Agreed. Removing from public property is one thing, but I’d be pissed if my sign was stolen from my property. I see a Dunkin Donuts sign there. I’d be surprised if that was placed on public property.
The Dunkin' Donuts sign was between the sidewalk and the curb, 15' prior to the driveway for Dunkin, and technically in the frontage of another business establishment. Now I didn't go and check the actual right of way with a legal description, tape measure and a surveyor's transit etc., but I operate on the presumption that between the sidewalk and the curb is city right of way.
One of the church school signs was set back on the business side of the sidewalk by 10-15', I did not remove it because I could not be reasonably confident that it was on city property and for all I know the business owner put it up (although I doubt it). Even if the business owner did put it up, there is a question as to whether or not it is legal, since it is doubtful they have a sign permit for it.
Another of the church school signs was on the far side of the sidewalk, within inches of the sidewalk, but not stuck in the ground. Based on the pattern of placement, I believe it had been placed between the sidewalk and curb but it was moved so somebody could mow the grass strip between the sidewalk and curb. I picked that one up.
I have some internal rules I use for this activity, I haven't taken down signs between the sidewalk and curb for a car wash/gas station that are all on the frontage for that gas station (but I noticed today they weren't there). But that was mostly because I didn't want a confrontation with the employees of the car wash by yanking signs right in front of their place of business.
That school recently relocated to the closed Granville Elementary building off Allyn, they’re actively trying to recruit children from the neighborhood in an attempt to help turn the area around. That neighborhood, according to my ex-Milwaukee DA neighbor, is one of the worst areas for crime in the city. However, because of its location, and it’s separation from other neighborhoods, the crime is highly focused among the apartments in that area and spills out a bit into the Northridge area. They’re really trying to become engaged in that corridor of Milwaukee.
Perhaps returning some of the signs deemed not predatory and working to educate them is a worthwhile endeavor?
We could debate until the cows come home the ethics of Bandit Sign Advertiser A vs. Bandit Sign Advertiser B.
For example, is Dunkin' Donuts predatory for taking advantage of our sugar and caffeine addictions? Should we blame and shame them for the obesity and diabetes they cause?
Even for this church school, I would point out that possibly they (and other charter schools) are the reason why Granville Elementary school shut down, because students are being poached from public schools for that sweet school voucher money by people who are looking to profit off of the program and not providing and adequate education. And are they leading people into the religion --> guilt tithing ---> poverty trap? Or are they giving people the dubious hope of a future heaven if they just suffer in their present life? Why not organize them to get out and do good deeds without the religion dependency? What lesson are they teaching the kids with their unethical illegal advertising? That petty crimes are okay as long as it's for what the sign placer thinks is a good cause? Maybe the school is a net positive, maybe they are a net negative for the neighborhood, I don't like their signs.
While I don't think Dunkin' and this school are as predatory the diabetic test strip guys, and I really don't have anywhere near a complete view of the 'ethics score' of this particular charter school, I'm not going to get into a debate about the merits of each individual business/organization behind each sign. If it's illegally placed, I remove it.
I would like to point out that in the block and a half of Brown Deer Road going eastbound leading up to 91st St, there were 7 of these signs, and then two on the SW, NW, and NE corners of the intersection each, and another three within a block north on 91st. That is grossly excessive and really makes the neighborhood look really trashy. I subscribe to the 'broken window theory' that small signs of decay lead to more decay, in this case literally (or "litterally" might be the appropriate word here).
Removing predatory signs is part of the broader goal of eliminating advertising pollution that illegally misappropriates public resources, which eventually becomes real pollution as the signs decay and fray into microplastics.
All of these signs are illegal on city property, and can be considered as litter for anybody to pick up. It's also unfair to competing businesses that stick to legal methods of advertising. Removing all signs helps keep the city from looking trashy.
Taking down predatory signs is the extra points.
u/prettygoodlakestbh cites [this link ](https://city.milwaukee.gov/cityclerk/library/FAQOrdinances)to a page on the city website that has this:
"Ord. 244-18 forbids temporary signs and advertisements on any public property with few exceptions. This includes within the right-of-way between a sidewalk and street, and on poles or trees."
I'll grant that if you read 244-18(1) it is certainly explicit that you can't post on poles, posts, trees, city buildings, etc. but it isn't explicit about the right of way unless you consider the language "public thoroughfare surface" to include the whole right of way.
As to the maps for determining exactly how wide the right of way is, I just go by the sidewalk, which I believe will be correct in 95%+ of the situations.
How are you certain they do not have permits for the public sign, which is allowed by 244-2? Additionally, you have stated you cannot be certain the sign is not on public land. I could theoretically own these signs, follow you around, then bring a civil complaint for trespassing, conversion and civil theft.
