* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.
          APOLOGIES FOR THAT. 
          [00:00:01]
ALRIGHT, ONCE AGAIN, I'M JEREMY MCDONALD, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, BOARD LIAISON FOR THE BUILDING RELATED FIRE CODES APPEALS AND ADVISORY BOARD. 
          THIS IS A MEETING OF THE SIGN CODE COMMITTEE OF THE B R F C A B BOARD, UH, DISCUSSING CHAPTER 28 SIGNS AND BILLBOARD ORDINANCE. 
          TODAY IS JUNE 1ST, 2022, AND I HAVE US AT 8 33 AND WE'LL START OFF WITH A BRIEF, UH, INTERPRETATION ANNOUNCEMENT. 
          GOOD MORNING EVERYBODY. 
          UM, THERE'S INTERPRETATION SERVICES FOR THIS MEETING, LOS, AND IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE ANYBODY HERE MAY NEED. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          ALRIGHT, NEXT WE'LL DO A ROLL CALL FOR QUORUM OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS THAT ARE BOARD APPOINTED. 
          ADRIAN CONTRE. 
          JOEL LAOS. 
          HERE. 
          MICHAEL RUST. 
          HERE. 
          MARK ROSS HERE. 
          AND I WANT TO, FOR THE RECORD, I NEED TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO THAT WE DID VOTE TO MAKE, UH, MARK THE PRIMARY AND MICHAEL THE ALTERNATE AT THE LAST MEETING. 
          SO I'LL UPDATE THAT IN OUR RECORDS. 
          BUT OFFICIALLY, MARK IS THE PRIMARY. 
          MICHAEL IS THE, THE ALTERNATE. 
          UH, SINCE WE HAVE BOTH HERE, MEMBERS HERE, ANY VOTE WOULD GO TO MARK ROSS, UH, FOR THIS COMMITTEE. 
          LIDDELL TOY PRESENT, PETE LEY HERE. 
          UH, SAME THING. 
          UH, LIDDELL IS THE PRIMARY FOR THIS. 
          SO ANY VOTE TO THE COMMITTEE WOULD GO TO LIDDELL WHILE HE'S STILL HERE. 
          UH, PETE, IF LIDDELL STEPS AWAY. 
          AND JACK MOORE HERE. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          THAT GIVES US QUORUM FOR THIS COMMITTEE. 
          WE ARE, UH, GOOD TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD. 
          UH, WE ALSO HAVE FOUR NON APPOINTED MEMBERS THAT WERE VOTED ON LAST WEEK, OUR LAST MEETING. 
          UH, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND ROLL THE CALL TO BIANCA MALDONADO. 
          PRESENT GREG MANN. 
          COLLEEN WASCO PEAK. 
          I'M SORRY. 
          I KNOW I BUTCHERED THAT. 
          THAT'S OKAY. 
          I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. 
          I SHOULD HAVE PRACTICED A LITTLE BIT BEFOREHAND. 
          AND I'M GONNA DOUBLE DOWN HERE IN A SECOND. 
           AND FOR AND FOR A NICKEL. 
          D FOR A DIME. 
          RIGHT. 
          SO , UH, PETTY FU MAN. 
          YOUR . 
          I WILL GET THAT CORRECT NEXT TIME. 
          I DEFINITELY PRE SPECIFIC ZIONS. 
          ZIONS. 
          YES. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          OH, WE GOTTA GET RIGHT. 
          YES MA'AM. 
          , I WILL PRACTICE. 
          DOY. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          I APOLOGIZE ONCE AGAIN FOR THAT . 
          ALRIGHT, SO, UH, THAT GIVES US EVERYTHING. 
          WE HAVE EVERYBODY HERE, . 
          THANK Y'ALL VERY MUCH. 
          UH, SO THAT CONCLUDES ROLL CALLS. 
          WE DO HAVE QUORUM. 
          WE DO HAVE, UH, THREE OF THE FOUR, UH, UNAPPOINTED MEMBERS AS WELL. 
          THANK Y'ALL FOR, UH, BEING PART OF THIS PROCESS, AND THANK YOU TO EVERYBODY THAT'S, UH, HERE. 
          UM, I THINK THE CHAIR WILL TALK ABOUT THIS A LITTLE BIT, BUT THE GOAL FOR THESE MEETINGS, WHILE WE HAVE TO BE FAIRLY FORMAL, BECAUSE THEY ARE PART OF THE COMMITTEE OF OUR FULL BOARD, UH, SO THEY'RE OPEN MEETING MINUTES, WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE'RE, UH, GOING THROUGH THE AGENDAS AND ALL THAT TYPE OF STUFF. 
          BUT WE WANT TO KEEP IT AS INFORMAL AS POSSIBLE. 
          ALLOW FOR AS MUCH OF THE, UH, PUBLIC OPINION AND, AND DIS UH, DISCUSSIONS FOR EACH AGENDA ITEM OR ANY ITEM THAT YOU KNOW, COMES TO MIND. 
          SO, WITH THAT BEING SAID, UH, THOSE THAT AREN'T HERE PRESENT, WE CAN WATCH THIS ONLINE, UH, LIVE, ARE AS A RECORDING. 
          UH, THE WEBSITE FOR THAT IS THE, UH, BOARD'S MEETING VIDEOS THERE. 
          UH, A LOT OF THE INFORMATION THAT WE'RE GONNA BE DISCUSSING, UH, TRACKING AND, UH, ANY DRAFTS THAT WERE CREATED ABOUT, UH, AMENDED CHAPTER 20 EIGHTS. 
          ALL OF THAT CAN BE FOUND AT THE FIRST, UH, CODE ADOPTION WEBSITE LINK THERE. 
          AND THEN ALSO COMMENTS TO STAFF. 
          SO WE HAVE AN OPEN, UH, COMMENT SECTION THAT SOMEBODY CAN CLICK ON AND IT'LL DO THAT. 
          BUT IF FOR SOME REASON YOU DON'T, YOU CAN'T FIND THAT YOU REALLY JUST WANT TO EMAIL US AND HAVE ANY COMMENT ON ANY AGENDA ITEM, ANY ITEM AT ALL, YOU CAN, UH, EMAIL THAT TO SIGN CODE REVIEW@SANANTONIO.GOV AND WE'LL READ THAT INTO THE RECORD. 
          PROVIDE THAT TO THIS COMMITTEE, UH, AS AT THE NEXT MEETING OR WHEN IT, UH, STANDS TO MAKE SENSE. 
          IF YOU'RE GOING AFTER A SPECIFIC AGENDA ITEM, GO AHEAD. 
          OKAY. 
          AT THIS TIME WE HAVE THE OPEN PUBLIC COMMENTS. 
          SO IF THERE'S ANYBODY BEFORE WE GET STARTED ON THE OFFICIAL AGENDA ITEMS, I WOULD LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND, AND DISCUSS ANYTHING. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, AS WE SAID, OKAY. 
          GO AHEAD, SIR. 
          IF YOU'LL JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS THE BUTTON. 
          OKAY. 
          OH, OKAY. 
          CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? GOOD, . 
          ANYWAY, MY NAME IS WILL MCLEOD. 
          I'M ON DISTRICT SEVEN RESIDENCE. 
          I'M ON, UH, 72 30 WBA. 
          UH, 
          [00:05:01]
IT'S MY ADDRESS. 
          I'M IN DISTRICT SEVEN, AND I'M SPEAKING TODAY ABOUT THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE SIGN ORDINANCE. 
          UM, BANDIT SIGNS HAVE BECOME AN EPIDEMIC ALL OVER SAN ANTONIO, ESPECIALLY POLITICAL SIGNS THAT ARE ON GUARD RAILINGS. 
          UM, THAT'S A VIOLATION OF CHAPTER 3 92 AND 3 93 OF THE TEXAS TRANSPORTATION CODE. 
          AND TO HAVE 'EM UP THERE. 
          AND, UM, WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THREE ONE ONE'S WEBSITE, WE'RE WE'RE SEEING THAT OH, THEY'RE, THEY'RE TEMPORARY SIGNS AND THEY CAN BE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY. 
          UM, IF THAT HASN'T CHANGED ON THEIR, ON Y'ALL'S WEBSITE FOR THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, Y'ALL NEED TO CHANGE THAT. 
          'CAUSE IT'S CONFLICTING WITH THE CHAPTER 28 ORDINANCE AS WRITTEN. 
          UM, I PROPOSE TODAY A, UM, AMENDMENT TO HAVE ALREADY TO INCLUDE WHERE IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE TO INSERT THE WORD GUARDRAILS. 
          SO THAT WAY IF, UM, RESIDENTS LIKE MYSELF, WE'VE TAKEN, I'VE TAKEN DOWN MYSELF ABOUT 1000 ILLEGALLY PLACED POLITICAL CAMPAIGN SIGNS ON THE GUARDRAILS ALL THE WAY FROM PARABA AND FOUR 10 TO MARBACH AREA. 
          AND, UM, I'VE GOTTEN SOME, A LITTLE HEAT FOR THAT A LITTLE BIT BY SOME OF THE CANDIDATES AND, UM, THREATS AS WELL. 
          AND, UM, I KIND OF REFER THEM TO TXDOT. 
          I REFER 'EM TO THE SIGN QUOTE. 
          AND, UH, A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE NOT GONNA READ 30 PAGES OF ORDINANCES. 
          THEY'RE GONNA GO BUY A SIMPLE CHEAT SHEET THAT THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO HAS FOR THE RESIDENT RESPONSIBILITIES, UM, WHERE IT SAYS, WELL, THEY CAN BE TEMPORARY SIGNS AND THEY CAN BE PLACED ON THE RIGHT OF WAY. 
          SO WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE'RE FURTHER DEFINING, DEFINING THIS AND THE ORDINANCE WHERE THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED AND INSERT GUARDRAILS. 
          SO THAT WAY, YOU KNOW, SOMEONE SAYS ANYTHING, UM, WHEN THEY'RE TAKING 'EM DOWN OR IT BE CITY STAFF OR IT BE, UM, THE CITIZENS, WE CAN POINT TO 'EM. 
          IT'S LIKE, HEY, IT SAYS GUARDRAILS. 
          ITS NOT ALLOWED. 
          AND THIS WILL SAVE PEOPLE A LOT OF TROUBLE. 
          THIS IS DEFINITELY NEEDED. 
          UM, BECAUSE WE ALREADY HAVE STATE LAW THAT PROHIBITS THAT. 
          THIS IS JUST CODIFYING IT. 
          THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT IT'S DOING. 
          UM, ON, ON TOP OF THAT, UH, THERE IS, THE SIGN SIGNS ARE ON THE AIRPORT PROPERTY. 
          THEY'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE THERE. 
          UM, SO I JUST WANT TO PUT, LAY THAT OUT TO Y'ALL. 
          THEY'RE ALSO ON SAHA PROPERTY. 
          WHEN I WAS COMING DOWN HERE, I FOUND TWO POLITICAL CANDIDATE SIGNS POSTED ON SAHA SAHA HEADQUARTERS, I BELIEVE, I THINK THAT SAHA IT'S HEADQUARTERS OVER THERE. 
          THEY'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO HAVE THAT. 
          I KNOW THEY'RE NOT. 
          UM, AND WE HAVE ORGANIZATIONS THAT PUT THESE UP AND IT'S LIKE, WELL, THEY REFER TO A 2014 MEMO FROM, UH, WHAT'S THE GUY'S NAME? UH, THAT'S NOW, UH, THE CITY MAN WORKS FOR THE CITY, UH, CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, UH, ROD SAN RODERICK SANCHEZ SAYING THAT THEY CAN PUT IT ANYWHERE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY. 
          WE DON'T WANT TO INTERFERE WITH DEMOCRACY, DA DA DA. 
          THAT'S INCORRECT. 
          UM, I'VE BEEN IN TOUCH WITH ROD SHANNON AND UM, I HAD AN EMAIL, GOT AN EMAIL FROM HIM THAT SAYS, THE CURRENT SIGN ORDINANCE IS CORRECT. 
          THEY'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE PUTTING THEM ON THE GUARD RAILINGS. 
          AND, UM, WHEN I CALL SATURDAY CODE ENFORCEMENT, SOME OF THEM ARE EDUCATED ON THIS AND SOME OF 'EM ARE NOT. 
          SOME OF 'EM, THEY SAY, WELL, WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO TOUCH 'EM TO, TO TOUCH 'EM. 
          THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT CORRECT. 
          Y'ALL ARE ALLOWED TO TOUCH 'EM. 
          IT'S IN THE, UH, ORDINANCE ITSELF. 
          SO CAN I ASK YOU TO DO THIS, UH, IF SOMEONE WILL STAFF BEFORE, UH, THE MEETING'S OVER, WE'LL PRINT ONE OF THE FORMS OUT FOR THE CODE CHANGE RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          IT'S AVAILABLE ONLINE. 
          IF YOU WILL JUST GO TO THE SECTION THAT YOU WANTED ADDED AND SAY, HERE'S WHAT I WANT TO ADD TO THIS SECTION. 
          WE WILL ADD IT TO OUR AGENDA AND GO OVER IT AND CONSIDER IT CHAIR. 
          UH, WE ACTUALLY HAVE THAT ON THE AGENDA FOR TODAY. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH. 
          PERFECT. 
          HE'S ALREADY GONE THROUGH THAT PROCESS, SO, OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          YES, SIR. 
          THE SECOND THING BEFORE WE GO, BEFORE WE GO ANY FURTHER, THE WEBSITE, UH, DID NOT HAVE THE FORMS UP YESTERDAY. 
          SO IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION BY ANYONE ON THE COMMITTEE AS CHAIR, I'M GOING TO EXTEND THE DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION BY A WEEK, UH, SO THAT EVERYBODY WHO WANTS TO PUT SOMETHING IN CAN PUT THAT IN. 
          AND THEN I WOULD ASK IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK, UH, MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ABOUT SOMETHING SPECIFIC THAT IS, WE'RE GONNA BE CONSIDERING IF YOU WILL HOLD YOUR COMMENT TILL THEN. 
          WE'RE GONNA HAVE A VERY OPEN FORUM, FORUM SO EVERYBODY IS ALLOWED TO SPEAK LIKE 
          [00:10:01]
YOU WERE ON THE COMMITTEE. 
          UH, ONLY THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS CAN VOTE IF IT COMES TO THAT, IF WE DON'T REACH CONSENSUS. 
          BUT RATHER THAN DOING IT NOW, WHICH YOU MAY, IF YOU WISH, MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE, IF THERE IS AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA THAT YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO, THAT WE RESERVE THE COMMENT UNTIL THEN, IF THAT'S OKAY. 
          SO, AND IF ANYBODY ELSE WHO IS SITTING IN THE AUDIENCE, YOU'RE WELCOME TO COME SIT AT THE TABLE, PLEASE. 
          IT WOULD BE MUCH EASIER ON ME, UH, TO BE ABLE TO SEE YOU. 
          SO THERE'S EMPTY SEATS, JUST FIND ONE OR IF SIT HERE IF POSSIBLE. 
          YES. 
          AND, AND PLEASE NAME, ADDRESS, WELL NAME LARRY GOTTMAN WITH AETNA SIGN GROUP. 
          UM, I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF INPUT FROM THE COMMUNITY, BUT I, I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT THE SITE IS TO GO TO, TO REVIEW WHAT'S BEEN SAID AND, UM, WHAT'S TO BE CONSIDERED AMONG THOSE COMMENTS. 
          CAN WE GO BACK TO THAT SLIDE, JEREMY? UH, YES, SIR. 
          SO ALL THE INFORMATION IS BEING TRACKED. 
          SO THIS IS, UH, D S D RESOURCES AND IF YOU GO TO OUR DSD WEBSITE, SAN ANTONIO.GOV, D S D, AND THE VERY CENTER OF THAT IS A MAJOR BANNER THAT'S CYCLING THROUGH, I THINK 10 DIFFERENT OPTIONS. 
          AND THE SIGN CODE IS ONE OF THEM. 
          UH, SO IF YOU JUST WAIT OR CLICK THROUGH THE LITTLE CIRCLE TO THE BOTTOM OF THAT, IT'LL KIND OF LET YOU FILTER THROUGH THAT. 
          BUT WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR IS THE SIGN CODE, AND I'M HAPPY TO SHOW THAT AS WELL. 
          UH, MAYBE AT THE END OF THIS COMMITTEE MEETING, UH, I CAN KIND OF PUT THAT UP REAL FAST. 
          UH, BUT IF YOU CLICK THERE, THEN IT'LL BRING YOU TO A LITTLE PORTAL THAT HAS ALL THAT INFORMATION, UH, WHERE WE'RE TRACKING THE PROPOSED CHANGES. 
          UH, TODAY WE'LL BE UPDATING ACTUAL CHAPTER 28 LANGUAGE. 
          UH, SO THAT'LL BE A DRAFT A THAT WILL PUBLISH THAT AFTER THIS MEETING AS WELL. 
          UH, WE'RE CURRENTLY ON DRAFT D OF THE PROPOSED, UH, RECOMMENDED CHANGES THAT WERE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY, BOTH INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL. 
