Geoff Helisma |

Clarence Valley Council will conduct a review of its logos and brands, with a report on the matter to be tabled at the July council meeting.

The decision to review the logos came about as a result of Cr Greg Clancy’s notice of motion (NOM) at the April 23 council meeting.

His NOM initially asked for “a review of the Clarence Valley tourism logo to assess the cost of replacing it with a more appropriate logo”, with a report to the June meeting “covering the costs and submitting possible alternative logos”.

After several amendments, including one from Cr Karen Toms – to “phase out the tourism logo over time to ensure minimal cost to council and use the corporate logo for tourism promotion in future branding (supported by only Cr Clancy)” –, all councillors apart from councillors Williamson, Lysaught and Kingsley supported the ultimate decision.

Councillor Richie Williamson’s question about what the difference is between a balloon and a bubble set the tone for some of the following debate.

He described the logo as “bubbles of happiness”, however, he also pointed out that he had found balloons online “that are 100 per cent biodegradable”, including the strings.

“The bubbles of happiness should continue in my opinion,” he said, “but in all seriousness council did invest a lot of other people’s

[ratepayers’]

money [on the logo].

“To change it is to throw away 20 grand of someone else’s money.

“I said at the time [prior to the logo launch in October 2015] that people hate paying more, but in my opinion they hate wasting money more.

“While there’s ever an element of waste here I am out.

“Undertake a review by all means, but I will not be voting to expend any of council’s finances on … changing a logo that does the job.”

Councillor Andrew Baker said he “hated” the tourism logo “when it was adopted” and has a similar opinion regarding the corporate logo.

“I’d like to see a good, solid, dynamic logo that represents both corporate and tourism and maybe one day the governing body,” he said.

Councillor Toms said she wasn’t “fooled” to think they were bubbles, “they are balloons being let off”, she said.

Councillor Arthur Lysaught said “this logo was chosen by tourism representatives and four existing councillors [Jeremy Challacombe (chair), Margaret McKenna (deputy), Richie Williamson and Sue Hughes] of the day”.

“I don’t believe we should spend a cent on this project,” he said.

Councillor Peter Ellem said the “logos just don’t cut it”.

Councillor Deborah Novak said she’d “like to think that what underpins our tourism brand also underpins our corporate logo; we are family orientated, fun, a whole lot of things”.

Councillor Clancy’s motivation was environmental; his NOM stated, in part: “… the logo is a cluster of helium balloons flying in the air.

“The Clarence valley Community Climate Change Committee is currently submitting a motion to ban balloons on all council lands and at council approved function centres.

“To have a logo that celebrates and thereby encourages the release of balloons is contradictory and hypocritical.”

In his right of reply, Cr Clancy said: “Cr Williamson is right, there are biodegradable plastics, but some of them still break down to micro fibres, micro plastics, and they are actually more dangerous than the larger pieces.

“…I look forward to the review; I know it will cost money, but sometimes you have to bight the bullet to get something worthwhile.”