Juan Monsanto celebrate the election night win. |
 |
Tom Radulovich, Executive Director of
Livable City, (center) listens to victory speeches with members of the Leaugue of Young Voters. |
San Franciso Beautiful
Says No to New General Advertising
On the 2009 San Francisco November ballot:
NO on Prop D
Creation of Mid-Market Sign District
YES on Prop E
Prohibiting Additional Advertising on City Property
NO on Prop C
Sale of naming rights to Candlestick Park
Vote No on Prop D – ‘Who Wants More Billboards?’
Mid-Market Special Sign District
Image by Scott Grabowski
Commercial interests have sponsored Proposition D in order to erect massive, digital billboards along a two-block stretch of Market Street, between Fifth and Seventh Streets. Only voters can grant the necessary permission for them to do so.
If passed, the most intrusive of billboard technologies would enter San Francisco. From nearby hotels and apartments as well as vantage points like Twin Peaks, one would see ads for commercial products blinking every few seconds, blazing away 24 hours a day.
Digital billboards, measuring up to 500 square feet, would appear on building facades and rooftops. At one location alone, a massive rooftop sign could be erected 200 feet above street level.
Proposition D proponents argue their billboard scheme is the best hope for revitalizing this historically depressed neighborhood. Impatience, not desperation, may be order. This neighborhood requires political leadership that transcends an opportunistic initiative.
Billboard profits are typically huge and could discourage property owners from pursuing attractive retail, office, and residential opportunities. The increased visual pollution could kill Mid-Market revitalization, too, while increasing the City’s carbon footprint.
Though a few local nonprofits would receive a share of billboard profits, the rest of San Francisco, including millions of tourists, would suffer a commercially blighted skyline.
The extreme presence of billboards along those two blocks could destroy prospects for fully restoring the whole of Market Street, San Francisco’s grand boulevard, to a world-class standard.
In 2002, 79.1% of the voters approved Proposition G, the measure prohibiting new general advertising on private property. Today, voters are being asked to make an exception to the “No New Billboards” law they had passed resoundingly. The benefits of a possible exception are highly speculative.
Save Mid-Market for a better tomorrow, Vote No on Prop D — November 3, 2009!
For 'No on D' .pdf version.
Vote Yes On Prop E
'Stop New Billboards On Public Property'
Prop. E will prevent commercial advertising from encroaching any further upon the unique character of our City, neighborhoods, and shared public spaces.
City Hall continually allows the billboard industry to install advertising on more and more public property - in every neighborhood. For now, the syndrome of “advertising creep” continues on sidewalks, streets and in transit stations, and it occurs contrary to past decisive actions by San Francisco voters.
In 2007, 62% of voters had approved Prop K, a ballot resolution that called for halting new billboards on public property. However, elected officials ignored it since this earlier measure was only a resolution, not an enforceable law.
Today we need a law that will protect the unique character of our City and neighborhoods. Prop E guarantees to hold the line against new commercial advertising on public property.
Prop E strikes a fair balance by keeping current ad space on public property in place — thus allowing the City to continue to receive those annual revenues — while preventing elected leaders not to sell additional public spaces to the billboard industry.
Historically, ad revenues that the City receives are a desperately small percentage of the City’s total budget. As the City experiences financial strains, our leaders can and must find alternatives to dragging the City further into the advertising business.
San Francisco can’t afford any new billboard deals when we consider its adverse impacts upon tourism as well as our own sense of place and civic pride.
Say ‘YES’ to preserving the unique character and priceless beauty of San Francisco! Vote YES on Prop. E — November 3, 2009!
For 'Yes on E' .pdf version.
Vote No on Proposition C
'Don’t Sell Candlestick Park’s Name'
San Francisco voters in 2004 officially designated our City-owned stadium as Candlestick Park, thus preventing any future sale of so-called naming rights. San Franciscans had clearly expressed their resistance to increased corporatization and commercialization of everyday life.
Former naming rights deals at Candlestick have generated trivial sums -- about $700,000 annually (enough money to run the City for one hour per year).
With economically desperate times upon us, there will be greater pressure to commercialize our public assets. The Golden Gate Bridge authority seriously considered a “proud sponsors” scheme with corporate advertisers, but it backed off following local and international protests. New York City recently sold naming rights to a subway station. Other cities are home to “Taco Bell Arena,” “Coors Field,” and for a time Houston had the embarrassment of “Enron Field.” Isn’t that enough?
Ironically, the sale of naming rights feeds the illusion of fixing budgetary woes. Usually it delays the true structural reforms that are needed to sustain a city. Rather than rely upon selling naming rights to corporations, government ought to make the hard choices necessary to function within its budget.
Defeating Proposition C would not affect any new privately-owned stadium or one built mostly with private funds such as AT&T Park (built in accordance with voter-approved Props D and F, passed in 1997).
Candlestick Park is unique in that it was built and paid for by the public, unlike other stadiums, including AT&T Park, which was heavily subsidized by corporations. We already have one corporate-named stadium. Our remaining stadium should be named after a San Francisco sports player, a SF legacy that we all admire. (Legendary 49ers coach Bill Walsh would be one such example.)
For now, it should remain “The ‘stick,” that is, “Candlestick Park.” Vote No on Proposition C — November 3, 2009
For 'No on C' .pdf version.
|
