Covington resident: Stop littering city with ads

COVINGTON – Not many people seem to want them, but that doesn't stop their spread.

White bags with the RedPlum logo with ads for Kroger, DirectTV and pet stores pop up everywhere on yards and sidewalks in many cities.

One resident in Covington, however, wants to stem the paper deluge. But he must first answer where free speech rights end and the rights of property owners begin.

"I don't think you should put anything on a homeowner's property without their permission," said P.J. Lonneman, a resident of Covington's west side who moved to town four years ago. "When it rains, they get all soggy. It's gross."

Lonneman has proposed an ordinance to the City Commission that would prohibit placing circulars and ads on the sidewalk or private property without the owner's position.

The city will consider a way to stop the RedPlum circulars, said City Solicitor Frank Warnock. He wasn't sure what the city could and could not do at this time.

"Effectively what we have is an advertising company unilaterally placing advertising circulars onto public and private property and that those items often end up being discarded and laying on the sidewalk," Warnock said. "It's a nuisance. I walk and jog in the city and see these circulars in gutters and yards. It's an issue."

Michigan-based Valassis prints the RedPlum circulars. Lonneman said he sees two teenagers every Sunday in his neighborhood pulling a cart full of RedPlum circulars and throwing them on lawns.

The RedPlum packages pile up on vacant properties, Lonneman said.

A local manager with Valassis referred comment to their corporate headquarters, where several messages were not returned.

Banning the circulars won't be easy. The First Amendment free speech protections could make any ordinance tricky.

Covington already prohibits putting any handbills, circulars, publications or advertising supplements on vacant properties. But enforcement can be tough, Warnock said. Advertising companies point the finger at distributors who point the finger back at the distributors, he said.

"The distributors come and go," Warnock said. "They're guys in pickup trucks, guys trying to make a buck. If you drive around Dayton, Ky., Newport, Ky., Covington, you see circulars laying in the sidewalk and curb."

Cities can enact ordinances that limit where fliers could be distributed. Some cities allow residents to buy decals for their property telling people not to distribute fliers and circulars on the property. Philadelphia has a decal with a line through a hand throwing a piece of paper that says "Circular-free property."

Requiring property owners to opt-out with decals, however, wouldn't address the problem of vacant properties and slumlords that allow the circulars to pile up, Lonneman said.

The ordinance proposed by Lonneman, however, might be too broad, said Ken Paulson, president of the First Amendment Center at Vanderbilt University and former editor-in-chief of USA TODAY. By banning materials left on properties where the owner didn't consent without permission, it would also prohibit materials from political candidates during elections and religious organizations, Paulson said.

"That would be tremendously broad," Paulson said. "There's no way of knowing who wants to communicate with you. It is a balancing act. The time, place and manner restrictions cannot be unreasonable."

Cities can require circulars be put on a porch or other specific area of the property, he said.

Covington is not a stranger to fighting unwanted ads. The city in 2005 passed a law to stop companies from putting bench billboards along streets. The city's ordinance prohibited the placement of items in the public right-of-way unless the company was granted a permit.

The Bench Billboard Co. sued the city but lost when U.S. District Court Judge David Bunning found the law didn't single out a specific form of speech.

Bunning found the ordinance served a legitimate government interest in aesthetics and safety.

Warnock pledged that the city will not ignore the residents' concerns with unwanted paper ads piling up in neighborhoods.

"Should the company have the unilateral right to determine to put something in somebody's yard?" Warnock said. "There is definitely a balancing of rights when you get into the arena of regulations involving the First Amendment freedom of speech."