Other articles by Erica Meltzer:

Speeders in county: Cameras are comingCounty revisiting cement company's permit requestsCounty not much help with barking dogs Supervisors to vote on Huckelberry contract UPH seeks millions more to run Kino Operator out, future unclear for Tucson Raceway Park Pima solar project a first step en route to renewable energyFuture in doubt for Tucson Raceway ParkPermit to build haul road across Davidson Canyon won't be revoked Panel: Go ahead with $1B Pima bond vote

Part Time Employment
AVIVA Children's Services
Monitor: Parent-Child Visits General
MEDLEY COMMUNICATIONS
INSTALLATION PROFESSIONAL General
Drexel Height Fire District
Firefighter

Billboard giant Clear Channel must remove four large billboards along Interstate 10, the Arizona Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday.

Though a dozen other billboards in unincorporated Pima County are still the subjects of litigation and dozens more are under investigation, lawyers and anti-billboard activists said the ruling was a victory for Pima County.

"The ruling has statewide implications because the issue was whether a private entity could ever be exempt from any local ordinance," said Deputy Civil County Attorney Amelia Cramer. "The opinion says a private entity can never be exempt."

Clear Channel, which still could appeal to the state Supreme Court, had argued the billboards, which stand 45 feet high and measure 14 feet by 48 feet, did not have to comply with local regulations because they are on land the Arizona Department of Transportation gave Clear Channel in compensation for land the state took to widen I-10.

The court found Clear Channel's agreement with ADOT does not allow the company to evade local rules.

The ruling comes three months after county supervisors rejected a settlement that would have required Clear Channel to remove 47 of its 118 billboards and modify another 32. At the urging of anti-billboard activists, the supervisors decided to continue with litigation.

The settlement would have allowed Clear Channel to keep two of the four billboards on a site along I-10. County code allows the company to have two billboards on this site, but they would have to be smaller.

The county decided not to contest a fifth billboard in the case, but litigation continues over whether it can be lighted.

Dave Sitton, vice president of Clear Channel's Southern Arizona division, said he couldn't comment until he had discussed the situation with the company's lawyers.

Mark Mayer, an anti-billboard activist, said the billboards affected by today's ruling are important commercially and among the more egregious in their violation of county ordinances.

"The ruling confirms that our local codes do matter," Mayer said. "This is just four billboards, but the practice of using a state agency to provide cover could have become widespread without this ruling."

Joy Herr-Cardillo, a public-interest attorney working with anti-billboard activists, said the ruling could be a factor in future settlement talks.

"Sometimes when you're defeated at the trial court level, you're more inclined to enter into a settlement that's less favorable," Herr-Cardillo said. "If settlement becomes part of the discussion in the future, the county will have a stronger hand."