Fair board begins naming-rights policy work, Metro code and procurement flagged as constraints

The Nashville Board of Fair Commissioners discussed a plan to pursue naming rights and corporate sponsorships for buildings and programs on the fairgrounds campus, and Metro Legal advised that council approval and additional legal and procurement review will be required.

Metro Legal attorney Erica summarized the legal framework: "There is a Metro ordinance. It's, 13 26 0 1 0 and 0 2 0 that, require council approval for naming of public buildings." She said the ordinance requires an ordinance to include biographical or company information and a recommendation from the fair board prior to second reading. Erica added that an earlier Metro Legal opinion recommended a competitive procurement for naming rights but that a sponsorship ordinance passed since that opinion may affect whether a formal request for proposals is required.

The board discussed which campus assets to offer first. Jasper Hendricks, chair of the board, suggested starting with on-campus pavilions and expo buildings and using those initial agreements to shape broader policy. "Let's begin with something, you know, and figure out, you know, what it is. So I'm not talking about Market Street. I'm talking about what we have right here and what can we and and this could be the test," he said, urging staff to consider Expo 1, Expo 2, Expo 3 and the outdoor pavilions as initial naming-rights candidates.

Why it matters: Naming rights and sponsorships could provide new revenue to reduce reliance on fund balance and support operations, but they require legal, procurement and policy guardrails to ensure compliance with Metro code and state law.

Board and staff discussion

Erica told the board the relevant Metro code sections require council approval for naming public buildings, that ordinances must include background information about the honoree or company, and that the board must provide a recommendation before council action. She also flagged the Tennessee Heritage Protection Act as a potential constraint for properties that qualify as protected memorials and said conflict-checks and Metro conflict-of-interest rules would apply to corporate partners. On procurement, Erica said: "There is an old opinion from Metro Legal stating that it is required. However, the sponsorship ordinance that was passed last year for the fair board was not in existence at the time the opinion was written. So we'd like to look into that a little further."

Board members discussed types and scope of naming opportunities. Laura, the fairgrounds executive director, and other board members noted several local corporate neighbors—music labels, Live Nation, and new corporate offices—that staff could approach for programmatic sponsorships such as a branded flea market or pavilion naming. One board member joked about a high-dollar sponsor: "Powered by Amazon would be great, you know, for $3,000,000," underscoring the board's interest in multi-year and programmatic deals as potential revenue streams.

Next steps and direction

Board members asked Metro Legal and procurement to draft a recommended policy and to identify whether a request for proposals would be required. The board asked staff to prepare an initial list of campus assets appropriate for naming or programmatic sponsorships (tentatively Expo 1–3 and the outdoor pavilions) and to return with draft contract terms and recommended guardrails, including morality clauses, duration options and conflict checks. Metro Legal offered to draft a policy template reflecting code requirements and procurement input.

Ending

The board did not take a formal vote on naming-rights policy at the meeting; members directed staff and Metro Legal to draft a policy and to return with recommended next steps and draft contract language for the board's review.