Too much or not enough?
Guest editorial by Jim Ridolphi
Jul 23, 2008

Political signs and the right to display them have received a lot of attention in Goochland County over the past several months. Last year’s election provided more than the usual excitement among the candidates, when the county attempted to restrict the sizes of some political signs in the county. Officials quickly retreated, and no signs were removed.

Last week, county staff took another shot in bringing the county’s current political sign ordinance into compliance with state code.

They suggested replacing the county’s current suggestive wording with some mandatory terms. In essence that means changing the word should to shall.

Some planning commission members didn’t think that was such a good idea. Others thought the 32 square-foot size as too large for residential neighborhoods.

A few opined there should be no limitation on political signs since they are temporary and appear infrequently.

As the discussion continued, one fact became abundantly clear when it comes to political signs. Displaying a political opinion on your property is a constitutionally protected right, and tinkering with laws that guarantee those rights is risky business.

While the Supreme Court has clearly answered the question of whether or not these signs are protected, the personal preferences of local citizens will be the ultimate decider regarding political displays.

While some will opt not to erect signs in support of their candidate of choice this fall, others will. They will do so without regard to county ordinance or Supreme Court decisions. It’s a right they cherish, deservedly so, and the mere hint of restriction draws a steady stream of public outcry.

Now, the size of those signs is another issue. At some point, one citizen’s freedom becomes another’s burden.

Under the proposed ordinance change, multiple political signs would be allowed during election season, up to 4 feet by 8 feet in size.

Many localities have no ordinance regarding political signs and simply rely on the state code for guidance.

As citizens spoke against the ordinance changes at last week’s meeting, one thing became clear, a desire to keep Goochland rural. Problem is, that means different things to different people.

One commissioner said a 32 square-foot sign doesn’t equate to rural vistas. But one citizen said being a county of rural character means you have “rural characters.” who may put up signs in their yards occasionally.

It’s a discussion that will continue as the Board of Supervisors considers the Planning Commissions refusal to recommend the proposed ordinance changes.

Perhaps a resolution is attainable if all components of the equation are considered and heard in the discussion. Citizens, legal counsel, the Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission all have an important role in the process.

The decision on political signs ultimately lies with the citizens and elected officials of Goochland County. With an election season right around the corner, there’s little time to waste if changes are necessary. Or, it may be best to leave alone an ordinance that has well withstood the test of time and received only one challenge since its inception.

That could be taken as a sign that things are sometimes best left alone.

(0) Comments • Email This Article