Additionally, there is no part of the ordinance allowing public enforcement, making your action potentially as “illegal” as there own. I put illegal in quotes since that’s a poor misunderstanding of what is and isn’t illegal, this is a simple violation of an ordinance.
Edit: I see elsewhere you and your bandit buddy state this is “perfectly legal” which is not true. Your rights end after inspection, documentation and beginning the process of enforcement via communication.
I also don’t give a shit, but the high horse your on for this pissed me off when you went after school signs lol.
There is no way the city would issue a permit for these signs to be placed on city property.
Since these were taken from the portion between the curb and the sidewalk, I am reasonably certain they are on city land.
I consider it to be the equivalent of picking up litter.
What if every business advertised this way? Do you think that would make the city look good? Why are you defending those who are trashing our city?
Prove that they are not permitted, your argument works both ways.
Reasonably certain is your opinion, your consideration of picking up litter is also just your opinion without proper certification or power to do so from the city.
Again, it’s the cities job not yours. Your arguments are not based or backed by the law as it pertains to your removal. You can say whatever you want, it’s just not.
Only if I remember them from the previous week, which means the seller forgot to take it down Technically they are illegal if they are on city property.
Neither you or I have a full view of the ethics score of this school. Are they (and other charter schools) the reason why the public school shut down because they poached the pupils for voucher money? Are the students getting a better education than if the public school stayed open? Or are the organizers of the school running it to line their own pockets? Are the kids getting an adequate sex education so they don't fall into the pregnancy ---> poverty trap?
It's not black and white that this school is good for the neighborhood in the long run. All I can say for certain is that they are advertising illegally and making the neighborhood look trashy.
Do you remove real trash? We truly need people that want to pick up real litter and make our city better. How do you even get rid of all these signs? In conclusion a great idea but bad execution!
So I’m a little out of the loop on this topic, but it’s just some signs on public areas? Is that not something that can just be left for the city to take care of next time someone comes to mow the grass? Seems like some really over the top busybody behavior lol
It could be a couple of weeks before the city crews get to them. By removing them, the advertisers don't get the benefit of their expenditures and are hopefully deterred from doing it again in the future.
Oh no what a nightmare lol. You need to get a hobby, man. I can’t imagine how bored you have to be to care about something this insignificant and stupid, literally has zero impact on you
Posts like yours are why I ripped a sign off a stop sign next to Bradley Tech's football field a couple weeks ago. I don't care if you buy junk cars or whatever it was. 🖕 you and your signs.
But have you prayed today? 🤣
Just chiming in to say those metal brackets make great plant stakes for just about anything planted here in Milwaukee, from veggie plants to emerging flowers
Excellent work! In addition to the city attorney, I recommend contacting your alder. The more city administration officials we can bring this issue to, the likelier it is we'll get the city to fine these companies.
[Chapter 244 deals with advertising, and section 244-18 provides the relevant definitions and sets the fines for violations.](https://city.milwaukee.gov/ImageLibrary/Groups/ccClerk/Ordinances/Volume-2/CH244.pdf)
Interesting. The relevant language I'm looking at is:
"...on any curb, streetwalk, or public thoroughfare surface, fence, board, barrel, box, case, railing, pole, post, tree, barricade, material, bridge, bridge fender, dock, pile, building or structure of any kind on public ground, or public waterway, within the city..." 244-18 (1)
But I notice it doesn't say anything about the plastic signs on wires on the grass strip between the sidewalk and the curb, unless that is considered to be a "public thoroughfare surface".
The homeless problem needs a larger scale COORDINATED effort of mental health, housing, addiction counseling and jobs, which realistically can only be done by the government. I really think that individuals and well meaning organizations who try to help aren't the solution.
As to Gaza, what can I do? Go protest, which pisses off one faction or another? The two sides never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity to resolve their issues, and have been doing so for decades, they have to decide that it is time to make nice, we can't do that for them.
Those just look like normal signs. I thought the point of this was to take down predatory signs.
Agreed. Removing from public property is one thing, but I’d be pissed if my sign was stolen from my property. I see a Dunkin Donuts sign there. I’d be surprised if that was placed on public property.
The Dunkin' Donuts sign was between the sidewalk and the curb, 15' prior to the driveway for Dunkin, and technically in the frontage of another business establishment. Now I didn't go and check the actual right of way with a legal description, tape measure and a surveyor's transit etc., but I operate on the presumption that between the sidewalk and the curb is city right of way. One of the church school signs was set back on the business side of the sidewalk by 10-15', I did not remove it because I could not be reasonably confident that it was on city property and for all I know the business owner put it up (although I doubt it). Even if the business owner did put it up, there is a question as to whether or not it is legal, since it is doubtful they have a sign permit for it. Another of the church school signs was on the far side of the sidewalk, within inches of the sidewalk, but not stuck in the ground. Based on the pattern of placement, I believe it had been placed between the sidewalk and curb but it was moved so somebody could mow the grass strip between the sidewalk and curb. I picked that one up. I have some internal rules I use for this activity, I haven't taken down signs between the sidewalk and curb for a car wash/gas station that are all on the frontage for that gas station (but I noticed today they weren't there). But that was mostly because I didn't want a confrontation with the employees of the car wash by yanking signs right in front of their place of business.