          SO, BUT THOSE ARE, CAN ALL BE FOUND THERE. 
          AND, AND TO MAKE IT EASIER IF YOU'LL DROP OFF A BUSINESS CARD WITH JEREMY, IF YOU WANT THAT, UH, THAT SLIDE EMAIL. 
          SO YOU CAN JUST PRESS THE LINK, UH, WE'LL DO THAT OR WRITE YOUR NAME AND EMAIL ADDRESS ON A PIECE OF PAPER. 
          AND LARRY, I HAVE YOURS. 
          SO I, I WILL EMAIL YOU AFTER THIS MEETING AS WELL, EVAN. 
          PERFECT. 
          ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS? OKAY, JEREMY, FIRST ITEM. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          OKAY, SO TWO PUBLIC COMMENTS. 
          ONE MORE. 
          OKAY. 
          SO, UH, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE IS TO APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE BUILDING RELATED FIRE CODES APPEALS AND ADVISORY BOARD SIGN CODE COMMITTEE MEETING ON MAY 6TH, 2022. 
          I SUBMIT THAT TO ALL THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS. 
          HAPPY TO PULL THAT UP AS NEEDED. 
          BUT THAT'S THE AGENDA ITEM FOR NUMBER ONE. 
          CAN I GET A MOTION FROM SOMEONE ON THE COMMITTEE TO ACCEPT MOTION TO APPROVE SECOND, UH, LIDDEL TOY SECONDS. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. 
          OPPOSE, ABSTENTIONS. 
          MOTION CARRIES. 
          NEXT ITEM, PLEASE. 
          UH, ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS JUST AN ITEM THAT WE'RE GONNA BE KIND OF CARRYING FORWARD JUST IN CASE WE EVER RUN INTO AN ISSUE WHERE WE WANT TO ADD ANOTHER BOARD MEMBER SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DID LAST TIME, ADDING JOE LAOS OR, UH, SWAPPING PRIMARY ALTERNATES. 
          AT THIS TIME, I DON'T HAVE ANY BOARD MEMBERS OF THE, OF THE FULL BOARD THAT WOULD LIKE TO JOIN THIS COMMITTEE. 
          SO I THINK WE CAN TABLE THIS AGENDA ITEM. 
          OKAY, JEREMY, NEXT ITEM PLEASE. 
          SO WHAT WE'LL DO THIS IS, UM, WE'RE MOVING INTO THE PROPOSED CHANGES AND THE EACH AGENDA AGENDA ITEM, WHAT I WANNA DO IS, THIS IS REALLY JUST WRITING WHAT'S ALREADY ON THE, UM, AGENDA THAT EVERYBODY HAS SEEN ONLINE OR CAN PRINT OFF A COPY. 
          SO IF YOU'LL GIMME A SECOND, I'M GONNA TRANSITION AND WE'LL PULL UP THAT DOCUMENT. 
          WE CAN LOOK AT THE PROPOSED CHANGES AND THE DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THOSE. 
          SO GIMME ABOUT TWO MINUTES. 
          SO LET ME JUST EXPLAIN, THE LIST HAS BEEN REORDERED. 
          WHAT I ASK STAFF TO DO IS TO GO THROUGH AND PULL OUT, UH, WHAT I CALL WHAT SHOULD BE NON-CONTROVERSIAL. 
          MOST OF IT'S JUST CLEAN UP SO THAT WE HOPEFULLY CAN JUST KNOCK A FEW ITEMS OUT AT THE END OF THE, MORE TOWARDS THE MIDDLE TO THE END. 
          THE MORE CONTROVERSIAL STUFF THAT WE MAY OR MAY NOT MAKE A DECISION ON TODAY WILL HAVE A OPEN DISCUSSION ON THEM. 
          EVERYBODY IN THE PUBLIC WHO IS HERE AND NOT ON THE COMMITTEE IS WELCOME TO SPEAK. 
          UH, JUST I WOULD ASK EVERYBODY, INTRODUCE YOURSELF, UM, BEFORE YOU START TALKING SO THAT WE KNOW WHO YOU ARE AND FOR THE RECORD. 
          AND, UH, AT THE THAT POINT WE MAY EVEN APPOINT, YOU KNOW, A WORKING GROUP TO JUST WHO HAD, WHOEVER BOTH COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND STAKEHOLDERS AND BOARD MEMBERS WILL ASSIGN A BOARD 
          [00:15:01]
MEMBER TO EVERY WORKING GROUP. 
