Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Signs And Free Speech topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission debates council request to change temporary sign limits; leans toward preserving existing clutter‑reduction rule
Summary
After a council vote to revisit temporary‑sign rules, the commission weighed whether corner lots should be allowed four temporary yard signs instead of three and discussed First Amendment and equity concerns; commissioners generally favored keeping the ordinance as written or reverting to three signs for all lots.
The Village of Franklin Planning Commission spent the bulk of its May 20 meeting debating a council‑requested review of the village sign ordinance after the council voted 6–1 to send the item back to planning for reconsideration.
The council’s referral asked the commission to consider allowing corner lots to display up to four temporary yard signs, rather than the three allowed for a single‑frontage property. The chair relayed the council’s action and asked for the commission’s view.
Commissioner Paul Brakeman read the council correspondence aloud and emphasized constitutional considerations, saying the courts have “consistently recognized yard signs [as] a protected form of political speech under the First Amendment.” Brakeman argued that the current ordinance gives corner lots a greater opportunity for expression and recommended equalizing the standard: “Make it all 3,” he said.
Other commissioners echoed concerns about political motivation for reopening the ordinance during an election cycle. Commissioner Sarah Greslick said she had watched the council meeting and felt the request was presented to increase election signage; she warned against changing rules in a way that would appear content‑motivated. The chair suggested that opening the ordinance now would put it back “under a political lens” and proposed conveying to council that the commission believes the original governing principle—to reduce clutter—should prevail.
Not all commissioners opposed some change. Commissioner Linda Novak said she would be open to a balanced approach, for example allowing one 4‑foot sign plus three smaller signs if applied equitably, and she urged quick action because the election season was approaching. Commissioners also discussed practical workarounds such as joint signs or magnetic signage for tradespeople when parked at a residence.
The commission did not adopt a formal ordinance change at the meeting. The chair said he would report the commission’s discussion and recommendation back to council, noting that the commission spent significant effort on the original ordinance and that opening it now risked reintroducing politically motivated changes.
What’s next: The chair will convey the commission’s feedback to council; if the commission is directed to reopen the ordinance formally, staff and commissioners said they would follow notice and hearing procedures.
Attributions: Quotes and position summaries in this story come from commission discussion recorded at the May 20, 2026 meeting.
