Entrepreneurs in Groningen are angry about the municipality’s advertising policy. He wants entrepreneurs to advertise less, otherwise they will have to pay for it. But the municipality does not look in the mirror.
Less advertising on the street was the decisive argument for introducing the advertising tax. Fewer signs, fewer flags and less neon advertising and therefore a more attractive street scene. In total, the municipality of Groningen expects that entrepreneurs will advertise their business or product 10 percent less as a result of the advertising tax.
In recent months, the subject has led to heated debates in the municipal council and a disturbed relationship between entrepreneurs and the municipality. The coalition in Groningen stood firm: the advertising tax will be introduced in 2024.
Now that the municipality of Groningen has to put its own billboards on the market again and has the opportunity to reduce their use, it is not setting a good example. The municipality is putting all 800 signs back in the window. This is expected to generate 150,000 euros for the municipal coffers.
‘It doesn’t get any more fun’
Eric Bos of the Groningen City Club thinks the policy is hypocritical. “The more signs you place, the more clutter you have. If your principle choice is to combat clutter, that applies to everything. Then you can’t say: this suits us, because we get money from this.”
According to Bos, that is what the municipality is doing now. At the Zuidoost business park in the city, chairman of the business association Harry Bouma thinks the same. “This fits completely into the ridiculous story of the advertising tax. As a municipality, you must set a good example. But no, the municipality is allowed to do anything. It doesn’t get any more fun this way.”
In urban politics, opposition parties D66, CDA and VVD councilor Carine Bloemhoff (PvdA, Economic Affairs) tried to hold up that mirror, without much success. “You cannot ask entrepreneurs to reduce their advertising and continue your own advertising,” says councilor Tom Rustebiel (D66). He wants the municipality to wait before repurposing the billboards. “That is fair to entrepreneurs and a step towards a more beautiful street scene.”
Jalt de Haan (CDA) believes that the municipality asks a lot from entrepreneurs, but does not look at itself. “We find that hypocritical.” VVD faction leader Ietje Jacobs agrees. “If reducing advertising is a goal of this municipality to regain public space, then it is also appropriate to do something ourselves. We find it sad that the municipality does not do this.”
‘Cultural and social institutions use the signs’
The argument for continuing with the tender for all 800 signs and not reducing them is that it is often cultural and social institutions or small local entrepreneurs that use them. There is also the fear of illegal posting if these signs are no longer there. The municipal council does not want to examine its own advertising until the advertising policy as a whole is discussed.
According to Daan Brandenbarg (SP), in 75 percent of the cases a local entrepreneur or cultural institution is on the signs. “I understand the hypocrisy that parties want to demonstrate, but is this really worth not giving institutions and local entrepreneurs no advertising for six months?” He accuses the opposition parties of symbolic politics.
Alderman Bloemhoff does not want to take away an accessible advertising tool for institutions and local entrepreneurs and is therefore continuing with her plan. But that is not the only reason: removing the billboards also has financial consequences. That 150,000 euros will have to come from somewhere else and the municipality is already short on cash.
Entrepreneurs’ patience is running out
But why not at least have fewer signs, for example the 10 percent that is also expected from entrepreneurs? “That has not been chosen now,” says Bloemhoff. She wants to think about it, but not now. “We will look at that when we discuss the advertising policy as a whole.” Is advertising tax not part of that? Bloemhoff says no, because that is a separate agreement from the coalition agreement. And that is why she does not find municipal policy hypocritical. “I think differently about that,” she says.
This is not possible for entrepreneurs. Bos and Bouma do not believe that Groningen wants to improve the streetscape with less advertising, because the municipality is deliberately missing an excellent opportunity to contribute to this. Eric Bos: “If you do it for the money, that’s fine too. But then you have to be honest and say that money is more important than combating clutter. Because that was not the actual argument for the advertising tax. That is now apparent.”
The business associations will sit down with the municipal council in January to discuss the disturbed relationships. “We will certainly discuss this, because this does not benefit the collaboration,” says Bos. “Entrepreneurs’ patience runs out at some point.”