          IF THERE, YOU KNOW, NEEDS TO BE EXTRA DISCUSSION, IF THERE SEEMS TO BE CONSENSUS, WHICH IS THE WAY I WOULD PREFER TO DO IT, RATHER THAN HAVE A THREE TO TWO VOTE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT TO WHERE WE'RE HAPPY BECAUSE MY GOAL IS, IS AND, AND WHY WE'RE BEING INCLUSIONARY. 
          AND, UH, I APOLOGIZE FOR SENDING THE WRONG TIME OUT EARLY AND THEN CORRECTING IT, BUT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE, THE PUBLIC IS PART OF THE PROCESS SO THAT WE DO NOT HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS TWICE. 
          SO WE WANT TO TRY TO BUILD CONSENSUS. 
          EVERYBODY'S WELCOME TO TALK AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE, AND THAT'S WHY I ASK THE STAFF TO RESET UP THE MEETINGS SO IT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, US VERSUS THEM. 
          BECAUSE SOMETIMES IT, WHEN YOU'RE AT THE DAIS, IT'S LIKE SCARY TO GET UP TO THE PODIUM. 
          SO WE WANT EVERYBODY TO FEEL FREE TO TALK. 
          THE OTHER THING I WOULD ASK IS IF YOU ARE TALKING, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, BE GERMANE TO THE SUBJECT WE ARE DISCUSSING. 
          IF YOU, YOU KNOW, WE WILL ALLOW EVERYBODY ANOTHER POP, EVEN IF IT'S NOT IN THE AGENDA. 
          ANOTHER PUBLIC COMMENT, IF YOU HAVE GENERAL COMMENTS YOU WANNA MAKE. 
          SO AS LONG AS YOU'RE GERMANE, YOU KNOW, YOU'LL BE ALLOWED TO SPEAK. 
          MAKE IT BRIEF. 
          I'M A BIG BELIEVER IN BOTTOM LINE UP FRONT. 
          SO IF YOU HAVE A POINT TO MAKE, MAKE THE POINT AND THEN WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE POINT. 
          AND THEN, UM, SO I WON'T HAVE TO INTERRUPT YOU AND SAY YOU'RE REALLY OFF TOPIC AND WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON. 
          'CAUSE I DON'T REALLY WANT TO DO THAT. 
          SO, JEREMY, IF YOU'LL HIT THE, IF YOU'RE READY. 
          FIRST ITEM. 
          YES SIR. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          SO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER THREE. 
          UH, THIS WAS BROUGHT UP IN THE MAY 6TH MEETING AND TABLED, UH, FOR FUTURE MEETING. 
          WHAT THIS IS IS LEMME GO TO THAT ACTUAL CODE SECTION. 
          SO THIS IS ON THE, UM, REVOCATION AND SUSPENSION OF REGISTRATION OF CONTRACTORS IN THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. 
          THIS IS SEEN IN TWO DIFFERENT AREAS. 
          SO CHAPTER 28 IS THE SIGNED AND ORDINANCE CODE. 
          WE ALSO HAVE CHAPTER 10. 
          SO BOTH OF THOSE CHAPTERS ARE OVERSEEN, UH, BY THIS, BY THE BOARD THAT THIS IS A COMMITTEE IS A MEMBER OF. 
          AND SO SOME OF THIS LANGUAGE IS ALSO FOUND IN CHAPTER 10 WHEN LOOKING AT LICENSING AND RE OR REGISTRATION OF CONTRACTORS WITHIN THE CITY. 
          AND WHAT WE WANTED TO DO IS ADD ITEM NUMBER FIVE IN RED, PERFORM ANY CONTRACTOR WORK FOR WHICH A PERMIT IS REQUIRED WITHOUT HAVING THE PERMIT OR HAVE AFTER THE PERMIT HAS BEEN CANCELED AS A MEANS FOR REVOCATION ASENSION SO THAT IT MIRRORS WHAT'S ALREADY IN CHAPTER 10. 
          WE BROUGHT THIS UP IN THE LAST MEETING, UH, STAFF ACTUALLY RECOMMENDED, SHOULD WE LOOK AT IT AND SEE IF WE SHOULD REDUCE THE SIZE OF CHAPTER 28 IF IT'S REDUNDANCY IN CHAPTER 10. 
