CC_Minutes_2003_0106 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

JA~~-06-2003 14: 22 RATWIK ROSZAK MALONEY 6123390038 P.04 Mr. Neal Beets January 6, 2003 Page 3 of 5 II. Would an attempt to amend the City Code to prohibit the Save RoseviUe signs violate the First Amendment? An attempt to amend the City Code to eliminate the Save Roseville signs, including prohibiting all signs on residential property or prohibiting only noncommercial signs on residential property ~ would present First Amendment concernS. Other ffiWlicipaIities have attempted to regulate noncommercial opinion signs by either specifically prohibiting opinion signs or banning all residential signs but providing for a limited number of exemptions. For example, in Goward v. City of Minneapolis, a Minneapolis resident challenged a city ordinance permitting campaign related signs on private property but prohibiting those signs expressing an opinion critical of the city government. The Court of Appeals held that the ordinance was unconstitutional because it placed a total ban on a particular category of speech, namely opinion signs. Goward v. City of Minneapolis, 456 N.W.2d 460 (Minn. App. 1990). Similarly, in Citv of Ladue v. Gilleo, the City attempted to ban all residential signs except those qualifying for one of several stated exemptions, including residential identification signs, SigIlS advertising the property for sale or lease, and signs for churches) schools or religious institutions. City of Ladue v. Gilleo; 512 U.S. 43 (1994). The United States Supreme Court found the ordinance unconstitutional because it preferred certain types of speech; specifically those falling within the listed exemptions, over all others. Furthermore, the Court in Ladue rejected the City's attempt to justify its ordinance as a reasonable time, place and manner restriction because other alternatives to residential signs are inadequate substitutes for the important medium of a yard sign. As the Court noted: Displaying a sign from one's own residence carries a message quite distinct from placing the same sign someplace else, or conveying the same text or picture by other means. Precisely because of their location, such signs provide information about the identity of the 'speaker'...an important component of many attempts to persuade.. ..Residential signs are also an unusually cheap and convenient form of communication. Furthermore, a person who puts up a sign at her residence often intends to reach neighbors~ an audience that could not be reached nearly as well by other means. City of Ladue\ 512 U.S. at 56-57. To determine whether an ordinance restricting time; place or manner of speech will survive constitutional scrutiny, a court will examine (1) whether the challenged ordinance burdens protected speech~ (2) whether the ordinance contains content-based restrictions or content-neutral restrictions~ (3) if the restrictions are content..based~ whether they are necessary