Agenda item

Consideration was given to the report relating to Council sponsorship (policy and activities) which had been requested by the Board in order for it to undertake an overview and scrutiny exercise.

With regard to the Sponsorship and Advertising on Roundabouts Policy which had been approved and adopted by the Cabinet in July 2008, questions were raised regarding sponsorship price.  It was noted that within section 9 of the policy, it stated that the sponsorship price was £12,000 per annum.  However, it was clarified that in relation to road traffic islands, sponsorship price was no less than £4,000 per annum for each location and £12,000 referred to three locations.  Officers accepted that the policy was unclear on this point and suggested that this was amended accordingly.

It had been reported to the Cabinet in July 2008 that it was intended that £80,000 in sponsorship would be generated in 2008/09, however, Mr. Street, the Executive Director – Partnerships and Projects, stated that £80,000 had perhaps been over ambitious for the timeframe and in-house resources.  Details of sponsorship activity since July 2008 were referred to as outlined in appendix 2 of the report. 

It was believed that Bromsgrove District Council was amongst the few local authorities to obtain commercial sponsorship funding on recycling vehicles and it had negotiated very competitive packages in the hope it would attract other businesses.  Other sponsorship activities included four road traffic islands, the bandstand programme, Christmas lights switch-on event and donation of Christmas trees. 

Mr. Street explained to Members that previously, a systematic approach had not been taken.  However, it was reported that the Council was in the process of producing a sponsorship prospectus that would detail sponsorship opportunities in the District.  It was anticipated that this would be circulated to a targeted selection of larger local businesses.

The flexibility of sponsorship duration was raised.  It stated within section 6 of the policy that each agreement would be for a minimum of one year with an option to extend.  However, it was questioned whether in some circumstances a period of 6 months could be offered.

Discussions with the West Midlands Regional Improvement and Efficiency Partnership (WMRIEP) were referred to during the meeting.  It was reported that WMRIEP provided the Council with contact details of a company which dealt with sponsorship for other local authorities.  Officers had investigated this option, however, due to the significant financial implications, it was believed that sponsorship should be dealt with in-house and this would also enable the Council to offer a more competitively priced service to local businesses.

In relation to the road traffic island located near to the Artrix and David Lloyd, Members were informed that it had not yet been adopted due to highways issues and therefore could not be used for sponsorship purposes.  It was confirmed that the District Council had entered into an agreement with the County Council that five road traffic islands could be used for sponsorship purposes with the understanding that the Council would look to expand on this in the future (e.g. the roundabout in Wythall close to Becketts Farm).  It was also noted that road safety considerations needed to be taken into account and that some road traffic islands belonged to the Highways Agency.

It was suggested that the Council could seek funding through sponsorship for high profile events (e.g. Older People Day national event).  Officers agreed that this would be explored and could be added to the prospectus where viable.  However, it was explained that officers were currently focusing on existing Council events and facilities.  Other suggestions included play areas (e.g. planters and litter bins) and car park banners.  However, it was noted that the Council would need to take any planning issues into consideration where necessary.

It was pointed out that there had been no impact assessment undertaken and although the ethicality of adverts was included within a legal agreement for sponsorship, the ethicality of advertisers had not been covered. 

Attention was drawn to unacceptable sponsorship types referred to within the sample legal agreement at appendix 3, which included offering or promoting the sale of tobacco or tobacco relating products, however, it was noted that these did not include alcohol.  Therefore, it was questioned whether there were other types of unacceptable sponsorship which should also be included.

The Head of Legal, Equalities and Democratic Services, Mrs. Felton, agreed with Members’ suggestions and pointed out that an equalities impact assessment should have been undertaken before the policy was adopted. 

It was also suggested that sponsorship for good causes could be included to try and support charities by donating a proportion of the funding raised.  Mr. Street agreed and informed Members that officers were exploring the possibility.

RESOLVED:

(a)    that the Executive Director – Partnerships and Projects and the Head of Legal, Equalities and Democratic Services report the results of the Equalities Impact Assessment back to the Board at its next ordinary meeting; and

(b)    that the Overview Board discuss this item further at its next ordinary meeting and agree recommendations it would like to put forward to the Cabinet.