Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: The victim restitution issue and the upcoming changes
Next Post: Another COVID-19 outbreak at LaSalle veterans’ home
Posted in:
* Daily Herald letter to the editor…
I live in the Northwest suburbs, and we are less than four weeks from an election when the political signs start to blossom for the second time this year, and they are an eyesore.
Most of the villages have specific guidance and allowance for political signs, and don’t allow these signs: in the right of way (between the sidewalk and the curb); on medians within 2 feet of the roadway; in front of empty lots or buildings; or on public property.
It seems that the volunteer organizations that put these signs in place are ignoring the ordinances of the various cities they are in. These are politicians who want our votes ignoring their constituents’ laws.
When one sign is left, many more pop up around it. I know it has been accepted for a long time, but I never knew the cities were against these signs, yet seem neutered to act. While villages allow public displays of personal political support on homes and businesses because they are a great and a powerful representation of our democracy, politicians and their proxies place their signage on public roadways artificially representing the size of their local support while being a visual nuisance and against city code using public property.
* The Question: Should Illinois law be changed to allow the state and local communities to fine campaign committees for each sign removed from a public right of way? Explain, along with how high or low you would make the fine if you could.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 1:41 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: The victim restitution issue and the upcoming changes
Next Post: Another COVID-19 outbreak at LaSalle veterans’ home
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Villages can and do remove signs placed in the right of way - as long as it is the competitor to the current mayor or board. Plenty of shenanigans in local towns happen like this every year.
Should there be a fine? Nope. For one simple reason. The competitor would simply print up some cheap signs and staple them to electric poles in order to generate huge fines for their competitors. It’s why there aren’t fines now.
The only fine allowed should be for a person directly caught placing a sign. The campaign they work for, whichever one it is, can then decide if they want to reimburse their volunteer or not. Such a method has a built-in feedback mechanism that would prevent abuse from getting out of hand.
Comment by TheInvisibleMan Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 1:48 pm
Yes, absolutely. Most campaigns never bother to pick them up and they blow around the neighborhood for years.
I say fine campaigns some substantial portion, say 25%, of their most recent cash on hand filing.
Comment by The Opinions Bureau Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 1:48 pm
No fines for the campaigns. There’s no way to know if that sign was put there by someone who works for the campaign or just a regular supporters who broke the rules/doesn’t know them.
Comment by lol Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 1:55 pm
Fine them. Localities’ staff could take a picture of each sign and be sure it’s geolocated (easily done with smartphones). Remove the sign and place it in a secure area- in case it’s needed for evidence later. Base the fines on a per sign removed. I’d start at $100 per sign. Bill weekly and charge for the billing. Eventually the campaigns will get the message. If they want to get their signs out of “impound”, charge another fee for that cost. Not all snark here. Might be a really good revenue stream for some areas.
Comment by Anon221 Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 1:56 pm
Yes, I only want wealthy people involved in politics. =snark=
Comment by Linda Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 2:00 pm
No. Because then the other side’s campaign is just incentivized to move the signs into the parkways.
Comment by Mary Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 2:00 pm
===is just incentivized to move the signs into the parkways.===
Boy, Tony Peraica coulda used you not too long ago…
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 2:03 pm
“No. Because then the other side’s campaign is just incentivized to move the signs into the parkways.”
This was my first thought. Most of the time, there’s no way to tell who placed the sign.
Comment by Techie Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 2:06 pm
o please.
Muni staffers have better things to do.
Comment by We've never had one before Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 2:07 pm
No, because such power would be ripe for abuse by the local authorities. They could exercise “selective enforcement” against candidates they politically disagree with. To cite a nearby ongoing example, how would such power be exercised, say, if the local mayor was a congressional candidate and his own signs were in violation, along with those of his opponent’s?
Comment by Ron Burgundy Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 2:07 pm
In theory I support a fine, but in reality we know people would obtain their opponent’s signs and move them.
Perhaps after the election is over, fine campaigns if they are still up — like yard sale signs after it is over.
Comment by Vote Quimby Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 2:09 pm
How about allowing the general public to remove signs in locations where they aren’t allowed. Removing illegal signs isn’t legal, is it? I’m generally not a fan of vigilante justice but I’d make this one exception.
Comment by The Velvet Frog Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 2:11 pm
Make the punishment fit the “crime”…sentence violators to community service… requiring them to remove the offending signs?
Comment by Dotnonymous Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 2:12 pm
I would put a bounty on the signs that goes into effect 24 to 48 hours after the election is over; signs left on public property can be brought to the relevant campaign headquarters and redeemed for cash, like recycling bottles and cans. Or bring them to the county building and get a voucher, then the campaign pays you electronically. Let that invisible hand of the market do some good work for a change.
Comment by Give Us Barabbas Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 2:18 pm
No. Asothers have mentioned, it’s too easy for dirty tricks campaign workers to move signs from permitted locations to forbidden ones.
