Council scoffs at hefty fines for “sign jail”
By Joel Wittnebel/The Oshawa Express
A new rule that could cost candidates thousands of dollars post-election this fall has been derided by local councillors.
At the most recent meeting of the Corporate Services committee, Oshawa councillors had strong words for a staff recommendation that could see municipal election candidates paying hefty fines for any discarded campaign signs, or signs placed in illegal spots.
The proposed change to the city’s election signs bylaw, an attempt to cut down on nuisance signs that can cause a “visual blight” in the city, and charge candidates for not picking up old or discarded signage, staff proposed setting a $60 collection fee for any election sign placed in an improper location, along with a $5 storage fee for every day the city holds the signs for a given candidate. In previous years, these signs would be held for candidates without charge, and candidates had the opportunity to call and check to see if any of their signs were being held in what councillors referred to as “sign jail.”
However, the new fees had many councillors concerned, as during campaign period, with so many signs out in the community, mischief, weather and other factors can play a role in where signs end up.
“Even in a ward situation, when you have more than one candidate running you could very well end up with your signs goodness knows where,” said Councillor Gail Bates, noting that all candidates deal with signs being desecrated or moved.
The same was said by Councillor Amy McQuaid-England, who noted that many of her signs went missing during the 2014 campaign and have been resurfacing ever since.
“At this point, there’s no way to tell who is moving those signs,” she said.
However, city clerk Andrew Brouwer noted that the proposed changes to the city’s bylaw was actually putting it in line with the Region of Durham’s bylaw that has been in place for some time. That information did little to deter councillors from slamming the new proposed changes, taking particular ire with the fact that there was no policy in the new bylaw to even notify candidates when their signs had been picked up and being held in the city’s lockup.
Mayor John Henry noted that charging candidates without notice for a bylaw infraction would be a slippery slope for the city’s other bylaws.
“If we can do this with no notice, imagine the problems we could clean up and put on the tax bills…because that’s where it’s going to go,” he said, referring to things like waste and property maintenance infractions where citizens are given notice and some time to come in compliance.
Councillor Doug Sanders agreed.
“We give notification to everybody that gets a bylaw infraction so that they can come into compliance,” he says. “I think there’s a real challenge for this current bylaw and the way it’s going to be implemented if it passes.”
For that reason, the councillors initially voted in favour of inserting a provision to have candidates notified when their signs are picked up and allow for a two-day grace period for the signs to be picked up without charge.
The bottom line, councillors agreed that there was just little control over the signs once they’re placed in the community, and charging candidates without notice just didn’t sit well.
“I think there’s a lot of things that are out of your control on this,” said Councillor John Neal.
Following the discussion, McQuaid-England put forward an amendment to cap the charges at $150, regardless of the number of signs collected by city staff. The amendment eventually carried.
Staff also attempted to have the time councillors were allotted to collect their signs following the election reduced from seven days to three. However, following an amendment from Councillor Sanders, this was taken out as well.
When the motion appeared before councillors on June 25 for a final vote, the entire motion was eventually quashed leaving the situation as the status quo.