Response to 11/11/02 Town Council vote
A couple months ago, it looked like the Chapel Hill Town Council was going to take sensible action on this issue and revise the outdated poster ban.
Now, they've decided to do nothing. I'm not sure what changed their minds, and I would hope it had nothing to do with pressure from Duke Power.
I'd like to think that the voices and wishes of the community speak louder than a big corporation when it comes to deciding town issues. Maybe I'm just naive.
Most people are flabbergasted to learn that this law exists to begin with. We collected 1200 signatures on a petition to change the law without breaking a sweat. I think the vast majority of residents in Chapel Hill, if asked, would agree that the town has better things to spend our tax dollars on than arresting people for putting up flyers, and tearing people's posters down daily. All we're asking is that they let people's posters stay up for a week at a time, which would save the town money. Would that be so terrible?
So at some point, I would hope the Council re-visits this issue and does the common sense thing by reversing its decision.
Showing posts with label repeal of poster ban. Show all posts
Showing posts with label repeal of poster ban. Show all posts
Saturday, November 16, 2002
Wednesday, October 16, 2002
1200 signatures total from residents of Chapel Hill on petition to repeal poster ban
Statement to Chapel Hill Town Council, 10/16/02
Good evening, Mayor Foy and members of the Council.
My name is Erik Ose, and I first came before you a last spring with a petition to allow the posting of notices on utility poles in Chapel Hill.
I see this issue is one of the items before the Council at tonight's public hearing, so I wanted to come back before you and present another 200 signatures on this petition. This makes a total of 1,200 Chapel Hill residents who have signed, which hopefully demonstrates that however minor this issue might seem in the global scheme of things, it's still a local issue that a great number of town citizens care deeply about. It speaks directly to what kind of town we all want Chapel Hill to be.
The ordinance that first prohibited signs or notices for advertising purposes from being placed on utility poles dates from April 7, 1925.
Maybe this ordinance made sense for Chapel Hill when it was still a small village back in 1925. It probably seemed like a progressive law, a way to keep local businesses from littering the town’s landscape with excessive commercial appeals. But there are important differences between the Chapel Hill of 1925 and today. In 2002, if you’re putting a flyer up on a telephone pole, more than likely, it’s advertising a concert, or it’s about a political issue, or you’re a small business, a locally owned business without a huge advertising budget. Local businesses like C.O. Copies, Back Door CD’s, Carolina Car Wash, Internationalist Books, and the Burrito Bunker use flyers all the time to attract customers.
These stores are trying every day to compete with faceless chain stores in our town owned by national corporations, the kind of economic competition that didn’t exist in Chapel Hill 77 years ago. I think the town needs to do all it can to encourage, not discourage locally owned businesses to stay open in Chapel Hill.
Obviously, even more disturbing is that you're subject to arrest if a police officer catches you in the act of posting a flyer. I don't think our town should be spending its limited resources criminalizing the simple act of its residents putting posters on telephone poles.
I know Duke Power would like to keep this ordinance as its now written, because the town is spending our tax dollars to keep their poles clean. I would think a utility like Duke Power would want to give something back to the community in which they operate by letting the citizens of Chapel Hill use the utility poles to post notices. They say the poles don't last as long if people put posters on them. What, are they going to fall over once they accumulate a critical mass of staples?
And the argument about how staples jeopardize the safety of linemen seems to be a red herring, because most linemen these days don't climb poles, they go up in cherrypickers, and if Duke Power is truly concerned about their workers' safety, they should be willing to spend the extra money to let them go up in cherrypickers if there's a problem with the poles.
I’d also briefly like to address the aesthetic argument against posters. If this ordinance is designed to improve the town’s appearance by keeping utility poles bare, then it’s accomplishing exactly the opposite of what it was intended to do.
Take a look at any one of the utility poles downtown located at major intersections. What looks better, a cold, barren pole littered with jagged, torn scraps of paper, or one covered with colorful, exciting posters representing the free exchange of ideas that’s so central to the very idea of what Chapel Hill is about? That’s obviously an aesthetic judgement call. But the reality is that when the town spends taxpayer money to tear down people’s posters every single day, the posters are going to look like eyesores. Look at the poles. They’re covered with staples and remnants of posters. Citizens put posters up on utility poles every day, and they’re going to keep doing it, unless there’s a cop on every corner ready to arrest them. So the poles are going to look like eyesores unless the Council revises this ordinance.
Right now the public works department spends taxpayer dollars to tear peoples’ posters down daily. Wouldn’t it make more sense and save some money by having them do it just a little less often, maybe once a week, like they clear the town-owned kiosks on Sunday mornings. That way, people’s posters would have a chance to be seen without being immediately torn down, and the poles would look more aesthetically pleasing all week long. But again, that’s just my aesthetic judgement call. The most important thing is for the town to start placing value on its citizens being able to freely express ourselves.
Some people might say that by virtue of the town maintaining several kiosks in the downtown area where flyers can legally be posted, the town has every right to declare utility poles off limits to public posting. Over the summer, more kiosks have been constructed as part of the town's Streetscepe improvement program. That’s great, more kiosks are certainly welcome. But the utility poles exist, they’re not being used for anything else, they’re a natural venue for free speech. More kiosks cost more money, but it would actually cost the town less money to clear the utility poles weekly instead of daily if this ordinance is revised.
