Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment First Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents clash at Portsmouth hearing over ‘First Amendment’ signs and alleged cyberstalking
Summary
Public commenters at Portsmouth’s March 16 hearing clashed over political/residential signage and alleged online harassment tied to local sign displays; the council heard calls for enforcement and was urged to consider harassment statutes outside zoning.
At a March 16 public hearing on a revised sign ordinance, several Portsmouth residents used their allotted time to press contrasting claims about expressive signage — from a property owner asserting First Amendment protections to neighbors who said certain displays amounted to harassment.
Property owner Mike Dipiola told the council the ordinance’s amortization clause and new size limits risk targeted suppression of political expression. "These restrictions appear to be content based...it risks falling back...to the same unconstitutional pattern that led to a federal litigation in the past," he told the meeting.
Several neighbors described the signs as disruptive and in one case said signage included vulgar language and direct harassment. A speaker identified in the record as Tara Woods said she reported online messages and images to police and to town offices but said those complaints were not acted on. "Not all speech is protected speech," she said from the podium, adding that local enforcement had not solved her problem.
Town solicitor and staff responses
The town solicitor explained the town entered into a consent decree in 2021 that limited enforcement against a single property because the prior ordinance was found not to be content neutral. He told the council adopting a revised, content‑neutral ordinance would allow the town to enforce objective, time/manner/place rules against all properties again but cautioned that whether any particular sign crosses into unprotected harassment is a case‑by‑case question.
On the record, staff and the solicitor encouraged any resident who believes they have been criminally harassed to pursue harassment or cyberstalking statutes in state law; they said zoning enforcement may not be the right tool for alleged online conduct.
Status and next steps
Councilors did not adjudicate the private complaints at the hearing. Instead, they amended the ordinance in other ways (agricultural sign allowances, inflatable sign prohibition, temporary sign durations) and scheduled the final adoption vote for the next council meeting, while asking staff to provide a cleaned final draft for review.
