Candidates flouting sign ordinance

There is no excuse for campaign signs to be placed illegally – including on public property or in the city’s right of way on private property, which is between the sidewalk and the street. But this year has been more amazing than most for the number of unlawful signs from campaigns of candidates for Sedgwick County District Court judge and, to our eye, of the GOP candidate for Sedgwick County district attorney. Illegal placement not only makes the candidate look bad but also wastes hard-to-come-by campaign dollars, because city employees just come along and sweep up the offending signs. Another heads up: All signs should be gone eight days after the election.

53 Comments

  1. sunflower5
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 6:14 am | Permalink

    Rhonda I could not agree with you more. There appears to be happening more this year than in past years.

    If you cannot convince people to allow you to put a sign at their home, business or property they own a candidate should not put up a sign. They should also be able to tell those assisting with the signs not to do it.

    Some of the big abusers seem to be judges (to many to mention by name) Kelly Arnold, Mark Schoenhofer(sp), Terry McLachlan, Walt Chappell, Jina Jeffery,Raj Goyle,Craig Gable and the list goes on.

    The candidates should be ashamed of this pratice.

  2. Maggotpunk
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 6:35 am | Permalink

    The anti-abortion terrorists are permitted to put their signs on public property so why can’t the rest of the public do so? Special rights for fundies I suppose.

  3. Mary_Caruso
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 6:41 am | Permalink

    Anti abortion terrorists? I think you need to look at the definition of what a terrorist is. Just because you don’t agree and they’re practicing their right to free speech…that doesn’t qualify them as terrorists.

  4. Maggotpunk
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 6:44 am | Permalink

    Mary, terrorists are those who bomb buildings and conduct assassinations right? I might as well throw in death threats, extortion, stalking, vandalism, etc. All actions by anti-abortion thugs in Wichita alone.

  5. Mary_Caruso
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 6:53 am | Permalink

    I think the majority of pro lifers don’t fit your steroytpe.
    There are nuts on BOTH sides.

  6. Maggotpunk
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 6:56 am | Permalink

    Mary, it’s the Operation Rescue nuts who are the ones putting out the signs. The majority of “pro-lifers” are not putting out the signs. If you aren’t a terrorist then the label doesn’t apply to you.

  7. Mary_Caruso
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 6:56 am | Permalink

    It’s slightly hypocritical to decry the activities you listed when Tiller kills innocent, defenseless humans for a living. I guess it’s a matter of perspective, isn’t it?

  8. Mary_Caruso
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 6:59 am | Permalink

    I’d love to stick around for this discussion, but work is calling. See ya later.

  9. Maggotpunk
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 7:07 am | Permalink

    Mary, if you have support for your claim that Tiller committed a crime then present it. Until you do then you are someone who likes to fondle farm animals. I have just as much evidence as you do that Tiller kills people.

  10. Monkeyhawk
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 7:07 am | Permalink

    I don’t consider them “anti-abortion.”

    I consider them advocates of illegal abortion.

  11. Maggotpunk
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 7:11 am | Permalink

    Well they oppose contraception as well labeling a birth control pill the same as an abortion. It must break their heart that millions of sperm die with each ejaculation. Oh the precious, defenseless humans all dying with only one making it to the egg.

  12. Raptor
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 7:16 am | Permalink

    Back to the thread for a moment…the waste and clutter of these signs on the public right of way should be punishable. The candidate can always claim it was an enthusiastic volunteer that placed them, and deny any knowledge.

    But, if the candidates were fined, maybe they would exert a little more control over where the signs get placed?

  13. Boxlock
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 8:21 am | Permalink

    I know one man that took action to correct the problem of people stealing signs from legal areas, ie. private property.
    And there is a lot of that going on as well, usually by Democrats and Obama supporters as the signs stolen are usually Republican.
    The lead person for the Minuteman Organization in Kansas and Missouri parked his car and took pictures of those stealing signs and followed taking pictures of their license and faces.
    Whoa….did that every pi$$ off the offender.
    The he then developed the digital pictures at one of those walk up to machines, called the police, filed a complaint and a report with them vowing to take them to court if the DA’s office would press charges. The signs were his, so he has standing that his property was stolen.
    With one he also filed a child endangerment complaint as the driver left two small children strapped in the running car a long distance away from where he ran up and stole the signs.
    Ha, now that’s someone getting involved.

  14. LonnythePlumber
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 8:35 am | Permalink

    Many may not realize that even with the property owners permission you cannot put signs between the street and the sidewalk. Some consider it their property since they must take care of it. It’s also regretful that feelings are so strong that some feel the need to take others signs. A campaign can explain to the volunteers the ordinance but their enthusiasm may override the message.

  15. bth
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 8:36 am | Permalink

    In defense of ’some’ sign placement in right-of-ways. The part of ‘my yard’ nearest the street is a right-of-way but I mow it. The City doen’t come out and take care of it for me. Therefore – in THAT right-of-way – I should have a right to put up signs supporting the candidate of my choice.

    Mary, maggotpunk – I agree that ‘most’ in the pro-life side are good peole and are not terrorists. Unfortunately at least some groups on that side HAVE supported terrorism as well as slander against their political opponents. Just as with excesses committed by a minority of those in Sunflower Action or ACORN these acts should be condemned – ESPECIALLY by their compatriots.

  16. oldksbattleaxe
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 8:50 am | Permalink

    Sunflower5 / aka Representative Landwehr,

    Still re-living the 2006 election, apparently. Let it go.

  17. TomPaine
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 9:34 am | Permalink

    To me signs are a waste anyways, its all about your supporters and base feeling good, who has ever made up their mind cause of a yard sign

  18. newsletter
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 9:38 am | Permalink

    I put out over 200 signs this week. 95% were placed legally. There is no excuse for Tiahrt, Roberts, Shonofher (the guy running for DA) and the other judges, etc… to be placing signs illegally.

    You would think people like the DA candidates and Judges would be the ones to stick to this rule. I expect it from the house and senate races.

    The ones i placed that i don’t consider 100% legal are just questionable, i.e. no definite line between public right of way and private property.

  19. newsletter
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 9:39 am | Permalink

    “who has ever made up their mind cause of a yard sign”

    Uneducated voters who remember names. Studies show that the uneducated (people who don’t read the paper or choose not to educate themselves on the election and its candidates) choose by either party affiliation or name recognition.

  20. newsletter
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 9:42 am | Permalink

    So my other question is this:

    If it is illegal for candidates to place signs between the sidewalk and the street…

    Wouldn’T it be illegal for operation rescue to place their crosses outside Tillers pace in the public right of way between the sidewalk and the street???

    I think the president is set, OR gets away with it, so should every single candidate…

  21. sunflower5
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 9:47 am | Permalink

    oldksbattleaxe – just killing you to try and figure out who I am. Keep trying.

  22. lindainks55
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 9:55 am | Permalink

    If you aren’t Landwehr, the two of you share the same political philosophy. So why is there a need to think about it further?

  23. LonnythePlumber
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 9:58 am | Permalink

    Change the city ordinance. Why not have signs on right of ways? They don’t restrict vision and elections are a public issue.

  24. oldksbattleaxe
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 10:10 am | Permalink

    Sunflower5 AKA Representative Brenda Landwehr,

    Another non-denial on your part. That would be number two.

    If you really aren’t Representative Brenda Landwehr of District 91, Sunflower5, why all the dancing around and unwillingness to give a simple, straight-up denial?

    Declare for everyone here, Sunflower5, that you are not Kansas State Representative Brenda Landwehr, Republican of District 91, posting under the name Sunflower5.

    I’ll take you at your word that you aren’t, and I’ll stop posting that you are.

  25. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 10:12 am | Permalink

    Landwehr = the queen of “low information” voters!

  26. Posted October 15, 2008 at 10:13 am | Permalink

    newsletter – good point about OR and the crosses on MY property. And, in that case it doesn’t even get the benefit of the doubt in regards to your “no definite line between public right of way and private property” which is similar to my comment above about where I mow..

  27. sunflower5
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 10:49 am | Permalink

    oldksbattleaxe – I thought my response was obvious.

    I’m not Brenda Landwehr.

    Hope that makes you feel better.

  28. spyuhire
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 11:32 am | Permalink

    Wow, just heard about the new “boycott the Wichita Eagle” site. Rhonda Holman is being made famous in it. If this boycott catches on, The Eagle may be added to the endangered species list again! Check out this web site http://trashtheeagle.com/

  29. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 11:37 am | Permalink

    bigotbox has a website? Who knew….

  30. lindainks55
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 11:38 am | Permalink

    Desperation takes many forms and goes off on tangents. Those who see the news as slanted must want fairy tales in our newspapers as there isn’t much they would consider good in the real news. And when they see that as the fault of the newspaper does “attack the messenger” come to mind?

  31. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 11:39 am | Permalink

    OMG, that website is hysterical. Funny stuff.

    And I note, at the bottom of the home page, it’s actually an advertisement for a conservative rag.

    Go figure.

    I bet the WE is quaking at the thought…

  32. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 11:40 am | Permalink

    bigot box thinks he actually had something to do with Randy and Richard leaving.

    Talk about delusions.

    A “legand” in his own mind. Like someone else we know….

  33. lindainks55
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 11:44 am | Permalink

    “Boycott the Wichita Eagle until it starts fairly reporting the news and stops forcing radical liberalism down our throats!”

    Do you ever wonder about all that is “forced” on these weaklings? They seem not to be able to change channels, keep themselves safe from adult stores, books, opinions. They really have little control over their world and are always in danger!

    Reminds me of this apt article at The Onion:

    ‘I Am Under 18′ Button Clicked For First Time In History Of Internet

    CHINO, CA—In an unprecedented and historic event Monday, the “I Am Under 18″ button, an Internet security device which if selected restricts access to websites featuring adult content, was clicked for the first time ever. “I knew I could simply claim to be over 18 and continue onto my desired destination, but I also realized that I would have to live with that lie for the rest of my life,” said local resident Garrett Kinley, 17. “I admit, I was curious to see what type of material I would find on http://www.juggworld.com, but that button was clearly placed there for a reason, and let’s face it: 17 and three-quarters is not 18. I plan to return to the site three months from now, when I will be mature enough to handle its content.”

    http://www.theonion.com/content/news_briefs/i_am_under_18_button?utm_source=onion_rss_daily

  34. Nathaniel
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 11:47 am | Permalink

    BlueJay?

  35. mrcontroversy
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 12:07 pm | Permalink

    OMG:
    “Phillip Brownlee is a radical Berkley-style liberal who never misses an opportunity to take cheap pot shots at those on the politically and socially conservative side of the fence. Brownlee should be fired.
    Rhonda Holman is a radical feminist who supports extreme abortion policies and is a consistent apologist for late-term abortionist George Tiller. She is a part of the ring of corruption that insulates Tiller from being brought to justice for legal violations (not to mention the human tragedy) that he has committed over the years.”
    ROFLMAO!!!!!

  36. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 12:10 pm | Permalink

    Yeah Mr. C. I cant decide if it sounds more like regular or bigotbox.

    Maybe Paul F. Rossel?

    Where is Franklin lately?

    I sure hope he’s getting the help he needs.

    Or maybe his masters decided he was hurting their candidates more than helping.

    Sigh. I miss those “obama supports Manson” posts….

  37. Boxlock
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 12:12 pm | Permalink

    Randy and Richard leaving.
    Ha, ha, ha, ha, made my day. Ha!

  38. LonnythePlumber
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 12:17 pm | Permalink

    I just called one of my ultra liberal friends to tell him about this blog coming down on Rhonda for being liberal. He’s having a fit because he considers the paper to be extremely anti-liberal and tried to give me so many examples.

  39. Posted October 15, 2008 at 12:29 pm | Permalink

    It will be interesting to see if the “uber liberal” Eagle endorses Tankerless Todd – AGAIN.

  40. newsletter
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 1:04 pm | Permalink

    Interesting… http://www.trashtheeagle.com is run by Operation Rescue.

    Domain servers in listed order: (for trashtheeagle.com)
    NS1.OPERATIONRESCUE.ORG
    NS2.OPERATIONRESCUE.ORG

    Interesting huh?

  41. lindainks55
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 1:05 pm | Permalink

    Yes, very interesting.

  42. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 1:11 pm | Permalink

    Oh my.

    “Interesting… http://www.trashtheeagle.com is run by Operation Rescue”

    BIG surprise!

    Parkay doesnt have enough to do?

    A terrorist organization wants everyone to trash the WE?

    Why does troy newman hate america?

    Maybe this is why Paul F. Rossel has been absent?

  43. Nathaniel
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 1:20 pm | Permalink

    If Operation Rescue is a terrorist organization then Tillers clinic is a Nazi death camp and Tiller is the lead SS guard marching people into the gas chamber to die.

  44. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 1:22 pm | Permalink

    Godwin.

    nuff said.

  45. Nathaniel
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 1:30 pm | Permalink

    KFG,

    I wonder how long it will take before they come up with another “law” about how long it takes to compare someone with terrorists?

    Seems like the trendy thing to do now days.

    Which was my point in making the comparison.

    Of course it was way over your head. I should use simpler terms and words.

    Perhaps Tara could draw you a picture?

  46. spyuhire
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 1:46 pm | Permalink

    My god, could you imagine anyone having the nerve to call the Wichita Eagle a bias liberal rag with a left leaning agenda? Where would they that idea? Glad I dont own stock in it though:)Looks like a bad investment………..

  47. spyuhire
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 1:51 pm | Permalink

    You gotta laugh though, all of the important issues in this election like health care, taxes, energy, crime rates, jail expansions etc. and Holman’s focus is on political signs. I see she has her finger on the pulse of Kansas as usual.

  48. situveux1
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 1:55 pm | Permalink

    OMG, you have to be kidding. A district court judge and DA candidates are the ONLY ones putting up signs where you don’t think they belong?

  49. Posted October 15, 2008 at 1:59 pm | Permalink

    They are not the only ones but, from what I have seen, they are the majority.

  50. Regular
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 2:01 pm | Permalink

    There will be a drive to pick up Obama signs posted illegally.Please drop these signs off at the Clinton target and shooting range.

  51. Posted October 15, 2008 at 2:19 pm | Permalink

    Judge signs – I think one reason for this is that they don’t really advertise much or get much coverage. So, they figure signs will give them name recognition.

    Also I have seen a number with the little elephant – apparently hoping people will vote for them based on that. I will be voting against them – I prefer people wanting me to vote for them – not their party.

  52. Jones
    Posted October 15, 2008 at 6:18 pm | Permalink

    Is this seriously all we have to worry about in this election?Rhonda Holman,please get a life.Whats next?I did hear a rumor that some candidates don’t use their turn signals all the time.I really wish I could get paid to sit around a whine about things that mean nothing.Lets hear some real issues for once or would that be to much effort to do some real reporting.

  53. Posted October 17, 2008 at 11:29 pm | Permalink

    There are SO fewer con signs this season. I’ve seen only 2 McCain Palin signs and only a few more Tiahrt signs.

    Heh, a few less after I put my kid to work.