San Francisco Examiner  circulation | classifieds | autos | real estate | jobs | advertise
   
Monster
View today's E-Dition

Saturday, July 31, 2010 | Last Update 11:38 PDT
click for forecast
Home News Politics Local Opinion Economy Sports Lifestyle Buy, Sell & More Jobs Homes Cars
Nation World Under the Dome Ken Garcia Beltway Confidential Weather Mobile Site Contact
Under the Dome California Nation World
Under the Dome California Beltway Confidential White House Congress Michael Barone Byron York
Under the Dome Ken Garcia Melissa Griffin Gavin Newsom City Hall People Real Estate Events Calendar
Editorials Nate Beeler's Toons Blogs Michael Barone Byron York
Economy Page Real Estate Technology
49ers/Raiders/NFL Warriors/NBA Sharks/NHL Giants/A's/MLB Soccer Colleges Golf
Movies Television Health Events Calendar Birth of Impressionism
Classifieds Stuff for Sale Post Free Ad
Find a Job Post a Job Career Tools
For Sale For Rent
New Used Certified Pre-Owned

Local
[Print]  [Email]         Share    

Sign ban faces challenge

By: Tamara Barak Aparton
Examiner Staff Writer
October 18, 2009

(Cindy Chew/The Examiner )

Weeks before voters decide whether to create a billboard district, a promotions company has filed a federal lawsuit claiming The City’s sweeping sign ordinance violates the First Amendment right to free speech.

In 2002, voters adopted a law prohibiting new general advertising signs anywhere in San Francisco. Proposition D would loosen the ban to create a special sign district on blighted mid-Market Street between Fifth and Seventh streets.

Supporters say the billboards will revitalize the area, restore the historic theater district, and lure tenants and tourists back to businesses. Opponents claim the signs will invite more blight to the area, put pedestrians in peril by distracting drivers and waste electricity.

But the federal lawsuit, filed Sept. 22, challenges entire citywide sign ordinance.

The plaintiff, Contest Promotions LLC, runs contests in which shoppers are invited to stores to fill out entry forms for various prizes. The City has issued more than a dozen citations against the company, claiming it has violated the general advertising ban, according to the lawsuit.

The company claims the ordinance is unconstitutional and vague, and it’s asking a federal judge to decide whether the law deprives off-site advertisers of the same free speech rights landowners are allowed when posting on-premise signs.

In court filings, the company’s attorney, Paul Fisher of Newport Beach, asked the court to restrain city officials from removing signs or Contest Promotions may sue to recoup lost profits and good will. The City’s crackdown on off-site signs has made property owners reluctant to work with Contest Promotions for fear of prosecution, Fisher wrote.

Fisher did not return calls for comment.

Jack Song, deputy press secretary for City Attorney Dennis Herrera, said he could not speculate on the outcome of the case or what it would mean for The City’s sign ordinance.

tbarak@sfexaminer.com

 

History of sign regulations in city

1906: San Francisco earthquake prompts sign regulations concerning structural integrity and fire hazards

1950s: Signage becomes larger and more prolific as car culture takes off; city begins to restrict their locations

1960s: San Francisco sign ordinance passes, prohibiting new signs near residential districts, schools, parks, freeways and city streets; it also identifies special sign districts

1985: Another wave of sign proliferation is due to a new method of changing copy using adhesive vinyl on walls and existing billboards; planning code is amended to require permits for all signs, not just those considered structures

1990s: Dot-com boom and live/work lofts provide opportunity for advertisers to add signs to the landscape

2001: New legislation created to offer stronger enforcement against illegal signs

2002: Voters pass Proposition G, prohibiting all new general advertising signs in city

2009: Voters to decide on mid-Market Street sign district; federal lawsuit challenges citywide sign ordinance

Source: Planning Department

 

 


More from Tamara Barak Aparton

  • Teens’ journey south brings civil rights journey to life
  • Police wary of copycats in Gucci window smashing
  • Putting stimulus money to work
  • Parents reach out to SoMa leaders
  • Redwood City struggling with rebuilding downtown



To view this site, you need to have Flash Player 8.0 or later installed. Click here to get the latest Flash player.


Most Popular Headlines
  1. Teenaged robbery suspect’s attempt to disappear fails
  2. Jury trial set for suspect in poorly researched robbery
  3. Muni mechanic, accomplice face three years for transfer sales
  4. Man stabbed outside Mission Street club
  5. Muni Fast Pass with BART option to be phased out by October
  6. More details emerge about fatal inmate stabbing at San Quentin
  7. Officer risks own safety to save mother, kids
  8. Wildfire jumps aqueduct in high desert outside Los Angeles, threatens hundreds of homes
  9. Medevac company suspends AZ service after crash
  10. Jobs a casualty in SFFD takeover of the Presidio; Alioto-Pier's office responds





Best Western Hotel Muenchen

masters degree in health administration

Online MBA Degree

Free Legal Forms Online

 


 



 

Reader Comments

All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Examiner or its staff. Comment box is limited to 200 words. Comments that advocate violence, racism, or libel as well as comments written in ALL CAPS are not permitted.
blog comments powered by Disqus
RSS | Twitter | Facebook | Mobile | Contact Us | Rack Locations | Advertise | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy