Toronto councillors say no to election sign restrictions

City staff had recommended all elections, including the next city vote on Oct. 27, have a three-week sign period, which a council committee last week cut to 14 days.

"It’s a valid debate and we can have that debate at the appropriate time," said St. Paul’s Councillor Josh Matlow, who on Monday proposed holding off decisions on the issue until next year.

"It is fundamentally wrong for incumbent councillors to be changing the rules of the election after the election has begun."

Tracey Cook, director of the city’s Municipal Licensing and Standards Division, said her staff spent more than $200,000 during the 2010 municipal campaign responding to almost 1,000 complaints about illegal signs and storing candidates’s signs.

MLS had also proposed replacing the $250 deposit collected from candidates who post signs with a non-refundable fee.

That fee – reduced by the committee to $125 per candidate – would at least get back part of the money the city spends on election signs, and would eliminate the need under a deposit system for invoicing and waivers, allowing MLS staff to concentrate on the signs affecting public safety, Cook said.

You might be interested in

{{type}}

{{title}}

• Dec 31, 1969
• Comments

{{type}}

{{title}}

• Dec 31, 1969
• Comments

For 2010, the period for posting campaign signs was cut to 21 days due to a religious festival. After an election ends, candidates have 72 hours to remove their signs or face a penalty.

Some councillors thought changing rules after Jan. 2, the day candidates started to register for this fall’s vote, wasn’t fair.

It’s "moving the goal posts" during the game," Mary-Margaret McMahon argued.

"It favours incumbents to shorten the time period," added the Beaches-East York councillor, who also said she believes a non-refundable sign fee is unfair.

Scarborough Centre Councillor Glenn De Baeremaeker, who moved the 14-day motion in the city’s licensing and standards committee last week, said after hearing the debate and reading a confidential legal opinion from staff, he would support keeping the status quo on the sign period.

But he argued councillors should approve other recommended changes he said would close loopholes in the sign-posting rules "that allow people to cheat and ignore our bylaws."

York West Councillor Anthony Perruzza said candidates are the only people who care about election signs, while other residents "dislike the clutter."

But Perruzza also supported Matlow’s motion to refer the proposals to the same licensing committee in the second quarter of 2015.

Only De Baeremaeker, Scarborough East Councillor Ron Moeser and Etobicoke Centre Councillor Gloria Lindsay Luby voted against the referral motion.

In an interview, Nick Dominelli, who in 2010 ran a close second to Frank Di Giorgio in York South-Weston and is running against him again, thought it surprising and "a little suspect" councillors would bring up the issue so close to the election.

Though he said it wasn’t a concern for him because he has name recognition already, Dominelli said campaign signs "are a good way for new candidates to get their name out there."

Since some residents equate signs with an effective campaign, the city should do more to publicize the sign period, he added on Monday.