Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutREP PWC 294 04/25/1984 1980-1984 S Report Of The COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS April 25 , 1984 Re : Comm. 621. 4 Chairman and Members • Hawaii County Council Hilo , Hawaii • Your Committee on Public Works, to which was referred Bill No , 1064 , Draft 2 , entitled "A Bill For An .Ordinance Amending Chapter 3 , Article 1, Division 3 , Section 3-32, Hawaii County Code 1983 , Relating To Exempt Signs" , reports as follows: The purpose of this bill is to amend the existing County sign ordinance dealing with political signs so as to eliminate the discriminatory regulation of political signs with respect to durational time limit and size. Your committee has been advised by the Corporation Counsel ' s Office that while government may impose certain restrictions on non-commercial speech (ideological messages, political campaign signs, etc. ) , government may not impose greater restrictions on non-commercial speech than on commercial speech (commercial advertising and messages, etc. ) . In this context, the absence of durational time limits for most classes of exempt commercial signs as compared with the treatment of non-commercial political signs is impermissible under the equal protection clause of our Fourteenth Amendment. Further , we have been advised that durational time limits -with respect to political signs , unduly restrict and burden the exercise of First Amendment rights when balanced against the government' s police powers to regulate land uses. Finally, we have been advised by the Corporation Counsel ' s Office that the existing regulatory scheme with respect to size also discriminates against political signs. In this instance , our code allows exempt "announcing signs" and "subdivision signs" of thirty-two square feet, "real estate signs" of eight square feet and signs' •"announcing a billing or an act"of one hundred square feet, yet "political campaign signs" are limited to one square foot. Clearly, ReportNo. 294 FILED: 1984 ", 111 i PWC-294 Page 2 April 25, 1984 under the equal protection principles of the Fourteenth Amendment, non-commercial speech should be treated as favorably as is commercial speech. In addition, the limitation of size to one square feet may also cause First Amendment problems as it may be considered as a deterrent against free speech. Your committee is in agreement that it is necessary to amend our County Code because of the aforedescribed Constitutional problems . Initially, your committee amended Bill 1064 ,by restricting political and ideological signs to one hundred square feet affording treatment with respect to size equal to the most permissive application of the code. Your committee, upon further consideration, finds that a one hundred square foot sign for political purposes is in fact too large and not in keeping with the intent and concept of our sign ordinance . Accordingly, the committee has amended Bill 1064 establishing thirty-two square feet as a maximum standard. In doing so, the committee recognizes that signs "announcing a billing or an act " hereafter shall be limited to thirty-two square feet. Your Committee on Public Works is in accord with the intent and purpose of Bill 1064, Draft 3, and recommends that it pass first reading. ME` E K. LAI, CH.A: 'WOMAN j bi , 40,40A/Jr2, WILLIAM S. KA- HARA, BICE CHR. FRANK DE LUZ III, MEMBER „..1 . N • ; -.----7 --,....---e_ ' TAKASHI DOMINGO, ME , : R HELENE H. HALE, MEMBE LA/GM