Though the primaries are finished, campaign season is here until November and with that season comes campaign signs. 

Where those signs are allowed was up for debate by the Riverton City Council in late May. The council voted 3-2 to restrict campaign signs to private property, banning them from park strips in front of government property. 

Riverton’s city code limits political signage to private property only, but state code—enacted after the city code—allows signage on certain spots of public property, superseding Riverton’s ordinance. But in 2017, the city council voted to allow signage on park strips during campaign season. 

City staff asked council to reaffirm that position in a resolution after public works requested clear guidelines when mowing and watering those park strips. Leaving them alone means potential dead spots in the grass and excessive grass growth underneath signs, explained City Attorney Ryan Carter, or public works would be tasked with removing the signs and then replacing them afterwards. 

Carter said at the time, the thought was these signs go up everywhere anyway and it’s hard to legitimately enforce without being accused of favoritism.

With the council effectively turned over since then, and the upcoming campaign season here, a resolution was put forth for further guidance. 

Councilmember Troy McDougal preferred no signs on park strips, feeling that if you run for office, signs should be placed on private property where homeowners can take responsibility. 

“Signage on city property tends to be forgotten,” he said. 

Councilmember Andy Pierucci felt limiting sign placement could overstep on free speech. 

“We need to be really careful as a city infringing upon people’s constitutionally protected right of speech,” he said, adding that while the city has the power to designate time and place, using that power “to limit free speech should be used incredibly narrowly.” 

He argued the benefit of allowing candidates to communicate their messages outweighs possible issues of limiting signage to private property. 

Councilmembers Tish Buroker and Spencer Haymond agreed with McDougal. Having residents put up signs holds more meaning. 

“I do think it is a better practice to have permission from where you’re putting a sign,” Buroker said. 

She said there is value in the respect for private property. 

“If we say you can’t do it and everybody follows the same rules, it’s a better look for our city and makes for a fairer campaign.”

Pierucci agreed having signs in front yards is “much more impactful” from his experience running campaigns for candidates around the state. “I just don’t think reducing that outweighs the constitutionally protected free speech.”  λ