Billboard control benefits everyone in Michigan

On Sunday, December 17, 2006, the people of Michigan were freed from “litter on a stick.” That’s the day that Gov. Jennifer Granholm signed two bills into law, one controlling billboard construction and the other regulating tree cutting around billboards.

And most Michigan residents agree. According to an EPIC MRA poll taken in 1997, more than 90% of the residents thought Michigan had too many billboards and 60% of them favored banning new billboards.

With approval of these bills not only can you now enjoy more of Michigan’s scenic beauty, but your community becomes more livable and Michigan’s destinations more attractive. The end result is Michigan becomes a more lovely place to work and play and the state’s economy is greatly improved. How? Why? Here are some specific ways:

For communities, fewer billboards mean:

§ Preserving the beauty and quality of life of communities, especially for residential neighborhoods, historic districts, parks, churches and schools.

§ More attractive communities and that means more business. A five-year study of 35 cities by the Mississippi Research and Development Center concluded that an attractive community had a better chance at attracting industry.

§ Improved property values. A study in Pittsburgh, PA found that property values rose as much as 255% after removing nearby billboards.

For tourism (Michigan’s 2^nd largest industry), fewer billboards mean:

§ More tourists. For Michigan, that’s critical, because tourism is the second largest industry (second only to the auto industry) and annually brings in $______________ to the state. And according to the President’s Commission on Americans Outdoors, natural beauty was the most important reason adults chose an outdoor recreation site. In fact, other states like Vermont, Alaska, Hawaii and Maine have even prohibited all billboards yet their states’ tourism thrives.

§ More tourists equal more money. Especially now that the auto industry is hurting, tourism is all the more important to the economic health of the state and to its people. Vermont is a good example. Vermont took down its last billboard in 1975. However, from 1976 through 1978, tourism revenue increased 50%.

For businesses, fewer billboards mean:

§ More money. Although fewer billboards improve the scenic beauty of Michigan and that draws more tourists, the businesses involved in tourism aren’t the only ones benefiting. It’s other businesses as well. For example, in the years after city leaders in Houston, TX prohibited new billboard construction, total retail sales grew more than 100%, from $9 billion in 1981 to $19 billion by 1992.

§ More employees. As jobseekers look to relocate, one of the factors is the quality of life of a community: its attractiveness, its economic strength. By reducing the number of billboards, the attractiveness of a community improves and that improves its economy. But by not reducing the number of billboards, a community is in for trouble. In an article on a low-income, blighted neighborhood in the Wilmington (North Carolina) Journal, the reporter wrote, “Nothing points out the lack of concern for Dawson Street and its citizens more than the numerous billboards that line both sides of the street. Billboards outnumber trees, and abut up against (sic) homes and churches . . . destroying the privacy of both.”

A better future

With the passage of this legislation that controls billboard construction, Michigan residents now have a better chance at a better future for both themselves and their children. A future where natural beauty is preserved and historic heritage honored. A future where communities thrive, economically and socially. A future where life is improved for all.

*Also thanks to State Senators Thomas George (R-Kalamazoo) and Senator Jud Gilbert (R-Algonac), for sponsoring the legislation and a bipartisan coalition supporting the legislation that included Scenic Michigan; the Michigan Land Use Institute; the Michigan Township Association; the Michigan Municipal League; Michigan United Conservation Clubs; Michigan Food and Beverage Association and the Michigan Historic Preservation Network.