Besides, I think the Council needs to take a hard look at whether speech in town is truly free if it’s restricted to only certain little areas. On any given day in Chapel Hill, people are on the move, going about their daily lives, and not necessarily stopping by the town-owned poster kiosks for their daily appointment with free speech. Bottom line, that’s why people put flyers on utility poles, because it’s where their messages have a realistic chance of being seen and heard.
I know this Council has the town's best interests at heart, and when deciding this issue, I know the Council will consider what is the right thing to do, the progressive thing to do, the Chapel Hill thing to do. Thank you.
Good evening, Mayor Foy and members of the Council.
My name is Erik Ose, and I first came before you a last spring with a petition to allow the posting of notices on utility poles in Chapel Hill.
I see this issue is one of the items before the Council at tonight's public hearing, so I wanted to come back before you and present another 200 signatures on this petition. This makes a total of 1,200 Chapel Hill residents who have signed, which hopefully demonstrates that however minor this issue might seem in the global scheme of things, it's still a local issue that a great number of town citizens care deeply about. It speaks directly to what kind of town we all want Chapel Hill to be.
The ordinance that first prohibited signs or notices for advertising purposes from being placed on utility poles dates from April 7, 1925.
Maybe this ordinance made sense for Chapel Hill when it was still a small village back in 1925. It probably seemed like a progressive law, a way to keep local businesses from littering the town’s landscape with excessive commercial appeals. But there are important differences between the Chapel Hill of 1925 and today. In 2002, if you’re putting a flyer up on a telephone pole, more than likely, it’s advertising a concert, or it’s about a political issue, or you’re a small business, a locally owned business without a huge advertising budget. Local businesses like C.O. Copies, Back Door CD’s, Carolina Car Wash, Internationalist Books, and the Burrito Bunker use flyers all the time to attract customers.
These stores are trying every day to compete with faceless chain stores in our town owned by national corporations, the kind of economic competition that didn’t exist in Chapel Hill 77 years ago. I think the town needs to do all it can to encourage, not discourage locally owned businesses to stay open in Chapel Hill.
Obviously, even more disturbing is that you're subject to arrest if a police officer catches you in the act of posting a flyer. I don't think our town should be spending its limited resources criminalizing the simple act of its residents putting posters on telephone poles.
I know Duke Power would like to keep this ordinance as its now written, because the town is spending our tax dollars to keep their poles clean. I would think a utility like Duke Power would want to give something back to the community in which they operate by letting the citizens of Chapel Hill use the utility poles to post notices. They say the poles don't last as long if people put posters on them. What, are they going to fall over once they accumulate a critical mass of staples?
And the argument about how staples jeopardize the safety of linemen seems to be a red herring, because most linemen these days don't climb poles, they go up in cherrypickers, and if Duke Power is truly concerned about their workers' safety, they should be willing to spend the extra money to let them go up in cherrypickers if there's a problem with the poles.
I’d also briefly like to address the aesthetic argument against posters. If this ordinance is designed to improve the town’s appearance by keeping utility poles bare, then it’s accomplishing exactly the opposite of what it was intended to do.
Take a look at any one of the utility poles downtown located at major intersections. What looks better, a cold, barren pole littered with jagged, torn scraps of paper, or one covered with colorful, exciting posters representing the free exchange of ideas that’s so central to the very idea of what Chapel Hill is about? That’s obviously an aesthetic judgement call. But the reality is that when the town spends taxpayer money to tear down people’s posters every single day, the posters are going to look like eyesores. Look at the poles. They’re covered with staples and remnants of posters. Citizens put posters up on utility poles every day, and they’re going to keep doing it, unless there’s a cop on every corner ready to arrest them. So the poles are going to look like eyesores unless the Council revises this ordinance.
Right now the public works department spends taxpayer dollars to tear peoples’ posters down daily. Wouldn’t it make more sense and save some money by having them do it just a little less often, maybe once a week, like they clear the town-owned kiosks on Sunday mornings. That way, people’s posters would have a chance to be seen without being immediately torn down, and the poles would look more aesthetically pleasing all week long. But again, that’s just my aesthetic judgement call. The most important thing is for the town to start placing value on its citizens being able to freely express ourselves.
Some people might say that by virtue of the town maintaining several kiosks in the downtown area where flyers can legally be posted, the town has every right to declare utility poles off limits to public posting. Over the summer, more kiosks have been constructed as part of the town's Streetscepe improvement program. That’s great, more kiosks are certainly welcome. But the utility poles exist, they’re not being used for anything else, they’re a natural venue for free speech. More kiosks cost more money, but it would actually cost the town less money to clear the utility poles weekly instead of daily if this ordinance is revised.
Besides, I think the Council needs to take a hard look at whether speech in town is truly free if it’s restricted to only certain little areas. On any given day in Chapel Hill, people are on the move, going about their daily lives, and not necessarily stopping by the town-owned poster kiosks for their daily appointment with free speech. Bottom line, that’s why people put flyers on utility poles, because it’s where their messages have a realistic chance of being seen and heard.
I know this Council has the town's best interests at heart, and when deciding this issue, I know the Council will consider what is the right thing to do, the progressive thing to do, the Chapel Hill thing to do. Thank you.
