34 South Main St., Attleboro, MA - Directions - (508) 222-7000
Home News Sports Features classifieds milestones services photos tvlistings cars jobs realestate subscribe
News

Signs spark Norfolk tempest



Walter Byron of Norfolk tried to change the town's bylaws regarding political signs like this one. (Sun Chronicle file photo)




Resident pushes to ease political placards bylaw
NORFOLK - There might be no elections on the horizon, but political signs have surfaced as a subject of contention in town.

A resident was unsuccessful in trying to push through a bylaw change for the signs at the recent town meeting.

The petitioner, Walter Byron of Fruit Street, contends existing sign regulations are too restrictive, and argues the window of time for signs to go up and come down is too short.

"This is really free speech, supporting a particular candidate," Byron said at town meeting.

The resident said last week he was told by a representative from the town's building department he had to take down his two Barack Obama signs around Labor Day or would face a fine.
Byron took the signs down and put them up in October to adhere to the town bylaw, which calls for candidate signs for local and national elections to be put up no earlier than 30 days before an election and removed no later than two days after the vote.

Bryon's proposed bylaw would have allowed for two signs, for presidential elections, to be put up the day candidates accept their party's nomination for office and removed no later than two days after the election.

Selectman Rob Garrity, a former zoning board member, adamantly opposed the proposal on town meeting floor, but on the grounds of what the existing rules spelled out.

"This is an unconstitutional bylaw," Garrity said, referring to the limit of two signs. "You are infringing on my political speech. Only two candidates. What do I do, hold a raffle?"

Advisory board members agreed with Byron's sentiments, but recommended the request be indefinitely postponed, saying the request was ambiguous because the expanded time frame for signs could possibly apply to candidates in local, as well as national elections.

Resident and local attorney Jay Talerman said the proposal might cause more problems - and be unconstitutional - by differentiating between political races.

"We often get in trouble amending on the fly," Town Administrator Jack Hathaway said, successfully recommending handing over the matter to the bylaw study committee and returning with an amended bylaw at the fall town meeting.

"I haven't given up the fight. I did get a lot of support from the advisory board," Byron said.

STEPHEN PETERSON covers Norfolk for The Sun Chronicle. He can be reached at 508-236-0377 or at speterson@thesunchronicle.com.


 


*Member ID:
*Password:
  Forgot Your Password?
 
View Comments » 7 comment(s) « Hide Comments

Southern View wrote on Jun 30, 2009 5:37 PM:

" Hey, Walter, you live on an appropriately named street (Fruit). I believe in free speech and you certainly are within your 1st Amendment rights. However, too bad there isn't a law prohibiting stupidity, cause you'd certainly be in violation of that law. "

chiman1111 wrote on Jun 30, 2009 4:57 PM:

" wxman,
I guess what I am saying is that if there are people that are that sensitive about things as miniscule as this then we are in big trouble for when something more serious happens in our community. Its not that I condone it or not its just that I dont care either way. "

wxman wrote on Jun 30, 2009 2:59 PM:

" Unfortunately, there's no such thing as "free speech". There's plenty we can't "say". Can't swear on TV, can't call someone a derogatory slur, can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater.

The problem is we've let the cat out of the bag years ago. The more the govt regulates what can and cannot be said, the more it tries to regulate speech.

Chiman talks about "offensive". Subjective term. What's offensive to one might not be to another. Look at the posters the abortion protesters show on 118 in Attleboro.

I personally despise political campaign signs. I don't care who you support and it should be your private matter. As a neighbor, I sure as heck don't want to see any brazen sign in my neighborhood, regardless if it is commercial, politcal, or personal.

But that doesn't mean there should be a law telling you to take it down. Again, have some respect for your neighbor and this flight doesn't even leave the ground. A thoughtful neighbor (or a normal person) would've taken the sign down back in November. "

chiman1111 wrote on Jun 30, 2009 2:38 PM:

" So... now people are upset because someone has a sign on there property? It reads Obama? Are you kidding me? People really have too much time on there hands to even make this into a story! This is a complete waste of time and ink in my opinion. Who has the right to create a law about this? I mean it has no offensive remarks in any way! This is supposed to be the "Land of the Free" or at least thats what I thought. How free are we exactly? When it comes to someone complaining about something like this and then people actually bloggin about it? To think a fine is possible when a election sign of the actual President is on private property and is forced to take it down? WOW thats all I can say about that...WOW! "

khmass wrote on Jun 30, 2009 11:33 AM:

" While I agree commercial signs should be regulated, I too agree it is a restriction on free speech to regulate political signs on private property. Not every political sign is for an election or candidate. Perhaps Rush Limbaugh and come and blame the whole thing on the commie liberal media, since we all know how much talk show hosts and talking heads (liberal and conservative) have actually done in their lives. "

skeptic wrote on Jun 30, 2009 10:22 AM:

" Perhaps the chosen one will come to Norfolk and with his usual Solomon-like wisdom (and TelePrompter)present a solution. "

Realist wrote on Jun 30, 2009 9:54 AM:

" I agree. It is a restriction of free speech. "