Continuously serving Kosciusko County since 1854
Warsaw's sign war ended Monday, and a remnant found after the battle at city hall was a note by representatives of billboard companies that read, "We're dead."
City officials would dispute that assessment. City planner Pat Hudson said the ordinance approved by city council Monday is proper, sound and "good for commerce."
But officials admit it could curtail the use of some billboards over the next few years.
Sign representatives spoke out against several aspects of the proposal, but were most concerned about changes involving off-premise signs and on-premise signs.
Currently, stores in some parts of the city can promote their own business with one sign and include a billboard on the same property to promote an off- premise business. Under the new policy, the city eliminates the distinction between on- and off- premise signs and limits the number of free standing signs to one.
A provision was included to protect existing circumstances, but if the sign is removed the new policy would go into effect.
A spokesman for Burkhart Sign Company predicted five of its 11 signs will be removed when leases expire.
Since they would no longer be able to provide "total coverage," the company will probably pull out of the community, said Peter Owsianowski, spokesman for Burkhart.
"This is a death sentence for us," Owsianowski said. "If they want billboards to go away, that's what they did."
Both sides interpreted the ordinance differently.
Sign supporters said the ordinance was riddled with holes, but city officials said many of their arguments were either misleading or inaccurate.
Sign supporters said the ordinance would limit businesses to one sign only. But Hudson said the limitation applies only to "free standing" signs and that businesses can still use banners and facade signs in addition to one free standing sign.
Dan Walcott, of Eagle Outdoor Signs, contended the new ordinance would outlaw small real estate signs, that $15 permit fees would be required for campaign signs and that the banner stretching over Center Street would have to be removed.
Hudson said real estate sign policy is the same as in the past and is never enforced.
The Center Street banner is not illegal and campaign signs aren't addressed in the new ordinance, he said.
Sign companies see the ordinance as an encroachment on private rights, while to Hudson it was liberal compared to ordinances in other communities.
Hudson said he believes the ordinance is fair.
"Without these kind of provisions, you would have carte blanche. All we're trying to do is take a lot and say there should be a cap on the size and a cap on the frequency," Hudson said.
Owsianowski said the ordinance is the only one of its kind in any of the 38 Indiana counties where they do business.
Walcott and another businessman said the battle had more to do with the rights of businessmen and not just signs.
They view it as another encroachment by government against property rights.
Another businessman, Harvey Hayes, added, "I think the (original ordinance) we have is pretty good."
None of the council members spoke against the proposal.
"I hope we don't hurt too many people with this," said councilman Dewey Lawshe. "It's something we have to do to restrict things."
Councilman Porter Polston took a different outlook.
"I don't look at it as restrictive. I look at it as controlled."
Councilman Mac Silveus he believed the task force that studied the issue gave it ample consideration and time.
Councilman Jerry Patterson added, "I don't think there's not anything in the ordinance we can't live with."
Some sign companies questioned why the city was making a change if nobody was complaining, but Hudson said they had received some comments.