Tuesday, July 2, 2002
Council loosens stance on signs: Rules on banners, flyers likely to ease
Chapel Hill HeraldTuesday July 02, 2002
By RAY GRONBERG
Page 1
CHAPEL HILL - A shakeup of Chapel Hill's rules on flyers and political signs is likely after the Town Council gets back from its summer recess.
Council members have tentatively endorsed an ordinance that would do away with a restriction on the number of campaign signs on private property, and a time limit on their display.
The 5-4 decision also would loosen a size restriction that applies to temporary banners, like the one that provoked last September's "woe to our enemies" flap between town officials and a Franklin Street restaurant owner.
The narrow margin of the vote means that council members will have to hold a second ballot on the ordinance when they reconvene in late August, but passage seems assured.
"There are arguments that limiting speech in that way, as far as political signs go, is unconstitutional," said Mark Kleinschmidt, one of the council members who voted for the change. "Even if it's not, I don't think it's necessary that we regulate that to the full extent of our power."
Kleinschmidt and five of his colleagues also joined forces last week to instruct Town Manager Cal Horton to prepare a second ordinance that would do away with Chapel Hill's ban on attaching flyers to phone and light poles.
The move answered a West Rosemary Street record-store owner, Erik Ose, who sought the ban's repeal after police ticketed him in April for putting up flyers that advertised a "banquet for global peace and justice."
The repeal ordinance should be ready after the council's summer break and will include a provision that allows the Public Works Department to strip flyers off poles up to once a week.
The twin votes capped several months of debate about the town's sign rules that began when zoning inspectors made restaurant owner Scott Maitland take down the "woe to our enemies" banner.
Maitland's banner ran afoul of the town's existing regulation because it was four times larger than allowed.
But the removal triggered complaints because the banner's wording - which voiced Maitland's reaction to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington - had drawn objections from a trio of council members who thought it too bellicose.
A subsequent review by administrators found that some of the rules were too strict to survive a court challenge.
The limit on the number of campaign signs a resident can post on private property clearly fell into that category, as the town was only allowing one. The federal appeals court that hears cases from North Carolina has said a two-sign limit is unconstitutional.
Officials also had doubts about the time limit that applies to campaign signs. The town currently allows them to go up 30 days before an election and requires that they be taken down within seven days after voting.
The upcoming change would waive those restrictions entirely for signs on private property and loosen them for postings on the public right of way. The new right of way limits would allow postings 45 days before an election and up to 12 days after one.
Ose's repeal request arrived after the ordinance review was under way, and targeted a section of the town code that hadn't gotten council scrutiny until he spoke up.
The flyer ban applies to any posting, whether it advertises a business or a political viewpoint.
A trio of council members - Flicka Bateman, Pat Evans and Jim Ward - voted against both proposals last week. Mayor Kevin Foy joined them in voting against the changes to the rules on campaign signs.
Bateman and Ward indicated that they had more objections to repealing the flyer ban. They and Evans noted that light poles are private property, which makes attaching flyers to them a form of trespassing.
Evans and Bateman added that flyers would only mean more visual clutter and litter on the town's streets, especially if they proliferate after the ban's repeal.
"Some people think this is only going to be the downtown, and it's not, it's going to be throughout the town," Evans said. "There's the possibility that some very offensive signs could be put up because there's no regulating them at all. And I don't know how we could possibly afford to take them down each week throughout the community."
Bateman agreed.
"People have made such a big thing about the entryways into Chapel Hill, but there are utility poles that line the entryways into Chapel Hill," she said. "And that would be a great place to advertise everything from 'free haircuts' to 'Viva Castro.' "
But Kleinschmidt said the town barely enforces the existing restrictions, a stance that undercuts the rule of law.
"It basically distills down into government giving citizens a message that 'we're in control and don't you forget about it,' " he said. "I don't think that's good policy. If we have laws on the books that aren't being enforced, we need to change them."
Monday, June 24, 2002
1000 signatures from residents of Chapel Hill on petition to repeal poster ban
Statement to Chapel Hill Town Council, 6/24/02
Good evening, Mayor Foy and members of the Council.
My name is Erik Ose, and I first came before you a couple of months ago with a petition to allow the posting of notices on utility poles in Chapel Hill.
I see the Council is scheduled to discuss this issue tonight, so I wanted to come back before you and present another 100 signatures on this petition, in addition to the 900 I delivered to you last month. This makes a total of 1,000 Chapel Hill residents who have signed this petition, which hopefully demonstrates that however minor this issue might seem in the global scheme of things, it's still a local issue that a great number of town citizens care deeply about. It speaks directly to what kind of town we all want Chapel Hill to be.
In the couple of months since you first received this petition, the town has constructed three new kiosks on Franklin Street where postings are allowed. Numerous people have commented to me that they guess the construction of these kiosks represents the town's response to our petition. I've responded that I'm sure the kiosks were already scheduled to be built as part of the town's Streetscape improvements, and are unrelated to the timing of this petition. I certainly hope that the Council will not turn to these new kiosks as the only solution.
More kiosks are welcome, but they cost money that the town can ill afford at a time of widespread budget cuts. In contrast, telephone poles already exist, they're all over town, not just in the downtown area, and it would actually cost the town less instead of more to allow citizens to post notices on them, because now the Public Works Department spends tax dollars clearing the poles more often than they clear the kiosks. Clearing the poles once a week makes much more sense, would cost the town less, and give people's messages a chance to be seen and heard.
