FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION REPORT: ELECTION PROCEDURES BYLAW NO. 989, 2018 – PROPOSED AMENDMENTS: ELECTION SIGNS AND LOGO USAGE

ELECTION PROCEDURES BYLAW NO. 989, 2018 – PROPOSED AMENDMENTS: ELECTION SIGNS AND LOGO USAGE

DISCUSSION:

Election Signs:

Staff have discussed sign-related challenges with other Corporate Officers in the region to explore bylaw amendments to ensure clarity, safety and reduced potential visual pollution. For example, some municipalities elsewhere in the province:

• limit sign size and height on public property;
• establish specific public locations on which election signs may be located;
• prohibit signs on boulevards adjacent to municipal and park properties;
• stipulate distances from the edge of roadways and fire hydrants; and
• describe provisions for siting election signs on private properties.

Information distributed in the Town’s Nomination Package for candidates, describes that election signs are exempt from the permit requirement under Sign Bylaw No. 950 and may be placed no sooner than thirty days before the election date and removed within forty-eight hours after the election date. The Nomination Package also describes that signs cannot be located on municipal properties which include the Town Hall, Public Safety Building or on the Town’s parks, trails, and open spaces. Information provided also notes that any damage (holes in boulevards, municipal sprinkler systems, etc.) by the installation or removal of election signs will be invoiced to the candidate.

Candidates in provincial and federal elections, as well as school board candidates who would not receive the Town’s Nomination Package, are sent the Town’s election signs information so they are aware of timelines, siting, invoicing for damage, as well as who to contact should they have questions.

As described in the June 2019 Committee of the Whole report, signage is a very visual representation of one’s campaign and considered by some a significant part of a candidate’s campaign. Despite the Sign Bylaw provisions and other guidelines, there can still be election sign concerns expressed by the public, other agencies, candidates, and third-party sponsors. These concerns include:

• siting on municipal properties, parks, trails and open spaces;
• affixing to utility poles which in turn creates a safety hazard for line crews and is contrary to WorkSafe BC’s Occupational Health and Safety Regulations;
• obstructing sightlines for drivers, pedestrians and cyclists;
• damaging boulevards and municipal irrigation systems; and
• misrepresenting property owners’ political views when signs for candidates or organizations they do not support are posted on boulevards adjacent to their properties.

The election sign proposals in this report are aimed at exploring clarity and safety and reducing visual pollution.

Options for Consideration:

1. Prohibit Election Signs on All Municipal Property

Currently the posting of election signs is not permitted at municipal facilities such as Town Hall, the Public Safety Building or on municipal property such as Town parks, trails, and open spaces but election signs are permitted to be posted on municipal boulevards – technically including the boulevards in front of municipal facilities, parks, trails, and open spaces. This option proposes the prohibition of election signs on all municipal property, including municipal boulevards. The City of New Westminster and the City of Burnaby use this approach.

At its March 5, 2019 meeting, Council declared a climate emergency, committed to work towards carbon neutrality by 2030, and make climate action a priority. As election signs are typically made from plastics – despite incumbents often reusing their signs – they are still environmentally harmful as new candidates will want to have their own signs and replacement signs for incumbents are produced if signs continue to be permitted.

In addition to the environmental benefits, the prohibition of election signs on municipal property would have the added benefits of:

• increasing safety with fewer distractions to drivers, cyclists and pedestrians;
• reducing visual pollution in the community;
• protecting workers as they would not be affixed to utility poles; and
• eliminating the risk of damage to municipal underground infrastructure.

If signs were restricted from municipal property, they would still be permitted on private property – unless Council determines otherwise.

Finally, information about local government candidates – links to a campaign website, Twitter, Instagram, Facebook – would continue to be available on the Town’s website from the time a candidate submits nomination documents until the election.

If an outright prohibition is not Council’s preferred option, there are other options to consider that look at locations and sign size or a combination thereof:

2. Prohibit Election Signs on Municipal Boulevards Adjacent to Municipal Facilities, Parks, Trails, and Open Spaces and Within 100-metres of a Polling Station

On election day and advance voting days, candidates are required to remove election signs within a 100 metre buffer from polling stations. In the morning, prior to the opening of polling stations on election day and advance voting days, election officials walk these routes to ensure all election signs have been removed.

This option provides that election signs can continue to be placed on municipal boulevards but that there be a clear provision prohibiting election signs from being placed on boulevards adjacent to municipal facilities, parks, trails, open spaces as well as within the 100 metre buffer zone of locations that are to be used for polling for the entire campaign period.

3. Establish Specific Public Locations or “Election Sign Zones” where Election Signs may be Located

When placing election signs, consideration must be given to pedestrian and traffic safety, proximity to school zones, and high-profile locations. Therefore, another option may be the creation of “sign zones” whereby election signs are limited to only one sign on the municipal boulevard per sign zone location per candidate such as followed in the City of Coquitlam.

If this option were selected, staff would develop a schedule to Election Procedures Bylaw No. 989, 2018 to set out specific zones in the Town where the installation of election signs would be permitted on the boulevard. A few higher profile locations, distributed throughout the community, could be identified for these sign zones and a sign size limit could be set. This approach would serve to limit visual pollution. Municipalities using this approach include the Cities of Coquitlam, North Vancouver, Port Coquitlam, and Port Moody.

4. Allow Election Signs on Municipal Boulevard with Requirement for Adjacent Property Owner/Occupier’s Consent

There is some concern around the siting of election signs on municipal boulevards in front of private property that is done without the consent of the owner/occupier adjacent to that piece of boulevard – particularly when they may not support that candidate or third-party sponsor.

