Truth matters. Community matters. Your support makes both possible. LAist is one of the few places where news remains independent and free from political and corporate influence. Stand up for truth and for LAist. Make your year-end tax-deductible gift now.
This is an archival story that predates current editorial management.
This archival content was written, edited, and published prior to LAist's acquisition by its current owner, Southern California Public Radio ("SCPR"). Content, such as language choice and subject matter, in archival articles therefore may not align with SCPR's current editorial standards. To learn more about those standards and why we make this distinction, please click here.
Complaint Filed Against 27 Defendants in Illegal Supergraphics Case
Locations of the 12 Supergraphics named in today's Complaint | View in a larger map
Photo by aharvey2k via LAist Featured Photos on Flickr
Supergraphics, those humongous advertising sheets that cover the sides of buildings and covering windows, are the focus of a major move today by the Los Angeles City Attorney's Office. 27 defendants are named in a civil law enforcement action seeking an injunction, penalties and other remedies for erecting illegal supergraphics, violating the city's permanent ban on supergraphic and off-site signs, the California’s Outdoor Advertising Act, the Unfair Competition Law, public nuisance laws and other state laws and ordinances. The complaint not just seeks the removal of 12 supergraphics around Los Angeles, but also an injunction "to prohibit the sign companies from engaging in the further proliferation of these unpermitted, unsafe and prohibited forms of advertising."
Fines sought are high, up to $5,000 for each day an illegal supergraphic or off-site sign was in place, placing the total around $10 million. Additionally, $10,000 is sought for each sign adjacent to a freeway plus $100 for each day after the signs were deemed illegal by Caltrans, per the Outdoor Advertising Act. And the big zinger is that the City wants all profits made by the signs to go to city coffers.
Named in the complaint is Defendants World Wide Mediacom, World Wide Rush, Yamit Enterprises, Citywide Pete, Mediacom Inc., Barry L. Rush, Leslye M. Rush, Paul Fisher, Peter Zachery and Scott Krantz, and other companies and individuals.
You come to LAist because you want independent reporting and trustworthy local information. Our newsroom doesn’t answer to shareholders looking to turn a profit. Instead, we answer to you and our connected community. We are free to tell the full truth, to hold power to account without fear or favor, and to follow facts wherever they lead. Our only loyalty is to our audiences and our mission: to inform, engage, and strengthen our community.
Right now, LAist has lost $1.7M in annual funding due to Congress clawing back money already approved. The support we receive before year-end will determine how fully our newsroom can continue informing, serving, and strengthening Southern California.
If this story helped you today, please become a monthly member today to help sustain this mission. It just takes 1 minute to donate below.
Your tax-deductible donation keeps LAist independent and accessible to everyone.
Right now, LAist has lost $1.7M in annual funding due to Congress clawing back money already approved. The support we receive before year-end will determine how fully our newsroom can continue informing, serving, and strengthening Southern California.
If this story helped you today, please become a monthly member today to help sustain this mission. It just takes 1 minute to donate below.
Your tax-deductible donation keeps LAist independent and accessible to everyone.
Senior Vice President News, Editor in Chief
