Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sign Program topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning staff reports billboard enforcement progress, litigation and fines in annual sign-program update
Summary
Planning staff told the commission the sign program has processed about 1,100 of roughly 1,600 known general advertising signs, removed 321 signs to date, opened ~10 lawsuits with sign companies and cited penalties that can reach $2,500 per day for large unauthorized signs.
Dan Snyder, a planning department staffer, presented the Planning Department’s annual report on the general advertising sign program and described enforcement, litigation and the program’s finances. He said the department has assembled a citywide inventory of roughly 1,600 general advertising signs and has processed about 1,100 of those signs, with roughly 321 mostly‑illegal signs removed to date. “Nearly half of the billboards that we’ve looked at are illegal,” Snyder told commissioners.
Snyder said the program has faced litigation: sign companies have sued, arguing the department’s detailed inventory is a trade secret and secured an injunction limiting disclosure. He said the department is involved in about 10 separate lawsuits with sign companies and that attorney fees run about $250,000 a year. He described the program’s revenues—annual company fees plus penalties—as roughly matching expenses at about a half‑million dollars annually and said staff expects the inventory to be fully processed by the end of the next calendar year if progress continues at current rates.
On enforcement procedures, Snyder outlined how staff assess each sign’s physical characteristics and permit status; an initial notice of violation (NOV) opens a 30‑day window for abatement or an administrative reconsideration request, after which penalties begin to accrue. He said penalties for an unauthorized sign of 501 or more square feet can reach $2,500 per day.
Commissioners pressed staff on repeat offenders, the program’s lack of funded outreach to commercial realtors and on how window vinyl and interior postings have been categorized. Snyder replied that outreach is not currently funded, that many repeat violators are subject to shorter compliance windows under the code, and that, in his view, many vinyl or interior window signs meet the program’s definition of general advertising.
Commissioners and staff discussed operational improvements including stepped‑up enforcement for repeat violators, potential coordination with DBI on tenant‑improvement permits, and the limits on what staff can publish publicly because of ongoing litigation. Snyder concluded by recognizing the enforcement team and named staff members who led the effort.
