yay for people power. Now lets hope the bureaucrats listen!
Dear Lord, if you give us back Johnny Cash, we'll give you Justin Bieber.
A bit of background for everyone...
And as I thought its a bit of AFL Influence there too...one of the councillers is the Pres of an AFL body up there....
So if you haven't yet voted....please do so ..
Thanks...
http://www.ntnews.com.au/article/200...5_ntsport.html
COMMENT: When pollution helps save the planet
PETER BROWN
21Jun07
EYE OF THE STORM: Austar Rugby Park is at the centre of a signage controversy
COMMENT: Darwin City Council candidates should be made to turn their campaign portraits away from public view when election time rolls around.
After all, it would only be fair.
Those disturbingly well-manicured ``vote for me'' headshots plastered across Darwin for even a brief couple of weeks fall well and truly into the realm of ``visual pollution''.
I'd prefer to eat a deep fried Mars Bar saturated in wet season room-temperature stale beer while watching Rosie O'Donnell on The View on Austar rather than consume anything they are trying to sell me.
Much has been made of visual pollution in Darwin over the last couple of days.
It is, of course, illegal under DCC bylaws for businesses -- including sports -- to display any third-party signage at their venues that faces out.
Unless of course, it's a community notice board ... so the Darwin City Council's Community Notice Board at The Gardens with a Qantas logo on it is A-OK.
The NT Rugby Union last week found out about visual pollution the hard way.
The NTRU was ordered to take down sponsorship banners on their fenceline that face out on to McMillans Rd, an NT Government-owned road, at Rugby Park, Marrara.
They had gone to a council meeting on Tuesday night to ask for an overall review of the signage bylaw in relation to sport.
The council meeting ended with them being told to take down their signs.
Council is standing firm while Marrara Sports Complex's tenants divide.
The complex's most powerful tenant AFLNT, led by DCC alderman Bob Elix, champions the bylaws saying "we (AFLNT) are getting adequate income".
Alderman Elix voted against the signage review last Tuesday. But he should have excused himself from the vote as the AFLNT president, regardless of the NT Government approval he was given.
AFLNT president Elix said: "There is only a minority that think that third party signage should be allowed."
Council was presented with the review submission by heavy-hitter Rex Wild QC on behalf of NTRU, NT Hockey, NT Athletics, Basketball NT, NT Cricket, Football Federation NT, Netball NT, St Marys Football Club and Gymnastics NT.
As far as Marrara goes -- and my maths -- it would appear the AFLNT is in the minority.
The NTRU and other sports in the complex see the AFLNT as the "Ivory Tower", especially on the eve of TIO Stadium hosting a maximum-exposure AFL match.
NTRU president Vince Kelly sees Elix's comments as a bit of a slap in the face.
"It's easy for them because everyone knows they get a heap of government funding ... and even more funding from the AFL," Kelly told the Northern Territory News on Friday.
As a business or organisation in this signage quagmire, it would be easy to become frustrated when a quick drive through our streets offers a plethora of signs that appear to contradict the bylaw.
What really is the difference between the Qantas sign at Gardens and a couple of signs at Rugby Park?
One is a community notice board and fits into the code, the other sponsors a sport -- they are both advertising signs being displayed in public.
If one is OK then the other must be as well.
If signs face in at a sports ground, they are OK, if they face out, they are not. But what about those signs that face in but can be seen from a public road? Is that not facing out? When is in "in" and out "out"?
Alderman Elix's assertion that sign anarchy would spread across Darwin if the bylaw was revised is alarmist council propoganda.
"What about schools and churches, which are all there to help the community," Elix told the Northern Territory News
on Friday.
I haven't seen too many Sunday morning masses sponsored by Gatorade or Telstra lately ... anywhere in the world.
Nor the Larrakeyah Primary School, Grade 3 ... proudly sponsored by Nike.
Grade 3 -- Just Do It (Once).
Commonsense needs to prevail because sport needs sponsorship dollars and there is only so much to go around. Sports can only dangle the greatest carrot they can to potential sponsors -- and that's exposure.
Council must compromise on the blanket ban and allow third-party sponsorship signage at sporting venues. But in the process put in place strict conditions. No one is asking for school or church sponsorship.
At the start of June, council voted to raise rates by 5 per cent. Then acting Lord Mayor Dorothy Fox rationalised the rise with this gem: "It's not as bad as Alice Springs or Katherine."
Phew. What a comfort. It's hot outside but at least we don't live on Mars.
She went on: "It's those things you wouldn't think of, like the watering of our parks that add up ... it's guaranteed as soon as the grass starts dying off people will be jumping up and down."
How is this for an innovative alderman re-election guarantee. Lower rates. Whhhaaaht? It would rid candidates of the need to put up those visual polluting headshots. Instant victory.
How, you ask? Let sporting organisations put up about six no-obligation third-party sponsorship signs under strictly enforced conditions:
THE SIGNS must not exceed two metres by one metre;
THE SIGNS must not be clustered; and
THEY must not be ugly.
In return, council enforces mandatory recycling at sporting venues as well as a commitment to 500 man hours of community service per sport per year.
Just 10 volunteers from one invididual sport, one hour per week would fulfil that sport's
annual commitment.
Factor in 10 sports, that's 5000 man hours toward beautifying our neighbourhoods -- for FREE.
Now, say the base hourly rate for a council worker making our parks look pretty is about $15 -- that's $75,000 worth of work. Let's say there are about 25,000 rate-payers in Darwin, split that $75,000 equally and that's a
$3 reduction. Better than nothing I say and a small price to pay for a few signs.
The headline would read: ``Council reduces rates.''
No way! Sports can then dangle a tastier carrot to potential sponsors, attract more cash, the signage would be regulated, our parks would be cleaner and our innovative aldermen at the DCC would be helping save the planet.
All at a time when the DCC hasn't exactly attracted the most positive attention.
Surely not.
What do you think? Email www.ntnews.com.au your opinion. Click here to send an email
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote