A committee in Lewes wants to explore changing the city’s code when it comes to outdoor signs.
The proposal is an attempt to stave off potential First Amendment challenges by rewriting the city’s sign ordinance to focus on size and other aspects not related to a sign’s actual content. It started with an almost-complete rewrite of the current law. But, after talking to city building officials, any potential changes may not have to be so sweeping in scope.
Signs in the city can be thought of in two broad categories: permanent signs, like those outside businesses, and temporary signs, like those from real estate agents, contractors, and political candidates.
Greg Cirillo, a member of the city’s Ordinance Review Committee has been looking at the ordinance. He says he is especially interested in looking at the current code and any changes from an enforcement perspective.
“I feel like the starting point in this is to restructure the ordinance section so that it actually matches how it's used and fixes any gaps in how it's used because I don't know how you use it in its current form,” Cirillo said.
Permanent signs are handled through the typical permitting process, said Archie Byers, a building inspector with the city. That process involves a review of the proposed sign and a chance for city inspectors to make sure the final construction matches the plans and the city’s rules.
That prompted Cirillo to question whether the Ordinance Committee needed to even look at changes to the code for permanent signs.
“Do we want to tackle the whole permit and commercial sign thing at all, or do we just want to narrow our focus and make sure that the temporary sign issue is not addressed in a way that is a problem?” he asked.
Byers says that the issue of temporary signs is usually enforced by simply picking up signs that violate city laws, like those that are placed in city rights-of-way.
“It keeps it on a friendly level and no hard feelings,” he said. “Your signs are there, pick them up, please don't put them in these locations, thank you for your consideration.”
While concerns about freedom of speech issues prompted a look at the code, Byers told committee members that code enforcement officers are very sensitive to that concern.
“Beyond vulgar language or something that is prohibited in our ordinance, we aren't going to touch First Amendment rights for what you say or don't say in your sign,” Byers said. “That's a third rail that is just not going to get us anywhere.”
Members of the Ordinance Committee will continue looking at the city’s sign laws, with more discussion expected at their next meeting later this month.