One option would be to allow the use of municipal boulevards for the placement of an election sign (could limit to just one per private property frontage and stipulate a maximize size) but require the adjacent owner/occupier, including a strata corporation, to consent to that posting. The District of Oak Bay is an example of a municipality that uses this approach.

It should be noted that complications with this approach include properties with more than one occupier. However, this approach may reduce the likelihood of complaints and the number of signs posted.

This option may not be required if election signs are permitted to be posted on private property only and not on municipal boulevards.

5. Limit Sign Size and Height on Municipal Boulevards

If election signs continue to be permitted on municipal boulevards, the visual pollution and distractions that they pose can be limited through the establishment of maximum size and height requirements. Limiting sign size would also make the playing field for candidates more equal and avoid “sign wars” while reducing environmental and aesthetic impacts. This addition to the Election Procedures Bylaw would simplify and add clarity to the existing bylaw, enabling a better understanding of election sign regulations by candidates. The City of Coquitlam, District of Oak Bay and the City of West Vancouver use this approach.

If this option is pursued, staff recommend that election signs on public property be restricted to a sign having only two sides, or faces, and each side or face of the sign area not to exceed 0.61 metres by 0.61 metres (2 ft. by 2 ft.). The height is recommended to not exceed 1.1 metres high (3.6 ft.).

6. Add Safety Requirements Such as Distances from Edge of Roadways and Fire Hydrants

Election signs can be distracting and obstruct the sightlines of drivers, pedestrians or cyclists. It is proposed that should election signs continue to be permitted on municipal boulevards, the Bylaw be amended to include language that emphasizes safety such as:

• signs cannot be illuminated, animated, rotating, flashing or have moving lights or other electrical features;
• signs cannot have attachments such as balloons, kites, an electronic message centre or inflatable devices;
• signs cannot interfere with traffic sightlines at street intersections or with the safety of cyclists and pedestrians;
• signs cannot be placed within two metres of a fire hydrant;
• signs are not permitted on any vehicles or trailers attached to vehicles;
• signs cannot be placed within 60 centimetres from the roadway or face of curb; and
• signs deemed to be a sightline hazard or obstruction will be removed immediately.

Several municipalities, particularly in the Lower Mainland, have similar provisions though the distances listed to fire hydrants and from the edge of roadway listed above include feedback from the Town’s Fire Chief and Director of Engineering respectively.

7. Provisions for Siting Election Signs on Private Property

Currently, election signs may be located on private property with the permission of the property owner. Regulations regarding the size, placement, and permitted dates for posting election signs apply to those posted on private property in the same manner as those located on public property.

Should Council wish to still allow election signs on private property, it may be useful to consider a restriction on the number and size of signs on private property to preserve neighbourhood aesthetics. Specifically, staff propose one sign having only two sides, or faces, with each sign not to exceed 0.61 metres by 0.61 metres (2 ft. by 2 ft.) and a height of maximum 1.1 metres (3.6 ft.) per property. The installation and removal of election signs would be consistent with the provisions for election signs in Sign Bylaw No. 950.

Use of the Town Logo

Currently, as part of the Nomination Package, candidates are asked to not use the Town’s logo or any likeness/elements from it in any campaign materials or on election signs. The intent of this restriction is to avoid confusion for voters who may interpret usage of the logo as a municipal endorsement of a particular candidate. Instead, candidates are advised that they may use both the name of the Town – as this conveys where the candidate is running – as well as images (photographs for example) from around the Town - though these images must not include the Town’s logo.

While this logo information is conveyed to candidates in the Nomination Package, it is advisable to reinforce this requirement through an amendment to Election Procedures Bylaw No. 989, 2018. This can be done with a clause such as:

“Other than as authorized in writing by the Town, no person shall embed or place on any election sign or other election advertising, a logo, trademark or official mark, in whole or in part, owned or licensed by the Town.”

CONCLUSION:

In conclusion, there are many aspects to consider with election signs – location, size, height, number, safety, and the basic question of whether Council should permit them at all. The following options – or a combination of these options – could be put forward as amendments to the Election Procedures Bylaw:

1. prohibit election signs on all municipal property;
2. prohibit election signs on municipal boulevards adjacent to municipal facilities, parks, trails, and open spaces and within 100-metres of a polling station;
3. establish specific public locations or “Election Sign Zones” where election signs may be located;
4. allow election signs on municipal boulevard with a requirement for adjacent property owner/occupier’s consent;
5. limit sign size and height on municipal boulevards;
6. add safety requirements; and/or
7. provisions for siting election signs on private property.

Should Council choose to amend the Election Procedures Bylaw, changes would apply to all election signs (local government (including school board), provincial and federal).

Candidate information for View Royal’s elections will be made available, regardless of option(s) selected on the Town’s website.

TIME CRITICAL:

For amendments to the Election Procedures Bylaw to apply to the 2022 election, the bylaw must be adopted at least fifty-six (56) days before the first day of the nomination period for the October 2022 election.

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT the Committee provide input on the suggested election sign options as described in the January 22, 2021 report entitled “Election Procedures Bylaw No. 989, 2018 – Proposed Amendments: Election Signs and Logo Usage” from the Corporate Officer and Deputy Corporate Officer;

AND FURTHER THAT the Committee recommend to Council that the following language regarding the use of the Town’s logo be inserted into the Election Procedures Bylaw 989, 2018: “Other than as authorized in writing by the Town, no person shall embed or place on any election sign or other election advertising, a logo, trademark or official mark, in whole or in part, owned or licensed by the Town.”.

SUBMITTED BY: S. Jones, Corporate Officer

SUBMITTED BY: E. Bolster, Deputy Corporate Officer

REVIEWED BY: K. Anema, Chief Administrative Officer