City Hall’s council chambers were filled to the brim Monday night — mostly full of people to speak against settlement of a lawsuit by Lamar Advertising. Though the item was scratched from the agenda, residents aired their views during public participation.
All Daphne residents who spoke on the issue in that segment said the council shouldn’t amend the city’s sign ordinance to allow electronic billboards.
Many people who expected a planned executive session on the issue learned of it from awareness e-mails such as one the Olde Towne Daphne Association initially sent to the Daphne Bulletin and 39 other recipients.
“The City of Daphne has been defending its sign ordinance for several years against Lamar Advertising. The Council rejected Lamar’s settlement agreement and the City is waiting for a ruling of summary judgement in the case,” the e-mail read.
“Tomorrow night, at the Council meeting, the Council is suddenly revisiting their decision.....in executive session......excluding public discussion on this issue.”
The e-mail — which OTDA President Kären Nady sent — urged residents to attend the meeting and speak out on the issue before the council discussed the issue behind closed doors.
Though the e-mail said that billboards should not be discussed during executive session — perhaps suggesting an opinion, rather than a fact of Robert’s Rules of Order, the manual that many governments use to prevent chaos in procedure — some affiliated with the city wanted to set the record straight.
“I don’t know if it’s due to misinformation, but we only vote in public,” Councilman Ron Scott said. “We discuss litigation options in executive session.”
City Attorney Jay Ross said an executive session on the matter wouldn’t violate Alabama’s Open Meetings Act because pending litigation is one justification for closed-door meetings.
Jury selection for a trial in the battle between the city and Lamar, which had filed a federal lawsuit challenging an anti-billboard ordinance — that, to Lamar, violates the business’ right to free speech — is set for Sept. 3, according to Ross.
Nancy Henderson, Daphne Beautification Committee chairman, said the group voted unanimously at an August meeting to keep the original sign ordinance, which prohibits digital and regular billboards.
Mike Sullivan, a resident, agreed.
“I oppose large, flashing, neon signs,” he said. “We don’t need to grow at the expense of these flashing signs.”
On the other side, Kevin Spriggs, owner of Eastern Shore Motel and a Spanish Fort resident, asked city leaders to support businesses.
“The existing sign ordinance is killing our businesses,” he said.
Without tall signs, people can’t see businesses from Interstate 10, he contended.
Willie Robison — a candidate for District 5 council member in the Aug. 26 municipal election — saw both sides of the issue.
“We need to enforce the ordinances that we have,” he said. “We need to be very careful not to be like Airport Boulevard (in Mobile) but we also have to make sure our businesses can attract customers.”
Recurring references to preventing an Airport Boulevard redux in Daphne have been heard throughout the billboard battle, and have reverberated in some residents’ mass mailings, such as one Starke Irvine sent to the Daphne Bulletin on Monday.
“One doesn’t have to go too far to Airport Blvd and see what the effects can and will be,” said the e-mail, which discouraged the need for “more, bigger and taller” signs.
Council members at the meeting had assured the crowd they would find balance between businesses’ and residents’ concerns and that they wouldn’t settle with Lamar.
Councilwoman Cathy Barnette said the city turned down a settlement and expressed pride in the citizen involvement to protect the quality of life, but added, “We do need to look at innovative ways to support our businesses.”