|
|
|
|
Does Your Bumper Sticker Violate Village Sign Law? |
|
|
|
Written by Jeff Radford
|
|
Wednesday, 28 December 2005 |
Still got that Kerry or Bush sticker on your car bumper? Did it occur
to you that you might be violating the Village’s ordinance regulating
political signs?
Thought not.
But councillors wrestled with that prospect at their December 13
council meeting as they attempted to revise the municipal ordinance on
political signs.
They had thought they were ready to accept the recommendations from a
task force appointed after the last messy election, but they got
tangled up in finding an appropriate definition for what, exactly, it
was they were trying to regulate.
If political signs, for example, have to come down within three days after an election, does that include bumper stickers?
Defining what is a “political sign” was left to Village Attorney John
Appel, who offered a definitional amendment to the proposed political
sign ordinance December 13.
Results of that discussion could not be included in this report.
The ordinance proposed begins with a declaration that “any sign not
classified in this section is not permitted in any zone within the
village.”
Section 8-97 paragraph 3 goes on to set the following policy. “Signs
related to political campaigns or referendums may be permitted prior to
an election subject to the following:
“a. A political sign shall be defined as one supporting a particular
political party, candidate, or question which advocates a position
relevant to a current election or referendum of local, state or
national scope.
“b. No one political sign including all its sides shall exceed 16 square feet in sign area.
“c. Such signs shall not be placed before the earliest of: 1) ten days
prior to the beginning of absentee- early voting, or 2) 25 days prior
to the election.
“d. All political signs shall be removed within three days after the election.
“e. This section shall be enforced pursuant to the provisions of the
Code of ordinances of the Village of Corrales, as set forth in Chapter
1, Sections 1-6, 8-92, and the following:
“1. The code enforcement officer or Village police, upon finding
a violation of this ordinance, shall issue citation(s) as follows:
“a. for a first offense a citation, specifying the datw and time of issuance, shall be issued as a warning;
“b. if an offending sign has not been removed, a second citation for
the same offense, with a mandatory fine of $25 shall be issued 24 hours
after the first (warning) citation was issued;
“c. if an offending sign still has not been removed, a third citation
for the same offense, with a mandatory fine of $50, shall be issued 48
hours afer the first (warning) citation was isused; and
“d. if the offending political sign has not been removed within 72
hours after the first (warning) violation, in addition to the fines
specified in subparagraphs b and c above, the penalty specified in
Section 1-6 shall also be applied.
[That generic penalty schedule for misdemeanors calls for a maximum of $500 and/or 90 days jail time.]
“2. The violations and fines specified in subsction 3 (e) 1 (a) through
(d) above are separate violations and fines, and are cumulative.”
This summer, the committee appointed to recommend changes to rules
about political signs was asked by the Village Council to re-think its
suggestions.
Councillors balked at making proposed changes that would significantly
restrict how many, and when, signs would go up during election
campaigns.
Those recommendations from the political signs task force were
discussed at the June 14 council meeting, but were remanded back for
more work. That action came amid citizens’ remarks that the proposed
rules were too restrictive on the rights of free speech.
The task force had submitted its recommendations in the form of a
proposed resolution to be voted on by the council. Those
recommendations, now remanded, were as follows.
“A ‘political’ sign shall be defined as one supporting a particular
political party, candidate, or question which advocates a position
relevant to a current election or referendum of local, state or
national scope.
“No one political sign including all its sides shall exceed a) 6 or b)
16 square feet in sign area.” (The task force left it up to the council
whether the maximum size should be six or 16 square feet.)
“Such signs shall not be placed before the earliest of (i) 10 days
prior to the beginning of absentee voting or early voting, or (ii) 25
days prior to the election.” (The task force left it for the council to
decide how long before election day the signs should be allowed up.)
“All political signs shall be removed within three days after the election.
“Only one sign per candidate, ticket or political issue shall be
allowed on each side of any property that abuts a roadway or ditch bank.
“Political signs in the public right-of-way may be permitted with the
permission of the adjacent resident or property owner subject to all
the limits in this section. No signs may be placed in the right-of-way
along Corrales Road.”
When councillors discussed the recommendations above at their June 14
meeting, some felt those rules would be too restrictive, suggesting the
Village’s existing rules just needed tweaking a bit. Perhaps the main
change needed, they suggested, was more leeway in getting signs up
ahead of early and absentee voting. On that point, councillors seemed
to agree with a “minority report” from the task force by the sole
member who opposed its recommendations, Charles Palmer.
Wrote Palmer: “The current political sign ordinance, Section 8-97 (3),
which has served our community for over 25 years, is perfectly
satisfactory and operable as currently stated, with the possible
exception of extending the time period which signs could be displayed
to coincide with the period for early voting.”
He also noted, “The majority proposes a restriction on numbers of
signs a property owner may put up in or on their own property. I am
absolutely opposed to this restriction.” He added, “Absent a compelling
safety reason and the history of the community fails to demonstrate a
single safety mishap due to political signs, the governing body should
not be telling a property owner what they can and cannot do on their
property, especially in the area of free speech and freedom of
political expression. As for esthetics, let’s just put up with it for a
few weeks every couple of years.”
The task force was established at the December 14, 2004 Village Council
meeting to recommend new rules for political campaign signs.
Destruction and defacing of political signs in the weeks before the
November 2, 2004 general election led many villagers to demand new
rules, especially to make Corrales’ law conform to those in surrounding
communities.
Some signs were pulled down because they went up far earlier than
allowed by the Village’s sign ordinance: 25 days prior to the election.
But both Democrats and Republicans alleged they and their signs were treated unfairly. |
|
|
|
|
