Critics' message for Ohio town: Change sign laws
By The Associated Press
09.20.02
Printer-friendly page
CINCINNATI — Activists have filed a lawsuit accusing an Ohio town of violating their rights by imposing extra requirements on people who want to post signs bearing political or noncommercial messages.
The lawsuit by a political advocacy group and two Springboro residents alleges that the city's sign regulations violate their constitutional rights of free speech and equal protection.
The plaintiffs say Springboro's regulations improperly classify signs by the content of their messages and require a $25 deposit in some cases for signs that bear political or noncommercial messages. A deposit is not required for other signs.
The lawsuit, filed Sept. 17, asks U.S. District Judge Susan Dlott to order the city to stop enforcing the sign laws. It also asks for unspecified monetary damages and attorney fees.
Roger Eckert, law director for Springboro, said on Sept. 18 that he was aware of the issue. He said the city had recognized that there were legal problems with its sign ordinances and was trying to work out a settlement with the people who filed the lawsuit.
The Warren County community of 13,000 people is about 30 miles north of Cincinnati.
Springboro residents Francis Catrine and Betty Bray and a Cincinnati-based group, the Coalition Opposed to Additional Spending and Taxes, filed the lawsuit. They say they want to post signs before the Nov. 5 election on private property advocating votes for certain candidates, against a school levy and against additional city spending.
Bray owns property in Springboro. Catrine is a former candidate for the Clearcreek Township board of trustees and says he intends to run again for election to that board.
Related
ACLU sues Wisconsin town over political-sign restrictions
Pewaukee resident Walter Fiedorowicz wants to put a 'Let Us Vote' sign on his property.
08.29.02
Judge strikes down N.Y. village's sign ordinance
Federal court rules town's law violates First Amendment by making content-based distinctions about which signs require permits.
07.09.02
Merchants take town to court over strip-mall sign
Businesses claim First Amendment right to use displays; Michigan township officials say Country Corners' sign would dangerously distract drivers.
12.27.02
