As November approaches, San Mateo is solidifying its temporary sign policy after the last election cycle garnered a high number of complaints.
The city received more than 60 complaints related to sign placement during the 2024 election, which City Clerk Martin McTaggart said was mostly related to location and placement of signs on public property and within the public right-of-way.
During a meeting March 16, the City Council approved an updated resolution clarifying some of the rules around distancing and location of campaign signs during the election period.
“Residents and candidates alike had misunderstandings about the rules or found it difficult to understand what our sign code requires,” McTaggart said of the previous cycle. “There is no modification to the existing sign ordinance. The policy is just intended to help streamline the intake process for complaints, helps overall enforcement and overall give better public awareness of what our sign code permits.”
The updated language standardizes the enforcement mechanisms and procedures related to sign violations, which usually starts with the issuance of courtesy notices to formal notifications and eventually to the collection and removal of signs.
Recommended for you
It also clarifies allowable placement, which can get quite technical, McTaggart said. For instance, the city allows campaign signs on sidewalks but they have to be a certain distance from one another, and up to four signs are allowed on the corner of an intersection, provided it’s public property.
“I think this is a great piece of work … to try and make it much clearer about where you can put signs, where you can’t put signs and what the process will be if someone does something incorrectly,” Councilmember Lisa Diaz Nash said during the City Council meeting.
The updated ordinance makes it clearer that residents can submit concerns directly to the City Clerk’s Office, which will follow up on each complaint. It also outlines the specific process by which potential violations will be verified and handled, which usually involves courtesy notices to formal notifications and removal.
The temporary sign placement ordinance isn’t the only policy the city has to regulate signs but is meant to specifically address campaign signs during the election cycle, McTaggart said.
“Our sign code has been on the books for quite some time to address different issues,” he said. “Community aesthetics and pedestrian safety are the two determining factors.”
Folks, this is why we can’t have nice things. I think that instead of first sending a “courtesy notice” to violators, personnel should first remove the signs and then send a courtesy notice to inform candidates why their signs were removed. And if candidates want their sign back, it’ll cost them.
Terrence- I think you’re on the right track. In addition to your ideas, I would give candidates five days after an election to remove their signs. For each sign that is not removed, the city would then fine the candidate $1000..
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO
personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who
make comments. Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. Don't threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Anyone violating these rules will be issued a
warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be
revoked.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(2) comments
Folks, this is why we can’t have nice things. I think that instead of first sending a “courtesy notice” to violators, personnel should first remove the signs and then send a courtesy notice to inform candidates why their signs were removed. And if candidates want their sign back, it’ll cost them.
Terrence- I think you’re on the right track. In addition to your ideas, I would give candidates five days after an election to remove their signs. For each sign that is not removed, the city would then fine the candidate $1000..
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.