Peterborough city council has rejected a proposed city by-law to regulate election signs in the city, mainly because candidates would have to pay a fee to recover non-compliant signs removed by the city.
A city staff team that included the city solicitor, elections coordinator, property standards officer, and others reviewed by-laws and rules from other Ontario municipalities to come up with the by-law, which was presented at the general committee meeting on Monday night (April 11).
The proposed by-law covered a number of issues with federal, provincial, and municipal election signs, including the placement of signs near voting locations, sign dimensions, the removal of unlawful election signs, the content of election signs, and third-party signs.
For example, the by-law would prohibit placement of signs on public property, including parks and areas adjacent to a roadway such as a boulevard. Signs displayed by third-party advertisers would have to identify the municipality where they are registered and provide contact information for the third party.
The staff report also recommended a fee of $10 be collected from candidates who seek to recover election signs that city staff remove because they were placed contrary to the by-law, with the fee helping offset the cost incurred by staff to remove non-compliant signs.
Councillor Dean Pappas moved that the report be received for information, which would mean council would not approve the by-law.
Calling it an “unfair by-law,” Pappas primarily objected to the proposed fee for candidates to recover signs, citing the lack of control candidates have over signs placed on private property such as a boulevard.
He said that the by-law would benefit candidates who could either afford to recover non-compliant signs by paying the fee or who could just produce more signs to replace those removed by city staff.
“I know there were some good intentions out behind this, but I don’t think it’s a workable by-law and I don’t think it’s fair in any way,” Pappas said.
Councillor Kim Zippel also expressed concerns about the fee but questioned why the entire by-law was not being considered by council.
“This is one small section of the by-law,” she said. “I’m not sure why we would be not using the by-law in its entirety and just removing that particular step, or setting the fees to zero at this juncture.”
In response to Zippel’s question, city clerk John Kennedy said the fee could be removed, or council could just move forward with sections of the by-law.
“I don’t think the whole by-law needs to be thrown out,” Zippel said, while adding a concern about the potential environmental impact for the city in disposing of collected signs that candidates do not pay to recover.
In the end, all councillors except for Zippel and Kemi Akapo voted in support of Pappas’s motion to receive the report for information, meaning council did not approve the by-law.
