Ventnor Theater Marquee to Go Dark, Again?

[normkling]

Ventnor's Heavy Hand Tries to Stifle Free Speech

Ventnor City issued an ABATEMENT ORDER against Frank Investments, Inc., on March 24, 2008, ordering the removal of the ENOUGH IS ENOUGH campaign signs of the Kelly, Piatt, Weintrob reform ticket from the Ventnor Theater marquee. If they are not removed by 3-31-08, the City will issue a Summons, a Complaint will be filed and appearance will be required before the court.

This action by Ventnor officials is disturbing, unlawful and puzzling. After all, the ENOUGH IS ENOUGH Kelly Team is advertised as the coming attraction on a movie marquee. What could be more appropriate?

The heavy hand of the incumbent commissioners is seen in action behind the scenes. There are signs all over Ventnor that clearly violate the law and no enforcement is aimed at them. The excuse being used by Ventnor against the Reform Ticket is that the signs on the shuttered (by Redevelopment) theater do not relate to the business of the theater. The awkward language of Ventnor's ordinance states that a sign can be erected on premises "...on which the use to which the sign relates is conducted."

By its own language, the ordinance does not apply to political speech as it is not a business, and, it cannot be regulated as a business.

Any unreasonable attempt to restrain or control the display of a political statement runs smack into the right of free speech under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. What's "reasonable" generally relates to signs on public property or obstruction and safety issues. Political signs are not commercial advertising and are not subject to the same rules.

Metromedia, Inc. v. City of San Diego, 453 U.S. 490 (1981), the leading U.S. Supreme Court case on the issue, was followed in June 2007 by the Georgia Supreme Court to strike down a sign ordinance that was too restrictive and too vague even as to commercial advertising. Ventnor's ordinance is worse, by a long shot.

"The ACLU has successfully sued six Pennsylvania municipalities in the past decade for similar ordinances." See, http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08051/858758-181.stm

Virginia and Florida, among many states, have also seen legal challenges upending unlawful attempts to control political signs with sign ordinances.

How many of our tax dollars are Ventnor's commissioners going to waste on this losing battle? I call on them to back off and cancel the abatement notice. If they refuse, they are herewith put on notice that they and their solicitor will be held accountable to Ventnor's taxpayers for this waste of our money and made to reimburse the City treasury for all expenses on both sides.

Norm Klinger

[VentnorMod]

Your post said this issued on March 24th? When did people find out?

[normkling]

Ventnor Theater Marquee Fiasco - Part II

VENTNOR COMMISSIONERS et al. ADVISED TO LAWYER-UP

Email to City Administrator 3-28-08, 6:50 p.m.

Dear Mr. McCrosson:

Please circulate the following among the commissioners, the solicitor and Jimmie Agnesino, the building and zoning officer, and please read it into the record and have it included in the minutes of the next commissioners' public meeting.

As a matter of fairness, each should be advised of the right to have separate counsel as there are built-in conflicts of interest in this messy affair and one attorney cannot be fair to each and every potential defendant when the finger-pointing begins. The ACLU likes to sue all the individuals involved. I have not invited the ACLU to get involved, nor do I know that anyone has. However, this matter will see the light of day in the public press and will attract attention. And then anything can happen.

It is not my wish to see the commissioners waste the taxpayers' money on this case by running up lawyers' fees. They can simply back off and withdraw the abatement notice. It is ill-advised. And, the election is only weeks away. So, in plain English, what's the big deal?

How can they maintain a straight face while claiming to the press that the signs are unsightly? Have they looked around and seen what they inflicted on Ventnor North with their ill-conceived years-long Eminent Domain threat? Have they considered the damage they did by telling homeowners and business people not to improve their properties because they would be seized by the city of Ventnor? Have they missed the fact that because of their active discouragement property values in that area went down during those years when values rose in the rest of Ventnor? And, are they not aware that depressed values lowered tax ratables and led to tax increases?

The legal references cited below should make it easy to arrive at the conclusion that the city of Ventnor has no business interfering with the right of free speech where a marquee, intended for the display of messages, is being used for exactly that purpose. And, appropriately, the "ENOUGH IS ENOUGH" Kelly Team is a coming attraction that should be playing for four years.

Sincerely,

Norm Klinger

Ventnor's Heavy Hand Tries to Stifle Free Speech

Ventnor City issued an ABATEMENT ORDER against Frank Investments, Inc., on March 24, 2008, ordering the removal of the ENOUGH IS ENOUGH campaign signs of the Kelly, Piatt, Weintrob reform ticket from the Ventnor Theater marquee. If they are not removed by 3-31-08, the City will issue a Summons, a Complaint will be filed and appearance will be required before the court.

This action by Ventnor officials is disturbing, unlawful and puzzling. After all, the ENOUGH IS ENOUGH Kelly Team is advertised as the coming attraction on a movie marquee. What could be more appropriate?

