Dover City Council Candidate files lawsuit against DelDOT over campaign signs

DOVER, Del.  – A Dover City Council Candidate is suing DelDOT after some of their campaign signs were taken down and damaged by mistake.

Donyale Hall, candidate for the city council’s 2nd district, filed a lawsuit Tuesday after the Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT) removed two of her campaign signs in Dover earlier this month by mistake.

Both signs, one placed along the highway in front of Coastal Car Wash and the other outside the US 13 Grill in Dover, were legally placed 10 feet from the edge of the roadway within the 30-day window prior to the April 18th municipal election. Despite this, Hall says one of the signs was removed by DelDOT on April 1, and then the other just days later on April 3.

“I have always placed them in the right-of-way legally and lawfully,” Hall said. “I had these out with no exception to following the rules that I’ve always followed.”

When Hall noticed the signs were missing, and discovered who took them down, she reached out to DelDOT.

“I reached out to DelDOT to figure out what had happened, and I was told that I was not permitted to put them out until the 10th for the election that is on the 18th,” Hall explained. “I wanted to know where that language was because according to state code you can put out election signs in the right-of-way as long as they are 10 feet off of the road, 30 days prior to any election.”

When the signs were returned to her, Hall says she was shocked to learn that they were both damaged.

“Not only did they take them down, but they damaged them severely,” Hall emphasized. “Folding them, they were 4 feet by 8 foot, so in order for them to fit in the back of their trucks, they creased them, damaging them to the point where they were no longer useable.”

After countless calls and attempts to reach personnel at DelDOT to no avail, Hall says she finally sent an email to DelDOT Secretary Nicole Majeski explaining what happened and hoping for a solution.

Hall provided 47 ABC the response she received back from Secretary Majeski who acknowledged that the signs were removed in error and apologized.

“Thank you for your email and please accept our apology,” Majeski wrote to Hall via email on April 7.  “Your signs were taken in error. The Department does not enforce roadside control and outdoor advertising provisions within a municipality. We have a new member of the team that was unaware they were within the municipal boundary. My understanding is that your signs were returned to you this week. Again, my sincerest apologies.”

Hall wrote back asking: “Am I to absorb the cost of replacement? In addition, I have been fined. Please advise how I may be reimbursed for the damages.” She tells us she never received a response.

Moving forward, Hall has since filed a lawsuit in the Justice of the Peace Court seeking $200 in damages for the signs and for them to cover court costs.

“I got an apology, but no reimbursement for the damage to my signs,” Hall said. “In addition to the $200 in signs, I’ve also lost the visibility for my campaign for 10 days, so any candidate wants their name to be out there, and I have certainly lost visibility as a result of this. So, I’ve filed for the damages to be restored to me.”

Hall said she ultimately wants a response from DelDOT and the costs of the signs covered along with the fine dropped, saying “I feel that I have been fair, I feel that I have expressed my concerns, and I feel that it is egregious for you just to not reach out and say ‘hey, we recognize that there is an error here and we’re willing to make sure that you’re made whole out of this situation.”

The following day, Secretary Majeski responded to Hall’s request for compensation, sending the following email saying that DelDOT would void any fine that Hall was issued and that they could not compensate her for the damages as state insurance wouldn’t cover it.

“We have been in contact with the state Insurance Coverage Office (ICO) regarding this issue, which is the reason for the delay in getting back to you,” Secretary Majeski wrote. “The ICO has advised that there is no insurance coverage applicable to this situation and as such, the State is sovereignly immune from damages claims pursuant to Article 1, Section 9 of the Delaware Constitution and Doe v. Cates, Del Supr., 499 A.2d 1175 (1983). As a result, we are unable to pay for the damaged signs.”

47 ABC has since reached out to DelDOT for a response to the lawsuit and we were told they have no comment at this time.