City Charging Candidates for ‘Unwanted’ Posters

Call it “Postergate,” a scandal full of illegal activity and steadfast denials that reaches from our own Los Angeles City Hall to the hallowed halls of the White House.

Some of the best-known politicos in the land have been implicated--household names such as Bill Clinton and George Bush--as well as Los Angeles mayoral candidates Michael Woo and Richard Riordan.

All of them--and dozens more--have been billed by the city of Los Angeles for flouting Section 28.04 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code. That means they or their agents illegally posted campaign signs on public property--telephone poles, light fixtures and even palm trees.

“Is this an issue?” sniffed a Riordan spokesman. To the city’s Bureau of Street Maintenance, you better believe it is.

The cost of removing the “political graffiti,” as city officials describe the posters, is $194.20 for the first sign and $1.60 for each additional transgression. That is just for stapled or tacked signs. Anyone with the temerity to use glue has to pay $48.60 a pop.

President Clinton has paid his $631 bill for the 274 errant signs put up during last fall’s presidential race, but Bush has not and the city intends to get tough--even though Bush had only one offending sign and nobody is accusing the former President of putting it up himself.

The message from the city to the former President: Pay the $194.20 you owe or the city will haul you into Small Claims Court.

Woo and Riordan have received bills for their signs too.

Woo owes $391.60 for signs that were illegally posted on Crenshaw and Los Feliz boulevards, while Riordan has $863.20 outstanding for misplaced “Tough Enough to Turn L.A. Around” placards.

The multimillionaire businessman, whose campaign says it has posted 10,000 signs citywide, has paid $1,572.80 for 20 earlier sign violations. Riordan will pay any other fees promptly, a spokesman said.

The Woo people say they will settle their debts too.

“Many people consider these things to be litter but it’s an important way to make sure your campaign has visibility citywide,” Woo spokesman Garry South said. He noted that most candidates use professional sign companies to post and remove the placards. But South said it is harder to control the gung-ho volunteers who go out on sign-hanging sprees.

Mayoral candidates are not the only recent violators of note.

Councilman Zev Yaroslavsky has a debt of his own--$211.80 for 12 signs posted illegally on Beverly Glen Boulevard. A spokeswoman said Yaroslavsky will pay because the city needs the money, not because his campaign takes responsibility.

Councilwoman Rita Walters ($200.60), Councilman Mike Hernandez ($194.20) and Councilwoman Joan Milke Flores ($202.20) also received bills--as yet unpaid--for their reelection efforts. Rudy Svorinich, who is challenging Flores in the runoff election, owes $390, the city said.

All candidates had to sign a pledge when they entered the race saying they knew about the sign law.

In other council races, Richard Alarcon and Lyle Hall in the 7th District owe $826.40 and $404.40, respectively. The 3rd District race is one-sided, with Councilwoman Joy Picus free and clear and Laura Chick $587.40 in the hole.

Jackie Goldberg, who is hoping to replace Woo in the 13th District, has paid half of her $388.40 debt; her rival, Tom LaBonge, has escaped the scandal unscathed so far, according to city records.

Politicians are not the only offenders. City workers have uncovered hundreds of thousands of illegal signs in recent years and have hauled more than 1,000 scofflaws into administrative hearings or Small Claims Court.

There is not any jail time involved for illegally posting a sign and this is one crime that does not appear on a rap sheet. But the per-sign fees have generated more than $300,000 for the city in recent years. The money is funneled back to the city’s street maintenance division and the three two-member crews that shuttle across the city’s 469 square miles in minivans in search of signs.

But the accused do not always confess. The treasurer for former mayoral candidate Julian Nava is vehemently denying responsibility for any illegally posted Nava signs and contesting the $375 fine. “Some individual trying to sabotage the campaign must have put up fake campaign signs,” Michael Collins said.

Homeless activist and onetime mayoral hopeful Ted Hayes, who plastered the city with hundreds of posters, said he has not received the city’s invoices totaling $1,800. When he does, though, Hayes does not intend to pay, he said.

“Why pick on the little guys?” Hayes asked. “They should applaud us for trying.”

The city has heard endless excuses and must frequently battle with alleged violators in lengthy closed-door hearings.

The law, which has been upheld all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, uses the legal theory of “rebuttable presumption,” which means that the bill goes to the person whose name is on the sign. Melrose Larry Green, the zany mayoral wanna-be who won 0.14% of the vote in last month’s primary, was shocked when his $243.80 bill .arrived this month. He denies that he or any of his agents stapled “Larry Green for Mayor” signs on 32 Highland Avenue palm trees.

“I didn’t do it and I don’t have any agents,” Green said. “Maybe it was the TreePeople.”