The heavy hand of the incumbent commissioners is seen in action behind the scenes. There are signs all over Ventnor that clearly violate the law and no enforcement is aimed at them. The excuse being used by Ventnor against the Reform Ticket is that the signs on the shuttered (by Redevelopment) theater do not relate to the business of the theater. The awkward language of Ventnor's ordinance states that a sign can be erected on premises "...on which the use to which the sign relates is conducted."

By its own language, the ordinance does not apply to political speech as it is not a business, and, it cannot be regulated as a business.

Any unreasonable attempt to restrain or control the display of a political statement runs smack into the right of free speech under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. What's "reasonable" generally relates to signs on public property or obstruction and safety issues. Political signs are not commercial advertising and are not subject to the same rules.

Metromedia, Inc. v. City of San Diego, 453 U.S. 490 (1981), the leading U.S. Supreme Court case on the issue, was followed in June 2007 by the Georgia Supreme Court to strike down a sign ordinance that was too restrictive and too vague even as to commercial advertising. Ventnor's ordinance is worse, by a long shot.

"The ACLU has successfully sued six Pennsylvania municipalities in the past decade for similar ordinances." See, http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08051/858758-181.stm

Virginia and Florida, among many states, have also seen legal challenges upending unlawful attempts to control political signs with sign ordinances.

How many of our tax dollars are Ventnor's commissioners going to waste on this losing battle? I call on them to back off and cancel the abatement notice. If they refuse, they are herewith put on notice that they and their solicitor will be held accountable to Ventnor's taxpayers for this waste of our money and made to reimburse the City treasury for all expenses on both sides.

Norm Klinger

[OPRA Reporter]

WLV was able to obtain verification late this evening that a building code citation was issued to the owners of the now-shuttered Ventnor Twin movie theater. Its marquee has displayed signs for the past several weeks for the ENOUGH IS ENOUGH slate of challengers, running for election against the incumbent PASSION INTEGRITY EXPERIENCE slate.



The signs in question are shown here:



News about this development came from a Forums posting on Friday afternoon, linked below:

http://www.ventnorevoice.com/bulleti...read.php?t=297

and then another post shared an e-mail which apparently has been sent to the City of Ventnor.

http://www.ventnorevoice.com/bulleti...read.php?t=299

[candyman]

Nobody likes a crybaby Timmay. How stupid can you be? Thought you welcomed the competition? Now they're going to beat you over the head with this. Who is your campaign advisor? Thought you were working on your "I'm really a nice guy" personna.

Good luck on trying to get the people to forget what a head case you are....you just reminded them again

[TheEqualizer]

FROM THE ATLANTIC CITY PRESS THIS MORNING


Now playing: Ventnor feud over political signs
By STEVEN LEMONGELLO Staff Writer, 609-272-7275
Published: Saturday, March 29, 2008

For the City of Ventnor, enough is enough with "Enough is Enough" - but the legal issues involved are anyone's guess.

On Monday the city issued an abatement order against the owners of the defunct Ventnor Theater, giving them one week to take down the campaign signs put up on the marquee by a slate of candidates in the upcoming municipal election.

The reaction from one of the candidates?
"I suspect we and the Franks (the theater owners) are going to do nothing about it," Stephen Weintrob said. "We'll allow the city to take whatever recourse is necessary."

City Zoning Official Jim Agnesino issued the abatement order to Frank Investments Inc. of Pleasantville on Monday, advising them that the signs violated a section of the Ventnor City code that says signs "shall be erected only on such premises on which the use to which the sign relates is conducted."

In other words, as City Administrator Andrew McCrosson said, "A sign on a building must relate to the actual conduct in the building."

Agnesino added that he was unsure whether a summons would be issued, bringing the matter before a judge, or whether it would fall under the auspices of the city Zoning Board.

Weintrob, planning to run for a commission spot on a ticket with Theresa Kelly and John Piatt, said that he signed a lease with Frank Investments on behalf of his campaign committee in order to put up the signs, which are emblazoned with the slate's slogans of "Enough is Enough" and "Vote for Change." He and the committee are not mentioned in the abatement order, however, just the Franks.

"Is it a question of political oppression, so to speak?" Weintrob asked. "Does the city equally (enforce) the ordinance for all people, all businesses, all signage?"

Assuming that the abatement order is ignored, the city could find itself entering stormy legal waters in trying to enforce it.

Attorney and self-described "gadfly" Norm Klinger, a persistent critic of the city commission, contends that the order "runs smack into the right of free speech under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. ... Political signs are not commercial advertising and are not subject to the same rules."
He cited a 1981 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in the case of Metromedia, Inc. v. City of San Diego, which stated that "Courts must protect First Amendment interests against legislative intrusion" - and Ventnor's signage ordinance "is worse, by a long shot," Klinger added.

