Venture Richmond Is Re-Branding Richmond - AGAIN. And Doing It on the Down-Low - Why the Stealth?

So, a friend of mine attended a meeting today where a a new branding campaign for the City of Richmond was presented.  Oops.  I should really say a new branding campaign for DOWNTOWN Richmond was presented.  This bus is being driven by Venture Richmond, and the team includes the Martin Agency and the VCU BrandCenter.  It is intentionally not being rolled out in the media, but through these small meetings with invited individuals.  Why this approach?  Apparently the powers-that-be are "concerned" about the public reaction and possible criticism if they go the usual route.  So they want this to be a "grassroots" effort, with a slow-building ground swell of support.

The back story is Venture Richmond is paying Martin + other design firms $X to create this new brand.  The new brand is FOCUSED on Downtown, not the entire City, not the Greater Richmond Region - for reasons that make absolutely no sense to me.  We've tried this exact route over and over again and failed miserably.

Well, you want grassroots.  You got it.  Here is one woman's reaction to the description of the meeting.  [NOTE:  I did not attend the meeting nor was I invited.  This is based on the description from an attendee].

My initial reaction:  Oh Lord.  Here we go again.  I have SO many thoughts on this whole process, but I can only hit a few highlights for now.  In no particular order, here are my off-the-cuff thoughts and comments:

• How much money is Venture Richmond spending on this exercise?  Perhaps there are better uses for that money, like, oh....actually providing grants and other incentives for small businesses to locate Downtown?
• How in the heck does Venture Richmond even have the AUTHORITY to create a branding campaign for Downtown?  Presumably the other neighborhoods outside of "Downtown," the apparent red-headed step-children of the City, are going to get stuck with whatever brilliant brand identity is developed.  I sure as heck am not excited about that idea.
• What about all the other studies, ideas, brands, etc. that have come before?  Does it seem to anyone else that we keep recreating the wheel over and over and over again?

Here are some absolutely hysterical facts about the meeting itself. 

• They are going to re-brand "history" as..."timelessness."  I don't even have any d*mn clue what that means.  But I suspect it is due to the fact that no one in these organizations wants to acknowledge the ugly side of Richmond's history.
• The presenters indicated that they want to emphasize Richmond's "diversity."  But the attendees at the meetings were....all white.  And almost all over 40.  Not a single African-American, Hispanic, or Asian in the bunch.  And two women attendees out of 15+.  I mean, really?
• The architects and presenters of this campaign to brand Downtown live....in Henrico and Chesterfield.
• They actually pursued the idea of changing the Richmond International Airport call letters from RIC to RVA.  I'd have LOVED to hear that discussion with the Capital Regional Airport Commission and/or the FAA.  "Hi, this is _____, I'm calling from Venture Richmond, and we're trying to re-brand our Downtown.  We'd really like to change our airport call sign.  That's not hard or anything, right?"  The fact that this idea made it out of any brainstorming session and was considered for more than 2 seconds does not inspire confidence in this project.

Does anyone else feel like a private entity creating this team and pursuing re-branding without significant public input, including the direct participation of, and the sign off from, the local governments, is inappropriate?  I don't like it.  Not one little bit. 

And frankly, I am REALLY tired of the incessant focus on Downtown.  This is a City made up of really cool, really unique, and really distinct neighborhoods.  In my opinion, those neighborhoods - which are doing it all on their own, without stupid studies and branding and cheerleading - get the shaft so Venture Richmond can focus on "Downtown," which seems to be the Business District, Shockoe Slip, and the Bottom, and Jackson Ward and Carver and Manchester when it suits them.

How about Church Hill and Fulton Heights and the Fan?  How about Oregon Hill and the Museum District and Carytown?  What about Bellevue and Highland Park and North Ginter Park?  Stratford Hills, Westover Hills and Woodland Heights?  What about the Mary Munford area, and Westhampton Annex, and Windsor Farms?  What about all those other neighborhoods that I haven't named?  Maybe if you highlighted some of these places, you'd be able to attract and retain talent.

Has anyone involved in this exercise actually read Richard Florida's books, The Rise of the Creative Class and The Flight of the Creative Class? 

This feels to me like the "same old, same old."  The stakeholders aren't at the table.  It's a program being driven from the top down by all those people who are so certain that they know what is "best" for the City.  And that, my friends, is hugely disappointing.  Although sadly, not at all surprising.

As always, I welcome your thoughts and comments. 

Comments

[Shannon]

Comcast's new commercials didn't make them better. Better service would make them better. Can't help but think that the same may apply here.

More substance would be nice, more focus on the educational system, which is a main reason we moved. Because despite the fact that my kid had the best of the available it's not good enough, not well-rounded enough. Not just REGULAR enough - not if you want it to be safe enough. Just one example.

Advertising cash is almost never spent for the good of the citizens. It is spent to make money. For who? Spend some money on the good of the citizens, and be better. And PS - genuinely creative people dig education.

So I agree that real action would be nice, rather than spin-doctoring by well-paid pros.

Nice post, Melissa.

[FanGuy]

What ballpark discussion? The one about rebuilding near the Diamond? LOL. Good luck. There is no upside to it financially for the City, and if they do it they are utter fools. Not to mention their own studies have shown that the Boulevard is not better suited for mixed-use (hello big box retail!) not baseball. If they are going to waste taxpayer money on something that will not offer a ROI, they should build a new coliseum first -- at least that can host events year round.

[Melissa Loughridge Savenko]

FanGuy!

Welcome back! I feel like Sally Fields, "You like me! You really like me!"

Nah, I am not content with the "status quo of mediocrity," as you so eloquently put it. However, I timidly suggest the folks running this shebang are...the same people responsible for self-same status quo. My problem is this: Various entities do study after study, analyze proposal after proposal, and come up with recommendation after recommendation, and nothing. ever. happens. Anyone else remember the "Young & the Restless" Report, on EXACTLY the topic of how to attract and retain the mobile young professionals that make up this Creative Class? Well, there were very specific recommendations in that report - focus on the things that make Richmond unique, like its history, like the river, like its architecture, etc. AND not only were there sweeping propositions, there were concrete, implementable recommendations.

My point: These institutions that are supposed to "promote" the City aren't doing a very good job, because their definition of what constitutes the important part(s) of the City appears to be limited to "Downtown." Why not implement some of the concrete recommendations that we've already paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for? Why not take on low dollar, implementable steps, like more bike trails, as advocated by the Richmond Times-Dispatch in recent editorials and as successfully executed in other cities we would like to emulate, like Portland? Does anyone REALLY think if we brand downtown as "RVA Downtown" members of the creative class will come in droves? It's just silliness and a waste of time.

As an exercise, can you describe the logos, or name the slogans, of three "successful" cities? No googling allowed.

Anyway, it's opinion, FanGuy. I love Richmond. I want to see it become a better place. But forgive me if I think a logo focusing on Downtown is going to do that.

BTW, what do you think of the ball park discussion? ;)

[FanGuy]

And in typical Richmond fashion, someone comes up with an idea, and the Richmond natives are there to belittle it and beat it down, apparently content with the status quo of mediocrity.