Tens of millions of dollars in advertising revenues are received each year by billboard companies from billboards, large screen video displays, tall walls and other off-site signs. Yet, under current law, the billboard companies pay virtually no taxes to West Hollywood for the privilege of being allowed to advertise in the city.

For decades, the citizens of West Hollywood have been forced to live with billboards, tall walls, large screen video displays and other off-site signs, while billboard companies have received over a billion dollars in advertising revenues and West Hollywood has become the sign capitol of California. The time is now for billboard companies to pay their fair share to the City of West Hollywood for this privilege.

This initiative would correct this inequity and provide new revenue for the City to provide added municipal services to the residents of West Hollywood. A 7% excise tax on advertising revenues received from the lease of billboards, video signs, tall walls or other off site signs in West Hollywood would be paid to the City and deposited into the General Fund for expanding City services.

The new revenue would benefit West Hollywood in enhancing current municipal services and permit an expansion of many community projects and services, including expanding Aids/HIV treatment and prevention programs, adding community public spaces such as pocket parks and public enhancements for the new library, public safety funding for sheriff services and first responders and continued funding of cultural affairs and community events.

Whether you love billboards or hate them, all agree that they impact the experience of living in West Hollywood and have resulted in massive financial gains to the billboard companies. In fairness, billboard companies should be required to give back a fair share of these revenues to the community through the “Tax Billboard Act” Initiative.

Support the West Hollywood quality of life. Support the “Tax Billboard Act” Initiative.

http://www.TaxBillboardAct.com

Ferienparks Holland

Dennis Hathaway
President, Coalition to Ban Billboard Blight
http://www.banbillboardblight.org

Thanks for laying things out like that. It has been very disappointing to see things play out like this in L.A. I don’t think any of us would mind if these insiders got paid to do work – so long as they did a good job of it.

Where did all the competent bad guys go?

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/07/local/me-rocky7

It kills me the city admits many of the billboards that litter our streets are illegal yet so far the city has been unable to even do an inventory. The billboard companies are shameless in their pursuit of keeping hold of this billion dollar cashcow.

Los Angeles is rife with civic debacles created by the excess pull of insiders. One rumor I have heard is many years ago when the city awarded the contract for bus shelters (I’m talking back when Tom Bradley was Mayor) it went to a company owned by an ex-staffer of then Councilman Zev Yaroslavsky. The company was undercapitalized and lacked the technical expertise to handle the job. Eventually a larger company bought it. And then a yet-larger company bought that one. The contract was passed like an heirloom through a succession of entities until Viacom Decaux ended up with it. And when the city some years ago made rumblings to finally put the contract out for bid Decaux used pull to instead have a negotiated new contract for street furniture that seemingly will last forever (sort of like being an LAPD Official Police Garage–http://www.opgla.com/). And most depressing is the result has been a poorly managed program seemingly unable to overcome the political conundrum between the anti-tax ideology of residents and the consequent need to facilitate advertising to generate the revenue to fund street improvements like bus benches. Other examples of insiders grabbing contracts and then proving their only skill is pulling strings include a non-profit that briefly was in charge of the paddle boats at MacArthur Park, a hand-to-mouth company that had a DASH contract in South L.A. and the venerable community group that for years held onto the contract with the county to run the Hahn Shuttle in the area around King/Harbor even though its competence was almost zero (we suspect the money was the near sum total of their cash flow given its decline in the years since the founder died).

Sometimes truth, justice and the American way triumphs. And then we have other times, such as this. :-(

Personally, I prefer the graffiti over the billboards, but I realize it is not an either or sort of decision to make.

I think there is something encoded into L.A.’s fabric that makes top-down, commercial, speech more “important” – which is why billboards blight our city in such vast number and variety. Graffiti is a bottom-up expression of a similar attitude and desire, but it is automatically considered “blight” and subject to an East German-style cultural throttling.

Is the anti-billboard stance a reasonable plank in L.A.’s livable streets movement?

I was under the impression that San Diego and San Jose had also long since banned new billboards, although there are so many cities and towns around San Jose that it’s hard to tell.