Billboards could some day become signs of the past in Provo under a new ordinance approved by the City Council Tuesday, but some say that isn't likely.
The council, by a 4-3 vote, approved an ordinance declaring all off-premise signs non-conforming to current law, meaning they can be removed from the city over a period of time. The ordinance also prohibits new billboards.In passing the ordinance, the council makes billboards unwelcome in Provo, but don't expect signs to come down immediately. The law requires the city to pay just compensation to sign owners to remove billboards and would use general tax revenues to buy out billboard owners.
"You will not see by the passing of this ordinance signs falling down tomorrow," said Leland Gammette, community development director. "It's matter of both time and money as to when those signs can be removed."
Mayor Joe Jenkins said he expects to see some billboards intact 30 to 40 years from now.
Councilman Gordon Bullock, who voted against the ordinance calling it "overkill," said the city simply has a new law on the books and he doubts it will be enforced.
"We don't have any money to buy a $1,000 sign," he said.
Gamette said the city will spend the next year appraising and cataloging Provo's 76 billboards. He said he has no idea as the value of those signs, but individual billboards could cost the city thousands of dollars. Seventeen billboards along I-15 in Provo will not be affected.
At least one citizen didn't like the fact that tax money would be spent to tear down signs. "Looking at this as a taxpayer, you're better off not touching (the issue)," Ron Hathcock told the council.
Doug Hall, real estate manager for Reagan Outdoor Advertising, said he was disappointed by the council's decision. The ordinance benefits neither those who wanted to see the billboards come down nor the sign companies, he said.
"What the ban does is basically force the status quo," Hall said. It prevents the billboard industry from responding to citizen complaints about signs and will leave current billboards in place for a long time, he said.
Reagan Outdoor Advertising suggested a compromise ordinance that would have allowed sign companies the flexibility to remove problem billboards as long as those could replaced on a one-for-one basis.
The council gave little attention to the proposal. Councilwoman Barbara Smith, who pushed for the billboard ban since winning a seat to the council four years ago, called the plan a ploy to delay the council vote.
"I think they should have no right to bring this and that we should not even consider it," she said.
Citizens who addressed the council on the issue Tuesday night were divided on the issue.
"I think Provo City is long due for a spring cleanup," said Mary Ann Andrus. She likened the removal of signs to cleaning up trash in one's front yard after the snow has melted.
Other called the ordinance ridiculous or ludicrous.
LaVorn Sparks, owner of Sparks Outdoor Advertising, said the ordinance had nothing to do with billboards but had everything to do with civil rights.
The ordinance "empowers you to take away individuals' property," he told the council. "I resent the heck out of having my rights deprived."
In addition to Bullock, council members Stan Brown and Ben Porter opposed the ordinance. Smith and council members Steve Clark, Mark Hathaway and Ron Last voted in favor of it.