A proposed bill in the Ohio legislature would bar homeowners and civic associations from banning the display of political yard signs.
House Bill 16 specifies that the protection applies only to political yard signs that do not violate applicable state or federal laws, local ordinances or regulations or a governor’s proclamation. It preserves the associations’ authority to adopt “reasonable restrictions” on displaying yard signs and the materials used.
Introduced by state Reps. Brian Lorenz, R-Powell, and Thomas Hall, R-Madison Twp., the measure has brought together conservatives and civil rights groups like the ACLU of Ohio.
“If House Bill 16 were to pass, Homeowner Associations would not be able to restrict the display of at least one political yard sign 30 days prior to an election,” Lorenz said in prepared testimony to the House General Government Committee. “Additionally, Homeowner Associations would not be able to restrict the size of political yard signs beyond the outlined limit of twelve by eighteen inches.”
In the last session, Lorenz introduced House Bill 668, which would have completely prohibited Homeowner Associations from restricting the display of political yard signs.
“As a democracy, political beliefs, whether I agree with them or not, should not be censored,” Lorenz added. “It is through that belief and that understanding of our democracy, that I worked to create this outright prohibition as outlined in last year’s House Bill 668.”
In his remarks, Lorenz said some people previously raised concerns that House Bill 668 “would allow the display of hate speech.” However, the lawmaker said the measure ensures “that would not be an issue, because all of the content displayed on these signs would have to adhere to state and federal law.”
In prepared testimony, Gary Daniels, chief lobbyist for the ACLU of Ohio, said that while the group supports the proposal “because of its overall goal of protecting speech,” lawmakers should improve the bill.
As “currently written, HB 16 explains this legislation is not meant to conflict with ‘any other state or federal law, local ordinance or resolution, or a proclamation by the governor,’” Daniels said. “Given our own experiences in litigating and pursuing local ordinances aimed at the regulation of political yard signs, the ACLU of Ohio is concerned about the likelihood there remains outdated and unconstitutional local laws, still on the books, across the state.
“So, should a conflict arise between a property owner and an HOA or similar entity, and that HOA/similar entity conducts a review of the local laws applicable to their area and location, they could be unwittingly relying on an unconstitutional ordinance to defend their restrictions,” Daniels added.
The civil rights group also raised a concern that an HOA’s “reasonable restrictions” could differ significantly from “what is otherwise allowed, or not allowed, by purely government actors under the First Amendment.”
Robin Strohm, president of the Ohio Community Associations Institute’s Legislative Action Committee, said Ohio law allows community associations to adopt rules allowing residents to display political signage on their units or lots. Many Ohio community associations have rules banning the display of political and other signs.
“House Bill 16 provides certain allowances for community associations to retain the ability to adopt and enforce reasonable rules and regulations concerning the time, size, location, and manner by which individual residents would be permitted to display political signs on their individual units or lots,” Strohm said in prepared testimony.
“...We believe House Bill 16 in its current form provides sufficient guardrails to support the core principle of community self-governance and co-ownership of common property essential to the community association housing model,” Strohm added. “CAI would respectfully request that members continue to consider these fundamental values of Ohio planned communities as work continues on the legislation.”
