Mobile Billboard Ban Under Consideration

[Ayatollahgondola]

What the hell!!! Where have we seen the useless state legislature start to restrict the first amendment.

The City Council on Wednesday ordered the city attorney to draft an ordinance that would ban the ads, which are mounted on trailers, hauled around and dropped off on city streets.

Councilman Paul Krekorian says the mobile billboards are ugly, distract drivers and can roll into traffic on windy days.

Neighboring West Hollywood already has such a ban and the state Assembly is considering one.
The ban won't apply to ads on buses or taxis.

Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2010/03/31/264...#ixzz0jngkDbwD


http://www.sacbee.com/2010/03/31/264...illboards.html

[Ayatollahgondola]

It's true

All those big billboards that Clear Channel put up, all those lighted flashing rotating billboards across the state that are springing up in front of colleges, alongside state highways, an on city owned lands are not a problem or causing distraction, but free speech...that's a problem

BILL NUMBER: AB 2756 AMENDED
BILL TEXT

AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MARCH 18, 2010

INTRODUCED BY Assembly Members Blumenfield and Feuer

FEBRUARY 19, 2010

An act to add Section 22500.2 to the Vehicle Codes,
relating to vehicles Chapter 33 (commencing with
Section 7599) to Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code,
relating to mobile billboard advertising displays .


LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


AB 2756, as amended, Blumenfield. Parking: commercial
advertising: mobile billboards. Mobile billboard
advertising displays: parking prohibition.
(1) The
The Planning and Zoning Law authorizes the legislative
body of a city or county to adopt ordinances that regulate, among
other things, signs and billboards.
Existing law authorizes local authorities to enact, by ordinance
or resolution, prohibitions or restrictions on the stopping, parking,
or standing of vehicles, including, but not limited to, vehicles
that are 6 feet or more in height, including any load thereon, within
100 feet of any intersection, on certain streets or highways, or
portions thereof, during all or certain hours of the day.

This bill would make it unlawful for a person to conduct, or cause
to be conducted, any mobile billboard advertising by parking any
vehicle or wheeled conveyance that carries, conveys, pulls, or
transports any sign or billboard for the primary purpose of
advertising on any public street, or other public place within the
city or county in which the public has the right to travel. The bill
would require enforcement by the city or county. By increasing the
duties of local public officials and creating a new crime, the bill
would impose a state-mandated local program.
The bill would also authorize a city or county to enact an
ordinance that would permit the use of mobile billboards in its local
jurisdiction.
(2) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse
local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the
state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that
reimbursement.
This bill would provide that with regard to certain mandates no
reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that,
if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains
costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall
be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

This bill would prohibit a person from parking a mobile billboard
advertising display, as defined, in a public place within a city or
county, other than a parking lot or parking garage. This bill would
declare that its enactment shall not create any inference that the
Legislature intends to occupy the field of mobile billboard
advertising displays or preempt any local ordinance that regulates
those displays, and would expressly provide that the bill does not
preempt a city or county from adopting or enforcing an ordinance
regulating those displays. This bill would exempt a vehicle that
displays an advertisement or identifies the business of its owner
from the prohibition against the parking of any mobile billboard
advertising display, so long as the vehicle is engaged in the usual
business or regular work of the owner, and is not parked for the
primary purpose of advertising.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes
no . State-mandated local program: yes
no .


THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The enactment of this act shall not
create any inference that the Legislature intends to occupy the field
of regulation of mobile billboard advertising displays, or preempt
any local ordinance that regulates mobile billboard advertising
displays.
SEC. 2. Chapter 33 (commencing with Section 7599)
is added to Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code
, to read:
CHAPTER 33. MOBILE BILLBOARD ADVERTISING DISPLAYS


7599. (a) No person shall park a mobile billboard advertising
display in a public place within a city or county, other than a
parking lot or parking garage.
(b) For purposes of this chapter, "mobile billboard advertising
display" means any advertising display that is attached to a wheeled
conveyance, or is otherwise mobile, that carries, pulls, or
transports any sign or billboard for the primary purpose of
advertising.
(c) This section shall not preempt a city or county from adopting
or enforcing an ordinance regulating mobile billboard advertising
displays that is more or less restrictive than the prohibition
contained in subdivision (a).
(d) The prohibition contained in subdivision (a) shall not apply
to a vehicle that displays an advertisement or identifies the
business of its owner, so long as the vehicle to which the
advertising display is attached is engaged in the usual business or
regular work of the owner and is not parked for the primary purpose
of advertising.
SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares
all of the following:
(a) Communities across the state are experiencing a surge in
mobile billboards. These portable advertising signs on vehicles or
trailers are driven to a location where they are detached and parked
on city streets for hours, and often several days.
(b) Not only are mobile billboards a visual blight, but they pose
a significant safety hazard when motorists are forced to veer around
them into the next lane of traffic. Mobile billboards also reduce
available on-street parking and impair the visibility of pedestrians
and drivers.
(c) Local jurisdictions throughout the state have attempted to
regulate mobile billboards, but these efforts have become mired in
litigation and are difficult to enforce. Therefore, the Legislature
declares that a statewide approach to regulating mobile billboards is
necessary to address this serious public nuisance and to protect
public safety.
SEC. 2. Section 22500.2 is added to the Vehicle
Code, to read:
22500.2. (a) It is unlawful for a person to conduct, or cause to
be conducted, any mobile billboard advertising by parking any vehicle
or wheeled conveyance that carries, conveys, pulls, or transports
any sign or billboard for the primary purpose of advertising on any
public street or other public place within the city or county in
which the public has the right to travel.
(b) A violation of this section is an infraction punishable by the
city or county where the violation occurred.
(c) This section shall not apply to any vehicle that displays an
advertisement or business identification of its owner, so long as the
vehicle is engaged in the usual business or regular work of the
owner, and not used merely, mainly, or primarily to display
advertisement.
(d) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), a city or county may enact a
local ordinance that authorizes the use of mobile billboards within
its local jurisdictions.
SEC. 3. No reimbursement is required by this
act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California
Constitution for certain costs that may be incurred by a local agency
or school district because, in that regard, this act creates a new
crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the
penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section
17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime
within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California
Constitution.
However, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that this
act contains other costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to
local agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made
pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4 of
Title 2 of the Government Code.

