The recent Supreme Court decision highlighted two challenges the sign industry faces when attempting to comply with sign codes and meeting business needs. Having a sign type that has more restrictions than other similar type signs and having the sign regulated based on content. The last challenge is something that many communities struggle with and the sign producer and/or sign owner are left with the consequences.
With this court decision there is now a message to municipalities that they need to have sign codes that are not based on content and indirectly they should recognize the business purposes and needs when structuring its sign codes. This would apply not only for temporary signs, but all signs in general.
For municipalities that have considered revising or updating their sign codes, this may spur them to take a deeper look and have more involvement from stakeholders for input. This of course, leads to sign code changes. For areas that have more problematic and conflicting codes, there can be more legal challenges brought by sign producers and sign owners.
Where codes are to be reexamined by a municipality they can work with stakeholders while the revisions are underway or they can impose a moratorium on sign permits and approvals until the new codes are established. The latter choice would be the more difficult for the industry as it would limit or halt the ability for signs to be installed or used.
This court decision also gives the sign industry a stronger voice and options when working with municipalities on balanced codes and bringing back the business position into the discussions.