          WE LOOKED AT THAT. 
          WE DID DO A, A, A LOOK THROUGH OF ALL THE DIFFERENT TIMES THAT THERE'S SOME REDUNDANCY BETWEEN CHAPTER 28 AND CHAPTER 10. 
          BUT WE DID SOME INTERNAL REVIEW AND A LOT OF THOSE THINGS WOULD REQUIRE ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATION IN CHAPTER 10 IF WE ONLY PUT IT THERE OR SOMETIMES IN CHAPTER 28. 
          AND OUR THOUGHTS ARE, FOR THE MOST PART, SIGN CODE CONTRACTORS OR SIGN CONTRACTORS ARE REALLY JUST GONNA USE CHAPTER 28. 
          SO WHILE THERE MIGHT BE SOME REDUNDANCIES, WE THOUGHT WE THOUGHT THAT WAS A GOOD THING, BUT SO THEY DIDN'T ALWAYS HAVE TO REFER TO CHAPTER 28 AND THEN CHAPTER 10 SOMETIMES. 
          SO IF THERE'S A LITTLE REDUNDANCY IN 28, WE'RE KIND OF OKAY WITH THAT AS LONG AS IT'S MINIMAL AND LOOKING THROUGH ALL THE OPTIONS, THERE'S, WE CAN MAYBE REDUCE THE CHAPTER 28 BY A PAGE AND A HALF IF WE WERE TO REMOVE SOME OF THOSE REDUNDANCIES, BUT THEN THOSE CONTRACTORS WOULD HAVE TO KINDA BE LOOKING THROUGH TWO DIFFERENT CHAPTERS VERSUS DE DEDICATING THEMSELVES TO CHAPTER 28. 
          SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO KINDA KEEP IT AS IS AND ADD THIS, UH, ITEM NUMBER FIVE. 
          SO IT IS, IT MIRRORS WHAT'S ALREADY IN CHAPTER 10. 
          ANYBODY HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON IT? UH, MARK LIDDEL TOY. 
          THE ONLY THING THAT I WOULD UH, BE WONDERING ABOUT IS AS FAR AS REVOCATION AND SUSPENSION, IS THE CITY GOING TO BE A STANDALONE, UH, AND NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH T D L R WITH THE STATE? CORRECT. 
          I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY MEASURE IN PLACE SO THAT IF THE STATE HAS ANY ISSUES. 
          OKAY, SO LIDDEL WHITE BEFORE THE STAFF, AN, CAN YOU JUST EDUCATE EVERYBODY THAT'S HERE ARE SIGN CONTRACTORS REQUIRED TO BE LICENSED? YEAH, SO UNDER, UM, I'M A PART OF THE, UH, UH, ELECTRICAL ADVISORY BOARD WITH T D L R. 
          AND SO SIGN CONTRACTORS ARE SIGN, UH, YEAH, SIGN MANUFACTURER SIGN CONTRACTORS HAVE TO BE LICENSED WITH THE STATE. 
          AND SO IF THERE'S A, UH, LICENSING ISSUE OR A A A FELONY OR, OR, UM, UH, WELL, YEAH, FELONY. 
          YEAH, THERE, THERE IS REP, UH, THERE'S REVOCATIONS WITH THEIR LICENSES. 
          SO I JUST WANNA MAKE 
          [00:20:01]
SURE THAT ART AND WELL, THE STAFF IN CITY SAN ANTONIO IS, IS IS STANDALONE AND NOT PART OF THE WILL DO THEIR OWN THING AS FAR NOT PART OF T D L R T D L R IS TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF LICENS AND REGULATIONS. 
          OKAY. 
          STAFF? YES. 
          YES. 
          UM, NO, WE, WE, UH, WE CANNOT TRUMP THE STATE LICENSE PROCEDURES. 
          SO THERE IS ONLY THE LOCAL LICENSE AND LOCAL REGISTRATIONS. 
