Candidate sues over election sign ordinances

MILFORD — Prothonotary candidate Michael Meacham of Lehman Township, has filed a federal lawsuit charging the election sign provisions of sign ordinances in eight Pike townships are unconstitutional. The townships are Blooming Grove, Delaware, Dingman, Lackawaxen, Lehman, Milford, Shohola and Westfall. The Milford Township supervisors noted the litigation, Monday but were apparently unaware that Milford had been named. (Meacham’s attorney Lawrence Otter confirmed that the title of the federal complaint erroneously names “Milford Boro”) Without much comment at the end of their meeting, they repealed provisions of Milford’s sign ordinance pertaining to elections signs. Supervisors’ Chair Gary Williams said the ordinance had called for a $25 permit, but added, “We haven’t enforced it in five years.” Secretary-Treasurer Viola Canouse agreed saying she had simply asked candidates to get property owners permission, avoid putting signs in the highway right-of-way and take them down within 10 days of the election. As they are in most election years, signs have again become a sticky issue in recent days, with both sides complaining about the other’s handling of sign issues. Recently Carole Orleman, county auditor candidate from Lackawaxen wrote, “You not only have to pay for the signs, but you have to pay fees and bonds in many towns... Is this a way to keep poor people from running for office? “Even if you buy your signs, and pay your fees, you’re not given equal opportunity... Less than a week after my signs were put out, they were removed - and replaced by Forbes/Caridi signs! You may have guessed my signs say ‘Vote Democrat.’” The incumbent Republican commissioners have also had their issues. Recently, after Delaware Township notified their campaign of a non-conforming billboard sign, attorney Tom Farley, allegedly accused Supervisor (and commissioner candidate) Ileana Hernandez of “attempting to manipulate the outcome of the election” through the enforcement of the zoning ordinance.” Hernandez promptly denied the charge. In his statement Meacham charged that, “The playing field is far from level and the US Constitution is being strangled in the process; by what I and others assess as an avaricious revenue mechanism for some townships.” He claims these ordinances have justified self-styled vigilante sign enforcement, “... that (has) citizens selectively turning against candidates of differing opinions and acting as defacto agents removing road signs under the guise of upholding township ordinances. Ordinances which should never have been created and absolutely never enforced. “... It is curious and disappointing that political organizations and committees have not been more assertive in their pursuit in repealing this process. Meacham’s statement concluded stating, “We take this opportunity and we expect the Federal Court will concur that the time has come to strike down these unfair laws.” No hearing date in the federal district court has been announced.