Free speech campaign wants to lift sign ban

By Paul Condra
University of Washington Daily
March 4, 1999

A local free speech activist group is trying to repeal a portion of the 1994 city ordinance against posting fliers and signs on city lampposts, trees and telephone poles.

The initiative, created by Free Speech Seattle, would not completely change the 1994 city ordinance banning the posting of signs on public property, but it would strike the words "lamppost" and "pole" from the list of illegal locations for posting signs.

They have about 175 days to gather the 19,000 signatures needed to send the initiative to the city ballot. They currently have a couple hundred, said Ben Livingston, Free Speech Seattle treasurer.

Livingston said the initiative is also partially intended to get young voters more involved in the political climate of the community.

Livingston drafted the initiative in December.

"I wanted something that wouldn't be too complex," he said.

Free Speech Seattle said the ban represents a violation of the Constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech. It has damaged the local entertainment industry because few bands have the money to advertise through mainstream media, the group said.

In addition, lampposts are a public resource that should be available for the public to use.

"We believe free speech isn't free if you have to pay for it," Livingston said.

The rest of the ordinance banning postering on trees, traffic signs, bridges, bus shelters and other city property would stand.

Opponents of the initiative say postering creates a safety issue to city workers who climb poles to repair them.

Sharon Bennett, spokeswoman for Seattle City Light, said line workers wear one-eighth inch spikes to grip the wood, while posters can be up to four inches deep. The safety hazard prompted the city ban on postering.

"They can slide down and receive serious injuries," she said.

Free Speech Seattle's initiative will be the city's third encounter with postering. Prior to the 1994 ban against hanging signs on city property, the city attorney passed an ordinance against signs, citing "visual blight" to the city.

Public defender Neil Fox defeated the 1984 ban as a free speech violation.