An appeal to allow a digital sign in the county stirred debate during the Morgan County Board of Commissioners Sept. 3 meeting.
On July 9, Lanford and Company submitted an application to install a digital billboard at the Ace Hardware property on Eatonton Highway.
The planning department denied the application based on compliance with the county’s sign ordinance. The planning department said the sign ordinance prohibits digital signs, unless they are used to list prices at fuel stations. Other violations cited included being within 500 ft. of a zoning district where billboard signs are not allowed, being within 500 ft. of an interchange or intersection, and exceeding 72 sq. ft. in area.
David Ellison, the company’s attorney, asked the BOC to appeal the decision, arguing that the county violates its own ordinance by operating a digital sign at Bill Wood Park. He said the park’s sign is identical to the one proposed.
“An outright ban when you all have the exact same sign is not reasonably proportional,” he argued.
Ellison claimed the county violated the First Amendment and restricted the company’s right to commercial speech by acting as a “commercial monopoly.” He also argued the county violated due process by not providing enough notice of the appeal hearing.
“We received notice of this hearing [Friday, Aug. 30],” Ellison told the BOC. “We don’t think one business day’s notice is reasonable under these circumstances.”
County attorney Christian Henry said the park is located within Madison city limits, not unincorporated Morgan County, so the county ordinance doesn’t apply. He also said the BOC can be exempt from ordinances, regardless of whether they come from the city or the county.
“The [Bill Wood Park] sign does not violate our ordinance,” Henry said. “It may be different than what the requirements are in our ordinance, but it doesn’t matter because it’s not in unincorporated Morgan County. It’s within the City of Madison, and as a governmental entity, we’re exempt from the City of Madison’s zoning ordinances.
[Lanford and Company] is not a governmental entity, and they don’t have those same rights. They may claim that it’s unfair, and maybe it is, but I don’t know. But I’m not here to judge fairness; I am here to judge the law. Under the law, they’re not entitled to do this, period.”
District 4 commissioner Philipp von Hanstein, who was critical of the decision to install the sign at Bill Wood Park two years ago, reiterated his criticisms and said the BOC shouldn’t deny Lanford’s appeal while the county operates its own digital sign.
“I, at the time, didn’t even know that there was a negotiation about [the park sign] until I saw the land being cleared and I asked questions,” von Hanstein told the Lake Oconee News. “The county manager, at that time, told me to stand by, that there would be a presentation at a future meeting. Mr. Lanford, who is also in the billboard/sign business and one of my constituents, was not given the opportunity to bid or negotiate on the recreation department sign."
“Frankly, after we had just passed a sign ordinance that prohibited electric signs, we should lead by example, not exempt ourselves,” he added. “What we are saying is, I know what’s good for you, but I will do something different because I do not have to abide by the rules. Three commissioners with a couple of county employees sold out for a price.”
“The ordinance does not apply to a government entity, and you should know that,” District 3 commissioner Ben Riden told von Hanstein at the meeting. “I know you threw a couple of us under the bus, [saying the sign] was done behind the scenes, which it was not. Nothing was underhanded about it. When it was done, it was all done above board, and it was done for the benefit of the public to provide information to the public.
“The city and the county can [exempt ordinances] if it benefits the public. They’re allowed to do what they need to do and what they determine is best. We’ve been through this before, and we know your position on it, but all I’m saying is that the county has a right to do this, just as a city would have a right.
“We didn’t violate anything, and we didn’t do anything under the table,” Riden added. “We didn’t agree to anything ahead of time, either, like you told the public that we did. There was nothing agreed to ahead of time. So just be careful when you make accusations.”
District 2 commissioner Blake McCormack asked Henry if denying the appeal would set a precedent for violating the First Amendment.
He said the company had “valid points” about limiting commercial speech. McCormack also asked if the BOC violated due process, but Henry said the county did not violate either issue.
The commissioners voted 3-2 to deny the appeal, with chairman Bill Kurtz casting the tie-breaking vote. Riden and District 1 Commissioner Donald Harris voted to deny the appeal, while von Hanstein and McCormack voted to approve.
Also, at the meeting, the BOC tabled the vote on a conditional use request for a telecommunications tower proposed for 149.6 acres on Paxon Dairy Road. The BOC plans to discuss it on Oct. 1 to give the applicant more time to gather information. As a condition for receiving the 5311 Grant, commissioners also approved the updated Title VI and Americans with Disabilities Act plans for transit.