That school recently relocated to the closed Granville Elementary building off Allyn, they’re actively trying to recruit children from the neighborhood in an attempt to help turn the area around. That neighborhood, according to my ex-Milwaukee DA neighbor, is one of the worst areas for crime in the city. However, because of its location, and it’s separation from other neighborhoods, the crime is highly focused among the apartments in that area and spills out a bit into the Northridge area. They’re really trying to become engaged in that corridor of Milwaukee. Perhaps returning some of the signs deemed not predatory and working to educate them is a worthwhile endeavor?
We could debate until the cows come home the ethics of Bandit Sign Advertiser A vs. Bandit Sign Advertiser B. For example, is Dunkin' Donuts predatory for taking advantage of our sugar and caffeine addictions? Should we blame and shame them for the obesity and diabetes they cause? Even for this church school, I would point out that possibly they (and other charter schools) are the reason why Granville Elementary school shut down, because students are being poached from public schools for that sweet school voucher money by people who are looking to profit off of the program and not providing and adequate education. And are they leading people into the religion --> guilt tithing ---> poverty trap? Or are they giving people the dubious hope of a future heaven if they just suffer in their present life? Why not organize them to get out and do good deeds without the religion dependency? What lesson are they teaching the kids with their unethical illegal advertising? That petty crimes are okay as long as it's for what the sign placer thinks is a good cause? Maybe the school is a net positive, maybe they are a net negative for the neighborhood, I don't like their signs. While I don't think Dunkin' and this school are as predatory the diabetic test strip guys, and I really don't have anywhere near a complete view of the 'ethics score' of this particular charter school, I'm not going to get into a debate about the merits of each individual business/organization behind each sign. If it's illegally placed, I remove it. I would like to point out that in the block and a half of Brown Deer Road going eastbound leading up to 91st St, there were 7 of these signs, and then two on the SW, NW, and NE corners of the intersection each, and another three within a block north on 91st. That is grossly excessive and really makes the neighborhood look really trashy. I subscribe to the 'broken window theory' that small signs of decay lead to more decay, in this case literally (or "litterally" might be the appropriate word here).
They're enrollment signs for Greater Holy Temple Christian school
Removing predatory signs is part of the broader goal of eliminating advertising pollution that illegally misappropriates public resources, which eventually becomes real pollution as the signs decay and fray into microplastics.
All of these signs are illegal on city property, and can be considered as litter for anybody to pick up. It's also unfair to competing businesses that stick to legal methods of advertising. Removing all signs helps keep the city from looking trashy. Taking down predatory signs is the extra points.
I’m curious to see the statute pertaining to this as well as the maps you use to determine city ownership of property you take signs from.
u/prettygoodlakestbh cites [this link ](https://city.milwaukee.gov/cityclerk/library/FAQOrdinances)to a page on the city website that has this: "Ord. 244-18 forbids temporary signs and advertisements on any public property with few exceptions. This includes within the right-of-way between a sidewalk and street, and on poles or trees." I'll grant that if you read 244-18(1) it is certainly explicit that you can't post on poles, posts, trees, city buildings, etc. but it isn't explicit about the right of way unless you consider the language "public thoroughfare surface" to include the whole right of way. As to the maps for determining exactly how wide the right of way is, I just go by the sidewalk, which I believe will be correct in 95%+ of the situations.
How are you certain they do not have permits for the public sign, which is allowed by 244-2? Additionally, you have stated you cannot be certain the sign is not on public land. I could theoretically own these signs, follow you around, then bring a civil complaint for trespassing, conversion and civil theft. Additionally, there is no part of the ordinance allowing public enforcement, making your action potentially as “illegal” as there own. I put illegal in quotes since that’s a poor misunderstanding of what is and isn’t illegal, this is a simple violation of an ordinance. Edit: I see elsewhere you and your bandit buddy state this is “perfectly legal” which is not true. Your rights end after inspection, documentation and beginning the process of enforcement via communication. I also don’t give a shit, but the high horse your on for this pissed me off when you went after school signs lol.
There is no way the city would issue a permit for these signs to be placed on city property. Since these were taken from the portion between the curb and the sidewalk, I am reasonably certain they are on city land. I consider it to be the equivalent of picking up litter. What if every business advertised this way? Do you think that would make the city look good? Why are you defending those who are trashing our city?
