This application was Approved by the City Council on October 26, 2023. Click here to view the meeting recording.
Applicants: Jason Reynolds – City Manager
Background: In 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States in Reed v. Town of Gilbert, Ariz. ruled that content-based sign restrictions are an unconstitutional restriction of the First Amendment unless the government can show that the regulations are narrowly tailored to further a “compelling government interest”. Because the sign ordinance in Gilbert treated sign types differently based on the type of message they contained, the court ruled that Gilbert’s sign ordinance was content-based because the restrictions that apply are based on the content of the sign and vary based on the sign’s content.
Section 5.79 of the ULDC presents a potential issue in light of Reed. Section 5.79 prohibits all off-premises signs except for (1) temporary directional signs, (2) political signs; and (3) city-sponsored event signs. Similar to Gilbert’s ordinance, these sign types have differing regulations in terms of location and time frames for display. According to the City Attorney’s office, this section is unlikely to pass Constitutional muster. In order to avoid a Constitutional challenge, staff recommends amending Section 5.79 of the ULDC to allow an exception for all temporary signs, regardless of the type, to be permitted both on and off-premises with a limit of 2 per location and for no longer than seven days in any 30-day period. This amendment would not change any prohibitions on placing signs in the right-of-way, which is not considered private property.
Comment Form - Temporary Signs Text Amendment
Comment Form - Temporary Signs Text Amendment
CLOSED: This survey has concluded.
