*
The Irony Of It All
Brad Hollerbach

Political Signage Violating Cape's Littlest 'Park'

Posted Tuesday, July 20, 2010, at 12:00 AM

Comments

View 12 comments or respond
Community discussion is important, and we encourage you to participate as a reader and commenter. Click here to see our Guidelines. We also encourage registered users to let us know if they see something inappropriate on our site. You can do that by clicking "Report Comment" below.
  • -- Posted by ksteinhoff on Tue, Jul 20, 2010, at 8:17 AM
  • It looks to me that it would be a horse race between Murtaugh and this property. Actually, the littlest park in town maybe the one located behind the Old Fire Station on Independence across from the Federal Building.

    Thanks for reading.

    -- Posted by Brad_Hollerbach on Tue, Jul 20, 2010, at 8:46 AM
  • Brad, I would just go & take them down. It's public property, right? ☻

    -- Posted by Turnip on Tue, Jul 20, 2010, at 9:43 AM
  • Well, I would do that, Turnip, but I'm not an Authorized Park Ranger.

    Although maybe if I get one of those cool wide brimmed hats that rangers often wear I could qualify as an Honorary Park Ranger. That would be neat. I even thought of an appropriate slogan:

    Remember only YOU can prevent political promotions on public property!

    Wonder where I can get one of those hats?

    TFR

    -- Posted by Brad_Hollerbach on Tue, Jul 20, 2010, at 9:51 AM
  • Brad,

    Is your life really so pathetic that you need to complain about where people put political signs?

    My advice, get a girlfriend.

    -- Posted by mofreedom on Tue, Jul 20, 2010, at 9:53 AM
  • I don't really care if the politicians put their signs on private property, mofreedom. I don't even care if the signs are in city right of way on private property -- which I think is a stupid ordinance to begin with.

    But these signs are on publicly owned property no different than Capaha Park, Cape County Park, the Osage Center, Cape Splash, the Municipal Golf Course etc.

    And since I drive by this corner several times a day, it offends me that these politicians are promoting themselves on public property.

    Thanks for the girlfriend suggestion by the way. I'll check with my wife.

    TFR

    -- Posted by Brad_Hollerbach on Tue, Jul 20, 2010, at 10:13 AM
  • Wow, what a non-interesting story.

    -- Posted by MINT4U on Tue, Jul 20, 2010, at 10:13 AM
  • they city did a big sweep a week ago and took out a whole bunch of signs that were in the right of way

    the signs you mention didn't get touched

    perhaps you have your facts wrong Mr. Hollerbach

    in fact, I know you do....time to move on

    PS: both signs were in the exact same spot two years ago. and no one complained then; not the city, and certainly not you. why? because the property owners gave permission for the signs to be put up.

    -- Posted by cjb2m5 on Tue, Jul 20, 2010, at 10:48 AM
  • Hmmm, Cjb2m5, so I am wrong...

    I have an email from August 25, 2009 from the Robert Kutak, the traffic operations manager for the City Public Works Department regarding this land where he says:

    "City owns the property."

    That's why they cut down a very dead tree that was a good 15 feet from the roadway last August. It was both on the city's property and in the city's right of way.

    But I suppose he could be wrong. After all he is just a city employee.

    TFR

    -- Posted by Brad_Hollerbach on Tue, Jul 20, 2010, at 11:03 AM
  • I just added a screenshot of the property assessment map of the intersection that shows property lines.

    -- Posted by Brad_Hollerbach on Tue, Jul 20, 2010, at 11:28 AM
  • I have one of those cocky Autralian out back hats. It makes one look so cocky that getting away with removing the signs would be no problem. Most folks would notice the hat and pay no attention to the removal of the signs to which no one pays any attention anyway.

    I enjoy wearing the hat when I make cocky responses to some of the featherheads on Speaking Out.

    -- Posted by voyager on Tue, Jul 20, 2010, at 5:58 PM
  • Thanks for your thorough investigation Mr. Hollerbach. The maps tell the tale quite clearly and I would hope the offenders would voluntarily remove their own signs from public property. Wouldn't that be the best way to handle it, CJB?

    I have a couple other more troubling questions this article raises.

    1. Why does a 14-year incumbent with 90%+ name identification need signs at all? And why so big right here in town? Seems like this is some sort of weird ego trip. Whatever, it will go down as the least effective campaign advertising ever and whoever made the decision to get these magumba signs should be relieved of their duties, forthwith!

    2. Why would anyone associated with any campaign ever argue with a member of the press? It is pointless and counterproductive. Brad is the IT guy, and a little slip of the old finger can send one's post through the crossbars or perhaps get your display ad placed among the mortgage foreclosure notices.

    I am not saying that Mr. Hollerbach would ever do such a thing intentionally, but accidents do happen. C'mon guys, take your signs down ASAP.

    -- Posted by DCisnot4me on Mon, Aug 2, 2010, at 8:29 PM