[Jeanfromfillmore]

What I question is what is considered advertising? That's the question. Making a statement is not advertising. I know here where I live you can't put up a sign or billboard advertising a commercial product or business without the cities permission or against the codes, but political ads are exempt. Are statements that serve no commercial gain, exempt?

[Don]

It is per se unconstitutional. Ayatolla's sign is not commercial speech, but pure political speech.

[Ayatollahgondola]

Originally Posted by Don

It is per se unconstitutional. Ayatolla's sign is not commercial speech, but pure political speech.

I don't see any exception for that in this bill. And you notice it will be an infraction? No jury trial.....maybe no trial at all like they do with parking violations

[Don]

relating to mobile billboard advertising displays .

any mobile billboard advertising

(a) No person shall park a mobile billboard advertising
display in a public place within a city or county, other than a
parking lot or parking garage.
(b) For purposes of this chapter, "[I]mobile billboard advertising
display"[/I] means any advertising display that is attached to a wheeled
conveyance, or is otherwise mobile, that carries, pulls, or
transports any sign or billboard for the primary purpose of
advertising.


The prohibition contained in subdivision (a) shall not apply
to a vehicle that displays an advertisement or identifies the
business of its owner, so long as the vehicle to which the
advertising display is attached is engaged in the usual business or
regular work of the owner and is not parked for the primary purpose
of advertising.


By its language the bill is limited to "advertising." This is commercial speech, not political speech.

[Ayatollahgondola]

Originally Posted by Don

relating to mobile billboard advertising displays .

any mobile billboard advertising

(a) No person shall park a mobile billboard advertising
display in a public place within a city or county, other than a
parking lot or parking garage.
(b) For purposes of this chapter, "[I]mobile billboard advertising
display"[/I] means any advertising display that is attached to a wheeled
conveyance, or is otherwise mobile, that carries, pulls, or
transports any sign or billboard for the primary purpose of
advertising.


The prohibition contained in subdivision (a) shall not apply
to a vehicle that displays an advertisement or identifies the
business of its owner, so long as the vehicle to which the
advertising display is attached is engaged in the usual business or
regular work of the owner and is not parked for the primary purpose
of advertising.


By its language the bill is limited to "advertising." This is commercial speech, not political speech.

I only see this as slightly better but not much. If the state can restrict what you say when you're parked, one of the few forms of advertising that the big boys don't control yet, then small business is beholden even more to the big boys. Take a look around. Who controls all the airwaves and advertisement now. This legislation is about knocking out another form of ads for small business.

[Dawes]

Sacramento is already getting ready to try and censor because they know the Dems are gonna get blasted by signs all over California during this election year. What's next? no bumper stickers.

[Ayatollahgondola]

So the governor signed this ban into law. I call it a ban, because it is written differently from what the intent was...as is usual when the legislature wants to pass something without drawiung the ire of affected people.

The law now empowers municipalities to outlaw sign trailers that when "advertisement" in their primary purpose. In addition, the law's chief proponent in the state legislature stated that it was aimed at unhitched trailers, but then went on to omit that portion from the code itself. This will, of course, allow the municipalities to broadly interpret it and let the victim fight their way out of it in court. What I'm unsure of is whether it will fall under the parking ticket scam or not. They also criminalized it if a muni elects to do so, meaning it can carry jail time if they charge it that way. I think we can thank a real ass for inspiring this too. the guy that Dennis Zine was aiming at took this form of advertising to the maximum level of provocation by placing multiple little trailers in a row on city streets, and just abandoning them there. To add to that, this guy is another one of those "businessmen" that is hell bent on using the court system to make up for his apparent inability to please his customers. He's got numerous lawsuits, as well as internet pages chock full of warnings from unsatisfied clients.
I hate having to be lumped in with the unadmirable, but I have to oppose this unjust law. The state and the munis are now doing the bidding of the big advertising lobby. The advertisers are cornering the outdoor market, and already dominate the airwaves and cable. What was left was public property, and for anyone paying attention, they have already connived their way into exclusive contracts for the outdoor advertising on schools, city, and county owned property.
I'd like to say that we were safe in doing first amendment events with this, but I fear that it will be another one of those situations that we will be ticketed and forced to pay fines while appeals work their way up to judges appointed by the same mentalities that brought and signed these laws into practice in the first place.

[ilbegone]

How about all those election campaign signs still tacked up everywhere?

Those are as obnoxious and blight contributing as anything else.

I have to agree that the "infraction" gimmick is way out of hand. The judge gets paid out of fines and assessments, and with no jury to hold him back the situation encourages him to be prosecutor as well. Appeal? No retrying the case, just a review of procedural correctness - getting screwed by the book.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

It has long ceased to be funny that those yokels in Sacramento somehow consider themselves to be "THE PEOPLE".

Which of those idiots proposed this legislation, and who were the others who went along with it? We still have a gaping deficit and unemployment is still astronomical in my kneck of the woods, and they have the time to mess with this?