Discussion of an item that was pulled off the consent agenda during last week’s Lawrence City Commission meeting offers some interesting insight into what kind of sponsors and sponsor signs commissioners might find acceptable at Sports Pavilion Lawrence.

The agenda item would have authorized city staff to look at possible amendments to the sign code to govern corporate sponsorship signs at public facilities. The issue was raised in connection with efforts to secure corporate sponsors to support SPL. Some of the signs or banners that corporate sponsors might want outside the center aren’t allowed under the current code. (Signs inside the facility aren’t covered by the code.) The agenda item didn’t propose any changes but sought authority to prepare some options for commissioners to examine later.

The discussion was initiated by Commissioner Matthew Herbert who mounted a broad attack on the city’s sign ordinances and particularly any measure that would allow signage at public buildings like SPL that wouldn’t be allowed at private businesses. Herbert even questioned the need for a city sign ordinance, saying that if the code is “so malleable” that the city can simply violate it at will then “perhaps the ordinance doesn’t need to exist.”

Whatever happens with sponsorship signs at SPL, Herbert’s comments on the sign ordinance are an overreaction. Before making such blanket statements, Herbert should read the entire sign ordinance and envision what Lawrence might look like if all its provisions were thrown out.

The discussion then turned to what kind of signs might be considered outside SPL. After hearing some examples, Commissioner Leslie Soden said she was “not excited” by the idea of large sponsorship signs on the SPL building or permanent banners on light poles in the SPL parking lot. She later added that she was “not excited” by the whole concept of corporate sponsorship of public facilities.

Soden and Herbert were joined by Commissioner Stuart Boley in a 3-2 vote denying the staff’s request for authorization to look at amendments to the sign code.

Based on last week’s discussion, any future consideration of corporate sponsorships for SPL is likely to trigger a lively debate on the commission. Mayor Jeremy Farmer and Commissioner Mike Amyx voted to authorize the staff to explore changes in the sign code. Herbert voted against that measure but expressed enthusiasm for attracting corporate money that could reduce taxpayer costs for public facilities. Soden seemed more concerned about the sponsorships themselves than the signs and Boley voted against the measure without commenting.

The last commission saw corporate sponsorships as a potential way to help support SPL. Now, there seems to be some question about whether the current commission will accept corporate sponsorships and the strings and promotional signs that may come with them.

Stay tuned.