Campaign Signs Damaged, Stolen
Mayor Nancy Tragarz said two residents have reported finding several of her signs in a pile in their yards.
Pile of campaign signs found in a resident's yard.
Courtesy photo
Photos (1)
Photos
Walnut City Council candidates report that some of their campaign signs have been stolen and others damaged.
Mayor Nancy Tragarz, who is running for a second term, said by email that she received a call Wednesday morning from the city clerk letting her know that a man had called Walnut City Hall to report that he had found several campaign signs in a pile in his yard.
“There were a few other names, but most of them were mine,” Tragarz said. “This has happened now two days in a row.”
City Clerk Teresa De Dios sent an email to the candidates to inform them that seven of Tragarz’ signs, along with three belonging to challenger John Saleeby and one for Councilman Antonio “Tony” Cartegena, had been recovered.
Another resident reported to the city clerk that she had recovered several of Tragarz’ vandalized signs from her yard. Tragarz said signs are costly, adding that she spent almost $2,000 on them.
De Dios said she had received reports of some stolen signs and asked that any incidents be reported to the city or the Walnut Sheriff’s.
Deputy Doug Daley said stealing signs is a misdemeanor offense of petty theft. Conviction on a charge likely would result in a fine, the amount typically set by the judge, he said.
Candidate Michael West said neither he nor his volunteers have been involved with stealing or damaging anybody’s campaign signs.
West said in an email that he has had several of his signs stolen. He said he called the city to see if any had been removed and was told no.
“I have a number missing from the Snow Creek area, about six of them,” he said. “I had to repair one torn down and left for dead on La Puente Road. “
He said that he also rescued and repaired one ripped sign belonging to his neighbor Eric Ching, who also is running for council
West said he suspects that not all signs that go missing are stolen. Some property owners that have shopping centers in town have told him that they don’t allow any campaign signs and that they will remove them, he said.
Ching said a small number of his signs disappeared, but he has noticed more of Tragarz’ and Cartagena’s missing. He said did not take their signs and does not believe his volunteers are involved in any way.
Wayne Breitkreutz
2:23 pm on Thursday, February 16, 2012
We agreed to have champaign signs placed in our yard, but the signs look somewhat trashy and we look forward to after the election when they are removed. Maybe a better idea would be for the City of Walnut to not allow any campaign signs on private or business property and that money not spent on campaign signs could be used to pay for a candidates forum where we could see and hear all the candidates speak about the issues.
Michael West
2:40 pm on Thursday, February 16, 2012
Sounds good to me Wayne! I wish we had a candidate forum where we could discuss and debate our opinions on the issues. I will participate in a forum, ANYWHERE, ANYTIME. I wonder if the other candidates feel as strongly about this as I do.
Wayne Breitkreutz
3:03 pm on Thursday, February 16, 2012
Michael; I hope you or any of the other candidates follow up and make this happen. Seems like it should be a standard event held by the City of Walnut. I know in past years we had a candidate forum. Not sure by who or how it was organized. Wish the City of Walnut would plan to hold a candidate forum this and every election.
Richard Michael
12:13 am on Saturday, February 18, 2012
Why are candidates above the law?
How about the candidates stop violating the clear language of the Municipal Code?
Especially, the candidates seeking re-election. Are they exempt from the law they approved?
Section 25-261(e)i.3
http://qcode.us/codes/walnut/view.php?topic=vi-25-xxvi-25_261&frames=off
Permits.
i. Political campaign signs supporting, opposing, or regarding any candidate or issue are allowed subject to the following:
3. No signs are allowed on any public right-of-way or on public property.
Section 16A.3
http://qcode.us/codes/walnut/view.php?topic=iii-16a-i-16a_3&frames=off
Definitions.
"Public right-of-way" means the areas dedicated to, and maintained by, a public entity including areas used for utilities, streets, parkways, curb, gutter and sidewalks.
Section 22-75.020
http://qcode.us/codes/walnut/view.php?topic=v-22-iii-22_15&frames=off
Definitions.
"Street" or "public right-of-way" means each of the following that has been dedicated to the public and maintained under public authority or by others and is located within the city limits: streets, roadways, highways, avenues, lanes, alleys, sidewalks, easements, rights-of-way and similar public property that the city from time to time authorizes to be included within the definition of a street.
Richard Michael
12:17 am on Saturday, February 18, 2012
Is city staff above the law?
What's up with city staff violating its clear and absolute mandate to remove all signs on public property -- no ifs, ands, or buts.
Section 25-269
http://qcode.us/codes/walnut/view.php?topic=vi-25-xxvi-25_269&frames=off
Removal of unauthorized signs.</h3>
Any unauthorized, illegal or unpermitted sign may be removed by the city in accordance with the following provisions:
(a) Public Property. Any unauthorized, illegal, or unpermitted sign located on public property shall be summarily removed by the city.
Wayne Breitkreutz
1:30 am on Saturday, February 18, 2012
Realtor's with their Open House signs may not know about all these laws as well.