A bill that would allow private sponsorship of city parks and other facilities is drawing the ire of the Outdoor Circle and others worried that it would clear the way for billboards and other outdoor advertising despite the strong insistence by the bill’s author that that won’t happen.

Bill 78 (2015) is scheduled for a final vote by the Honolulu City Council on Wednesday. The Outdoor Circle, meanwhile, is slated to hold a news conference today to detail its opposition and explain why the group contends the bill violates the state’s ban on billboards and other off-site outdoor advertising, as well as the city’s sign ordinance.

The news conference will begin at 12:30 p.m. on the Diamond Head side of Honolulu Hale.

Introduced by Councilwomen Kymberly Pine and Ann Kobayashi two years ago, the bill would allow the city to set up a five-year pilot program for individuals, community organizations and businesses to sponsor “city facilities, parks, programs, equipment and tangible property.” The bill has the backing of Mayor Kirk Caldwell’s Parks and Enterprise Services departments, as well as a number of community organizations that contend public-private partnerships will allow them to enjoy more stewardship over the facilities they use.

While much of the discussion has centered on city parks and their facilities, the Caldwell administration maintains that sponsors could help provide funds for other projects involving city facilities, including the upcoming renovation of the Neal S. Blaisdell Center.

The bill would allow the city to take advantage of private funding for city programs and facilities, making them less dependent on property tax revenues at a time when city dollars are being stretched, Pine said. While powerful and influential entities can donate large sums of money and have their names memorialized on plaques and the sides of buildings, there is no mechanism for less advantaged community groups, families and individuals to donate what little they can and be able to receive some small recognition for it, she said.

“For me and my district, we don’t have a lot of wealthy donors that can give money to a park,” Pine said. “But we have a lot of individuals who, in honor of their families, can give a little.”

Billboards or garish signs won’t be allowed because it states specifically that any physical recognition of a sponsor “must conform to all applicable laws and rules,” Pine said. City attorneys reviewing the language of the bill confirm that it does not run afoul of any sign or outdoor advertising laws and that the city could not conflict with existing laws even if it wanted to, she said.

Additionally, the bill states that “any physical form of sponsorship must blend in with the surrounding environment.”

Such details are expected to be worked out in the administrative rule-making process, which would require at least one public hearing.

Bill opponents are are troubled by what different forms “sponsorship recognition” could take. In the bill it’s defined as “a tangible acknowledgement and expression of gratitude issued as part of the sponsorship agreement.”

Kathy Whitmire, former Outdoor Circle president, said what constitutes sponsorship recognition is so vague that the word “sign” does not appear in the bill, much less any parameters for the size or number of signs.

Asked whether it would be OK if the bill were to ban for-profit businesses from receiving sponsorship recognition but allow it for nonprofit groups or individuals, Whitmire said, “That would be going in the right direction.”

But the bill as it now stands would allow the sale of advertising on city property, she said.

Whitmire pointed to a June 2005 letter by then-Corporation Counsel Carrie Okinaga regarding a different bill that would have allowed the city to sell naming rights to city facilities. Okinaga cited the state law’s definition of “outdoor advertising device” as including any “sign, poster, notice, bill, or word or words in writing situated outdoors and so designed that it draws the attention of and is read by persons in any public highway, park, or other public place.” Exceptions can be made for what may be deemed “public signs,” Okinaga said.

Whitmire said, “If you’re not trying to sell advertising signs, if you’re trying to appeal to civic-minded people, then go ahead and say there shouldn’t be any signs used for sponsor recognition but that the only tangible sponsorship recognition that is allowable is a small bronze plaque that is within a certain size range.”

Under the bill, sponsorship agreements involving contributions of less than $50,000 or less than five years would be approved by the appropriate city agency. Any agreement of $50,000 or more, or five years or more, would need Council approval.