COM 0401.005 1996-1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Dominic Yagong, Ch, 31 July 1997 Page 2 "Sign" means any sign, device, figure, painting, drawing, message, placard, poster, billboard, ground sign, wall sign, roof sign, illuminated sign, projecting sign, temporary sign, marquee-sign, awning, canopy, and street clock, and includes any announcement, declaration, demonstration, display, illustration, or insignia, used to advertise or promote the interests of any persons when it is placed out of doors on real property on buildings or structures on real property or buildings in view of the general public. While the word flag or banner is not separately enumerated in this definition, we believe that the use of such generic words as "device" clearly encompasses flags. Additionally, the special provisions for "temporary banners", HCC §3-2(9) 3-32(b), demonstrate a clear intent to include banners or flags within the Ordinance. Does the Failure to Enforce the Ordinance against other Car nPaiprs Constitute a Denial of Egual Protection of the Law? in his letter of July 13, 1997 to the Committee Chair, the attorney for the applicant alleges that "the County has not significantly enforced Chapter 3 as to numbers of signs or flags". He goes on to leap to the conclusion that such a failure constitutes the favoring of one competitor another, and might be actionable. The test for showing discriminatory enforcement of the law can be found in State v Kailua Auto Wreckers Inc. 62 Haw. 222 (1980). What must be shown is intentional or purposeful discrimination, that is deliberately based upon an unjustifiable standard such as race, religion or some other arbitrary classification. The mere showing that others have not been prosecuted, or that there is a laxity in enforcement, is not sufficient. I i at 227. While it is doubtful that such a showing could be made in this case, the practice of basing code enforcement entirely upon complaints, as seems to often be the case in this County, is troubling. While there is not unanimity of opinion on this point, the Courts in New York State have pointed out that such a practice results in the "surrender to private parties and interest groups who without constraint may manipulate the law for purely private purposes." People v. T. S. Klein Corn., 381 NYS 2d 787, 790 (Misc 1976). And therefore result in a denial of constitutional protection.