CANMORE – Canmore residents could see fewer election signs at the next municipal election in 2025.
Town council directed staff to prepare a bylaw that would mostly restrict municipal election signage to private property, but look at potential public locations to limit it to four public spots.
“I do believe limiting the number of election signs on public property is in the best interest of the community,” said Mayor Sean Krausert. “It just becomes a visual noise and as has been stated … really getting signs on private property is a more effective sign of support and a sign of engaging with the community.”
The motion passed 5-2, with only Couns. Tanya Foubert and Joanna McCallum in opposition.
Coun. Jeff Mah said he could see why not having municipal election signs on public property would be important, but added having signs on four locations is pretty minimal.
"I think for some folks new to campaigning, even putting your first couple signs out on a public spot is not a bad way to get your momentum going," he said.
During the 2021 municipal election, there were numerous complaints about the amount of signage seen throughout the community, particularly on public property.
While some candidates reused past signs, other people relied on homemade signs or put out few if any signs.
Council previously directed Town staff to return before the end of 2022 with options for election signs on Town property. The report was pushed back to the end of 2023 due to “capacity constraints and competing priorities”.
A staff report noted concerns came around significant amounts of election signs during the last municipal election, the cost to candidates of purchasing signs and not all being able to afford them, signs potentially having no influence on an election and how the signs could be seen as a single-use plastic item.
Town staff compared different approaches used in Banff, Airdrie, Strathcona County, Wetaskiwin, Lethbridge and Camrose. The approach by different municipalities ranged from only allowing election signage on private property, allowing on public property without a municipal building on it, requiring a development permit to put up an election sign and specific placement distances from roads.
“Based on the review of these approaches, it is clear many municipalities already prohibit election signage on municipal land to some extent. Therefore, implementing similar regulations would be consistent with the approaches of other jurisdictions,” said Anika Drost, a Town development planner.
Under the land use bylaw, election signs are allowed on private and municipally-owned land and are allowed to be up to 0.5 square metres in size. Mobile signs, which are painted or attached to a vehicle, aren’t allowed.
A fine for a first offence is $50 and then $100 for a second offence and $250 for third and additional offences in the same calendar year.
Canmore's land use bylaw has detailed requirements for private property, but less so for public property.
“Although there is value in maintaining signage regulations in one document, administration believes that election signage could be dealt with more effectively through a separate municipal election sign bylaw,” according to the staff report, noting enforcement would be done by municipal enforcement rather than planning and development.
“A separate election sign bylaw would strictly deal with election signage and its unique nature. This could include provisions regarding sign placement, sign size, enforcement, and penalties for offences.”
Foubert wanted to limit municipal election signs to public property with specific setbacks on arterial roads and major intersections such as Bow Valley Trail, Railway Avenue and Three Sisters Parkway; however her push to do so was defeated 4-3, getting support from only Krausert and Coun. Karen Marra.
“I think by fully restricting election signs from all public property, we run the risk of putting candidates at a disadvantage of either considering running or running because that’s one way for people who are vying for a position on Town council to get themselves in front of the community,” Foubert said.
However, Coun. Wade Graham noted “signs don’t necessarily translate into votes”, adding there are many ways to engage people.
Coun. Jeff Hilstad echoed Graham, highlighting the importance of not relying on election signs and engaging people.
“People who do want to run need to get out there, they need to talk to people, go knock on doors. They need to reach out, they need to connect with their community,” he said. “They can’t just be ‘I’m going to buy a bunch of signs, slap them up and hope I get the votes’, and in some ways option one is better for democracy and engagement in our community.”
Coun. Joanna McCallum emphasized how the removal of election signs from public property has long been a priority for her.
She said council should fully remove municipal election signs from public property, and in doing so, reiterated the importance of candidates engaging residents through door knocking, mailouts and being out and about in the community.
“Those are all things that are way less expensive than signage,” she said. “Not only to the candidate personally, but to our waste system and how signs are recycled.”
McCallum said she was disappointed council could not fully commit to removing municipal election signs from public property.
“We see communities adjacent to us having free and fair elections not permitting any signage on their property. Certain members of council compare us to that community all the time and yet in this regard, it’s not good enough," she said.
"I just don’t understand why we can’t even try it for one election cycle and see what happens.”
However, several council members expressed that limiting signs to specific public property spots may be restrictive enough, while still giving candidates the option of putting out signs in select locations.
“I think there are locations in town we could put one sign at that are prominent locations that allow the general public to see the folks who are running for this position,” Graham said. “I believe this is restrictive enough to not be put all over town, yet prominent enough folks can get their names out there.”
