5-18-06 While the County of Los Angeles ignores 100's of thousands of the illegal signs and at least dozens in Agua Dulce and Acton, they have cited a homeowner for posting a political sign on his property opposing the airport.
The fact that the US Supreme Court found unanimously in 1994 in City of Ladue v. Gilleo, U.S. (1994) that these signs were protected speech under the First Amendment was ignored. The Supreme Court found a that in a similar city law "The ordinance violates a Ladue resident's right to free speech".
The fact that LA County ignores a precedential Supreme Court case in an effort to help the airport and its co-conspirators is abominable.
Jose Garcia of Regional Planning needs to stand in a corner for a few hours reciting a few thousand times that the US Supreme Court trumps the Department of Regional Planning of LA County.
He further needs to look at the other commercial illegal signs in Acton and Agua Dulce. This paper is calling for every citizen to cite the location and content of all the illegal signs in Acton and Agua Dulce. We will handle the reporting of them to Mr. Garcia and insist he notify each property owner to immediately remove the illegal sign. And if he refuses, we need to raise funds to bring a lawsuit against LA County for selectively enforcing laws particularly for the benefit of the hated Agua Dulce Airport.
The fact that i the airport has a changeable type sign that appears to be in the road right-of-way and there is a large sign promoting the liquor store at the corner of Sierra Highway and Agua Dulce Canyon seems to be ignored by LA County.
In fact, the proposed modifications to the airport ignore that the FAA law under section 161 specifically exempts laws passed before its adoption in 1991. But the same idiots at Regional Planning claim the law forces the repeal of the ban on jets and helicopters and allows what amounts to an uncontrolled expansion of the airport.
It seems LA County only interprets the law when it supports the airport and attempts to use the law to quash protected speech against the airport.
For those of you who are interested, here's a Supreme Court case supporting a total ban on the signage on public property City Council V. Taxpayers For Vincent, 466 U.S. 789 (1984).
The pictures from the LA Times web site of their story opposing the airport should receive an award for the rabbit crossing the road, confirming the rural conditions of Agua Dulce.