Bottom line, the town shouldn't be spending its limited resources criminalizing the simple act of its residents putting posters on telephone poles. Thank you.
Good evening, Mayor Foy and members of the Council.
My name is Erik Ose, and I first came before you a couple of months ago with a petition to allow the posting of notices on utility poles in Chapel Hill.
I see the Council is scheduled to discuss this issue tonight, so I wanted to come back before you and present another 100 signatures on this petition, in addition to the 900 I delivered to you last month. This makes a total of 1,000 Chapel Hill residents who have signed this petition, which hopefully demonstrates that however minor this issue might seem in the global scheme of things, it's still a local issue that a great number of town citizens care deeply about. It speaks directly to what kind of town we all want Chapel Hill to be.
In the couple of months since you first received this petition, the town has constructed three new kiosks on Franklin Street where postings are allowed. Numerous people have commented to me that they guess the construction of these kiosks represents the town's response to our petition. I've responded that I'm sure the kiosks were already scheduled to be built as part of the town's Streetscape improvements, and are unrelated to the timing of this petition. I certainly hope that the Council will not turn to these new kiosks as the only solution.
More kiosks are welcome, but they cost money that the town can ill afford at a time of widespread budget cuts. In contrast, telephone poles already exist, they're all over town, not just in the downtown area, and it would actually cost the town less instead of more to allow citizens to post notices on them, because now the Public Works Department spends tax dollars clearing the poles more often than they clear the kiosks. Clearing the poles once a week makes much more sense, would cost the town less, and give people's messages a chance to be seen and heard.
Bottom line, the town shouldn't be spending its limited resources criminalizing the simple act of its residents putting posters on telephone poles. Thank you.
Tuesday, June 18, 2002
Council to debate lifting flyer ban: Music and video store owner was fined $115 for putting poster on utility pole
Chapel Hill Herald
Tuesday June 18, 2002
Page 1
By RAY GRONBERG
CHAPEL HILL - The fight's left him $115 poorer, but Erik Ose will at least have the satisfaction of seeing the Town Council debate the petition he filed seeking the repeal of a ban on stapling flyers to phone poles.
Tuesday June 18, 2002
Page 1
By RAY GRONBERG
CHAPEL HILL - The fight's left him $115 poorer, but Erik Ose will at least have the satisfaction of seeing the Town Council debate the petition he filed seeking the repeal of a ban on stapling flyers to phone poles.
Council members are set to debate Ose's petition Monday, more than two weeks after Town Manager Cal Horton advised them to preserve the flyer ban.
Councilman Bill Strom stepped in last week to make sure the repeal request wasn't tabled without discussion.
"I thought [Ose] made a good point," Strom explained afterward. "There are some unspoken things that make for community character. It seems to me as if this is an area the town can come up with a way to compromise."
Ose - the owner of Lost City Music & Video - asked the town to repeal the ordinance after a police sergeant ticketed him April 4 for stapling a flyer to a pole.
The flyer advertised a "banquet for global peace and justice" that eventually raised about $2,500 for a variety of causes.
Chapel Hill has banned the posting of signs or leaflets on telephone and light poles for decades.
A Chapel Hill police officers saw Ose put up the flyer and called in his sergeant, Anthony Brooks, when the record-store owner refused an order to take it down. Brooks repeated the order and wrote the ticket when Ose again refused.
Ose branded the ordinance a violation of free speech and vowed to fight the ticket. But he made no headway with a judge when his case came up May 20. The judge found him guilty and fined him $25, plus $90 in court costs.
"The court felt that the way the ordinance was written, it was pretty clear I'd violated it," Ose said. "The police officer caught me in the act, and it was a pretty cut-and-dried case. But they didn't go into the free-speech implications."
Meanwhile, Horton and Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos were advising the council that the ordinance is on firm ground, legally speaking.
In the eyes of the court system, "Aesthetic values and other legitimate concerns related to public safety and littering are sufficient to support the town's current regulation," they said.
Horton added that those reasons were also good enough from a policy standpoint.
"We think that community appearance is important and that having these kinds of materials on utility poles throughout the downtown detracts from the appearance of downtown," he said.
Ose has countered by arguing that the flyer ban keeps small businesses and nonprofit groups without big advertising budgets from spreading their messages. Roughly 1,000 people have signed petitions supporting his request.
Opposition is coming from Duke Power, which owns most of the poles.
Strom said he'd prefer allowing postings, so long as the Public Works Department removes them at regular intervals.
A Public Works employee already strips flyers from poles and kiosks each week.
Horton said the kiosks already offer would-be posters a place to display their materials. The town is putting up new ones as part of its Streetscape program.
So far, the new kiosks have been well received. "They certainly are used, and I think their appearance is an improvement over the old wooden ones," Horton said.
Councilman Bill Strom stepped in last week to make sure the repeal request wasn't tabled without discussion.
"I thought [Ose] made a good point," Strom explained afterward. "There are some unspoken things that make for community character. It seems to me as if this is an area the town can come up with a way to compromise."
Ose - the owner of Lost City Music & Video - asked the town to repeal the ordinance after a police sergeant ticketed him April 4 for stapling a flyer to a pole.
The flyer advertised a "banquet for global peace and justice" that eventually raised about $2,500 for a variety of causes.
Chapel Hill has banned the posting of signs or leaflets on telephone and light poles for decades.
A Chapel Hill police officers saw Ose put up the flyer and called in his sergeant, Anthony Brooks, when the record-store owner refused an order to take it down. Brooks repeated the order and wrote the ticket when Ose again refused.
Ose branded the ordinance a violation of free speech and vowed to fight the ticket. But he made no headway with a judge when his case came up May 20. The judge found him guilty and fined him $25, plus $90 in court costs.
"The court felt that the way the ordinance was written, it was pretty clear I'd violated it," Ose said. "The police officer caught me in the act, and it was a pretty cut-and-dried case. But they didn't go into the free-speech implications."
Meanwhile, Horton and Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos were advising the council that the ordinance is on firm ground, legally speaking.
In the eyes of the court system, "Aesthetic values and other legitimate concerns related to public safety and littering are sufficient to support the town's current regulation," they said.
Horton added that those reasons were also good enough from a policy standpoint.
"We think that community appearance is important and that having these kinds of materials on utility poles throughout the downtown detracts from the appearance of downtown," he said.
Ose has countered by arguing that the flyer ban keeps small businesses and nonprofit groups without big advertising budgets from spreading their messages. Roughly 1,000 people have signed petitions supporting his request.
Opposition is coming from Duke Power, which owns most of the poles.
Strom said he'd prefer allowing postings, so long as the Public Works Department removes them at regular intervals.
A Public Works employee already strips flyers from poles and kiosks each week.
Horton said the kiosks already offer would-be posters a place to display their materials. The town is putting up new ones as part of its Streetscape program.
So far, the new kiosks have been well received. "They certainly are used, and I think their appearance is an improvement over the old wooden ones," Horton said.
Wednesday, May 8, 2002
Petitioners want to post messages on town's telephone poles
The Chapel Hill NewsMay 8, 2002
Page A1
By Virginia Knapp
CHAPEL HILL -- It's a message some folks want plastered all over town: Let us stick flyers on telephone poles.
More than 800 people have signed a petition asking the Town Council to repeal an ordinance banning posters on utility poles. They say that the problem is that there aren't nearly enough spaces where bands, small businesses and anyone willing to spend a few cents at Kinko's can exercise their freedom of speech.
"The free speech issue is the most important thing here," said Erik Ose, the Lost City music store owner who is leading the petition drive. "We want to show council that a lot of people care about this issue and that this is an ordinance that serves no useful purpose."
It took a ticket for Ose to start the petition drive.
In April, Ose was hanging flyers on utility poles along Franklin Street for the Banquet for Global Peace and Justice, a dinner sponsored by Internationalist Books, the Triangle Free Press and the UNC Campaign to End the Cycle of Violence.
In front of the Franklin Street post office, Ose was stopped by Chapel Hill Police officers, who asked him to tear down the flyers he had just tacked up. When he refused, Ose was cited for violating section 16.3 of the town ordinances.
"Both officers said they were surprised by my willingness to waste my time and money by being written up and having to go to court over this issue, when I could have done what everyone else they've ever caught in the act of postering on telephone poles does," Ose said. "Namely, torn my own posters down, apologize and go on to the next corner to put up more posters once the officers' backs were turned.
"But why should a citizen have to play cat and mouse with the police?"
The ordinance banning signs on utility poles is a long-standing one. Ose found the regulation in codes dating back to 1925.
"It was probably passed to prohibit excessive commercial appeals by businesses," Ose said. "But there's an important difference between the Chapel Hill of 1925 and today. Today you're more than likely to be advertising a concert or a social issue or you're advertising a small local business without a huge advertising budget."
One argument that the pole-poster advocates use is that the fliers help nonprofits and small businesses spread their messages.
"No nonprofits I know of have an ad budget the size of Wal-Mart's," said Andrew Pearson, a UNC student who was helping Ose post flyers for the peace banquet. "It's a shame they can't put up a flyer on a utility pole to advertise."
Another argument is that the town has taken down all but two of the five kiosks on Franklin Street where it was legal to post flyers.
"It's a problem of the town's own making because people don't have enough places to post," said Matt Barrett, co-owner of the Poster Guys, a business that posts flyers for everything from university functions to church services. "I don't think a telephone pole is a thing of beauty, anyway, so anything that can make it more useful is good."
Curtis Brooks, the town's landscape architect, says the old kiosks were in poor repair and needed to be taken down as part of Streetscape improvements downtown.
A new kiosk went up recently in front of the town-owned parking lot at the corner of Rosemary and Columbia streets. Unlike the old wooden pole and shingle kiosks, the new one is made of fabricated metal and plywood for the posting boards.
"This is new design, so we decided to install one as a prototype," Brooks said, adding that he hopes the others will be installed by the end of the year. "I'm very pleased with it."
The kiosks are cleared of posters weekly by the Public Works Department, and Ose suggests that the poles could be cleared with the same regularity. Public Works employees clear the utility poles of illegal posters every other day or so now.
"Revising and repealing the ordinance would provide a cost-effective way to make sure people's messages are being heard," Ose said, comparing the easy availability of poles to the cost of installing more kiosks. "It also would save the town money by not having Public Works go out to tear down the posters."
But some folks like having the posters torn down. People who support the ordinance say the flyers, torn scraps of paper and staples hurt the town's appearance.
"I think it looks pretty trashy if you have people sticking posters up all over town," said Mickey Ewell, owner of Spanky's and 411 West restaurants on Franklin Street.
