After a "reasonable period of time," the citywill file a lawsuit to get the billboards down ifAckerley and Rite Media refuse, Deputy CitySolicitor Donald A. Drisdell said.

Several councillors have expresseddissatisfaction with the OAB's enforcement. "Thegovernor has packed the OAB in such a way thatthey didn't do their job in applying theregulations," said Councillor Francis H. Duehay'55. Duehay was the sponsor of the original 1991legislation banning billboards.

"Many of the billboards that are now up areillegally up," Duehay added. "This company andthis industry has been told to leave the city andthey need to know we mean business."

Along with the zoning challenge, Ackerley isalso planning a constitutional suit.

"If they try to enforce the ordinance therewill be litigation," Nickinello promised.

"It's only a handful of political people whoare trying to control the minds of a majority ofpeople," said Nickinello, who said mostCantabrigians don't mind the signs.

Nickinello said billboards are oftenunattractive but should be accepted as a part ofthe urban landscape.

"We're esthetically not pleasing but we're nodiferent from a gas station or whatever,"Nickinello said. "We're a communciation medium. Wehave a right to be heard and we have a right to apresence."

Non-commercial speech, such as public serviceannouncements and Ackerley's "quote campaign," areprotected by the Constitution, he added.

Other business interests appear to agree."There is a real fine line between freedom ofspeech and regulation of what is considered freespeech," said Helena G. Rees, public affairsdirector of the Cambridge Chamber of Commerce.

City officials disagree.

"We feel that this is a visual blight and isnot appropriate," Duehay said. "If you carry thatargument to a logical extreme, you would havesigns everywhere--in residential areas, commercialareas, blinking neon signs everywhere.