Here is an excerpt from the City Manager’s newsletter:

Folks, let me try to make all of this as plain and simple as possible!!!

Neither I, nor anyone other reasonable person in town supports shoddy, dangerous, misleading, outdated signs. That is not the issue!!!

But there are TWO parts to signs, especially signs of the larger, higher, free-standing variety. There is the sign facing, which carries the message and perhaps a logo, and in the grand scheme of things is relatively inexpensive. This is the part of the sign that, when abandon, most often becomes vandalized, weathered, shows signs of neglect. Neither I nor any other reasonable person should object to ordinances requiring the owners to remove or maintain (if the sign is being used to advertise the vacant property for sale or lease) such sign FACINGS, and to keep them from being unsightly. This should apply even to properties perceived by some as historic.

The second, and more expensive part to the signs is the sign supporting structure. Now I am not referring to damaged, decrepit, dangerous, dilapidated, or structurally failing sign structures. Of course neither I nor any other reasonable person would object to the appropriate remedies for those situations being promptly and sternly enforced by whatever means necessary.

The problem here in Middletown is that Mr. Kohler and his cronies wish to use sign structures as a personal weapon. They want to try to legally FORCE the demolition of perfectly sound, useful sign structures, simply because there is no longer a current message on the sign facing. This is a “double whammy” to the property owner. He is faced with the expense of demolishing a perfectly good, structurally sound sign support, and then when a new business is interested in the property, either the current property owner or the new business is faced with the expense of constructing a new, replacement supporting sign structure. NO reasonable person should be favor of this screwball, wasteful approach!!!

Additionally, enforcement of this seems to be quite “selective”. This ordinance only seems to apply to properties where “blue collar” employers become interested, cronies want to buy the property on the cheap, or doggie parks might be considered.