Here in Austin, we are considering getting the City Council to improve their sign ordinances to (a) promote easier enforcement and (b) permit (not prohibit) removal by private citizens. A good example of a pro-removal sign clause for the city of Richmond (VA?) is:

Any violation of this article is hereby declared to be a nuisance. No person shall have any legal right to the continued presence of a sign in a public way in violation of this article; nor shall there be any legal remedy against any person solely for the removal from a public way of a sign which is in violation of this article. Any person may abate the nuisance created by a violation of this article without liability for doing so.

Can anyone else post links to good, ironclad language similar to the above?

As a matter of background, we are unfortunate enough to have a City Attorney in Austin who dispenses all sorts of FUD, saying that only city staff are authorized to remove signs and that signs are protected property, and other similar BS about liability. Basically, his opinions play right into the hands of the street spammers, making this place heaven for them and their junk.

LAST EDITED ON 04-30-02 AT 03:50 PM (CDT)

http://www.state.ma.us/legis/laws/mgl/266%2D126.htm

Massachusetts General Laws

Chapter 266: Section 126. Natural scenery; penalty for defacement.

Section 126. Whoever paints, or puts upon, or in any manner affixes to, any fence, structure, pole, rock or other object which is public property or the property of another, whether within or without the limits of the highway, any words, device, trade mark, advertisement or notice which is not required by law to be posted thereon, without first obtaining the written consent of the municipal or public officer in charge thereof or the owner or tenant of such property, shall, upon complaint of such municipal or public officer, or of such owner or tenant, be punished by a fine of not less than ten nor more than one hundred dollars, and in addition shall forfeit to the use of the public or private owner of such property or the tenant thereof the cost of removing or obliterating such defacement to be recovered in an action of tort. Any word, device, trade mark, advertisement or notice which has been painted, put up or affixed within the limits of a highway in violation of this section shall be considered a public nuisance, and may be forthwith removed or obliterated and abated by any person.

Rhode Island's law is very similar, though not quite as specific - the Mass law is an excellent model to use. Thanks for posting it, Dudley.

Would that all the State laws had such wording.

Redstone

Our City Council has just put the sign ordinance back on the table to be upgraded to a misdemeanor. I'll post it when the language is finished.

This city of Dallas TX has a single event fine of $2000 per day per sign. The judges are not sympathic when it comes to persistent spammers. A lot of the municipalites have up their minimums to $500 with considerations going even higher

Your city council may want to consider something other than a slap on the hand. Anything less than $1000 minimum is just the cost of doing business for most of these folks.


Trash is trash, whether it's fast food wrappers thrown from moving vehicles or street spam nailed on the utility poles. One is just as bad as the other.

GreatWhite-BH (GW)
Texas Chapter - CAUSS

GW