I wonder if city planners thought reaction to their billboard ordinance would be tame, since nothing that drastic is proposed; billboards would be have to be smaller and a little lower. But it turns out a lot of people are unhappy. Those who own and use the billboards don't want any changes at all. And many of the "make our city beautiful" types would like the things outlawed altogether. Here's a good rundown on all the legal issues involved in billboard control -- basically, as long as the rules are uniform and municipalities don't flout the First Amendment by getting into content-control, anything goes, including an outright ban: "The decision made clear the Court's view that aesthetics and safety considerations alone are sufficient governmental interests that can justify a ban."
It's hard for me to be against billboards on philosophical grounds -- they're a part of the advertising industry that helps consumers make choices and, among other things, pays my salary; I've always thought that the lesser respect shown by courts to "commercial" speech is a companion to the sort of snobbery that sees property rights as somehow not as important as "real" rights.
As a simple matter of aesthetics, I don't like to see a lot of billboards cluttering the countryside. But in cities -- not only do I not mind seeing them, they're a comfortable and expected part of the landscape.