However, Barrett defended the posters as an enhancement.
"People who run the town are very hung up on appearances. They want it to look like a mall," Barrett said. "I'm all for posting on telephone poles. It makes it look like the town has something going on."
Ose agreed.
"What looks better: A pole covered with staples and torn, jagged scraps of paper or a pole that is covered with brightly colored posters?"
The council will take up the petition again in June, but Ose will present additional petition signatures at the council's next business meeting on Monday.
That's a week before Ose's May 20 court date to fight his citation for postering.
Thursday, April 18, 2002
POSTING ON POLES: Ban on flyers should be repealed
Chapel Hill Herald
Thursday April 18, 2002
EDITORIAL
Page 4
Chalk up another law you knew nothing about: it is forbidden, by the town of Chapel Hill, to post flyers and signs on telephone and utility poles. The reason you may not know about this, of course, is that the statute is honored more in the breech.
In other words, no one has paid much attention to the 41-year-old law, at least until Erik Ose decided to fight it. Ose, the owner of a West Rosemary Street music store, earlier this month was putting up flyers advertising a "banquet for global peace and justice." A Chapel Hill police officer saw him attaching a flyer to a pole near the Franklin Street post office.
The officer, who apparently did know about the statute, asked Ose to desist. In the spirit of principled refusal made famous by our colonial forefathers, Ose refused. He refused again, when asked by a police sergeant, who then presented Ose with a ticket for the infraction.
The infraction was of section 16-3 of the Town Code, which says "no signs or notices for advertising purposes shall be fastened or tacked to telephone, telegraph or electric light poles or trees on the streets or sidewalks."
The logical question to ask here is why there is such an ordinance on the town books. The poles are used by dozens of people each day to let the community know about a concert, an apartment to rent or even a banquet for peace and justice.
They do no harm. In fact, as Ose suggests, the poles full of information add to the ambiance of a college town, where the skinny on what's happening is available on every street corner.
They do not interfere with town efforts to keep the community beautiful and tidy. In fact, very few of the flyers last more than a week on the poles, since the town's Public Works Department regularly strips them from their posts.
Chapel Hill officials would prefer flyers be attached only to the town kiosks, where postings are legal. But there are just a few kiosks - now, in fact, fewer than normal - and they are not to be found everywhere.
Officials must safeguard the town's appearance, but regulating the posting of flyers seems a bit much. Trees still need to be protected against the depredations of staples, but the rest of the ordinance serves no useful purpose. It should be repealed.
Thursday April 18, 2002
EDITORIAL
Page 4
Chalk up another law you knew nothing about: it is forbidden, by the town of Chapel Hill, to post flyers and signs on telephone and utility poles. The reason you may not know about this, of course, is that the statute is honored more in the breech.
In other words, no one has paid much attention to the 41-year-old law, at least until Erik Ose decided to fight it. Ose, the owner of a West Rosemary Street music store, earlier this month was putting up flyers advertising a "banquet for global peace and justice." A Chapel Hill police officer saw him attaching a flyer to a pole near the Franklin Street post office.
The officer, who apparently did know about the statute, asked Ose to desist. In the spirit of principled refusal made famous by our colonial forefathers, Ose refused. He refused again, when asked by a police sergeant, who then presented Ose with a ticket for the infraction.
The infraction was of section 16-3 of the Town Code, which says "no signs or notices for advertising purposes shall be fastened or tacked to telephone, telegraph or electric light poles or trees on the streets or sidewalks."
The logical question to ask here is why there is such an ordinance on the town books. The poles are used by dozens of people each day to let the community know about a concert, an apartment to rent or even a banquet for peace and justice.
They do no harm. In fact, as Ose suggests, the poles full of information add to the ambiance of a college town, where the skinny on what's happening is available on every street corner.
They do not interfere with town efforts to keep the community beautiful and tidy. In fact, very few of the flyers last more than a week on the poles, since the town's Public Works Department regularly strips them from their posts.
Chapel Hill officials would prefer flyers be attached only to the town kiosks, where postings are legal. But there are just a few kiosks - now, in fact, fewer than normal - and they are not to be found everywhere.
Officials must safeguard the town's appearance, but regulating the posting of flyers seems a bit much. Trees still need to be protected against the depredations of staples, but the rest of the ordinance serves no useful purpose. It should be repealed.
Monday, April 8, 2002
Petition for the revision or repeal of Chapel Hill Ordinance Sec. 16-3. (Placing notices, signs on utility poles, trees, prohibited; exception.)
Statement to Chapel Hill Town Council, April 8, 2002
Good evening, Mayor Foy and members of the Council.
My name is Erik Ose, and I’d like to respectfully request that the Town Council examine an existing city ordinance, Sec. 16.3 of the Code of Ordinances, in order to revise or repeal it.
I've been a resident of Chapel Hill for the past twelve years, and owned a business in town for the past five. During that time, I've always been one of those people you see around town hanging flyers and posters up for one cause or another. I've probably hung tens of thousands of flyers in Chapel Hill while I've lived here, so flyering is something I know a little about.
