The 2010 general election cycle doesn’t begin until next year, but a political sign controversy, this one pitting free speech issues against public safety and aesthetics, is already brewing in the city of Orangeburg.

Bill Connor, a local attorney running as a Republican for lieutenant governor, says the removal of his political sign from a supporter’s Cluster Court property by city officials is a violation of the First Amendment guarantee of free speech.

“This supporter (Mabel All) had one campaign sign displayed in the privacy of her own yard,” Connor said. “I can understand the concern about removing signs from any right-of-way areas that might hinder the public access.

“However, what a citizen puts in the privacy of her own yard is clearly the constitutional right of free expression. The case precedence is overwhelming.”

Mayor Paul Miller says the city ordinance clearly states, “you can’t put up a political sign until 30 days prior to an election.

“That’s what I told him. They can’t be on a telephone pole and they must be off the right-of-way. And they should be removed in a reasonable period of time after the election.”

According to Miller, City Attorney James Walsh “says there’s case law that covers the fact” for the city’s position.

“I told Bill, ‘If you want to sue us, that’s fine. Let the courts decide. I don’t take it personally,’” Miller said. “He’s fussing because he’s got some people who want a sign in their yard.

“The reason we passed the ordinance is we don’t want the city cluttered up with signs.

“He’s still got one year before the primary. He contends the ordinance favors the incumbent. If he wanted to challenge the ordinance, he could sue us ... if you feel like your rights have been violated under the First Amendment. Or, he could come before council and ask us to change it. ... I gave him a couple of alternatives -- come to City Council or take it to court.”

In a letter to Orangeburg City Council, Connor says he’d, “rather not have to bring a lawsuit against the city I call home.”

“I understand the city’s concern about signs in the right-of-way, but telling people in their own yards that they paid for ...” Connor said. “If we throw the baby out with the bath water and limit free speech, it won’t stop there. ... If we don’t put a stop to it, who says they can’t say next that you can’t put out crosses or Christmas lights 30 days before Christmas?

“As long as you’re not hurting somebody ... it’s not City Council’s right to limit free speech. Even if there are only a few in the city who want signs up, the majority can’t take that right away.”

Connor says he’s not a litigious person and he hopes that City Council will “do the right thing” and avoid another court case.

“I hope it doesn’t have to go to a lawsuit and they do the right thing,” he said. “If this goes to court, it’s a waste of a lot of the city’s money. ... That’s taxpayers’ money. People like Miss Mabel, her taxes will be used to defend it.”

Citing a previous lawsuit involving a ticketed protester, Connor says that there’s a continuing problem with free speech in the city.

“Orangeburg has a reputation among attorneys as a city that doesn’t pay attention to free-speech rights,” he said.

Warren Harley, a governmental affairs liaison with the Municipal Association of South Carolina, says that several other municipalities, including Columbia, North Charleston and Myrtle Beach, have political sign ordinances.

Harley was the assistant city administrator for Orangeburg back in 2006 when the issue was a hot topic of discussion.

It was during a public hearing discussion of the five-year renewal of the comprehensive plan that the issue of free speech was raised by Councilman Bernard Haire.

“We’re encroaching on the rights of individual citizens,” Haire said then. “This is not something we need to be dictating to citizens. In essence, I’ve been in violation for some time then. I have a sign I’ve displayed that I feel I have a constitutional right to display. ... The government needs to take a breather and back up.”

Haire says he still has the same opinion.

“A person has a right ... I just don’t see that being an issue we need to make,” Haire said. “In a private yard, you shouldn’t take it out.”

Connor said he’s seen a “lot of Obama signs still up” and suggests there may have been selective enforcement in the Democratic voting area.

Although he “may not have voted for Obama,” the S.C. National Guard lieutenant colonel and Afghanistan war veteran says the protection of free speech for all is why he volunteered for military service.

In addition, Connor charges that the city’s ordinance favors incumbents and puts challengers, who depend largely on signs for name recognition, at a disadvantage.

The city’s ordinance leaves a million questions about what constitutes “political,” he says.

“Is a pro-life or pro-choice sign ‘political?’ Is a picture of James Clyburn or Barack Obama or Mark Sanford ‘political?’” he said. “With absentee balloting starting weeks before an election, putting a sign up 30 days out is almost useless. Is this 30 days out before both the primary and general election? Is it before a special election?”

The best answer to the endless questions is to allow citizens to decide when to put up signs, Connor argues.

“It’s not about my election,” he said. “I won’t win or lose by a few signs in Orangeburg.”

T&D Government Writer Tucker Lyon can be reached at tlyon@timesanddemocrat.com or by calling 803-533-5545.

You must be logged in to comment.