Tag Archives: HB 3785

State Legislation, State of Illinois

Quinn says time limits on campaign signs violate free speech

1 Comment

Following up my last post, I ran across this press release from Governor Quinn’s office explaining his support for HB 3785:

Governor Quinn Signs Legislation Protecting Free Speech in Illinois
Municipalities Cannot Restrict Political Signs on Residential Properties

CHICAGO – June 3, 2010. Governor Pat Quinn today signed a bill into law that prevents municipalities throughout Illinois from restricting the display of political campaign signs on residential property at any time.

“Government has no place restricting free speech,” said Governor Quinn. “This bill will protect the First Amendment rights of residents across Illinois and strengthens participatory democracy for us all.”

House Bill 3785 prohibits Illinois’ municipalities from restricting the display of outdoor political campaign signs on residential property during any period of time. Under current Illinois law, municipalities may pass and enforce local ordinances establishing time periods during which residents or landowners may display political campaign signs on their property. Under the new law, municipalities may still place reasonable restrictions on the size of such signs.

The new law brings Illinois into compliance with several court cases, including City of Ladue v. Gilleo. The 1994 U.S. Supreme Court decision affirmed that outdoor political yard signs are protected First Amendment speech and municipalities may not prohibit their display on residential property.

The legislation, sponsored by Rep. Michael Tryon (R-Crystal Lake) and Sen. Pamela Althoff (R-McHenry), passed the Illinois General Assembly nearly unanimously and was supported by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Illinois. It takes effect on January 1.

In a statement filed with the Illinois House Elections and Campaign Reform Committee, the ACLU of Illinois stated that, “yard signs are a traditional, effective and protected way for home owners to communicate with their neighbors and passersby about political elections and public issues.” The organization also argued that municipalities should not be able to prohibit the display of such signs at any time since many political candidates announce their candidacies long before an election takes place.

If you’re interested, you can read the 1994 Supreme Court ruling by clicking here. It seems odd that this ruling has been around for 16 years, but Illinois is only recently concerned about complying with it.

City of Peoria, State Legislation, State of Illinois

State eliminates time limits for campaign signs

16 Comments

Roof-top signs, “floppy-man” signs, and temporary banners were just some of the signs discussed at Tuesday’s Sign Review Committee meeting. But one thing the committee can do little about is political signs.

A new Illinois law set to take effect January 1, 2011, limits the city’s home rule authority to limit how long political signs can be displayed. HB3785 “[p]rovides that a municipality may place reasonable restrictions on the size of outdoor political campaign signs on residential property,” but also “[p]rovides that no municipality may prohibit the display of outdoor political campaign signs on residential property during any period of time.” The bill was passed unanimously by the Illinois House and Senate and signed by the Governor on June 3. The city currently requires that political campaign signs “be removed within seven days after an election.” That will have to be changed. Apparently, campaign signs can be left up year round starting next year. Won’t that make the city look fantastic?

Most of the discussion on other temporary signs revolved around how better to enforce the current ordinance during a time when the city is cutting staff. Ideas included lowering or eliminating the fee (currently $75) to apply for a temporary sign license (to improve compliance), utilizing city workers who are already driving around the city (such as police or public works employees) to call in violations to the sign ordinance when they see them, and partnering with printers and sign companies to educate those purchasing signs about the city’s rules.

The committee also recommended permitting inflatable signs so they can be approved administratively through the licensing process instead of through the Zoning Commission via the special use process. However, if permitted in this way, the change ordinance would add size limitations and prohibit “floppy man” types of signs (here’s an example).