17-1458 Amending Sign Regulations

Home Browse Search

WHEREAS, the City of Casselberry finds and determines that the provisions of Chapter I11, Article XVI (Unified Land Development Regulations), City of Casselberry Code of Ordinances, that replace the current Article XVI are consistent with all applicable policies of the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City of Casselberry finds and determines that these amendments are not in conflict with the public interest; and WHEREAS, the City of Casselberry finds and determines that these amendments will not result in incompatible land uses; and WHEREAS, the City of Casselberry recognizes that under established Supreme Court precedent, a law that is content -based is subject to strict scrutiny under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and such law must therefore satisfy a compelling governmental interest; and WHEREAS, the City of Casselberry recognizes that under established Supreme Court precedent, a compelling government interest is a higher burden than a substantial or significant governmental interest; and WHEREAS, the City of Casselberry recognizes that under established Supreme Court precedent, aesthetics is not a compelling governmental interest but is a substantial governmental interest; and WHEREAS, the City of Casselberry recognizes that until a recent Supreme Court decision released in June 2015, there had not been clarity as to what constitutes a content -based law as distinguished from a content -neutral law; and WHEREAS, the City of Casselberry recognizes that in Reed v. Town of Gilbert, Ariz., — U.S.—, 135 S. Ct. 2218, 192 L. Ed. 2d 236 (2015), the United States Supreme Court, in an opinion authored by Justice Thomas, and joined in by Chief Justices Roberts, Scalia, Alito, Kennedy and Sotomayer, addressed the constitutionality of a local sign ordinance that had different criteria for different types of temporary noncommercial signs; and WHEREAS, the City of Casselberry recognizes that in Reed, the Supreme Court held that content -based regulation is presumptively unconstitutional and requires a compelling governmental interest; and WHEREAS, the City of Casselberry recognizes that in Reed, the Supreme Court held that government regulation of speech is content based if a law applies to particular speech because of the topic discussed or the idea or message expressed; and WHEREAS, the City of Casselberry recognizes that in Reed, the Supreme Court held that even a purely directional message, which merely gives the time and location of a specific event, is one that conveys an idea about a specific event, so that a category for directional signs is therefore content -based, and event -based regulations are not content neutral; and