Amador County – The Jackson City Council deadlocked Tuesday over a decision to change the city’s sign ordinance after a Jackson resident complained that no special exception should be made for a local sign shop owner.
Thornton Consolo of Jackson said he filed a complaint with the council two weeks previous “after recognizing three signs for local political candidates that were out of compliance with city code.”
The signs were approximately 32 square feet – twice what is allowed under the ordinance.
After two of the signs were promptly removed, the complaint quickly focused in on a third sign located in front of Merzlak Signs, prompting a special meeting of the city council in order to gather the opinion of the city attorney.
Consolo said Merzlak Signs was giving certain candidates an unfair advantage. “If we change the sign ordinance, we’ll be doing it only to accommodate one particular person,” he said.
In his defense, Kam Merzlak said he is merely displaying the product his business creates, but he is being singled out because the signs he currently displays happen to be for candidates who Consolo opposes.
Consolo readily admitted that he supports an opposing candidate. “If my candidate doesn’t buy his signs there then he is clearly at an unlawful disadvantage,” he said.
Merzlak said: “I make signs to display outside the city of Jackson that go over that size limit because the county and city are not held to those same constraints. It’s so out of line that I’m the only business within the city limits being asked not to display its work.”
“For 20 plus years I’ve been making and displaying signs in their current location…with no prior complaints,” he added.
Merzlak says it is also necessary to leave the signs in front of his shop for more practical reasons, including drying time and after-hour pickups.
Councilmember Marilyn Lewis pointed out that Consolo made a contradictory complaint four years ago asking to allow larger signs for her campaign. Consolo told TSPN this was untrue. “They were setting sign limits at the time and it was my opinion that they should be able to have larger signs,” he said.
City Manager Daly said he is unsure about the actual penalty for sign ordinance violations, as there has been “no historical concern” over the regulation.
The council voted 3-2 in favor of changing the ordinance to allow larger signs, with Councilmembers Wayne Garibaldi and Keith Sweet against. Since a four-fifths vote was needed, the ordinance remains unchanged. Sweet said he was concerned about changing the ordinance to accommodate one person, and both councilmen did not want to make changes before the election.
The city council requested the city planning commission look at the ordinance to consider size revisions consistent with the county ordinance and other cities in the county.
Story by Alex Lane. This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
