The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

Bm CONTRIBUTED SHOULD ELECTION SIGNS BE BANNED IN OAKVILLE? FUTURE VOTERS WEIGH IN ON THE ISSUE ‘he following opinion from ike ren 6 class at New Centra Public School, and were inspired 9 a recent article in the Gukvilte Beaver. Can you imagine an election without signs? The motion was discussed on Monday, Jan. 30 at a Ward 1 council meeting to ban or not to ban signs and I think we shouldn't. My first reason is that if we didn't have election signs, how would anyone know there was an elec- tion going on? Many eligi- ble voters don't know when elections are hap- pening, and When they see signs they it there is an aaieton, and whoi is running. In the last "municipal election, only 28 per cent of Oakville voters turned out to vote for a new mayor. with fewer or no signs, imbers could dwindle even more. If this happened, could we even consider our governmenta true democracy? Another reason is you could just make rules for but have less money ant only have them on ble pr spend on signs because he was younger than every- one else and it put him ata lisadvantage. If there were rules re- garding the limits on elec- tion signs, all candidates would have the same Oakville students share their thoughts on a proposed ban on electi amount of signs and the same amount of money spent on them, creating a more fair opportunity for all those running for elec- tion. Finally, if we take away signs, candidates will turn to social media to cam- paign for the election. This is not as good as signs be- cause you can't see them when you are driving and people will not be aware of elections or candidates. This also limits who gets this important informa- ion, as making an in- med vote is important to all citizens, not ust those with social m« So if we take away lec: tion signs, where will the fun be in looking at signs on a walk or in your car. People will not have an op- portunity to show their support for the favourite candidate who is running, which is an important as- pect of democracy. ROIC ROTA Imagine taking a walk at your favourite park. In- stead of the expected array of red and orange flowers, emerald en iss, an rich, black soil, you see cheap, ugly election signs istered with enlarged candidate faces. ones could potentially hap to ° your favourite public a Nection signs. Are they good or bad? Here are three reasons why election signs should be bani the wironment. Election signs usually con- sist of plastic, which can take more than a 100 years to decompose. Even more, after the election, most of the signs are discarded and thrown away, contrib- uting to the ever- growing landfills. Additi the tion signs. advantage over candidates with less money. This could also lead to people voting for the party with most signs, thinking that the more signs the party has, the better they are, even though the party's ideas and promises might not appeal to you. Thirdly, election signs create visual pollution. In some places, it's hard to go anywhere without being assaulted by a wave of signs and it can get hia and chaotic Election signage may have its uses but its nega- tive impacts outweigh it. Yes, electio: i mé alert some citizens to an election but it harms the creates visu- production of the signs can emit harmful gases into the atmosphere resulting in pollution. Secondly, candidates have advantage. Candids that have enough money to manufacture and produce mae signs have an unfair wealthier al pollution and manipu- lates the choices of who cit- izens vote for. EMMA BI Election signs seem like a pretty good way to boost publicity for the elections, but there are also a lot of downsides to having them Graham Paine/Metroland file photo up. Election signs should be banned. During election times, there are lots of signs up, and there are also times when the roads are crowd- ed with traffic, and there can be a chance that the driver may get distracted, which isn't safe for them, or anyone near them on the road. Also, on windy, rainy, stormy, and e Olas water, and other teal places. This can pollute the environ- ment, and is very un- healthy for Oakville. If we want our nature to thrive and stay healthy, election signs need to go. In addition, election signs cost money, lots of money, and not all candi- dates have enough to pur- chase lots. For example, in a past municipal election, Jack Kukolic didn't get elected, and one of the rea- sons may have been that he didn't have as much money as the other candidates fe purchase wasn't as widely inowm a as Julia Hanna, or Rob Bi ton. They make the results unfair for younger, or less wealthy candidates. ‘herefore, election signs should be banned for the betterment of Oakville, ezo2'2 uoreW “Kepemus | seneeg oayeo | ee and road distractions. ISLA BELTON Did you know that cam- paign signs are one of the most effective ways to noti- fy people about an election in their area? Election signs can also ing awareness to the people who are running in an upcoming election. For example, I normally don't look up "is there an upcom- ing election in Oakville?" I mean, ee does!? these signs may valsol lower the amount of people voting. Voting rates are already at an all time lowand the only thing this will do is decrease it further. I believe that ban- ning this campaign meth- od isn't a very smart idea. I am aware that these signs are not the most e friendly, but instead of banning them altogether, you could them made with nore su ous. tainable materials, or e rules against them saving things like “you not have more than x amount of signs for Per candidate." This will s: money and it will cause less pollution. social media and stating your platform. You could also always try and get int the local paper, but just be- cause they exist shouldn't 2 have | to mean that signs get Hi g EMMA CORFIELD 3 ISU