Monday, October 19, 2009

City Council looks to change postering law

From the Times Ledger:

New Yorkers who post signs on city property are subject to one fine for each poster at $75 apiece, which often results in extremely high penalties.

Under the PATH Act, enforcement officers would be required to serve tickets to residents within five days of observing a violation. In addition, small businesses and nonprofits that receive multiple tickets for posting on city property within five days of their first violation, and who have not violated the law in the past, will be charged for just one offense and will be ensured sufficient time to correct the problem before being issued further fines.

“With the PATH Act, we’re creating a path to fairness when it comes to ticketing small businesses and nonprofits,” Council Speaker Christine Quinn (D-Manhattan) said in a statement. “Presenting someone with thousands of dollars in fines before they’ve had a chance to fix the problem is simply irresponsible.”


And I received this from a civic leader:

"There is nothing in the release about what these fliers make our neighborhoods look like. Or about DOS giving religious groups a bye on posting.

According to the release, the Intro is supported by civics, businesses, non-profits and churches--just the folks who are most likely to decorate public property with their litter.

This non-profit (Kew Gardens Hills Civic Association) does not post on public property anywhere--ever.

IN Kew Gardens Hills, these are the major litterers--that and the illegal businesses."

Which position do the rest of you agree with?

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

Littering is littering. Whoever, whenever, wherever.

If they are found guilty, let them pay.

Ignorance is no excuse.

When I walk my dog at 5AM I remove all offending flyers and signs from my route. If more people would do this it would become unprofitable to post these eyesores.

Power to the people!

Anonymous said...

In many European cities there are public bulletin boards on the streets available for public announcements. They are just a bit wider than lamp posts. It seems to work because I did not notice any posters or flyers anywhere but on these public boards.

Taxpayer said...

What about the fines already assessed to John Liu for his numerous election posters illegally littering the city?

Will he be able to wriggle out of paying if this otherwise proper bill passes?

No politician should ever be permitted to litter with posters.

Anonymous said...

This fine kills a lot of amateurs with garage sales who don't know the law. It's fair to give them one pass and them come down on them like a ton of bricks for a second offense.

Anonymous said...

Litter is litter. The content of the sign should not be the determiner.

Suzannah B. Troy said...

I wanted to post my protest posters of Mike Bloomberg with an oversized crown with red white and blue gems which said "NO THIRD TERM" but I would have gotten ticketed.

If these "politicians" get ticketed I am guessing they pay out of campaign funds.

Business as usual -- campaign funds were set up to pay for politcos breaking laws -- right?

Quinn is exposed for more corrupt dealings in The New York Times but the reporters states close to the line when it is clear she has yet again stepped over the line and with an aide that now works on Bloomberg Campaign.

http://suzannahbtroy.blogspot.com/2009/10/christine-quinn-and-her-staff-member.html

J Liu said...

Whew!

Anonymous said...

so...
are advertising flyers and /or bags filled with advertising flyers left on homeowner stairs, stoop, or front yard considered litter?
why are businesses permitted to SPAM
our homes with their $#*^&$%# litter!

Anonymous said...

laws are already on the books and obviously there's NEVER been any enforcement,so what's different here ?

Anonymous said...

Iaxpayer -

Bloomberg had to pay his fine - they even have the report tacked up at the enforsement office and gleefully point to it

I also pull down the signs when I walk my dog. Only leave lost animal or lost people signs up. Of course some politians are lost souls but I still take theirs down.

CntrySigns said...

Lets ask a better question. Why are these people putting up the signs? For low cost advertising. These news papers are soo expensive to advertise in it has become cheaper to post some signs and hope you don't get caught. And even when you do get caught the fines usually equal less than the what the advertising costs. Most papers have little or no non-profit discounts. Some do allow free line listings in the classifieds but who really looks at those? Until advertising rates come down we are going to have these illegal posters.

Anonymous said...

kevin kim's name is painted all over Bayside,on construction developer's fences. i guess that tells district 19 voters,who is supporting k.kim for CM ?and who kim will be beholden to ,if he should win the election.

it will be interesting to see how many site violation fines will be dismissed by the d.o.b., at these sites ,in the future.

only 5% of kim's donations are coming from local district 19 ? why? is not that an odd situation for a councilman election ? why did he go to CHINA to learn mandarin ? why are his donors from China?is he not American/Korean? who is kim ? we know he is a schoolboy,but where is the experience to represent a n.y.c.district ?

Anonymous said...

Maspeth Mom says...

I am so glad they creating a law against these flyers. In my area they put up signs for polish discos in Brooklyn and I live in Maspeth. The only poster I would consider is that for a lost dog or stoop sale - but when the sale is past the date on the poster -they should be removed my the person who placed it. Still, I am glad they are putting this into effect - I am sick of this crap blowing in my front yard.

Anonymous said...

I take note of the various flyers in my neighborhood as I go to work, the store etc but it doesn't go much farther than that.
just my opinion but it is what it is.