Surrey’s controversial sign bylaw change narrowly passes

Surrey council has passed amendments to a bylaw that limits what signage locals can put up on their personal property.

The move, in part, changes the definition of what a “political sign” is, and passed with a vote of 5-4.

Previously, the definition was “a sign erected to promote the voting at a municipal, provincial or federal election or the election of a particular candidate, or the voting for or support of a particular cause at a municipal, provincial or federal election.”

However, that has now been amended to include signs that promote the voting at, support or opposition of “referendum, plebiscite, initiative petition, or recall petition,” “the election, support or disapproval of a particular candidate or political organization,” and “the voting for, support or opposition of a municipal, provincial or federal issue.”

The change is seen by some as one that limits the publics ability to speak out on certain issues and subjects.

Coun. Linda Annis is among those who voted against the amendment, saying it is “very obviously is aimed at silencing people,” particularly those who are in opposition to Surrey’s ongoing switch from the RCMP to a municipal police force.

“That’s just wrong. People have every right to express their opinions on their own personal property, so long as it’s not illegal or [hateful],” Annis, who has been vocal about her support for keeping the RCMP in Surrey, told CityNews on Tuesday.

However, not all councillors agree with her.

Related articles: 

• Special prosecutor to help Surrey RCMP investigate mayor’s complaint

• Mother of Surrey Six victim joins push for police transition referendum

• Surrey Mayor Doug McCallum under investigation for public mischief

Coun. Laurie Guerra, who voted for the amendments, says the original bylaw was first introduced in the 1990s, and was last amended in 2019.

“We all supported it in that 2019 amendment which, basically the rationale behind it was to clean up the city when it came to municipal elections,” she explained. “The Safe Surrey Coalition, when we campaigned, we thought it was just a mess … it’s just a terrible mess when municipal campaigns are on the go. So when we got elected, we actually made a promise that we would change that sign bylaw to only allow political signs to go on private property, and not to allow political signs to go on any public property.”

She says many people complained about various issues, including sight lines on roadways and traffic disruptions.

Guerra notes the amendments were proposals from staff to expand definitions, not confine them.

“There was a number of councillors that I find it bit disingenuous in their support or lack of support for it, because they all supported it in 2019 when they voted on it, and now the only ones that didn’t support it are the ones that have changed their minds, I guess you could call it, toward the Surrey Police Service,” she claimed.

“It’s housekeeping and tidying up with our sign bylaw. To make it anything more than that I think would be disingenuous by the other councillors,” Guerra added.

The councillors who voted against the change include Steven Pettigrew, Brenda Locke, and Jack Hundial, as well as Annis.

Guerra, when asked by CityNews about her thoughts on claims that the change silences certain residents, argues the amendment actually broadens the ability to put political signs up.

“It broadens the definition so that during a referendum or during a political campaign you could put those kinds of signs up as well. So it’s not to confine it anymore, it’s to expand it rather than put governors on it, and that’s exactly what the city solicitor had stated last night in the council chambers,” Guerra explained.

But Annis disagrees, saying the amendments made in 2019 only limited where and when political signage could go up. She claims the latest change to be approved goes too far.

Surrey Police Vote, a campaign that is asking the province to hold a referendum on the police transition, also sees the bylaw amendment as “effectively muzzling signage and other forms of advertising regarding ‘the voting for, support or opposition of a municipal, provincial or federal issue.'”

Darlene Bennett, the widow of a man killed in a case of mistaken identity in 2018 who is a proponent of the initiative, says the change “clearly targets the ongoing, popular Surrey Police Vote and related Surrey residents’ deep concerns about the proposed transition,” adding the move is just another step in “the ongoing attack on democracy in Surrey” by Mayor Doug McCallum and his supporters.

A ‘housekeeping issue’

Coun. Doug Elford also voted in favour of the amendment Monday. He says he doesn’t see the move as one that limits free speech.

“I supported the bylaw because it really was just a matter of — my interpretation was — cleaning up some inefficiencies in a bylaw that we introduced in 2019,” he explained.

“From my point of view, for example, from what I understand, they had timelines for removal of signs, but they didn’t have any timeline for the introduction of signs during election periods and referendums,” he said of the bylaw.

When asked for his response to critics calling the definition change a move to silence some residents, Elford said it was “just a clarification.”

“We had to introduce some legislation to cover, what I have said before, a weakness in the sign bylaw, and that’s basically why I supported it. One group or another may consider it oppressive, but you have to take into account all different groups, all different organizations when you make these decisions, not just one,” he continued.

Elford agrees that this move is more of a “housekeeping issue” and that “I didn’t think it was a big deal at all.”

Annis doesn’t see it as such.

“It’s just the wrong thing to do. People have every right to have their voices heard, and I think residents of Surrey are being increasingly frustrated and not allowed to speak out publicly about issues that are deeply concerning to them,” she said.

She says the bylaw amendment will be enforced by bylaw officers — something she sees as a waste of their time, which could be spent working on other things.

Surrey’s police transition is in full swing, with the first 50 officers of the new force expected to be deployed by Nov. 30.