Political signs will be allowed in the public right-of-way this election season despite an Oxford Township ordinance prohibiting their placement in such areas.
Officials last week voted 5-2 to allow political signs in the road right-of-way as long as they do not obstruct the view of traffic.
‘I would hope somebody who’s running for political office would use common sense and put’em back off the road,? said Supervisor Bill Dunn.
According to the township Zoning Ordinance and an opinion from township attorney Gary Rentrop, ‘any signs located in the right-of-way are prohibited, unless allowed by a unit of government.?
‘The Zoning Ordinance does not provide that political signs are allowed in the right-of-way, therefore all political signs in the right-of-way are not permitted,? Rentrop wrote.
Unauthorized signs can be immediately removed without notice to the owner and held at the township for five days. A $10 service fee must be paid to the township before the sign can be released.
Dunn received some complaints regarding political signs in the right-of-way and came to the board seeking direction due to the sensitive nature of the issue.
‘I won’t go out there and grab somebody’s political sign and get mud thrown in my face,? he said. ‘What would this board like to do? Follow the ordinance or maybe stand a chance to violate somebody’s civil rights.?
Back during the 2004 election, Dunn said there were political signs all over the right-of-way.
‘I don’t think there’s anybody here who can toss the first stone,? he said.
Trustee Sue Bellairs said that ‘historically? the township hasn’t touched political signs and that’s set a precedent.
‘We’ve never enforced it before,? she said. ‘That set a policy.?
Bellairs noted that because the ordinance applies to all signs in general, not just political ones, you can’t discriminate by enforcing it for one type and not others.
If political signs are removed, then garage sale signs would also have to be taken down, ‘which is kind of un-American in my opinion.,? Bellairs said. ‘If you’re going to enforce political signs, you’ve got to enforce every single sign out there.?
Trustee Doleen Behnke agreed with Bellairs? logic, but noted the ordinance is still in place and must be dealt with.
‘If you have the ordinance on the books, we either have the ordinance and we use it or we don’t use it,? she said. ‘If we’re not going to enforce it, then let’s take it off the books or reword it so that it is understood.?
‘We spent a lot of money having these ordinances put together, now either we’re going to use them or we’re not going to use them.?
Clerk Clara Sanderson said this issue has come up many times before and the way the ordinance is written is not enforceable in some aspects because it covers a very broad category of signs in the right-of-way.
‘Political sciences are a little unique and different animal,? she said.
According to Treasurer Joe Ferrari, the ordinance language concerning signs was never updated to reflect all the court challenges in the mid-to-late 1990s which ruled against parts of it.
‘At one time we got into a little trouble by touching somebody’s sign and we had to go put it back after we spent some money on lawsuits,? Bellairs said.
Because the issue only arises every four years, Bellairs said, ‘My vote is we just leave it alone. It isn’t worth spending money over.?
‘Sometimes when you make unjust laws, the people do what they’re going to do,? Bellairs said.
Although she disagrees with candidates who ‘blatantly? violate the ordinance by placing signs in the middle of M-24, Trustee Pat Fitchena said there are ‘reasonable agreements? that can be made to ensure political signs aren’t blocking the view of drivers pulling out of driveways or turning at intersections.
‘Some of these people have mammoth signs,? she said. ‘You can’t see the road right-of-way to pull out.?
Fitchena said candidates ‘have to be considerate? when placing signs.
The township board directed Dunn to instruct the ordinance review subcommittee to revisit the sign ordinance and make the necessary changes.