Last Thursday I was hanging posters on Franklin Street for a Banquet for Global Peace and Justice that was being held that night at the New Century Center in Carrboro. This event was sponsored by three local groups, the UNC Campaign to End The Cycle of Violence, the Triangle Free Press, and the Internationalist Books and Community Center. It drew over 150 local peace and social justice activists together for a night proclaiming that another world is truly possible if we dare to dream. Celebrating the idea of a world free from violence, hatred, and injustice. This banquet raised over $2500 towards those goals.
I was in front of the Franklin Street post office, and had just finished stapling two posters for the event onto a telephone pole there at the corner. A visible spot, where the poster was likely to be seen be many people walking or driving by. It's irrelevant, really, what the poster I was hanging said. It could have been raising awareness about any number of other causes, or it could have been a poster for my own business, or for one of the several other small, locally owned businesses that I occasionally hang signs for, as a gesture of support for other small stores like my own. The fact that it was a political message I was distributing and not a commercial one just makes what happened next even more disturbing.
I was questioned, detained, and eventually cited by a Chapel Hill police officer and sergeant for the simple act of having stapled this poster up to a telephone pole, and refusing to tear the poster down when told to by the officer. The officers were very polite and courteous to me, and explained to me that they really didn't want to write me up, they were just doing their jobs and enforcing Chapel Hill city ordinance Section 16.3, which prohibits the placing of signs or notices on utility poles. I didn't feel threatened or intimidated by them at any time during our encounter. But the fact remains that I was detained, cited, and threatened with arrest and being hauled before a magistrate if I was seen putting any more flyers on telephone poles that day.
Both officers said they were surprised by my willingness to waste my time and money by being written up and having to go to court over this issue, when I could have simply done what everyone else they've ever caught in the act of postering on telephone poles does, namely, torn my own posters down, apologize, and go on to the next corner to put up more posters once the officers backs were turned.
But you know, who's fooling who here. Why should a citizen have to play cat and mouse games with the police when they're simply trying to publicize a worthy cause, or advertise their business, or speak out about an issue they care about by making a sign and posting it somewhere where their neighbors might actually see it?
This is a city ordinance that doesn't make sense. Anyone who thinks about it a minute should realize it's ill conceived, and needs revision or outright repeal.
Why does this ordinance exist in the first place? Was it drafted for aesthetic purposes? Is it designed to improve the town’s appearance by keeping utility poles bare? If so, it’s accomplishing exactly the opposite of what it was intended to do. Take a look at any one of the utility poles downtown located at major intersections. What looks better, a cold, barren pole littered with jagged, torn scraps of paper, or one covered with colorful, exciting posters representing the free exchange of ideas that’s so central to the very idea of what Chapel Hill is about?
Was it drafted to protect the utility poles from the ravages of staples and thumbtacks? Are the poles somehow in danger of falling down once a critical mass of staples accumulate on them? If so, the ordinance isn’t working. Look at the poles. They’re covered with staples. Citizens put flyers up on utility poles every day, and they’re going to keep doing it, unless there’s a cop on every corner ready to arrest them.
The question is, it is a sensible allocation of the town’s limited public resources to have the public works department relentlessly tearing down any posters that pop up on utility poles every few days? I don’t know how many public works employees are assigned to this task, or how frequently they carry out this duty, but they must be working pretty hard. Flyers get taken down from utility poles in the downtown area almost as soon as they’re posted. There’s a utility pole that sits right outside my store on Rosemary Street. Every day I post a flyer for my store on that pole, and lately, every next day, I come to work to find that flyer torn down. Now isn’t that a little ridiculous?
As a small business owner, I’m upset. Is Chapel Hill serious about maintaining the quality of life here by fostering a climate of support for small, locally owned businesses over huge, faceless, national chains? If so, this ordinance needs changing. An important real world effect of this ordinance is to make it harder for small businesses who can’t afford expensive newspaper and radio advertising campaigns to stay in business in Chapel Hill. Grassroots advertising by small, locally owned businesses in town is something we should be encouraging, not discouraging.
As a taxpayer, I’m upset. There’s got to be a better way for the town to keep the appearance of utility poles regulated, one that uses a little less of town employees time and energy. Maybe if the town cleared the poles once a month, or once a week, like they do the kiosks.
With respect to the kiosks, some people might say that by virtue of the town maintaining two kiosks in the downtown area where flyers can legally be posted, the town has every right to declare utility poles off limits to public posting. Let’s leave aside the fact that I can remember when there were no less than five kiosks downtown devoted to this very purpose.
I think the Council needs to take a hard look at whether speech is truly free if it’s restricted to one or two little areas in town. On any given day in Chapel Hill, people are on the move, going about their daily lives, and not necessarily stopping by the town-owned poster kiosks for their daily appointment with free speech. Bottom line, that’s why people put flyers on utility poles, because it’s where their messages have a realistic chance of being seen and heard.
That’s why I think the Council needs to revise or repeal this ordinance, because any time you restrict free speech, we would all hope it’s being done because of other considerations that are very important to the public welfare. And in this case, I can’t see the reasoning behind maintaining this ordinance as it’s now written, or how it helps makes Chapel Hill a better town to live in.
Good evening, Mayor Foy and members of the Council.
My name is Erik Ose, and I’d like to respectfully request that the Town Council examine an existing city ordinance, Sec. 16.3 of the Code of Ordinances, in order to revise or repeal it.
