Let's Ban or Limit Political Yard Signs...

I just see political signs as being a waste in a campaign. They're expensive and do disappear - sometimes due to natural causes and over a period of three months that can mean even more money. Which means more fundraising and increased reliance on PAC contributions.

Signs don't vote, people do.

Some candidates insist that a homeowner put one in their yard, etc. - which is uncomfortable for some people to accept. I also know that many businesses along Dixie were told that even if they didn't want them there, they had to stay - the reason given was that it was a "City thing" or that it was in the right-of-way, etc. They are a pain to pick up afterwards and none of them are really environmentally friendly - a lot of waste stream created for a very short period of time. And they create a lot of visual clutter. They also clue in the opposition of who your supporters are.

It also encourages school yard behavior "oh, he touched my sign..."

Now, if we prohibited them entirely, there might be constitutional issues - freedom of speech, etc.

I don't know if it will go anywhere, but that was my pet peeve during the election - anything related to signs.

I brought this up at the City Commission meeting last night under Public Comment on non-agendaed items.