Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Signage And Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Jackson ZBA voids $275 fine but upholds Black Mountain sign violations
Summary
The Jackson Zoning Board of Adjustment on Sept. 4 found Black Mountain’s roadside signs violated town sign rules but ruled the Select Board’s $275 fine invalid under RSA 676:17 because written notice arrived after police removed the signs; the board voted 4-0 on the decision.
The Jackson Zoning Board of Adjustment on Sept. 4 upheld findings that two roadside signs placed by Black Mountain violated the town’s zoning ordinance but reversed a $275 civil fine, ruling the notice required by RSA 676:17 came after the violations had ceased.
The board concluded the “Free Lift Rides Today” sign and a directional sign did not meet Section 13.1 and Section 13.3 of the Jackson Zoning Ordinance, which broadly prohibit off‑premises signs except in narrow cases. Jackson Police Chief Christopher Perley testified he observed the signs impairing sightlines at the Veterans Triangle and dismantled them for public‑safety reasons; Perley also documented a text message to the applicant stating the signs were not zoning‑compliant.
The board accepted Perley’s account that the signs created an immediate traffic hazard and that, after the initial dismantling, the applicant reassembled the signs on what is believed to be Jackson School District property. After the school board asked for their removal, Perley and Officer Eaton removed the signs later that afternoon.
At the hearing the applicant argued the $275 fine assessed by the Select Board could not stand under RSA 676:17 because fines are imposed for each day a violation continues after written notice, and the signs had been removed the same day notice was given. The ZBA found the June 5 letter from the building inspector referenced a different ordinance provision and was too narrowly worded to provide reasonable written notice that off‑premises signs were prohibited. The board concluded the text message sent by Chief Perley after he dismantled the signs did not establish the kind of advance written notice that RSA 676:17 contemplates for assessing a daily civil penalty.
Black Mountain also argued that other businesses had placed temporary off‑premises signs without sanction, alleging selective enforcement or estoppel. The board examined an Art Gallery sign posted nearby and found it likewise violated the zoning ordinance; that sign was removed after police contacted the owner. The ZBA said Black Mountain’s reassembly of the dismantled signs and the subsequent placement on school property made its case materially different from the gallery example, and the board found the record did not meet the burden to prove intentional discriminatory enforcement.
The board’s motion, moved by Frank Benesh and seconded by Dave Mason, passed 4‑0. The ZBA denied the appeal on most substantive claims (finding the signs were unlawful and dangerous and that the directional sign required Planning Board recommendation and Select Board approval) but affirmed the appeal on the limited issue of notice under RSA 676:17 and voided the Select Board’s $275 fine. The board also recused itself from deciding the estoppel/selective‑enforcement counts for lack of jurisdiction.
