[Durham INC] urgent: ask Commissioners to support current billboard ordinance; industry has dragged this out long enough

[John Schelp]

folks,

Out-of-town advertisers got an alert this week to pack tonight's County Commissioner's hearing.

The Commissioners need to hear from us.

Please send an email asking Commissioners to "please vote tonight for Durham's current billboard ordinance."

Email a short/positive note TO: commissioners at durhamcountync.gov

And come to the Durham County Courthouse tonight at 7pm. Speakers at the City Council meeting clearly had an impact. (FYI, billboards are BEFORE 751-South on tonight's agenda.)

The billboard industry has dragged this out for two years. Enough is enough, we need closure.

with many many thanks,
John

Here's more background...

* Fairway admitted they have no employees from Durham on its staff. None. And they've hired no staff in local offices over the past five years.

* Why is a Raleigh-based billboard company (whose manager lives in Wake County) targeting Durham County -- instead of starting with Wake?

* Local nonprofits reported no increases in client referrals or donations while their ads were posted on Fairway billboards (per Council member during hearing).

* Fairway employees (who do not live in Durham) and proponents (who do not live in Durham) do not vote in Durham. Durham residents, who do vote in Durham, overwhelmingly support the current ordinance.

* The American Advertising Federation-RDU sent out an alert this week, urging advertisers to show up at the County Commissioner meeting. Here we go again, more out-of-town industry lobbyists trying to influence our elected officials.

* If the County were to approve the billboard industry's measure, it would only be effective outside the City. All of Durham's digital billboards would be in the County.

* The County is just starting a new Fiscal Year, with a new budget. So, if the measure passes, the County would need to find funds elsewhere in the budget. Money could come from schools or the sheriff.

* The County will have to pay all costs to administer the billboard measure (if it passes).

* City residents also pay County taxes. So, City taxpayers would be paying for a program that was overwhelmingly rejected by City Council.

* The cost of text development, implementation and enforcement of the billboard industry's measure requires money. We'd need to find more funds for schools, sheriff and other important County services. The last thing we need to do is shift away funds to implement and enforce the billboard measure.

* Billboard lobbyists argued that only by supporting their measure would we able to clean up billboards in Durham. Actually, our current UDO specifically states: "Permanent signs shall be maintained in good condition at all times and shall be kept free of cracked or peeling paint, missing or damaged sign panels or supports, and weeds, grass or vegetation that obscures the view of the sign message."

* While industry talks a lot about PSAs for non-profits, you don't see them in areas with digital billboards. And if the ordinance were to pass, we'd be unable to enforce Fairway's assertion to provide PSAs. Fairway (or subsequent managers) could decide not to provide PSAs -- and we wouldn't be able to do anything about it.

* Nonprofits and local businesses that advertise on digital billboards tend to reduce budgets for advertising in local newspapers and other advertising outlets. This will take additional monies out of local economy and reduce support for local businesses. Local media outlets would also be affected (ie. Herald-Sun, N&O, Independent, Carolina Times and Triangle Tribune).

* Local businesses are most likely to be supported by locals (who are most effectively reached through local advertising in local press and media).

* Why erect big blinking billboards in Durham that would send passing drivers to businesses in the next county? (Blue highway signs point drivers to restaurants and hotels near highways in Durham; billboards send motorists to exits that are miles down the road.)

* The chair of the Durham Committee supports the current billboard ordinance (and called industry's presentation nothing but "spin").

* If only we can get the Chamber of Commerce to work as diligently on violence, affordable housing, clean air, jobs, Shop Local campaigns and youth issues -- as they worked trying to get digital billboards in our community.   

* Fairway has located multiple "Gun & Knife Show" billboards along our roadways and abutting Durham neighborhoods.

* Industry lawyers continue to tell officials half-truths when they say their measure will allow them to move billboards away from homes. They neglect to say the measure (which they wrote) allows industry to leave billboards right where they are -- next to homes, churches, parks, schools and the R. Kelly Bryant Bridge.

* Historian R. Kelly Bryant supports Durham's current billboard ordinance.

* The billboard industry has exaggerated its support. During Council's hearing, the City Manager said that, contrary to Fairway's assertions, the Durham Police Department does not have a position on digital billboards.

* In addition, turns out that City-wide Partners Against Crime do not support industry's measure (a facilitator later apologized on listservs) and the Museum of Life & Science rescinded its letter supporting digital billboards. (We may learn of another nonprofit rescinding its support later this week.)

* Fairway's most recent op-ed claims "hundreds" of supporters (08/04/10 Herald). The fact is Council members received nine letters, and only seven emails, pushing for digital billboards. Industry failed to back up its claim for "hundreds" of supporters at the Council hearing.

* Council members received no messages of support from industry's own billboard, which drove traffic to a website for people to offer support. None.

* Billboards for national companies and businesses outside Durham will not direct resources to Durham businesses or contribute to Durham's economy.

* Unanimous support for current ordinance by City Council, planning staff and Planning Commission. County Commissioners who support Fairway's measure will face Durham voters -- not voters in Raleigh and Greensboro. (Fairway headquarters must be wondering if all the money they spent on lawyers and lobbyists was worth it.)

* Billboards display 24/7, while Amber/Silver alerts are rare. Police departments are already trying to opt out of billboard alerts elsewhere.

* The State has its own series of official message signs for Amber Alerts. They're designed to provide the information for motorists to react with the least possible distraction from their driving task, because they are designed in accordance with safe highway practices as mandated by the U.S. Department of Transportation... In contrast, the Amber Alerts on billboards have no official sanction, and often display useless and unnecessary information. As a result, rather than communicating an important message in a non-distracting way, they require the motorist to take his/her eyes off the road for extended periods to read the material on the billboard. (Scenic Michigan)

* Commissioners have received more 1000 emails supporting Durham's billboard ordinance. Hard to recall the last time officials have seen 1000 emails agreeing on a controversial issue in Durham.