I realize the thread title may be misleading, and hopefully the admins will view the thread instead of deleting it based on it's title................I'm pretty sure the primaries are over, but this little gem has been living in the triangle at N. Thompson and Princetown Rd. for quite some time now.........illegally I might add, as I assume this little island is town property
It is a "roadside," so that would qualify it as illegal. (So is the Ron Paul sign on EOE park, but we won't talk about Mr. Parks and Recreations here...)
It is a "roadside," so that would qualify it as illegal. (So is the Ron Paul sign on EOE park, but we won't talk about Mr. Parks and Recreations here...)
Aren't the police supposed to get rid of 'em in that case.............gee that's what 100 yds from the station............................time for STEP to stand up and be counted
Aren't the police supposed to get rid of 'em in that case.............gee that's what 100 yds from the station............................time for STEP to stand up and be counted
Yeah, but they're too busy / not in the area. They have a whole town to patrol, you know, they can't be looking outside their own window. What are you thinking, that they can actually care about the area near the station? If they did that, who knows what would happen to this town...
well look here's a chance at some extra revenue.....................find the scoundrels who put the sign there and fine the crap out of 'em.............................hey here's another idea, when the rest of those buggers start appearing later this year fine each party for each illegal sign. criminy!!!! that'd be a veritable gold mine
You'd think in this town they would love to do that. As the code is written, they could actually FINE the Ron Paul campaign a fee for EACH sign that "litters" the town.
You'd think in this town they would love to do that. As the code is written, they could actually FINE the Ron Paul campaign a fee for EACH sign that "litters" the town.
there ya go......................In 7 posts we solved the whole revenue problem..............next
well look here's a chance at some extra revenue.....................find the scoundrels who put the sign there and fine the crap out of 'em
Are you kidding me? The way each campaign steals each others signs, moves them, uproots them and intentionally posts them illegally - you REALLY think they're gonna find who originally put it there? It's the minions that put up the garbage, not anyone really important in the party.
Now, fine the campaign, that idea might have merit
Are you kidding me? The way each campaign steals each others signs, moves them, uproots them and intentionally posts them illegally - you REALLY think they're gonna find who originally put it there? It's the minions that put up the garbage, not anyone really important in the party.
Now, fine the campaign, that idea might have merit
That's what the code says...
Part of section D of this part of the code...
Quoted Text
It is the presumption of this section that all signs erected on the above-referred-to residential property have been so erected by the candidate whose name appears on said sign and with the permission of the owner of said property. Said sign shall be the sole responsibility of the candidate whose name appears on said sign including the duties, obligations and penalties as provided for in this section.
Anyone got Ron Paul's cell phone # so he can be called to come get it? Hmm, on second thought, he probably doesn't have a cell phone - anyone got a telegraph machine?
A person violating any provision of this section shall be subject to the penalties contained in § 270-180 of this chapter.
Quoted Text
§ 270-180 Penalties for offenses; enforcement actions. A. Penalties. The Town Board intends to exercise its authority under § 10, Subdivision 1(ii)(d)(3), of the Municipal Home Rule Law, and any other applicable provision of law now or hereinafter enacted, to supersede the applicable provisions of § 268, Subdivision 1, of the Town Law, and any other applicable or successor law, in order to impose a penalty and fine structure that best reflects the needs of the community. Except as set forth in Chapter 270, Article XXII, Schenectady Intermunicipal Watershed Rules and Regulations, for each violation of the provisions of this chapter, the owner, general agent, person in charge of the premises, architect, engineer and/or contractor of the building, structure or premises where such violation has been committed or exists shall be guilty of an offense punishable by a fine or penalty of not less than $250 nor more than $5,000 or by imprisonment for a period not to exceed six months, or both, for a conviction of a first offense; upon conviction of a second violation, where the offense is committed within a period of five years of the first offense, a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000 or by imprisonment for a period not to exceed six months, or both; and upon conviction of a third or subsequent violation where the offense is committed within a period of five years of the first and second offense, a fine of not less than $1,500 nor more than $15,000 or by imprisonment for a period not to exceed six months, or both. Each day such violation continues following notification by the Town or service of a summons shall constitute a separate offense punishable in like manner. The Town Board shall have such other remedies as are allowable by law. [Amended 7-9-2003 by L.L. No. 9-2003; 7-12-2006 by L.L. No. 7-2006] B. Enforcement actions. The Town Board may also maintain an action or proceeding in the name of the Town in a court of competent jurisdiction to compel compliance with or to restrain by injunction the violation of any such ordinance, rule or regulation, notwithstanding that the ordinance, rule or regulation may provide a penalty or other punishment for such violation.
Well there you go.................there was never gonna be an attempt to enforce this...................the fines seem to be excessive for the offense............way I see it they were just tossing a bone to the folks who protested the excessive signs................nice................so what would happen to a concerned citizen who removed these things from prohibited areas and returned them to their owners?.................I can't seem to find anything about that anywhere............maybe I'll give one of my cop friends a call on that myself
And I thought the thread title had to do with "our" Ron on father's day
Optimists close their eyes and pretend problems are non existent. Better to have open eyes, see the truths, acknowledge the negatives, and speak up for the people rather than the politicos and their rich cronies.