As a retired owner of a franchised sign company here in Medford, I find it's business as usual for our elected officials. Concerning the signage on the airport tower, let me lay out a picture for you.

As a retired owner of a franchised sign company here in Medford, I find it's business as usual for our elected officials. Concerning the signage on the airport tower, let me lay out a picture for you.

The largest sign we ever erected was the yellow motel sign on Biddle and Vilas. Total square footage was 275 feet. That sign can be seen from the freeway.

Now imagine almost three of those signs, or 675 square feet, plastered on each side of the tower. Get the picture?

Every sign we erected was permitted allowing a sign size based on the lineal footage or footprint of the building it was to be attached to. If the building was a corner lot, we were allowed a sign facing the opposite street, but never a sign on all 4 sides of the structure.

Every sign shop in this valley should contest this with the city. This amounts to unfair business practices and should be repealed. I am not saying there should be no signage there, but follow the ordinances you imposed on us.

Finally, what good is the current citizens advisory commitee if you disregard its findings? Might as well disband them and stick to your "Good ol' Boys Club." — Gene Wood, Medford

Columnist Bill Varble and the editorial board have named the recent decision to "advertise" on the tower at the airport for what it is, advertising! Airport manager Bern Case wants to call this "branding."

He should google the word branding. This is not branding. This is selling out not only Medford but all of the consumers who use the airport. I personally don't want our airport branded as a communication company, a financial institution, restaurant or whatever other ad that goes up from the highest bidder.

Kudos to Karen Blair for having the guts to vote "no" on this decision. Thank you Bill Varble for your Sunday column, and to the editorial board for naming this decision what it is, advertising. Medford City Council, you should reconsider your decision. — Patti Busse, Ashland

Selling ads for the faces of the airport tower at $36,000 is a short-sighted decision by the commissioners and airport manager. The income will only bring in enough to fill some potholes. A marketing approach for the Rogue Valley and Medford would stand us in better stead.

Writing something like "Serving the Beautiful Rogue Valley," with some appropriate artistic images would bring in more long-term value than the commercially paid income apparently to be received over the years.

Flyers would recall this in their long-term memory and ditch the short-term commercial as soon as possible. Do we want another ad-at-the-highest-bidder mentality or something that will add value to our beautiful environment? Have our elected officials completely lost the idea of culture and art for art's sake? — Ken Engelund, Ashland

Our Medford City Council has decided that it is necessary to sell every square inch of available open space to businesses in the name of "branding" our community. For our City Council to completely ignore the input given by the Citizens Planning Advisory Committee as well as the Planning Commission (who both voted 8-0 to deny the request) is unacceptable. It is obvious that the council no longer needs or wants any input from its constituents to make its decisions. Count us among those who think that the council is making a terrible mistake. Perhaps if they hear from enough like-minded citizens, they will reconsider. — Randy Hall, Medford

Advertising on our airport tower? Are you kidding, City Council members?

I'm glad to hear there was at least one dissenting vote from that group. This is an outrageous proposal and needs to be reconsidered and voted down.

A recent Mail Tribune editorial and Bill Varble's "Rogue Viewpoint" sum the situation up well. Our Planning Commission and Citizens Planning Advisory Committee unanimously voted this proposal down, and I thought this issue was resolved. You might as well write "Walmart" across the tower. The pennies produced per day are a joke relative to the airport budget.

This airport belongs to our community. I'm proud of our new airport and its representation of our valley as a distinguished place to live and visit. Speak up, citizens of the Rogue Valley, or your airport will look like a box store. — Sue Dolf, Medford

There is a reason no other airport in the country has sold advertising space on their airport's control tower, it looks cheap. Placing the name or logo of a company on the control tower at the Medford Airport will make the city look desperate.

The control tower is 35 feet wide on each side. The proposed sign is approved at 675 square feet on each side; therefore, the proposed sign will be at least 20 feet wide and at least 30 feet tall, on each side. It will look grotesque from every angle.

Our new airport facility and the new tower is a source of pride for all of us in the Rogue Valley, but allowing some company to rent huge space on the four sides of our airport's control tower is ill-advised. It will set a bad precedent and will lead to ridicule from other cities, perhaps even getting unwanted negative national attention.

I hope the city leaders will reconsider their decision and uphold the beauty and stature of the new control tower, as it is. There are plenty of media outlets for advertising and marketing, we don't have to scar our structures with corporate graffiti. — Michael Goldman, Medford