San Diego’s strong sign laws are again under attack
San Diego was the first to establish in the 1981 Metromedia case that cities can limit off-site commercial advertising in the interests of aesthetics and safety. Subsequent court cases have ruled that cherry-picked exceptions undermine a government’s claim that strong public policies justify ad limits.
Digital kiosks are a bad idea
|
Kiosks are commercial visual clutter which promote inequality and overconsumption
In 2018, San Diego Port Commissioners rejected a similar IKE kiosk project to the one now proposed by IKE Smart City, LLC. Commissioners heard strong public opposition to littering our harborfront with giant ad screens capable of capturing the data of passersby. The current proposal stipulates 50 kiosks but at a recent city meeting an option to increase that number to 75 kiosks was found hidden in the documents. In 2020 the Biscayne Times in a detailed critique called IKE company’s kiosks in Miami “An Eyesore by Any Other Name,”. Miami is now slated for as many as ad 150 kiosks. Media reports say outdoor advertising is directly contrary to social justice goals and anathema for advocates for equality and climate action. Cities around the world are reducing or eliminating outdoor advertising, including in Brazil, France and China. Shouldn't San Diego be showing leadership in forward-thinking development? |
|
|
Digital Kiosks are a safety hazard
Traffic safety is one of the two important governmental interests underlying the legal justification for San Diego’s off-site advertising freeze enacted in the 1980s. Studies have shown digital kiosks are distracting to drivers and pedestrians in the same way digital billboards are. Giant, flashing ad platforms put public safety at risk and conflict with the legal justification for the City’s cap on billboards and other outdoor ads. |
|
Claimed public benefits of digital kiosks are illusory
Kiosk vendor IKE claims digital ad platforms help with “wayfinding.” But Scenic San Diego believes this is ad speak for the true function of these devices - platforms projecting commercial advertising in the public right of way to generate profits for corporations. All purported public benefits of the kiosks are duplicative and unneeded – directory listings and maps are already available on cell phones, on static wayfinding signage and in the mass media. Free wifi is available in many local businesses. The true function of these ad platforms is unavoidable profit-making advertising. Outdoor Ads Can’t Be Turned Off or Ignored
Advocacy groups contend outdoor ads are harmful to children and promote inequality. The Sierra Club and many other community groups strongly support off-site sign restrictions and the Sierra Club is on record as opposed to the kiosk proposal. |
|
Follow the money on digital kiosks
- The kiosk proposal is not legally or economically sound. The City’s Independent Budget Analyst (IBA) IBE in November 2022 cautioned against the proposal and advised it could undermine the current sign regulations. The IBA concluded the revenue potential would be limited and cited many more viable options for pursuing new revenue sources opportunities for the City.
- The City Staff Report estimated total annual revenues from the 50 ad platforms of $604,500 to the general fund. This is about three one-thousandths of the current year budget of $1.95 billion. The Keyser Marston study included in the agenda packet said this sum is less than 14 percent of the advertising revenue (13.81%).
- Advertiser IKE gets the majority of revenues – at least 55%.
- Scenic San Diego contends this miniscule sum reveals the kiosk plan is a camel’s nose under the tent to bust the sign ordinance and open our city to a plethora of off-site advertising.
|
Digital kiosks, face scanning, data capture & privacy violations
In the 2017-2018 Port District battle over kiosks and wraps along our City’s beautiful harborfront, where IKE was also the winning kiosk vendor (doing business as OBMSMG, LLC DBA IKE SMART CITY), the company touted the ability of its kiosks to gather personal data from cell phones of passersby and “push” or force undesired paid advertising onto the smart phones of nearby pedestrians. Each kiosk contained a sensor that identified the unique Radio Frequency Identification signal of a pedestrian’s cell phone. IKE representatives claim they don’t capture any data, and also claimed they don’t sell data. However, other than promising not to store “personally identifiable data” or some similar phrase, these safeguards are not in the public documents. It is crucial that our elected representatives understand the technology well enough to ask these important data capture and usage questions. The Biscayne Times reported the Miami IKE contract allowed kiosks to capture data from users. City documents to date have not disclosed whether the proposed kiosks will capture data from users. City officials should not facilitate intrusive data capture from personal cell phones. |
|
Exceptions to the City’s Sign Laws are Risky
In 2013, we formed Scenic San Diego and successfully defeated a proposal to add nearly 100 outdoor ads downtown.
The City Attorney’s legal analysis strongly warned of the dangers of carving exceptions in the City’s historic sign limits.
Scenic San Diego contends the kiosk project is a disguised attempt to bust the sign ordinance and allow a massive increase in outdoor ads of all types.
In 2013, we formed Scenic San Diego and successfully defeated a proposal to add nearly 100 outdoor ads downtown.
The City Attorney’s legal analysis strongly warned of the dangers of carving exceptions in the City’s historic sign limits.
Scenic San Diego contends the kiosk project is a disguised attempt to bust the sign ordinance and allow a massive increase in outdoor ads of all types.
|
Say No to digital kiosks
|
Archive
|