- contacting households with the Vote No signs on their property and/or
- removing the signs based on that contact
Saturday, April 24, 2010
COR employees used to pull Vote No signs?
I'm hearing chatter that COR employees may be:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Found the audio. Listening to it now.
have to run, but will post the audio later.
Hope this is not the case. We need a fair election.
I am interested in a PRO-bond vote sign. Does anyone know what organization might have them? This is not to start an argument. We all have a right to out opinions - that is why we have elections. My opinion just happens to be in favor. Thanks. Eremita
"Hearing chatter"? Who are you, Homeland Security or something? They aren't terrorists, and if they pulled signs I'm sure there was a reason.
Someone put a "VOTE NO" sign my my neighbor's yard a couple days ago without permission and when she took it out, they told her since hers is a corner house they can legally put it up on the outskirt of her property and that if she took it out again they would file charges against her.
I respect your opinions but don't be surprised if people play at the same level as you. If you put signs in high-traffic areas without permission and try to intimidate homeowners, people may retaliate by removing your random ass signs.
Charlie
Before I respond, let me clarify:
Private property is sacrosanct.
I have placed no signs.
I have donated no money for signs.
I do not have a sign in my yard.
I would raise the exact same issue if the COR employee was pulling "Yes" signs.
@anon1142/Eremita: The "Yes" signs do exist; I saw them in Richardson Heights area this morning while visiting garage sales; they were blue. Did not get close enough to see who published them but the Richardson Coalition may be able to point you to a supplier. I fully support your voicing your opinion and I appreciate your civil and gentle manner.
@anon1201: I must address several potentially misleading aspects of your comment.
* I am not DHS, and did not claim to be. "Chatter" is a valid English word that has been in common use long, long before DHS was dreamed of. It appears in some translations of the Bible. I have personally used it for about 4 decades. Feel free to substitute "grapevine/rumor/whispers" if it helps make the point that I had an eyewitness report but no other corroboration. I was asking for input, not making truth claims.
* I did not claim the sign-puller was a terrorist. The sign puller appears to have been a COR employee (as I said) and perhaps a worker bee of the Building Inspector's office (as I had not yet said).
* There being a reason is insufficient. One might have a reason to steal a candy bar but this would not make it ethical.
* Your neighbor's house: I am fully, totally, and completely supportive of property rights. If the sign placement would have been on her property I fully support her right to choose what sign is placed there. If the outskirt of her (apparent) property is not her property but rather public right of way of some kind then I would assume she has no say any more than any other COR resident. I would hope any sign placers would abide by applicable law.
* I don't play at any level. I am uninvolved in any Yes/No issues beyond what I have detailed in this blog. The totality of my opinions are expressed here. I am very nearly apolitical. I find politics and partisanship distasteful in the extreme.
* I don't put signs anywhere. I certainly wouldn't put them on private property without express permission.
I did listen to the RPD audio; the dispatch mentioned the description of the car, the license plate, and the city of residence of the COR employee. I do not think it would be ethical or productive to relay that information.
"Someone put a 'VOTE NO' sign my my neighbor's yard a couple days ago without permission and when she took it out, they told her since hers is a corner house they can legally put it up on the outskirt of her property and that if she took it out again they would file charges against her."
If the "outskirt" of that property where the sign was placed consisted of the area between the sidewalk and the curb, it was an illegally placed sign. With a few "unofficial" exceptions (garage/yard sale signs on weekends, signs dealing with churches, and real estate signs), ALL signs posted in the described area are removed, per the COR sign ordinance.
If the "outskirt" of the property where the sign was placed was inside of the sidewalk (between the sidewalk and the house), then that is private property and the sign placer had no more right to post a sign there than I do to put in a paved parking spot in the same location.
Sounds to me like some of the sign placers, in their enthusiasm, MAY have crossed a line or two (assuming that the quoted incident actually occurred as described). If it were me, I think that I'd obtain a copy of the sign ordinance before putting out any more signs.
Our Mayor and his neighbor both have VOTE YES signs in their yard. I wonder if RPD/COR peeps will ask these to be removed?!
So many "Anonymous" on here...
@anon8:33pm
The version I heard had COR calling the resident to see if they wanted the sign _on their property_ or not. If the resident had already contacted the city about an unwanted sign on their property and COR was making a follow-up then it appears to be much ado about nothing. If COR proactively reached out to the resident then I think we have a problem.
If the sign placers were placing the signs illegally, then they have a problem and should strive to obey the law.
I do not like the idea of unofficial exceptions, btw. If there is an ordinance against it then there is an ordinance against it. Who gets to make the call about which ones will be unofficially exempted? A recipe for misunderstanding and conflict at best, and egregious favoritism at worst. Is "unofficial exemption" a valid defense when standing in front of municipal court?
@Kevin -
when I set up the blog I chose how to handle comments. I allowed anon posting, and so far no one has abused it. The main issue with anon comments is that it's hard to reply to people (or personas) with no name. There is no elegant method to address them.
@bloggermouse-
I hear you on the unofficial exceptions, but the current sign ordinance doesn't make provisions for the garage sale, etc... signs. If not for the exceptions, NO user-placed signs would be allowed.
Post a Comment