Ore. Police Officer's Signs May Be Illegal
Posted on: Saturday, 8 January 2005, 18:00 CST
EUGENE, Ore. - A police officer's spraypainted signs on curbs and sidewalks are coming under fire. The white and red "no trespassing" and "no soliciting" signs - meant to ward off panhandlers - may be illegal, according to city officials. That's because begging is legal in Oregon and, as such, the signs could represent an infringement.
But Eugene police officer Randy Ellis says the best thing about the "no soliciting,""no trespassing" signs he painted on curbs and sidewalks around Eugene is that they work.
Panhandlers have left the corners where signs began appearing about six months ago.
"It was so effective, it shocked me how simple it was," Ellis told the Register Guard newspaper.
While the signs have won praise from Eugene business owners, they have sparked complaints from advocates for the homeless. And legal experts say Ellis does not have the law on his side.
In 1996, the Oregon Appeals Court found the state's anti-soliciting statute unconstitutional.
A number of state law enforcement agencies have been sued for trying to enforce it, and they faced settlements ranging from $5,000 to $25,000, said Kevin Neely, a spokesman for Attorney General Hardy Myers.
But when it comes to officers painting signs on public property, city policy isn't crystal clear, said Eric Jones, spokesman for Eugene's Public Works department.
Earlier this week, Jones condemned the signs as "graffiti" - not realizing they had been painted by members of the city's police force. Ellis said his signs have been so effective that other police officers have asked to borrow his stencil and paints and several have since painted their own.
Federal guidelines govern signs that deal with pedestrians and traffic, and must be approved by the city's traffic engineer before being posted, Jones said.
Ellis counters that property owners can post no-trespassing signs on their property - and sidewalks typically belong to the property owners, he said.
But that's not always true, Jones said. Sometimes the government agency that owns the road also owns the adjacent property - in which case painting a "no soliciting" sign would violate the state statute.
---
Information from: The Register-Guard
Source: Associated Press/AP Online
Related Articles
- Governor Rendell, Police Officers Ask Federal, State Lawmakers to Stand Against Deadly Assault Weapons, Illegal Handguns
- Aurora Gold Corporation Is Pleased to Announce Drilling Has Begun on the Santa Isabel Property in the Tapajos Gold Province, State of Para, Brazil
- Aurora Gold Corporation Announces the Results From Its Rock Chip Sampling Program on the Sao Joao Property in the Tapajos Gold Province, State of Para, Brazil
- Aurora Gold Corporation Announces Initial Drilling Results From the Attacadau Gold Occurrence on the Sao Domingos Gold Property and a Significant Gold in Soil Anomaly at the Santa Isabel Property in the Tapajos Gold Province, State of Para, Brazil
- Aurora Gold Corporation Announces That It Has Entered Into a Memorandum of Understanding on the Santa Lucia Property in the Tapajos Gold Province, State of Para, Brazil
- Of N.C. Cities, Durham's Fees Highest: Proposal Would Raise Property Taxes and Fees for City Services
- Aurora Gold Corporation Announces That the Drilling Rig Has Arrived on Site and Drilling Will Commence on the Weekend of May 27, 2006 on the Sao Domingos Property in the Tapajos Gold Province, State of Para, Brazil
- Aurora Gold Corporation Announces Results From Preliminary Exploration Programs at the Sao Joao Property in the Tapajos Gold Province, State of Para, Brazil
- Aurora Gold Corporation Announces Results From Preliminary Exploration Programs at the Sao Domingos Property in the Tapajos Gold Province, State of Para, Brazil
- Cities, States Court Biotech Industry
 |
 |
User Comments (0)
RSS Feeds