Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Airport Advertising topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Flagstaff staff propose revising airport ad policy and reopening paid ads to boost enterprise revenues
Summary
City staff presented a revised draft policy and requested direction to reopen paid advertising at Flagstaff Pulliam Airport, proposing tightened content restrictions and a clearer internal review process.
Get email alerts on the Airport Advertising topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City staff presented a revised draft policy and requested direction to reopen the paid-advertising program at Flagstaff Pulliam Airport.
Kevin (staff) reviewed the history: the city paused paid advertising at the airport and at Jay Lively in late 2023 after stakeholder concerns about content and policy application. He said staff met with the concerned stakeholder and revised the draft policy to address those concerns. Key changes include expanded purpose and goals, clarification that the advertising spaces are a non-public forum, a prohibition on ads that depict graphic violence or weapons used to harm people or animals, a prohibition on advertising that markets adult‑oriented businesses, and an explicit statement that any content restrictions must be viewpoint neutral under First Amendment doctrine.
Heidi Hansen, Economic Vitality Director, described prior revenue levels: about $25,000 a year when Clear Channel provided the service and approximately $41,000 a year after the city managed the program. Staff also noted airport annual enplanements have fallen from over 100,000 to roughly 79,000, reducing potential ad impressions. Pros staff also reported the recreation center advertising program had historically made modest revenue (a figure staff recalled around $8,000 annually) and that pros staff did not want to restart that program now because of staff time and maintenance demands.
The city manager emphasized the airport operates as an enterprise fund and needs revenue sources. Legal staff explained that policies restricting content in a non-public forum are allowable but must be viewpoint neutral. Council generally signaled support to continue refining the policy and directed staff to return with a final policy and an internal review process so denials are vetted and, when appropriate, come to council for review. No formal vote was taken.

