Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Banner Program topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City manager outlines draft banner program, warns of costs and First Amendment constraints
Summary
City staff briefed the Portsmouth Arts & Culture Commission on a draft banner program limited to arts and cultural nonprofits, citing staffing limits, multi-thousand-dollar fabrication and installation estimates and the need to design selection criteria to avoid constitutional challenges; the policy will go to council as an informational item on July 13.
City Manager Karen Conard told the Portsmouth Arts & Culture Commission that a draft city banner program is "a work in progress that is much more complex than you might imagine," and urged careful design to balance promotion of arts events with staff capacity and legal limits.
The commission heard a staff presentation on a pilot program that would focus on downtown and several gateway zones. DPW staff estimated installation and fabrication costs in the low thousands per event and said the city currently has about 32 banner-bracket sets available; staff cautioned that labor for installation and removal is the main recurring cost. "It takes two staff two days to set up 36 of these," DPW staff explained, and repairs and replacements add ongoing expense.
Why it matters: commissioners and arts groups view banners as a high-visibility way to promote cultural events. Staff said the program must be narrow and administrable to reduce legal risk and staff burden and to ensure equitable access for nonprofits that may lack sponsorship dollars.
City policy and limits: staff said council policy 2025-02 limits eligible uses to community-based, arts and cultural nonprofit organizations and that the city intends to treat banner placements as government speech to limit First Amendment exposure. Staff warned the commission that municipal banner programs have produced litigation in other cities and said the city will craft clear selection criteria and application windows rather than permit ad-hoc requests.
Cost and design trade-offs: staff described two cost drivers. Printing and fabrication have scale efficiencies — printing 32 identical banners is cheaper per unit than a small run — while labor to install and remove banners drives ongoing operating expense. Staff cited a range of figures during the meeting (on the order of several thousand dollars for a pilot cycle) and said they are still refining the budget and procurement approach.
Alternatives and complements: commissioners proposed lower-cost or lower-labor options, including a rolling banner on the city website, newsletter placements, kiosks and upgraded digital signage. Members also suggested piloting organization-level or seasonal banners rather than single-event banners to reduce turnover and cost.
Next steps: staff said a city-manager policy and implementation guidelines will return to the City Council as an informational item, with staff aiming for a July 13 council date for initial review. Staff invited the Arts & Culture Commission to submit feedback or testify at the council meeting.
The commission did not take a formal vote on the banner policy at the meeting; staff will refine eligibility criteria, application windows and procurement details before returning to council.
