Health Department: Signs Don’t Reflect Badly on a Community’s Appearance?
More illegal signs along N May Avenue.
At least that’s the impression I got this morning with Julie Cox-Kain when it came to the question of whether or not she agreed with VI Marketing’s Tim Berney that the yard signs placed along city streets and in city parks don’t hurt the community’s appearance. I asked this question several times over, and each time Cox-Kain, chief operating officer at the Oklahoma Department of Health, recited the message of their campaign, which, while it’s an answer, it’s an answer to a question I wasn’t asking. After making it clear she wasn’t answering my question, it became quite apparent that she’s not willing to say they do detract from community appearance.
The Department of Health is paying VI Marketing $350,000 in federal tax dollars in this campaign to urge people to do more to take better care of their health. Great message. We can all do to get in better health (and as some of you have pointed out in different ways, me included). But does the message justify breaking the law? Taxpayers are paying for illegal signs that they are then paying to have removed. Does that make sense?
And yes, that’s the top reason I’m writing about this. It’s not unusual to see these illegal signs in campaign seasons. I don’t know of anyone who says “Hey, I saw that sign for Fidel Castro (or pick any name), and because of it, I’m going to vote for him for Labor Commissioner (or pick any office).” But you do hear from plenty of people who think they’re road clutter and detract from community appearance. And that’s the reason that was cited by the city council in passing these laws and doing sign pick-up.
So why did I write about it this time? Well, again, it’s not my first time on this topic. And what makes this occasion unique The difference this time is it’s taxpayers who are paying to put out these signs (the health department with federal tax dollars), and it’s taxpayers paying to remove them (the city’s general fund). The other question I keep asking is, where does the inclination to break the law for a message campaign end? Posters pasted onto bridges? Graffiti?
Cox-Cain said she knew the campaign would include VI Marketing printing up 3,000 yard signs, but added it was not the health department’s intent to break any laws. And whereas Berney said the illegal signs would stay up through the duration of the campaign, Cox-Cain said this morning VI Marketing is being instructed to immediately remove the illegal signs (the ones along Broadway are gone; Councilwoman Meg Salyer had them removed).
Final note. I talked to Kristy Yager, spokeswoman for the City of Oklahoma City. She said that VI Marketing is on standby for more contracted work with the city’s water/wastewater utilities department, and that she does not see the stance of Tim Berney/VI Marketing in regard to violating the city’s ordinance would play into the firm getting further work from the city. The utilities department is overseen by the Oklahoma City Water Trust, which is chaired by Ward 4 Councilman Pete White. His email is ward4@okc.gov.
Thank you for joining our conversation on OKC Central. We encourage your discussion but ask that you stay within the bounds of our commenting and posting policy.
Comments
I saw the signs on May Ave. about 1130am today, and I went to pull them at 1230pm, but someone beat me to it. I have 5 signs that were placed in the median of Grand Blvd. between May and Drexel.
LOL. In one of Steve’s example links, in the body of this post, it mentions Microsoft being in some hot water in San Francisco for a sidewalk chalk campaign. The public officials in super-conservative and repressive San Francisco said they were going to demand Microsoft clean up after themselves, and if they didn’t do it, bill Bill (Gates) for city cleanup.
It also mentioned a similar case in NYC (that’s New York City, apparently another backward, conservative burg), where they arrested and held in jail a sidewalk “chalk artist” for doing a similar “guerrilla marketing” campaign.
Also, it should be noted that under Mr. Berney’s definition apparently San Francisco and NYC should no longer be thought of as “big league cities.”
On another note, can we please retire the use of “big league city?” It was great for a couple of months after the Thunder arrived, but the more we invoke the term, the less we actually look like one. Thanks in advance.
Also – this is for Tim (Evanston) – “the full attention of the city’s newspaper” would mean a story or storIES in the actual PAPER, the one tossed on your doorstep each morning.
I’m more concerned that there is even a need for these signs more than I am about my tax dollars being spent on them. I mean, if this is all about the poor health indicators of Oklahoman’s, shouldn’t we be more concerned about the amount of tax dollars we spend every single day on the health problems of our citizens? I’m sure this was some regulated federal grant money that had to spent and the state had no choice how to spend it. So who cares if there are some yard signs. It doesn’t make the city any trashier a fat guy throwing his cigarette out the window onto our streets.
Would it be money better spent if they took out a full page ad in the Daily Disappointment? The next day, it would be bird cage fodder.
And… Have you paid attention to Twitter? This stuff is popping up everywhere! Apparently, the $350K wasn’t all spent on yard signs.
Interesting.
I have been told twice in the past that the Mayor has told Municipal Law Enforcement Officer to leave developers signs alone. It was only after I posted on the Internet my complaints and that it was an election issue about illegal signs that the offending signs were finally removed – BUT City staff still did not respond to me. I had to call them how is that for service?What is even more interesting is that the developer who is threatening me with Peel police action is the same one who the City informs me had his illegal signs removed by the City and which would have cost them money.
Follow @5320polluters on Twitter to keep up to date with the 5320 tax scandal, and VI Marketing and Branding’s involvement.
It’s hard to know what’s more outrageous. A gate on a sidewalk that is never used or temporary signs in a field.
But what I do know is that these are major problems facing our citizenry and they deserve the full attention of the city’s newspaper and undoubtedly people (government employees that is, so while technically “people” but clearly not human) should be fired.
Moreover, the state and city government should probably be dismantled because they are such an impediment to a satisfactory life (except the Mayor of course).