McCrosson maintained that the city has always been allowed to limit the size and duration of political signs.

"It's not a (question) of freedom of speech to have reasonable restrictions on signage within the city," he said.

Agnesino, meanwhile, was more circumspect when asked about First Amendment concerns.

"That sounds like a court case to me!" he replied. "Someone could rule on that."

The effect the signs had on the theater itself was another reason given for the order.

"The building isn't in the best of shape," said McCrosson of the closed Ventnor Avenue business. "We don't need anything less attractive than it (already) is," he added, while Agnesino said that the sign "just goes to highlight the poor condition of the building."

When told about that particular reasoning, both Klinger and Weintrob laughed out loud.

"After 10 years of ruining the north end of Ventnor, they have the gall to say that?" asked Klinger, referring to what he called a failed development strategy undertaken by the city.

Mayor Timothy Kreischer - who said he didn't know of the abatement order and that "I don't know what in the hell it's all about" - had a similar situation happen to him when he first ran in 1992.

Kreischer was allowed to use the theater as his campaign headquarters, he said, and also had signs on the marquee. But then theater owner Bruce Frank told him the headquarters couldn't stay there, citing insurance reasons.
"I had several people come to me and say, 'They can't do that,'" he said. "I told them, 'Yes they can.' But you know who won that battle? Me."

As to the current situation, all these years later, Weintrob just laughs it off.
"It's pretty funny," Weintrob concluded. "It just brings more viewings to the sign."

To e-mail Steven Lemongello at The Press: SLemongello@pressofac.com

COMMENTS POSTED TO PRESS ARTICLE 3-29-08

The signs are ugly? That's what the city muck-a-mucks are saying. Are they kidding? That's the reason they should come down?

What are they smoking in City Hall?

THE SIGNS ARE BEAUTIFUL. RED, WHITE and BLUE. It's America.

They speak of hope. They speak of change. They speak of rebirth. And that's ugly? GIVE ME A BREAK!!

What about the movie titles and posters that used to speak of murder, mayhem, sex, mutilation, inter-galactic wars? Were they acceptable Mr. Mayor? Is that what appealed to you? That's sick, sick, sick.

Have you ever seen such moral inversion and perversion?

We now have in Ventnor elected officials who rule on what's in good taste. Have we not seen the deterioration they caused in Ventnor North with their ideas of gentrification? They ruined the so-called Redevelopment Area with their back-door dealings and bunglings.

These guys in office can't be trusted. Get them out. They are Un-American and I don't care how many American flags are festooned around Ventnor at taxpayers' expense. They are against DEMOCRACY and its ideals. Judge them by their actions, not their B.S. and photo-ops. CLEAN HOUSE VENTNOR.

Posted by: BEAUTIFUL SIGN on Sat Mar 29, 2008, 9:29 AM
__________________________________________________ ______________

Take your money with outrageous taxes. CHECK.
Take your private property with eminent domain. CHECK.
Take your energy with fights in court. CHECK.
Take your tongues if you dare to speak up. CHECK.

Posted by: VentnorAMERIKA on Sat Mar 29, 2008, 9:03 AM
__________________________________________________ ___________

Very good reporting, Steve Lemongello. Finally, we're getting more than photo-ops and press releases from Ventnor City Hall.

The mayor didn't know? That's a laugh. The mayor can cancel the abatement order with one call. Why has he failed to do so?

Instead of answering you honestly, he spins the question into what happened to him years ago. So what? What's he going to do now?

The mayor is Mr. Control. He struts around with a two-way radio paid for by the taxpayers so that he won't miss a photo-op and acts like the sun won't rise without him. He gets into everybody's hair in City Hall and reaches down to the lowest levels to dictate what he wants done. Again, I ask, what's so hard about calling off the zoning officer?
Pure and simple, we're seeing another example of political oppression from the Boys in City Hall. Or, should it be the Bullies in City Hall? They sure are weirded out by the growing realization that they might lose power and all the goodies that have come their way.

But, it's spring. The sun is shining. City Hall will get a spring cleaning. Out with the old. In with the new.

Coming Soon: ENOUGH IS ENOUGH starring the KELLY TEAM, featuring THERESA KELLY, JOHN PIATT, STEVE WEINTROB.

Register to Vote now. Change what's playing at City Hall.

