Editorial: Corporate partnerships inevitable for parks’ survival

The Idaho Parks and Recreation Board can’t count on much state funding, so officials have been seeking creative ways to adopt corporate partners without allowing its natural havens to become crass playgrounds.

One idea would give businesses naming rights for park facilities, or offer other marketing opportunities in exchange for sponsorships. The Parks and Recreation board has been working on a proposal that would allow this without going so far as changing the name of parks. However, that could still happen under the current version of the proposed rules, so the board is working on new language that will be reviewed by the state Legislature during its next session.

Purists may decry any naming rights for donors, but Parks and Recreation is getting a mere $3.5 million from the state, which is only 10 percent of its budget. As recently as 2008 it got $18 million.

So the department has to make up the rest of its budget with various charges, grants and a small portion of the state gas tax. It also gets registration fees from boats, snowmobiles, motorbikes, ATVs and RVs.

The more money Parks and Rec can bring in from the private sector, the better chance it has to keep fees down and services intact.

The board is not going to allow parks to be named after corporate interests, so have no fear about Golden Arches Park or the like. However, facilities, brochures or maps could carry sponsor names.

It could be similar to Boise State University, which has Taco Bell Arena, renamed in 2004 for $4 million in a 15-year deal.

Idaho isn’t alone in collaborating with private businesses. It’s happening all over the country as money that once went for parks goes elsewhere. Transit agencies sell ads on buses, trolleys and light rail to keep costs down. University athletic programs team up with apparel and shoe companies.

This isn’t a choice between granting commercial opportunities or remaining pure. It’s between granting them or closing facilities and/or limiting services.

Faced with closing many parks after the recession, California came up with a partnership program that Idaho and Washington might want to consider. Businesses can advertise as “proud partners” in exchange for financial contributions. Some businesses run contests to raise money for parks in exchange for the publicity.

The Parks and Recreation board won’t join up with just any business. The proposed rules bar sponsorships from tobacco companies, X-rated businesses and political organizations. Names with political or religious connotations would not be allowed.

The board is considering adding legislative review to the naming process. That would at least give citizens somebody to complain to if a particular partnership stirs controversy.

Nonetheless, it looks like partnerships with private entities are inevitable. As long as officials keep it classy, citizens shouldn’t object.