Bernson Plan Would Force Payment for Sign Removal

The election is over, but a plethora of political signs still clutter the streets of Los Angeles.

To combat the problem, San Fernando Valley Councilman Hal Bernson has proposed requiring individuals or organizations whose names appear on signs illegally posted on public property to pay for their removal. The proposal would apply to all illegal signs, including those advertising garage sales and real estate.

The city attorney has questioned its legality. But the plan, which was the subject of a City Council hearing last week, has been endorsed by the council’s Public Works Committee. It still must be approved by the full council and Mayor Tom Bradley.

Bernson’s proposal also would permit property owners to remove signs posted illegally on public property in front of their homes. Existing law allows only the police and public works departments to remove illegal signs.

Private Property

It is legal to place signs on private property if the owner gives permission, but many people also post them on public property, such as utility poles, in violation of the law.

Last year, the city took down 48,500 signs of all types at a cost of $3.39 a sign, said William Bradford, chief inspector for the bureau of street maintenance in the Public Works Department.

Those efforts “did not come close to ridding the city of the blight such signs create,” City Administrative Officer Keith Comrie said.

“People are placing signs on public property, and we don’t have the means to take them down,” said Bernson, who after past elections has paid 10 cents for each campaign poster turned in to his office.

Existing law says that people can be cited for illegally placing signs only if they are caught in the act, making enforcement difficult. Only one person was prosecuted last year for violating the law, which is a misdemeanor.

Bernson’s proposal, patterned after a Detroit ordinance, establishes a principle in the law called “rebuttable presumption, which assumes that the party who is benefiting from the sign can be held responsible for the removal,” Bradford said.

“The hope is that all the cost of pulling the signs down will be applied to the people who put them up,” he added.

Assistant City Atty. Anthony Alperin, however, has expressed concern about the legality of the proposal.

“We haven’t been presented with any factual basis for believing that these presumptions are true,” he said. For example, there must be a factual basis for presuming a person who lists his property for sale, or whose name or face appears on a poster, is responsible for putting up the illegal sign.

“Is it the artist who is performing at the concert, or is it the company that runs the concert hall?” Alperin asked.

The city, however, has been sued in the past over sign controls.

In 1984, a Los Angeles City Council candidate challenged the ban on political signs on public property, claiming it violated the constitutional right of free expression. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the law, saying cities have a legitimate interest in removing “visual clutter” and traffic hazards from municipal property.

The candidate who filed the suit said that the ordinance contributed to his poor showing in the race which, ironically, was won by Bernson.

Tom Carnahan, president of the San Fernando Valley Board of Realtors, said that he has not had time to study Bernson’s proposal. But, he said, he believes the current regulations are too restrictive.

“We need to do something to keep the streets clean,” he said. “Yet, the ordinance, as it now stands, is not in the best interests of buyers or sellers.”

Carnahan said the board has taken steps to try to reduce sign clutter. Under a board rule, real-estate agents can only post a sign one hour before an open house and must take it down one hour after.

Joel Palmer, president of the Tarzana Property Owners Assn., said he welcomes strengthening of the law. Palmer, who has been dubbed the “sign vigilante” because he has ripped down hundreds of illegal signs, said he also believes the city needs to better enforce the current ordinance.