The Opelika Observer has written about Rose City Outdoor’s successful challenge to local sign law using Reed v Gilbert as a precedent.  Here are the facts.

• Rose City Outdoor submitted applications for 6 commercial billboards (conventional advertising) and 2 non-commercial billboards (which would run public service messages).  All of the signs followed Alabama and local regulations.

• The city’s planning director asked Rose City to provide examples of what sort of ads the public service signs would display.

• The city denied the non-commercial sign permits and refused to give a decision on the commercial signs permits

• Opelika sued based on denial of free speech and Opelika settled.  The settlement agreement permits Rose City to install 4 digital signs.

On May 3 Opelika will hold a public hearing on a new sign ordinance which complies with Reed v. Gilbert.

Insider’s take: Opelika made a mistake when it asked about sign messages and based a decision to deny on the messages.  Reed v Gilbert is clear that you can’t use the basis of the sign message to decide whether to permit the sign or not.  If your local community does this you have a good basis for a court challenge.

Paid Advertisement