I do think that signs should be moved from the public right of way as quickly as possible, if for no other reason than to show campaigns to futility of breaking the rules.
Comment by Benjamin Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 2:22 pm
Barabbas - it’s hard enough to get campaigns to clean up their signs, especially losing ones. You think they’d rather fork out cash for someone else to do it? Not to mention that a cash reward would incentivize grabbing the opponent’s signs before the election.
Comment by The Velvet Frog Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 2:27 pm
No. It would allow local officials to selectively enforce against their opponents, while looking the other way for their friends.
Comment by DuPage Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 2:43 pm
How about allowing me to run them over with my car? /s sort of.
I would say yes but then enforcement becomes a nightmare for the unintended victims.
So, no.
Comment by JS Mill Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 2:51 pm
What Anon221 x 2.
Comment by Huh? Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 2:55 pm
City of Naperville removes them on a regular basis. Don’t think we need state laws for it micromanaging
us, cities can decide how they want to enforce.
Comment by Dupage Mom Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 2:56 pm
The campaigns should (but don’t) follow the example of new home developers - they know that signs can’t be out in the right of way for an extended period. To get around that - when they have new models open and lots of houses to sell they have a crew go around and put the advertising signs out on Friday morning and then pick them up on Sunday PM.
Comment by Donnie Elgin Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 3:00 pm
Not to sound partisan here but I ONLY see Republican signs illegally placed in the burbs, NW burbs in particular.
The city is anyone’s game, but I drive past half a dozen illegal signs on dundee in less than 10 minutes, all Republican.
Comment by Commissar Gritty Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 3:07 pm
Yes, I hate that some signs never seem to be picked up.
FWIW, I drive past a portion of Cermak when I head west from Sox games. Mayor Daley is still the Mayor there based on the banners on some of the light poles.
Comment by ddp76 Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 3:08 pm
No, signs build name recognition for newcomer candidates. If we want new candidates, allow them to get their names out on public right of ways. Running for public office should be encouraged.
Comment by Froganon Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 3:34 pm
===follow the example of new home developers - they know that signs can’t be out in the right of way for an extended period. To get around that - when they have new models open and lots of houses to sell they have a crew go around and put the advertising signs out on Friday morning and then pick them up on Sunday PM.===
I’ve seen the Wheaton police go out and pull the real estate signs out and load them into the trunk of the police car. Political signs seem to be left alone.
Comment by DuPage Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 3:50 pm
My bounty/redemption idea was to motivate campaigns to pick up their own trash to avoid having to pay the bounty collectors.
Comment by Give Us Barabbas Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 3:52 pm
No, I am not sure fines would be appropriate. But aggressively removing, storing and destroying signs publicly might make a difference.
Currently, our local politicians blame each other for stealing signs. It would be nice if the cities (and lets not forget, counties) would make public record of littering by campaign workers, refusing to return them, and then publicly destroying them.
Comment by H-W Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 4:31 pm
But it would also motivate others to beat them to it to get the bounty.
I’m glad some towns enforce the rule, I wish they did that here where I live.
Comment by The Velvet Frog Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 4:49 pm
Give a two week post election cleanup period.
Require each candidate to post a bond of $5,000 to cover the signs. Any sign found on the public way more than two weeks after the election is $50 per sign. Price goes up to $100 per sign at one month. Take the money out of the bond.
Return the bond after 3 months. Any signs found to still be around would be assessed as penalties against the campaign. The individual would be prohibited from being on future ballots until all fines were paid.
Comment by Unionman Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 4:57 pm
No. It’s hard enough to get volunteers to help out up signs. Each village has different ordinances. It’s frustrating but it’s not worth criminalizing. It doesn’t make sense to legalize marijuana and fine candidates for the signs.
Comment by Downstate Dem Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 5:00 pm
No, slap a big ugly warning sticker on them and if the property owner doesn’t move them after that, then issue the fine to whoever owns the lot they should be in.
Comment by Leap Day William Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 5:14 pm
== Removing illegal signs isn’t legal, is it? I’m generally not a fan of vigilante justice but I’d make this one exception. ==
Does it matter if the election is over? I removed a sign two months after the primary (losing candidate so wouldn’t be helpful in the general).
Comment by Big Dipper Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 5:43 pm
I’d say remove all illegal signs. Only fine when repeat offenders can be identified.
Comment by Tombrady Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 7:32 pm
I have asked certain municipalities to “clean up” the right of way offenders. I was told not until it gets crazy, and they worry about the Supreme Court ruling…not directly, but if the municipality uses the ROW locations to promote their own city events as many do, then they have created a precedent for others to use the ROW, otherwise they have inadvertently created different rules for different sign uses, which would contradict the Supreme Court ruling.
Comment by Collar County Confused Monday, Oct 24, 22 @ 11:03 pm