Moses Lake city manager addresses sign ordinance

GUEST EDITORIAL

MOSES LAKE — As with most issues, there is usually two sides to the story. Such is the case with the current debater regarding placing signs on Moses Lake city owned property or right-of-way abutting city owned property.

Only a court can declare an ordinance or law unconstitutional, not a lawyer like Ms. Ashley Ries nor an organization like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). They may have an opinion on the constitutionality of an ordinance or law, but it is just that, their opinion.

The city’s legal counsel has reviewed the city’s current sign ordinance and the proposed amendment to the sign ordinance and, in legal counsel’s opinion, the current ordinance and the proposed amended sign ordinance are constitutional. So, a difference of opinion definitely exists. The city’s lawyers disagree with the analysis and conclusion of both Ms. Ashley Ries and the ACLU.

The city’s legal counsel, in coming to its opinion, reviewed the relevant U.S. Supreme Court cases and the Washington State Supreme Court cases, commentary from various sources and authors, and reviewed ordinances from many jurisdictions in Washington and from around the country. Additionally, others were consulted about the matter. All in all, in the end, the advise to the city council from the city’s attorney is that the council can legally prevent signs from being placed on city owned property or in the right-of-way abutting city owned property but does the council want to?

One thing that was discovered when the city legal counsel was doing its research was that legal counsel could find no city in Washington that out right allowed signs to be placed on city owned property. Many prevented placing signs in the right-of-way abutting city owned property. One practical reason is that signs might be placed in parks, open spaces, green spaces, around city hall, the library, city well sites, lift stations, or water reservoirs. The other reason is that there is a statute that may prevent the placing of election or campaign signs on public property. To try to get some advise on just what the statute means, the city council directed that the city ask one of our state legislatures to ask the state’s attorney general what, in his opinion, the statute means. The request has been made to one of our legislators and the request will be sent to the attorney general.

In the meantime, the city council delayed considering the proposed amendment to the city’s current sign ordinance. The proposed amendment to the sign ordinance remains tabled until the attorney general’s opinion on the meaning of the statute has been received.

So that being the case, the current sign ordinance and the city’s current rules and regulations on placing signs on city owned property or right-of-way abutting city owned property remain in place. That means a sign can be placed on city property with the permission of the city council. Any sign placed in right-of-way abutting city owned property requires permission from the city council. Political, election, or campaign signs can be placed in right-of-way abutting private property with the permission of the owner/occupier of the private property. As a side note, the State of Washington, Department of Transportation prohibits the placement of any signs on its property or right-of-way.

Another point needs to be made. While there is a group of people advocating for the placement of signs on city owned property and right-of-way abutting city owned property, city councilman and city staff over the years have heard groups and individuals who think the placement of some signs on city owned property or right-of-way abutting city owned property is inappropriate for a variety of reasons. So, again, there are two sides of the story with competing interests providing their ideas.

In the end, after the attorney general’s opinion has been received and reviewed, the city council may consider its options, keeping in mind the various ideas about placement or prohibition of signs on city owned property or right-of-way abutting city owned property. Until then, the current ordinance remains in place with individuals and groups being able to place a sign on city owned property or right-of-way abutting city owned property with permission of the city council.