CC_Minutes_2003_0106 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

JAN-06-2003 14=21 RATWIK ROSZAK MALONEY 6123390038 P.03 Mr. Neal Beets January 6, 2003 Page 2 of5 II. Would amendment or enforcement of the Roseville City Code in a way that required removal of the signs violate the First Amendment? ANAL YSIS I. Do the signs violate the Roseville City Code? The Roseville City Code, Chapter 1009, defmes both noncommercial and political signs. Noncommercial signs are defined as ....Communicative devices that express an opinion or viewpoint of a social or political nature in contrast to commercial signs that seek to draw attention to or promote a commercial, business or economic interest or activity," Political signs are defined as, "A sign or poster announcing candidates seeking political office Or issues to be voted upon at a political election." The Save Roseville signs are best classified as noncommercial signs. 1 They appear intended to express a political viewpoint, but they do not specifically advocate an issue to be voted on at an election Or a candidate seeking politicai office. 1 ne text of the sign does not convey a specific message like "V ote Yes for Schools" which identifies a clear ballot issue or ''Vote for X" which identifies a specific candidate already on an election ballot. A citizen who chooses to display a Save Roseville sign in his or her yard~ rather, is expressing a political or social viewpoint relating to governance of the City ofRoseville. The City Code currently states "One noncommercial sign nO larger than six square feet and no higher than six feet tall may be displayed on any lot in any use district without obtaining a pennit frorothe chief code officer." The Save Roseville signs are 12 inches high by 18 inches wide. Under the current Code, residents ofRoseville could display the Save Roseville sign as long it is the only noncommercial or opinion sign in their yard. A resident could not, for example, display a Save Roseville sign in addition to a second sign proclaiming "Stop the War in Iraq." The Code does not currently place a time limit on the display of noncommercial signs, as it does for political signs, and residents would not be required to remove the signs upon the completion of an election. I Although at least one citizen has alleged that the Save Roseville signs should be classified. as advertising signs, this characterization is inconsistent with case law. Advertising signs are those which advertise the sale ofa certain service or product. VirJUnia State Bd. of Pharmacy v. Vir~inia Citizens Consumer Council. Inc., 425 U.S. 748, 779-80 (1976) (stating that ttcornmercial price and product advertising differs markedly from ideological expression because it is confined to the promotion of specific goods and services.") While the Save Rosevil1e signs advertise the organization's web $it~ and the web site does sell signs and buttons; it 3ppe3rS the purpose of the site is not to make money from the sale of these items but rather to publicize the groupls dissatisfaction v.ith city government. As a resul~ the signs are best classified as a form of ideological expression which is given greater prote~ion than a commercial sign advertising a product. Id.