State law brings placement of campaign signs into question

With a new state law that lifts restrictions on the placement of political yard signs under legal question, a city ordinance directly in conflict with the law remains on the books. But with changes in the pipeline, city attorneys say that Lawrence residents needn’t worry too much whether they should be following state statute or city ordinance when placing political yard signs this election season.

The main question is whether political yard signs can be placed in public right-of-ways, such as the area of land between the sidewalk and the street. The state law allows such placement, but the city ordinance states the right-of-way is off limits. The city didn’t finalize an update to its ordinance to bring it in line with state law because of a U.S. Supreme Court case out of Arizona, in which elements also present in the Kansas law were ruled unconstitutional, according to Randy Larkin, city attorney of planning and development and land use.

For now, Lawrence residents don’t need to try to pick between the two. Larkin said while the city prefers signs not be placed in the public right-of-way, it isn’t enforcing the ordinance for the time being and that signs won’t be removed unless they present a hazard to drivers.

“Basically what we’re doing is taking things that are hazards out of the right-of-way,” Larkin said. “So if it’s in the sight triangle or it’s in the median or if it’s a distraction to drivers, then we’re removing them.”

This is the first year for the state law that prohibited cities and counties from regulating the placement of political yard signs, which voided restrictions sometimes put in place by cities that limit the number or location of signs. But not long after the state law passed, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a somewhat similar ordinance in the case of Reed v. Town of Gilbert, Ariz.

In the Reed case, a local ordinance prohibited displaying outdoor signs without a permit but made several exceptions based on the content of the sign. Specifically, the law applied different restrictions to “ideological” signs, campaign signs and “temporary directional” signs. But the Supreme Court ruled that having different policies based on the content of signs was unconstitutional.

That ruling also makes elements of the Kansas law unconstitutional.

“You have to look at it and read it to determine whether it’s a political sign, so that’s a problem,” Larkin said.

The ruling also affects elements of Lawrence’s ordinance. The city’s standing ordinance has exemptions from its permit process based on content, which would not be allowed according to the Reed ruling, Larkin explained. The city is rewriting the ordinance to bring it into compliance with the Supreme Court case, but also including modern updates, such as policies on electronic signs, Larkin said.

“You can’t make your regulations based upon what’s written on the sign, so we have certain things in there, and everybody does, but we have to go back and change it,” Larkin said.

The draft of the new ordinance will instead make rules for all signs, including restricting them from being placed in the right-of-way. Larkin said the new ordinance should go to the City Commission for review early next year.