I've been a resident of Chapel Hill for the past twelve years, and owned a business in town for the past five. During that time, I've always been one of those people you see around town hanging flyers and posters up for one cause or another. I've probably hung tens of thousands of flyers in Chapel Hill while I've lived here, so flyering is something I know a little about.
Last Thursday I was hanging posters on Franklin Street for a Banquet for Global Peace and Justice that was being held that night at the New Century Center in Carrboro. This event was sponsored by three local groups, the UNC Campaign to End The Cycle of Violence, the Triangle Free Press, and the Internationalist Books and Community Center. It drew over 150 local peace and social justice activists together for a night proclaiming that another world is truly possible if we dare to dream. Celebrating the idea of a world free from violence, hatred, and injustice. This banquet raised over $2500 towards those goals.
I was in front of the Franklin Street post office, and had just finished stapling two posters for the event onto a telephone pole there at the corner. A visible spot, where the poster was likely to be seen be many people walking or driving by. It's irrelevant, really, what the poster I was hanging said. It could have been raising awareness about any number of other causes, or it could have been a poster for my own business, or for one of the several other small, locally owned businesses that I occasionally hang signs for, as a gesture of support for other small stores like my own. The fact that it was a political message I was distributing and not a commercial one just makes what happened next even more disturbing.
I was questioned, detained, and eventually cited by a Chapel Hill police officer and sergeant for the simple act of having stapled this poster up to a telephone pole, and refusing to tear the poster down when told to by the officer. The officers were very polite and courteous to me, and explained to me that they really didn't want to write me up, they were just doing their jobs and enforcing Chapel Hill city ordinance Section 16.3, which prohibits the placing of signs or notices on utility poles. I didn't feel threatened or intimidated by them at any time during our encounter. But the fact remains that I was detained, cited, and threatened with arrest and being hauled before a magistrate if I was seen putting any more flyers on telephone poles that day.
Both officers said they were surprised by my willingness to waste my time and money by being written up and having to go to court over this issue, when I could have simply done what everyone else they've ever caught in the act of postering on telephone poles does, namely, torn my own posters down, apologize, and go on to the next corner to put up more posters once the officers backs were turned.
But you know, who's fooling who here. Why should a citizen have to play cat and mouse games with the police when they're simply trying to publicize a worthy cause, or advertise their business, or speak out about an issue they care about by making a sign and posting it somewhere where their neighbors might actually see it?
This is a city ordinance that doesn't make sense. Anyone who thinks about it a minute should realize it's ill conceived, and needs revision or outright repeal.
Why does this ordinance exist in the first place? Was it drafted for aesthetic purposes? Is it designed to improve the town’s appearance by keeping utility poles bare? If so, it’s accomplishing exactly the opposite of what it was intended to do. Take a look at any one of the utility poles downtown located at major intersections. What looks better, a cold, barren pole littered with jagged, torn scraps of paper, or one covered with colorful, exciting posters representing the free exchange of ideas that’s so central to the very idea of what Chapel Hill is about?
Was it drafted to protect the utility poles from the ravages of staples and thumbtacks? Are the poles somehow in danger of falling down once a critical mass of staples accumulate on them? If so, the ordinance isn’t working. Look at the poles. They’re covered with staples. Citizens put flyers up on utility poles every day, and they’re going to keep doing it, unless there’s a cop on every corner ready to arrest them.
The question is, it is a sensible allocation of the town’s limited public resources to have the public works department relentlessly tearing down any posters that pop up on utility poles every few days? I don’t know how many public works employees are assigned to this task, or how frequently they carry out this duty, but they must be working pretty hard. Flyers get taken down from utility poles in the downtown area almost as soon as they’re posted. There’s a utility pole that sits right outside my store on Rosemary Street. Every day I post a flyer for my store on that pole, and lately, every next day, I come to work to find that flyer torn down. Now isn’t that a little ridiculous?
As a small business owner, I’m upset. Is Chapel Hill serious about maintaining the quality of life here by fostering a climate of support for small, locally owned businesses over huge, faceless, national chains? If so, this ordinance needs changing. An important real world effect of this ordinance is to make it harder for small businesses who can’t afford expensive newspaper and radio advertising campaigns to stay in business in Chapel Hill. Grassroots advertising by small, locally owned businesses in town is something we should be encouraging, not discouraging.
As a taxpayer, I’m upset. There’s got to be a better way for the town to keep the appearance of utility poles regulated, one that uses a little less of town employees time and energy. Maybe if the town cleared the poles once a month, or once a week, like they do the kiosks.
With respect to the kiosks, some people might say that by virtue of the town maintaining two kiosks in the downtown area where flyers can legally be posted, the town has every right to declare utility poles off limits to public posting. Let’s leave aside the fact that I can remember when there were no less than five kiosks downtown devoted to this very purpose.
I think the Council needs to take a hard look at whether speech is truly free if it’s restricted to one or two little areas in town. On any given day in Chapel Hill, people are on the move, going about their daily lives, and not necessarily stopping by the town-owned poster kiosks for their daily appointment with free speech. Bottom line, that’s why people put flyers on utility poles, because it’s where their messages have a realistic chance of being seen and heard.
That’s why I think the Council needs to revise or repeal this ordinance, because any time you restrict free speech, we would all hope it’s being done because of other considerations that are very important to the public welfare. And in this case, I can’t see the reasoning behind maintaining this ordinance as it’s now written, or how it helps makes Chapel Hill a better town to live in.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
