Bill aimed at fliers and circulars stirs debate
Small business owners claim it would hurt bottom line
By Bryan P. Sears
bsears@patuxent.com
Posted 9/01/09
The bill, sponsored by Democratic Councilman John Olszewski, would require businesses that advertise using fliers and circulars left at homes to maintain a toll-free number that residents could call to end delivery. The bill also makes it illegal to place those fliers or circulars on cars.
Sandra Brookman, owner of Brookman Motor Works, in Cockeysville, said her business specializes in repairing BMWs and she "only put fliers on BMW automobiles."
"Making it illegal to place fliers on windshields would be devastating to small businesses in Baltimore County," Brookman said. "Affordable advertising is important to a small business owner. Last year, 60 percent of my new business came from automobile fliers."
John Fiastro, a Parkville resident who spoke on behalf of restaurant owners who operate two establishments, including Cibo Bar and Grille in Owings Mills, said fliers led to an increase in lunch business.
"In fact, our heads are up 27 percent since the inception of it, so it does have results," Fiastro said.
Fiastro said his company can get 5,000 pieces of literature printed for $250.
"It's rather cheap," he said. "We're not targeting BMW drivers. We are targeting people who are hungry. Everybody gets hungry on a daily basis."
But not everyone thinks the fliers are a good idea.
"Putting fliers on cars in parking lots is not an acceptable way of advertising," said Mike Pierce, a Kingsville community activist. "It's just not acceptable. There are ways for a small business to advertise."
Olszewski, who represents the 7th District, said in June that he received a lot of complaints from constituents about unwanted fliers being left at homes.
Those fliers litter the neighborhoods and sometimes end up in streams, said Olszewski, who represents Dundalk, Essex and part of Rosedale.
This is the second time this year that the council has been asked to consider this legislation.
The bill was passed in June but vetoed days later in July, at the request of Olszewski. An amendment meant to exempt newspapers inadvertently made some free newspapers subject to the newly passed law.
During the hearing, Councilman Bryan McIntire and Ken Oliver expressed interest that the bill would hurt small businesses.
"The killer of it all is why now," said McIntire, a Republican who represents Parkton, Kingsville and part of Cockeysville. "Of all times to introduce any bill that will hurt any business."
Olszewski said it was not his intention "to hurt any business. I understand what Ms. Brookman said that she uses it for advertising.
"There's other ways of advertising. Not everybody depends on putting little pieces of paper on somebody's windshield with the possibility of it finding its way into the storm system, which finds its way into our waterways. I'm sorry, that's just how I feel about it."
Oliver said Brookman was "targeting marketing and most small businesses that I know of don't have a budget for marketing."
"We are in some tough economic times and this will hurt small businesses," Oliver said. "You're reading in the paper that a lot of them are going out of business. I think the bill is honorable, respectful and I think it's needed, but maybe we should consider it for a later time."
Olszewski appeared to be surprised by McIntire and Oliver's comments.
"We all voted on this bill, 7-0, last time and I didn't hear any of these concerns last time," Olszewski said. "I hear the concerns about the advertising of small businesses. Besides Ms. Brookman, that's the only small business that had any concern about putting fliers on automobiles on windshields. I've heard many more complaints from constituents that live in the district that they're tired of these advertisements being put on windshields, particularly in parking lots and just flying all over the place littering and cluttering up their neighborhoods.
"I know we're going through tough economic times and I wouldn't introduce anything that would hurt small businesses," Olszewski said.
The bill continues to be opposed by a state press association.
Jack Murphy, executive director of the Maryland-Delaware-DC Press Association, said his organization continues "to have an issue with this bill because we believe there is a possibility that it could be interpreted in the future to apply to products we don't even yet have."
"We understand the purpose of the law is to try and cut down on litter," Murphy said. "Newspapers are not interested having products that they distribute that are not read and are not responded to. Newspaper products are very expensive to produce. We don't want those delivered to homes that don't want them, but we don't want to be cited for it."
Olszewski told the council that the county Office of Law told him the bill does not apply to newspapers and he would not be amending the bill to specifically exclude the publications.
A vote is scheduled for Sept. 8 at 7 p.m.
user comments (5)
user crdfilm says...
I think this issue has come up now because there are carry-outs in my area in Dundalk that deliver the same menu to my house on a weekly basis. Sometimes they come from the same place two or three times a week! Is this really necessary? If there is nothing new on the menu, then they don't need to be delivered more than once a month, in my opinion. As for newspapers, I don't subscribe to the Sun but they insist on throwing the Sun Plus on my lawn on a weekly basis and even after calling them and telling them to stop, it still comes and goes directly into the recycle bin. If you don't subscribe to the paper, you shouldn't get the Sun Plus! These things are a nuisance and need to be regulated because they've gotten out of hand.
Posted 2:22 PM, 09.02.09
user brucerobinson says...
crdfilm - one of the basics of advertising is that the advertiser is required to be repetitious if they are to be effective. Those little restaurants are counting on getting their name in front of you when you are inclined to go our to dinner. Recycle the paper with Sun Plus and hope that the six people at each restaurant keep their jobs. I wonder if Mr. McIntire was also considering the timing of this ordinance relative to the election cycle. The last time this council tried to limit inexpensive advertising was in the year before an election. Are we there again?
Posted 4:20 PM, 09.02.09
user brucerobinson says...
People might take to picking up the pieces of paper left in their neighborhoods. Baltimore had a reputation for clean steps and clean streets when folks kept up their property. They cleaned up all of the trash, not just their own. We have watched our own neighbors as they take walks, picking up the errant advertising pieces or items on the lawns of homes that are for sale. We all hate to see debris in our waterways, but paper is the least of it. Paper after all, desintigrates in water. Perhaps the council can address schools with windows that don't open, gangs, and transportaion for a while and leave the little things alone for a time.
Posted 4:24 PM, 09.02.09
user trish213 says...
I agree with Bruce...is this issue really creating such an emphasis when there are so many more important issues? I sort my mail over my recycle bin and only important items make it inside the house. To me, it is a waste of money on the part of the company advertising because I don't even look at it. On the side of businesses, it is getting more difficult to reach the public and I understand they are trying all tactics. Let's just let the business cycle run its course and focus on more important issues.
Posted 4:55 PM, 09.02.09
user macandivy says...
I own a BMW and found Brookman motor works via flier. I now use them exclusively. And by the way, if this flier advertising is so environmentally harmful and irritating...why are these politicians/council members exempting themselves from the same law?
Posted 7:40 PM, 09.03.09
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement