Sign purge debate continues

Was the municipal decision to remove hundreds of election signs earlier this month based on its election sign bylaw or was it outside that document’s scope?

It’s a question with two answers, depending on who you speak to on the matter.

From Chatham-Kent’s perspective, the removal of the signs for being too close to the road, and the reasoning, is outlined in the election sign bylaw, passed in 2009. It stipulates election signs can’t be on public property (prior to Aug. 27) and must be four metres back from the road.

However, the proverbial devil may be in the details.

Here is what the bylaw says.

“During a campaign period, campaign signs shall only be permitted to be erected on an inner boulevard with at least four metres clear distance to the edge of the roadway or a private driveway.

However, the definition of “campaign period,” within the bylaw is causing the disagreement.

“Campaign period means the period … commencing 60 days before voting day and ending on the fifth day after voting day for a municipal election.”

That “campaign period” applies from Aug. 27 to Nov. 1.

Two Chatham-Kent lawyers told The Voice that based on these details, they believe the election sign bylaw is inapplicable outside of Aug. 27-Nov. 1.

“They just randomly decided to enforce a bylaw that isn’t in place,” one said.

Another agreed.

“Based on the information you’ve provided, it appears that the restrictions on sign placement only apply during a ‘campaign period,’ which would mean it does not apply during times outside of the campaign period,” a second lawyer said. “As a result, the general sign/advertising bylaw would apply to signs outside of the campaign period.

In the meantime, municipal staff defended the recent election sign purge as following the election sign bylaw.

Emily Crawford, director of legal services for Chatham-Kent, said she sees where the lawyers who spoke to The Voice may have drawn conclusions.

“I can understand how they’d interpret that. I think they’re missing that the municipality, outside of any bylaw or campaign period, has control over municipal property and doesn’t permit signs within the right of way,” she said.

Chris Bantok, election co-ordinator for the municipality, said just because the particular section in the election sign bylaw states “campaign period,” the provisions within the bylaw still apply outside of that time bracket.

The general advertising sign bylaw comes into play as well, staff said.

“You kind of have to read the two together,” Crawford said of the election sign bylaw and the general sign bylaw. “The municipality still has an obligation to make sure things are safe.”

The contention is signs too close to the road or a sidewalk can impact a driver’s ability to see traffic, whether pedestrian or vehicular, as they pull out of their driveway.

In regard to the election sign purge, Bantok said it was a matter of enhanced enforcement in the wake of a slew of complaints.

“We were working with candidates and providing information. We are still taking complaints and will still be actively enforcing,” he said. “But we can’t be everywhere at once.”

Crawford agreed.

“We’re just trying to be fair and apply the bylaw uniformly,” she said.