Billboard firms not happy with new county rules

Wednesday, Nov. 5, 2003 | 9:01 a.m.

Representatives from billboard companies objected sharply to new rules passed by the Clark County Commission on Tuesday, but their lawsuit against the county's existing rules was cited as a primary reason for the new ordinance.

With a 6-1 vote, the commission passed new rules that bar any waivers from the existing rules. Commissioner Myrna Williams, who opposed the last rule change in February, once again voted against the newest billboard ordinance. Williams argued that the board needs flexibility to respond to specific situations.

The rule change is the latest turn in a three-year odyssey that has made putting up billboards in many unincorporated areas of the county more difficult. Billboard companies sued the county in March, arguing that rule changes in February, among other issues, amounted to a suppression of free speech because the commission could selectively grant waivers for some signs and not others.

The rules in February were complex, and among other provisions set minimum distance separation of 750 to 1,500 feet between signs. But that set of rules also allowed exceptions. The commission since then has rejected most of the applications for exceptions, but not all of them, opening the door for the industry's challenge.

So no more waivers, county staff and a majority of the commissioners decided.

Attorney Jay Brown, who said he represented smaller billboard companies, argued that the main reason for the suit was that the February rules were applied retroactively to many of the dozens of billboard applications in the pipeline nine months ago.

"Getting rid of the waivers will not solve the litigation problem," Brown told the commission. "You've already limited our right to ask for waivers. Why take it away from us completely?"

Brown asked the commission to delay consideration of the new rules to give time for the staff and billboard industry to discuss the issue.

County counsel Rob Warhola argued against any delay.

"They are challenging the ordinance on the basis that we have discretion," Warhola said. "What we are doing is eliminating all the discretion.

"The urgency comes about because the longer we wait, the more and more applications come in, and the more and more legal challenges we have in the future," he said.

Commissioner Mark James said the problem with the rule passed in February is that it made things tougher for the billboard companies.

"This is going to be a difficult process whenever you change from a more liberal policy to a more strict policy," James said. "The ultimate place were trying to get to is less billboards in residential areas."

Commission Chairwoman Mary Kincaid-Chauncey said she would have preferred to postpone changing the billboard rules because there is a need for occasional waivers.

Commissioner Yvonne Atkinson Gates pointed out that the ordinance had been introduced two weeks ago, giving the industry time to lobby on the issue.

"We've given ample time for people to express their concerns about the ordinance," she said.

Commissioner Rory Reid spoke for the majority.

"We need to continue to protect our neighborhoods from the proliferation of billboards," he said. "If we don't do this, the litigation that is pending could overturn our previous ordinance. I just don't see any reason to wait."