For a corporate sponsor, good community reaction to a stadium naming-rights deal is dead silence. In a truly fortunate case, there might be a smattering of applause.
Qwest Communications, in its newly announced deal with the city of Seattle and the Seahawks, is getting neither.
This summer, Qwest obtained naming rights to the 67,000-seat home of the Seahawks and a convention center beside the football stadium for about $75 million. At the time, the deal attracted little notice. Then, in September, a little-known citizens group called Save Our Skyline got into the game.
In a lawsuit filed Sept. 28 in King County Superior Court, Save Our Skyline alleges that two rooftop signs bearing the Qwest corporate logo (which measure more than 4,000 square feet each, according to SOS) are defacing the famed city skyline. In its court filings, SOS asks that the two rooftop signs be removed and that the communications giant be required to comply with local zoning laws that the group says place strict limits on the size of such commercial advertisements.
Seattle officials say that SOS is mistaken in asserting that the signs violate local ordinances. And the city’s top lawyer, city attorney Tom Carr, questions the legitimacy of Save Our Skyline.
Whereas SOS lawyer Knoll Lowney describes the group as a small band of stadium neighbors and concerned Seattle residents, Carr intimates that the citizen group consists of one citizen: Knoll Lowney.
“I am not sure there are any [other] members,” Carr said. He bases this on the organization’s recent incorporation filing, in which, he said, Lowney is listed both as lawyer and president of SOS.
 |
| A citizens group hit the roof over the rooftop signs at the Seattle Seahawks' stadium. |
“I don’t think it’s a serious lawsuit,” Carr said. “Or that Save Our Skyline is even a real organization.” Carr said he believes the lawsuit was filed “to get a lawyer’s name in the paper.”
Lowney said, “There are a few members.” And he added, “We don’t care if he tries to discredit us. We are just citizens upset at the city of Seattle for flouting the law.”
Lowney said that his group’s goals are about preserving the aesthetics of the Seattle skyline.
“We have a beautiful city and a frequently photographed city,” he said. “In the future, those photos will have a corporate logo in them. To me, that’s a pretty significant issue.”
The city has filed a motion to dismiss the SOS lawsuit. A King County judge is expected to rule on Nov. 12.
Save Our Skyline claims that the city of Seattle initially rejected the proposal for the two rooftop signs, then “instructed” Qwest and Tube Art, a sign company, how to do an end run around Seattle’s zoning restrictions.
The lawsuit claims city officials “instructed” the companies to erect a Qwest business outlet at the stadium. That would allow the company’s application to be evaluated according to a standard for “on-premises” signs, the lawsuit says.
On Aug. 11, according to court filings, Qwest received approval to erect a 10-foot-by-11-foot booth at the stadium. That day, the lawsuit says, the city of Seattle approved an application to apply two painted signs on the roof of the stadium.
Even as “on-premises” signs, the Qwest advertisements exceed the square footage permitted for commercial advertisements by the city by 400 percent, Lowney claims.
But Carr, the city attorney, said that SOS misconstrues the ordinance. “The regulations they are talking about are for signs off the roof,” Carr said. “These signs are painted on the roof.”
Because the stadium sits far below most of downtown, the signs are visible to commuters on I-5 and to residents in many neighborhoods.
The city attorney also challenges the timeliness of the Save Our Skyline lawsuit. Such complaints must be lodged within 21 days of the permit being issued or the complaining party having notice of the sign. Carr contends that SOS missed both deadlines.
Such facts may help Qwest keep its rooftop signs. But it’s too late to avoid a public tiff with a community group, even though that group may be more imagined than real.
“A lawsuit, whether it’s frivolous or not, probably is going to be written about and talked about,” said Gilco Sports executive David Cope, who played a role in negotiating naming-rights deals at the MCI Center and FedEx Field. “Even if it doesn’t reflect poorly on Qwest or the Seahawks, no one wants that kind of publicity.”
It’s especially painful when the price for stepping into controversy is $75 million.
Mark Hyman is a writer and attorney.
