Temporary signs on sidewalks in Santa Barbara could get seized by the City of Santa Barbara, according to an ordinance change under discussion.

Some businesses place signs on the ground to draw attention from prospective customers. Those signs, however, can block pedestrian access or cause mobility issues for people with disabilities.

Currently, temporary signs are not technically legal, but the ordinance carries no enforcement mechanism to remove them, unless the city wants to sue a business owner.

The city is looking to make it possible that it could remove the signs and then thrown them away after 90 days.

“With the summer season coming, there’s some need to get this on the street now and start to remedy it,” Ordinance Committee member Mike Jordan said.

Jordan and Kristen Sneddon voted Tuesday in support of the ordinance. Committee member Oscar Gutierrez disagreed.

“Now, in our current climate of our economy, it is hard enough to run a business, and for us to put more restrictions on how to advertise that business I think is pretty detrimental,” Gutierrez said.

He said he didn’t want to create a snitching environment in which businesses start to tattle on each other. He also said the city needs to be more business friendly.

“Optically, it looks like we are being bullies to a lot of businesses and organizations,” Gutierrez said.

The proposed changes state that signs may be placed only in the parkway area, and they may be placed only on weekends during the 42-hour period between 6 a.m. Saturday to 11:59 p.m. Sunday.

Signs shall not be placed in a manner that obstructs a sidewalk, curb ramp or other pedestrian path of travel.

Signs must not extend higher than 42 inches above the ground and must not have an area greater than six square feet.

Signs must be free standing and not attached or locked to trees, signs, utility poles or street furniture.

Temporary signs are prohibited altogether in the city’s El Pueblo Viejo District.

Elizabeth Sorgman, chair of the city’s Access Advisory Committee, said there is no current enforcement of signs blocking pedestrian access.

“There is absolutely no enforcement,” Sorgman said. “When we drove down before this meeting, there were probably four or five signs we saw in the sidewalks. People come to complain about their inability to get around some of these boards.”

She said a member of the committee suggested staking signs into the ground to ensure that they are in the parkway where there’s dirt, and away from sidewalks.

Robin Elander, executive director of the Downtown Improvement Association, suggested that the city provide a standardized template for businesses.

“To support new and small businesses and to reduce barriers of entry, we propose the implementation of pre-approved signage templates,” Elander said. “These templates would meet all regulatory design standards, allowing new businesses to install compliant signage quickly and affordably.”

Real estate signs, such as those set up for open houses, would be allowed under the ordinance.

Part of the ordinance allows for “a sign consisting of a display of no more than 12 balloons for any single business or residence, displayed at a height which is not above the roof ridge line of the main building or 15 feet, whichever is lower.”

Ordinance Committee member Sneddon asked that the ordinance remain “silent” over the balloons, raising environmental concerns from the mylar.

“I don’t really see that we need balloons,” Sneddon said.

Gutierrez, who recently won re-election to the City Council, made a comment during the meeting that he doesn’t hear complaints about excessive signs in the public right-of-way. Mostly, he said, people complain about political signs remaining up after an election.

“The signs that are left up are losers, so in a way it makes me feel good to see them up. That’s just my personal opinion,” he said.

The matter is scheduled to go before the full City Council for discussion.