Why USSC Has Gotten Involved Part II

(more about how you can get involved)

By Richard Crawford

In our last Newsletter, Part 1 of this article discussed how and why USSC has gotten involved with Sign Zoning issues, and the genesis of the Sign Research funded by the USSC Foundation. The article concluded with the question of how individual Sign Companies can get involved, and how they can use USSC research. This question was raised, with the promise of an answer in this issue of Signpower USA. For your review and consideration, here are some real-life examples of how Sign Company members (and one non-Member) have actually gotten involved with local Zoning issues, and how they approached their particular problems and issues. Specific names and company identifications will not be used, but if you have further interest, please feel free to contact me to obtain the actual parties involved.

When local Sign Companies and Members can get involved at the local level to address Sign-related problems, this is good for both the Industry and for the local Company. The sign business is a national industry, distributed across the entire United States, but at the same time it is a fragmented business, and this is caused primarily by wildly inconsistent local Zoning rules and regulations. Local sign companies are in the best position to address local issues, and can reap the benefits of this involvement, as others in the community may look to the Sign Company because they appear to be professionals in the field.

At USSC, we are privileged to have Members from across the US, but due to geographical separation and the vagaries of local Zoning Codes, we can't be everywhere in person to assist in zoning questions and challenges. We can set the table for Members: we provide competent (we hope) advice and suggestions to Members, we review local situations, codes and documents, we maintain access to a complete up-to-date Legal library, including both cases and statutes covering all 50 states, we can provide more than a dozen scientific studies and research projects related to On Premises signs that can be used by Sign Companies locally (submit to the local board),, and on occasion we deal directly with the local parties involved or the attorneys. The system works best, however, if you are involved!

Getting Involved: Sign Permit Fees

A USSC Member from New York State contacted us in 2006 concerning a problem with local Sign Permit Fees in his Town. A new Fee schedule was recently enacted, and it seemed excessive. Below is the new revised Fee schedule:

Job Cost / Fee

$ 0.00 - $ 250.00 $75.00

$ 251.00 - $ 500.00 $125.00

$ 501.00 - $ 1000.00 $250.00

$1001.00 - $ 3000.00 $500.00

$3001.00 - $ 5000.00 $750.00

$5001.00 - $ 7000.00 $1000.00

$7001.00 - $10,000.00 $1500.00

$10,000.00 and up $2000.00

The consequence of the new Permit Fee scale was this: for a simple $1,100.00 sign face replacement job, the new Permit fee would be $500.00. While Sign Companies do not directly bear the cost of permits, we do bear these costs indirectly: (1) we often front permit costs for Customers at no charge; higher fees means more lost revenue on the use of the money tied-up; (2) higher fees can act as a “tax” on signs and Commercial Speech, and can have a chilling affect on Sign Customers, who may not be able to afford the fees or may resent the fees and then resent the Sign Company involved; (3) the higher fees are inappropriate and unconstitutional in almost every state we have researched.

Embedded in every state's jurisprudence is the principle that local fees (permits, licenses, etc.) are not to be enacted or applied as a revenue raising device, nor as a tax. They are intended to cover the cost of reviewing the “application”, and no more. Courts are not allowing every possible and conceivable administrative “overhead” cost to be lumped into this charge. The local Taxpayers are already employing the Building Inspector or Zoning Officer, and are already paying his or her salary (including Benefits, vacation, etc.) through local tax revenue. That is the appropriate legal mechanism for gathering funds to compensate Municipal employees.

What did the NY Sign Company do to get involved?

1. They researched the problem locally;

2. They contacted USSC;

3. They used the legal research and written opinion provided by USSC; they presented the information to the local Town for review and action, along with their own written communications;

4. They were acquainted with or became acquainted with the local Municipal officials, and business leaders; membership in a local Chamber of Commerce can provide access to people in your town from all types of businesses, besides your own Customer base.

As a result, the NY Sign Company efforts resulted in the Fee Schedule shown below; quite a difference I am sure you will agree:

Job Cost / Fee

$ 0.00 - $ 250.00 $75.00

$ 251.00 - $ 500.00 $75.00

$ 501.00 - $ 1000.00 $75.00

$1001.00 - $ 3000.00 $75.00

$3001.00 - $ 5000.00 $75.00

$5001.00 - $ 7000.00 $100.00

$7001.00 - $10,000.00 $150.00

$10,000.00 and up $200.00

Getting Involved: Zoning Code change to downsize Signs

Over the years, we have fielded countless requests for assistance from Members faced with local Sign Code revision projects. These requests have come from all over the United States: New York, Florida, Georgia, California, Arizona, and Pennsylvania. The revision of a local Sign Code invariably involves a re-examination of permitted Sign Size, often being considered in a vacuum, without reference to scientific research on Sign Size, or applicable national sign standards. It is often accompanied by an effort by the local town to “take” or amortize signs that become non-conforming due to the new Code revision. States vary on their approach to the legality of sign amortization, but this is powerful tool that some towns use to remove "regulatory nuisances" (the non-conforming signs) without paying any compensation to the Sign Owners.

From our experience, here is a list of steps that most Sign Companies should consider when dealing with a local Sign Code revision:

1. Monitor local efforts to revise the Sign Code - the sooner you are aware of planned changes, the earlier you can enter the process. This includes reading legal notices in the paper, talking to local town officials, etc.

2. Volunteer to be on the local committee that is formed to review the existing Code. If anyone can represent themselves as an expert on On Premises signs, it's someone in the sign business. Make your volunteer offer in writing; even if the Town does not include you on the committee, you have at least made a good faith effort to participate and later can demonstrate that you were excluded from the process.

3. Get your local Chamber of Commerce involved, and keep them abreast of developments; the local business community will be your best resource for gathering signatures on a Petition, for instance, or organizing local businesses. If the town is attempting to implement "sign amortization", this will be a critical issue for local Sign Owners, and will get their attention.

4. Contact USSC and let us know about your situation. Use USSC research to support your requests for fair and balanced rules for On Premises signs. Key to this approach is to insure that the sign regulations allow for adequate Size, Height, Placement and Lighting for Motorists, who are naturally the main Users of the signs.

5. Make sure that the committee and/or the town is aware that standards for sign size have been accepted by other professional organizations, including the American Planning Association and the national association of Building Officials, the International Code Council

6. Attend the meetings.

7. The rewards for working this process will be a Sign Code that is reasonable and enforceable for all concerned - for the Sign Users, the Community, the Sign Manufacturers, and the Motorists. All too often, Sign Codes are written by emotional impulse, often suggested by individuals with little knowledge of the complex interplay between motorists and signs. Or, the Code is duplicated from some other jurisdiction because "it's working there". Avoid the cookie-cutter Code, and use the scientific research!

Getting Involved: Zoning Code change to increase sign size

USSC was contacted in 2005 by an individual with a unique request: their local County wanted to up-size permitted Freestanding sign sizes in certain districts. What made this request so unique was that the individual who contacted USSC was a Supervisor in a County in Southwestern Virginia. This elected official was a proponent of permitting larger Freestanding signs in certain districts in the County where the Interstate Highway passed through. He felt that local businesses were losing revenue because motorists passing the exits in his County did not have enough time to detect or read the signs identifying the goods and services available at the local exits.

There were those in the County (strangely, they were the newer residents in the County) who opposed allowing larger signs so local businesses along the Interstate could tap potential business.

To make the case that larger signs were needed and justified, the Supervisor inquired if there was research that could support the argument that larger signs were needed to reach the Interstate.

USSC provided him with this information, including our own USSC On Premise Sign Standards, as well as information from the International Zoning Code, published by the International Code Council, and from Street Graphics and the Law, published by the American Planning Association. Using these resources, the Supervisor was able to make the argument that the larger sign sizes were needed so that motorists could safely detect and read Freestanding Signs from the Interstate, and this proposal was based on science, not speculative opinion or emotional impulse. In the end, the County Code was amended to permit larger Freestanding signs on properties with frontage on the Interstate.

Getting Involved: Electronic Message Centers (EMC's)

A large Sign Company in New England has been spearheading efforts to combat restrictive and unconstitutional local sign codes related to EMCs. Legal issues related to EMCs are common across the country; we have reports and requests for information regarding EMCs from all geographic areas.

The New England Sign Company got involved this way:

1. They had customers who wanted to purchase and use the new LED technology;

2. As a Company, they were committed to trying to provide these products to their Customers;

3. They were committed as a Company to work through the legal and Zoning process; this is no small task; many Sign Companies sometimes throw up their hands in disgust and avoid dealing with tough local Zoning issues; in the long term, it is economically beneficial to Sign Companies to be able to offer as wide an assortment of products to their Customers as possible, and to do so with as few Zoning hurdles and bureaucratic requirements as possible;

4. They found Customers who were willing to be patient and work through the legal system to get what they wanted; this again is no small task; many Customers do not have the stomach for long Zoning applications and appeals; yet, without the committed Customers, there is no application or process to obtain approval for these signs;

5. The Sign Company used the Association resources available to it for guidance and assistance: both State and National Sign Associations; remember, if you do not call us, we have no idea what problems you are experiencing locally;

In the end, the New England Sign Company was successful in overturning restrictive and/or unconstitutional Code provisions in two municipalities. USSC contributed to these efforts, both financially (through the Legal Defense Fund) and in terms of advice and research.

To highlight this point, below is a paragraph taken directly from the Judge's decision in their most recent successful court case. This paragraph demonstrates how USSC information and research helps support your local Zoning Applications. In this specific case, and in many others, the Town attempted to say that their EMC restrictions were in place to prevent traffic accidents and/or improve traffic safety. This is a claim made repetitively by Municipalities, but one that has no validity in fact, based on all available research:

"As to the concerns about safety, the City contends that the changing displays of the proposed sign might be distracting to motorists and lead to increased traffic accidents. While this may have a common sense appeal, no evidence was presented to support such a concern. Moreover, the petitioner presented to the ZBA the results of traffic study which concluded that the placing of signs similar to that proposed by the petitioner did not raise the incidence of traffic accidents. The City's argument is also belied by its own allowance of electronic signs to display date, time, and temperature."(emphasis added by USSC)

That Study, which the Judge cited directly, was the USSC publication TRAFFIC SAFETY STUDY, An Examination of the Relationship between Signs and Traffic Safety (2003) authored by Tantala and Associates, an engineering firm based in Pennsylvania. Without this vital piece of research, the Town's claim of traffic safety and the sign/accident linkage would have gone unchallenged, as it often is. This claim is the underpinning used to justify all sorts of restrictions on EMCs. Five years ago, this research didn't exist; today, it is available to Members and was designed for exactly this type of use. It is encouraging that courts are using USSC research when considering a case involving sign restrictions, and further research in this area, particularly by the EMC manufacturers themselves, would go a long way to solidifying the Sign User's ability to display EMC technology.

Conclusion

The lesson learned from all of the situations described above comes down to this fact: positive results can be achieved when USSC and local Members work together. USSC can "get involved" and perform volumes of sign research, but without local Members to apply and use the research, it is very difficult for a national organization to effect local change. Conversely, Sign Companies can "get involved" with local sign Zoning issues, but if they do so in isolation, without the support of their national Sign Council and available scientific research, their chances for success are diminished. Getting involved means working together, to protect and promote the On Premise sign business. We see positive growth in these areas, and we look forward to working with Members to solve these difficult issues. Stay involved!

Back