Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sign Ordinance Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Maplewood council to bring sign‑ordinance amendments into alignment with Richmond Heights; city attorney cites First Amendment time/place/manner limits
Summary
Council discussed amending Chapter 6, Advertising, Article 2 (Signs) to align election‑sign timeframes with neighboring Richmond Heights, clarify election‑season definitions, and consider an emergency clause so changes take effect before an upcoming school‑board election.
Maplewood City Council members discussed proposed amendments to Chapter 6, Advertising, Article 2 (Signs) during a Jan. 14 work session and asked staff to bring the ordinance forward for formal readings. The change is intended to align Maplewood’s timelines for election signage with adjacent Richmond Heights, which shares a school district and election contests.
Council members said parity matters because candidates running for the shared Richmond Heights‑Maplewood school board would otherwise have different sign‑display windows in the two municipalities. One council member summarized the goal as ensuring that a candidate in the shared district “doesn't have twice the time to display a sign” in one jurisdiction.
Council discussion covered practical and legal issues: permitted sizes for banners, differences between residential and commercial signage, enforcement of short‑term signs such as garage‑sale notices, and whether to set 60 days as a uniform period for election signage. Several members endorsed a 60‑day window as generally acceptable.
City attorney Jackie (first name recorded in the transcript) advised the council that municipalities may lawfully impose reasonable time, place and manner restrictions under the First Amendment. “You can make restrictions on, for example, the amount of time that signs are up,” Jackie said, but added that the council should be prepared to explain distinctions in timing if different rules remain for different sign categories.
Council members instructed staff to prepare ordinance language that aligns sign timelines and clarifies definitions of “election season.” One council member asked whether the ordinance could take effect immediately for the upcoming school board contest; staff noted there must be at least one week between readings but that the council could include an emergency clause in the ordinance so it would be effective immediately after the second reading if they make it an emergency ordinance.
No formal vote was taken at the work session; council members voted to adjourn after instructing staff to prepare the ordinance for first and second reading at the next meeting.
Next steps: city staff will draft the revised sign ordinance language (Chapter 6, Advertising, Article 2, Signs), include timing and enforcement provisions, and present it for first and second reading; council discussed the possibility of an emergency clause to make the ordinance effective immediately after the second reading for the pending school‑board election.
