April 1, 1948
Hal V. Patton today threatened court action after the City Council rejected his protest that a parking lot sign erected in a city street by Alderman Martin F. Bauman constitutes "discrimination" against other parking lots.Mr. Patton owns a parking lot site a block north of the Santa Fe street international bridge.
A rival parking lot adjacent to the bridge is advertised by a Bauman-built sign that stands on poles in the street on City property.
Sold Sign Outright
Mr. Bauman, who operates an electric and neon sign company, obtained a permit to erect the sign, Nov. 26, 1946, for Phillip C. Stevens. The sign is 4 feet by 9 feet.
Mr. Bauman said today he does not, own , the sign. "I sold it outright,” he explained.
The Council, after hearing Mr. Patton's protests, learned from its legal staff that there is some question as to the legality of a previous council's action in approving the Bauman-built sign.
New Ordinance Ordered
To validate the previous council's authorization, which was granted by letter, the present council today instructed its attorneys to prepare an ordinance giving Mr. Stevens authority to have his sign on City property.
"From here on out I'll have my lawyer handle this,” Mr. Patton told the council after his rebuff.
Proceeding today’s action the council debated whether to validate the existing sign or order it removed.
Alderman Wyler said it might equalize things to let Mr. Patton put up a sign in the street for his parking lot. No action was taken on this suggestion.
Says He Waited Too Long
“I have the same setup down there and I think I should have the same right,” Mr. Patton argued.
Alderman Bauman said, “I can’t take the sign down now.” He told Mr. Patton: “You waited too long to complain.”
Mr. Patton retorted that the City waited from six months to a year before forcing him to remove a public address system which he installed to advertise his parking lot “to offset the damage done by the illegal sign” of his competitor.
Had a Pop Stand There
Mr. Patton also asserted that the City once made him remove a soda pop stand from the spot where Bauman later built the disputed sign.
He said the City ought to let him “go back on the air” with his public address system.
R.F. Momsen, assistant City attorney, recalled that a “trade” was made with Mr. Stevens to let him erect the sign on City property in return for his withdrawal of objections to construction of a new Government inspection station by El Paso city Lines at the west side of Santa Fe street.
Mr. Patton protested that he could see no reason why the City had to “compromise” with a private land owner in regard to a structure built on City property.
Comments