By Alan Ehrenhalt

It’s a good idea to be careful what you satirize, especially if you are in the habit of writing about government. The preposterous scheme you invent as a joke can turn out to be someone else’s idea of good public policy.

A few months ago, I argued facetiously in a column that local governments strapped for cash consider selling off the naming rights to local streets and other prominent public places. A struggling factory town might make a deal with Nabisco, and change the name of its Washington Street to Snackwell Boulevard. Or the courthouse square could be re-christened Dr. Scholl’s Plaza. Niagara County, New York, could go a long way toward solving its fiscal problems merely by changing the first letter of its name from an N to a V.

You get the idea. I tried to make the whole thing as silly as I could — too silly, some readers no doubt thought. But now I discover that a jurisdiction outside Denver is taking the first step toward doing this sort of thing for real. The commissioners in suburban Arapahoe County, unable to pay for pedestrian overpasses at several light-rail stations currently under construction, are considering selling the naming rights to the overpasses.

There are lots of intriguing possibilities. One of the overpasses would be at a station along Dry Creek Road. In the interest of preserving some continuity, the county government could sign a naming agreement with Canada Dry. Or with the makers of Knob Creek bourbon.

Of course, there are a few problems that would have to be straightened out. Presumably the deal would be for a fixed period of time, say 20 or 30 years. If the company didn’t renew, would the name of the overpass change? Or would it be a bequest in perpetuity? I doubt if anyone has thought about that.

The whole thing isn’t merely silly; it’s offensive. I’m fully in sympathy with the difficulty that localities face in paying for the transit infrastructure they need. But the bottom line is that some things are public, and should never be anything else. A city hall. A firehouse. A police station. They belong to the community at large. Selling the name for profit is an abdication of governmental responsibility. I would include a pedestrian overpass along a light-rail line in the same category.

Maybe you feel differently. Maybe you would draw the line somewhere else. But it’s a subject that citizens in many places ought to start having a conversation about. Otherwise we will wake up one day and find that our worst satires have come true.

Alan Ehrenhalt is executive editor of Governing.

Agree? Disagree? Want to expand on a point? E-mail us at mailbox@governing.com, and we'll post your comments here. Please include your name, location, government or business title or job description, and a daytime phone number (for verification purposes).

Reader Response:

LEGISLATIVE WARNING

I should hope you would take precautionary steps to keep this article out of the hands of Pennsylvania's General Assembly. Doesn't take much imagination in assuming they would name Front Street in Harrisburg "Give Me My Pay Raise Now, We'll Talk About Its Constitutionality Later Alley." Or possibly, "Let My Colleagues Out of Jail — They're Only Guilty Rue."

D.R. Thompson
Mt. Lebanon, Pennsylvania

Recently in View:

Dead Fish and Environmental Progress: alternatives to the enforcement stick (posted October 13, 2000)

The Dangers of Decisiveness: the need for a little Coolidgism (posted October 6, 2000)

The Elusive Political Pro: why we need people who can slap backs and cut deals (posted September 28, 2000)

Bedeviled in the City of Angels: who's minding the store? (posted September 24, 2000)

Confessions of an Eco-Criminal: how not to get people to drive smog-free cars (posted September 17, 2000)

Complete index of previous columns

Copyright © 2000, Congressional Quarterly, Inc. Reproduction in any form without the written permission of the publisher is prohibited. Governing, City & State and Governing.com are trademarks of Congressional Quarterly, Inc.