Stricter regs for political signs moves forward
The Whitefish City-County Planning Board last week voted 5-1 to send on to the city council amendments to the city's sign regulations — including some "minor housekeeping items."
According to the planning staff report to the board, the Whitefish City Council had requested a review of the existing sign regulations. City planners came up with amendments to regulations for signs at private schools, temporary banners, off-premise signs for community-wide events and historical signs.
Under the heading "housekeeping items' was a recommendation for stricter regulations on "political signs." As defined by city code, "political signs' express "a political or social position, as compared to expressing support for a political candidate or election measure."
City officials concede that by using the words "political or social position," the ordinance covers a wide range of ideas, expressions and opinions.
The current regulations allow for political signs up to 32 square feet — the size of a standard sheet of plywood or drywall — for an undetermined amount of time. The planning staff report recommended limiting political signs to 16 square feet and 60 days.
City planning director David Taylor noted that political signs do not include campaign and election signs, which are governed by other regulations.
Taylor explained to the board that the recommended change for political signs originated after a discussion with city attorney John Phelps.
But on Monday, Phelps told the Pilot he didn't recall suggesting the idea. He said he remembered hearing discussion about reducing the size of political signs but nothing about limiting the length of time they could be displayed.
Taylor told the Pilot on Monday that the matter arose while he was reviewing the city's sign ordinance. When he came across the section on political signs, he noticed that it was significantly different than what he had seen in other communities.
People are allowed freedom of speech, Taylor told the planning board, and no problems with political signs currently exist, but they "can become an eyesore." He noted that political signs are not currently regulated by permit. People could theoretically change the words on a sign or move it to a neighbor's property to get around the suggested 60-day limit.
Planning board member Karen Reeves cited a currently existing sign that states "God Bless America" and asked if that counted as a political sign and what would happen to it. Another board member asked about signs saying "We Support The Troops." Taylor said existing signs could be grandfathered in.
On Monday, Phelps told the Pilot it would be up to the city council on whether they wanted to make the regulation change retroactive.
Planning board chairman Ken Meckel noted that what's offensive to one person might not be offensive to another, and he wondered if "this could become a real issue." Taylor replied that approving the change was not a "make or break thing."
Referring to the ongoing city council election, which he characterized as "polarizing," planning board member Kerry Crittenden noted that he had seen "big nasty signs' go up in other communities in similar situations.
"I don't think this is curtailing free speech," Crittenden said.
Planning board member Greg Gunderson, who cast the lone opposing vote, said he didn't want to over regulate the residents of Whitefish and the two-mile planning and zoning "doughnut" area. He also said he did not believe this was a "housekeeping item."
Among the other recommended amendments to the sign ordinance — language intended to provide equity between public and private schools for grades K-12, a provision allowing a 'reader board" with changeable copy in public parks and facilities, a change in the number of temporary signs allowed by businesses sharing a property, and an exemption for historical identification signs on buildings.
The amendments will go to the city council at their Nov. 2 meeting.