Vote May 13th

Posted by: Average Ventnor on Sat Mar 29, 2008, 8:54 AM

[Justice & American Way]

Interesting timing to all this, their was news from St. Louis yestrday too about a sign case going in court. not ACLU.

http://www.ij.org/first_amendment/st...3_28_08pr.html

City of St. Louis Sues Eminent Domain Activist:

First The City Sought To Take Away His Property, Now It Wants to Silence His Speech

WEB RELEASE: March 28, 2008
Media Contact:
William R. Maurer
(206) 341-9300
[First Amendment]

Arlington, Va—Should the federal courts help the City of St. Louis violate free speech and property rights? That is the question posed to a federal court this week in a countersuit filed by the city against Jim Roos, a longtime activist against eminent domain abuse. In a continued attack on fundamental constitutional freedoms, the City of St. Louis wants to shut down Jim’s protest of its long history of eminent domain abuse: a mural painted on the side of a building targeted for eminent domain abuse that is visible from a heavily traveled highway. The same bureaucrats now threatening Jim Roos’s free speech rights are also threatening to take away the property on which the mural is painted for private development. The city’s lawsuit requests a federal judge to order the mural removed and to fine or sanction Jim if he does not remove it. “The city’s countersuit is unfortunately indicative of how many governments disregard both property rights and free speech,” said William Maurer, an attorney for the Institute for Justice, a national public interest law firm representing Jim in his battle to protect constitutional liberties. “The Supreme Court in its awful Kelo decision said that the primary defense for Americans to stop land grabs for private gain is the political process. St. Louis’s actions against Jim Roos show that the governments that don’t respect your right to own property won’t respect your right of free speech either.”


This stuff seems to be like hand + glove. Nasty barefist fights to take property and give it to greedy developers. Then if regular guys try to show their bruised knuckles in the open, out come the gloves to hide the scars of whats happened.

Its sick when towns let people with maybe very serious mental or emotional issues take more and more control over everthing that happens.

[Seahawk]

Suing your opponents supporters in an election because they decide to allow u to advertise on their property. Better yet suing your opponents supporters who happen to own the only theater in the town ( now closed because of your malfeasance) is giving new meaning to the phrase Free Press! Thats exactly the real effect of this stupid ill considered move by the dummies at city hall. Now everyone in So. jersey knows about these signs and everyone who hasn't seen them sure has now. But, knowing how arrogant and stupid the crowd at City hall is I doubt they'll now do the right thing and rescind this ill considered ticket. Why should they? Hell, Their solicitor who in all probability was behind this dumb move was probably figuring that the money he'll reap from any lawsuits about this will buy him a new Mercedes. Maybe, he'll hit the jackpot and this whole mess will end up in the State Supreme Ct. or a federal Court. What does he care the taxpayers will be picking up the tab won't they? Its nice being the city solicitor and the main political adviser to these guys at the same time. The TRUTH is that Ventnor's solicitor is a greedy person who confuses his own economic well - being with the law and the job he holds in Ventnor. He uses his office as a piggy bank and this ill-considered ticket is just another example of this man's arrogance and contempt for the law.

[Old Timer]

The building department's decision to prevent these signs from staying at the old Ventnor Movies location just doesn't make sense. I thought there might be some action taken on these signs by a different part of the code that I saw last week on the City's web site. When checking pdf files in the City Clerk's section I read the files that are handed out to candidates. In those files was a copy of the code that stated political signs could not be posted until 30 days prior to an election. I was going to post that info when the thread showing the signs was first posted but didn't want to be accused of bringing the signs to the attention of the City administration. I find it hard to believe that Mayor Tim did not know about this notice until contacted by the media. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he didn't order the action but if he wasn't told about the notice sent to the Franks I'd be pretty upset that I wasn't told after it was done so I'd be prepared when the media called.

It would seem the only thing the Enough is Enough team would have to do to be legal is to rent the building for a $1 for some legal purpose for their campaign, remove the signs until 30 days out and put them back up. I heard the end of the conversation between Mayor Tim and Harry Hurley on Hurley's show this morning and the point that the City doesn't allow billboards in town and the use like this may be set a precendent that could allow others to use that space as a billboard would seem valid.

It seems it would be easy to make the display of the signs legal so I'd like to see the Enough is Enough team take the steps to make it legal for the signs to be posted and not disregard the law. After all it is a great location when you consider the traffic the WaWa brings to that area.

[TheEqualizer]

READ THE U.S. CONSTITUTION OLD TIMER

Your suggestions are all wet.

Political speech is free speech.

Free speech is protected by the U.S. Constitution.

Again, you are confusing apples with oranges.

A political sign is not a precedent for a commercial billboard.

The mayor is in a hole and he keeps digging. Genius.

Citizens of Ventnor, do you need any more than this to toss this bunch out of office?

How many of our brave American servicemen and women died or were maimed to bring DEMOCRACY and FREEDOM to Iraq? (The present commissioners may not understand this as not one of them served his country through military service, unlike the Kelly Team.)

How can you find any justification to limit the most fundamental freedom by tinpot commissioners?

The commissioners should be ashamed of themselves, apologize to the people of Ventnor and withdraw the notice to abate the political signs.

The Equalizer