Aggressive bylaw enforcement?
#1
Posted 10 November 2010 - 10:44 AM
Is his signage stating the bridge can be repaired upsetting certain people? hhmm?
#2
Posted 10 November 2010 - 10:48 AM
What's going on? Why are Steve Filipovic's campaign signs being removed by city bylaw enforcement?
Is his signage stating the bridge can be repaired upsetting certain people? hhmm?
I saw one on a telephone pole, and that's a no-no for any sign.
#3
Posted 10 November 2010 - 10:52 AM
The ones I was told about were not on telephone poles.I saw one on a telephone pole, and that's a no-no for any sign.
I'll try and get more information.
#4
Posted 10 November 2010 - 11:23 AM
They don't specifically mention traffic signs or telephone poles, but I've seen many Filopovic signs attached to "stop" signs which would seem to violate city rules saying election signs should not block sightlines for vehicles and pedestrians.
I was told by a successful politician that an election sign has far more value when it is on someone's lawn as opposed to a public median or boulevard.
A sign on a traffic sign may even have negative value. I would recommend that Steve make more of an effort to find households that endorse him and place his signs there.
#5
Posted 10 November 2010 - 03:13 PM
#6
Posted 10 November 2010 - 05:21 PM
The one sign I was told about was removed from a boulevard. Are they not allowed on boulevards?
#7
Posted 10 November 2010 - 08:13 PM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users