Sign Restrictions

I find it quite interesting that the City Council banned useful signs, such as lost pet signs, but are more than willing to litter our community with their political signs. Yes, they have a right to have their polticial signs, but it seems to me that if they were honest, ethicial and not hypocritical that they would not put up all those signs after claiming that other signs are bad. I know of many pets who were reunited with their owners because of the signs. As well, owners being notified that their pets had died. If it were not for the signs, the owners may never have known what happened to their pets. Since the "shelters" only keep animals for a short period of time before allowing them to be adopted, then a short time later killed, it seems to me to be better to try to find the owners.

This is also a sign that the City Council is going after just a symptom, rather that dealing with the problem. The problem is those people who put up signs and never bother to take them down. In my opinion, it would be better to have regulations which would ensure that the signs are taken down than to ban all signs and then spend money to have a City employee drive all over the city in a city vehicle taking the signs down. We, the people of this city, get to pay the employee, pay for the gas for the vehicle, and get to deal with replacing a vehicle sooner as it has more miles on it and also have to deal with the added pollution.