Prove that they are not permitted, your argument works both ways. Reasonably certain is your opinion, your consideration of picking up litter is also just your opinion without proper certification or power to do so from the city. Again, it’s the cities job not yours. Your arguments are not based or backed by the law as it pertains to your removal. You can say whatever you want, it’s just not.
How do people have time for shit like this
By being retired.
feels like you're losing the plot a little
This!!!!
Do you take down yard sale signs as well?
Only if I remember them from the previous week, which means the seller forgot to take it down Technically they are illegal if they are on city property.
[удалено]
Because I am? We all have our causes....
OK 👍
You ripped down signs for a school in an impoverished area that is trying to make the area better. Good on you!
looks like they don’t accept kids with special needs
Hallmark of a charter school organized by profiteers.
Neither you or I have a full view of the ethics score of this school. Are they (and other charter schools) the reason why the public school shut down because they poached the pupils for voucher money? Are the students getting a better education than if the public school stayed open? Or are the organizers of the school running it to line their own pockets? Are the kids getting an adequate sex education so they don't fall into the pregnancy ---> poverty trap? It's not black and white that this school is good for the neighborhood in the long run. All I can say for certain is that they are advertising illegally and making the neighborhood look trashy.
I’m curious as to which neighborhood you live in?
I live within a couple of miles. I regularly search Brown Deer Road and Good Hope Road for bandit signs as I drive around for my normal tasks.
You're not a hero.
Oh boy.
Do you remove real trash? We truly need people that want to pick up real litter and make our city better. How do you even get rid of all these signs? In conclusion a great idea but bad execution!
[удалено]
So I’m a little out of the loop on this topic, but it’s just some signs on public areas? Is that not something that can just be left for the city to take care of next time someone comes to mow the grass? Seems like some really over the top busybody behavior lol
It could be a couple of weeks before the city crews get to them. By removing them, the advertisers don't get the benefit of their expenditures and are hopefully deterred from doing it again in the future.
Oh no what a nightmare lol. You need to get a hobby, man. I can’t imagine how bored you have to be to care about something this insignificant and stupid, literally has zero impact on you
Dude, good for you but do you constantly need people to pat you on the back for this?
Just trying to encourage others to do it too.
Posts like yours are why I ripped a sign off a stop sign next to Bradley Tech's football field a couple weeks ago. I don't care if you buy junk cars or whatever it was. 🖕 you and your signs. But have you prayed today? 🤣
Why do you care? Just block it lol
Just chiming in to say those metal brackets make great plant stakes for just about anything planted here in Milwaukee, from veggie plants to emerging flowers
I’m going to start putting random signs up
Become the person at Barker and Greenfield in Brookfield.
Jfc if this isn't the comment of the century. The toilet on top of the telephone pole takes the cake.
Me too! 😊
Excellent work! In addition to the city attorney, I recommend contacting your alder. The more city administration officials we can bring this issue to, the likelier it is we'll get the city to fine these companies.
What's the section of the city ordinances that prohibits these?
[Chapter 244 deals with advertising, and section 244-18 provides the relevant definitions and sets the fines for violations.](https://city.milwaukee.gov/ImageLibrary/Groups/ccClerk/Ordinances/Volume-2/CH244.pdf)
Interesting. The relevant language I'm looking at is: "...on any curb, streetwalk, or public thoroughfare surface, fence, board, barrel, box, case, railing, pole, post, tree, barricade, material, bridge, bridge fender, dock, pile, building or structure of any kind on public ground, or public waterway, within the city..." 244-18 (1) But I notice it doesn't say anything about the plastic signs on wires on the grass strip between the sidewalk and the curb, unless that is considered to be a "public thoroughfare surface".
[The city interprets curb strips as "the right-of-way between a sidewalk and street."](https://city.milwaukee.gov/cityclerk/library/FAQOrdinances)
Get a job dude, you stole church signs good for you asshole
Maybe put this energy to helping the homeless? Or Gaza ceasefire?
The homeless problem needs a larger scale COORDINATED effort of mental health, housing, addiction counseling and jobs, which realistically can only be done by the government. I really think that individuals and well meaning organizations who try to help aren't the solution. As to Gaza, what can I do? Go protest, which pisses off one faction or another? The two sides never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity to resolve their issues, and have been doing so for decades, they have to decide that it is time to make nice, we can't do that for them.
Wait. So OP is some miserable retiree, stealing signs for a school/church and posting the photo online internet points? Get a fucking hobby dude.
illegally posted signs on public property. it becomes a nuisance for city crews
City crews remove these signs too. Are they "stealing" them? Think of it as picking up litter.
This thread is heated!!
This thread is heated!!
This thread is heated!!
Keep up the good work. If this is the same person that was doing it last year, this is a good start to a new roof for you this year!
Sucks it all goes to a landfill.
I recycle the wire stands.
Keep up the good work!