          SO A QUESTION, SO IF THE STATE REVOKES A SIGNED CONTRACTOR'S LICENSE, WHICH MEANS THEY NO LONGER HAVE, I GUESS THE ELECTRICAL LICENSE TO PUT UP SIGNS, SHOULD THAT BE ANOTHER MAYBE ITEM SIX WHERE YOU CAN REVOKE THEIR REGISTRATION IF THE STATE REVOKES THEIR LICENSE? OR IS THAT COVERED SOMEWHERE ELSE IN THE CODE? SO CHAIR, I BELIEVE, UH, ITEM NUMBER TWO UNDER THIS, WHERE THEY REFERENCE THAT THEY NEED TO HAVE A LICENSE AND DO THE WORK AS A PROPER LICENSE INDIVIDUAL, WHETHER IT, UH, WHATEVER ENTITY GIVES 'EM THAT LICENSE, IF IT'S GETS REVOKED OR SUSPENDED, THEN IF THEY CONTINUE TO DO WORK, THEN THEY WOULD BE, WOULD FALL UNDER ITEM NUMBER TWO. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YEAH. 
          UM, MARK, LARRY GOSMAN, LARRY, UM, ARE WE STILL REQUIRED TO KEEP OUR SAN ANTONIO SIGN LICENSE ALONG WITH OUR TEXAS LICENSE OR, UM, IS THAT NOT A REQUIREMENT ANYMORE? I BELIEVE THERE IS NO SAN ANTONIO LICENSE. 
          IT'S A SAN ANTONIO REGISTRATION. 
          YEAH, YOU'RE, YES. 
          SO THAT THEY CAN TRACK YOU AND YOU CAN GET INTO THE SYSTEM TO PULL THE PERMITS ACCORDING TO THE CODE. 
          THERE'S A LICENSE. 
          BUT THAT'S WHAT GONNA ASK LIDDELL. 
          SO THE, IF YOU LOOK AT 28, 23, YOU KNOW, IT TALKS ABOUT THE ON-PREMISES SIGN OPERATOR LICENSE ARE THE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE LISTED IN HERE IN OUR CODE SIMILAR TO THE STATE. 
          THE STATE REQUIRES SOMEBODY THAT'S GONNA PAINT A SIGN TO BE LICENSED. 
          IS THAT, IS THAT CONNECTED? NO, IT'S ONLY AN ELECTRICAL BECAUSE THE SECTION 2023 ON, ON PREMISE, I'M CLOSE TO THE MICROPHONE. 
          SORRY. 
          UH, THE ON-PREMISES SIGN OPERATOR LICENSE. 
          A PERSON ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF ERECTING PAINTING, SERVICING, OR MAINTAINING ON-PREMISES SIGNS MUST BE LICENSED TO DO, TO DO BUSINESS BY THE CITY. 
          DO WE REALLY REQUIRE SOMEONE TO BE LICENSED TO PAINT A SIGN? YES, SIR. 
          UNDER CHAPTER 28, YES, WE DO REQUIRE, I READ IT, I WAS BEING SARCASTIC, LIKE HOW ON EARTH DO WE REQUIRE A LICENSE TO PAINT A SIGN? WELL, THE SIGN EXCEEDS, UH, 32 SQUARE FEET, THEN IT DOES REQUIRE A PERMIT. 
          SO ONE FAVOR BEFORE YOU CONTINUE, CAN WE GET RID OF THE COMMENT, THE VIEW AND MAKE IT BIGGER? 'CAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY, I UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR A PERMIT, BUT, UH, I JUST, I WOULD LIKE SOME, MAYBE SOMEBODY TO EXPLAIN WHY WE FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO LICENSE SOMEBODY THAT THEY NEED TO PASS 75% ON A SOME EXAM AND BE WORKING FOR A SIGN OPERATOR FOR TWO YEARS BEFORE THEY CAN PAINT A SIGN. 
          I'D JUST LIKE TO MAKE SOME SENSE OF THAT. 
          IF I COULD. 
          UH, ANDREW PEREZ 2 43 AWARD. 
          UM, I KNOW IT SOUNDS KIND OF BASIC PAINTING A SIGN MAYBE ON A WALL, INSTALLING IT ON THE WALL, MAYBE, MAYBE NOT A LOT OF DANGER TO THAT, BUT THAT SAME PERSON CAN ALSO INSTALL A FREE STANDING SIGN. 
          WE WANNA MAKE SURE, I THINK THE CITY WANTS TO MAKE SURE THAT ANYBODY INSTALLING THEIR FREE STANDING SIGN KNOWS WHAT THEY'RE DOING, HOW TO INSTALL IT, HOW DEEP TO GO ON THE GROUND. 
          WE DON'T WANT JUST ANYBODY PUTTING UP A SIGN AND FALLING AND HITTING A CAR, HITTING A PERSON OR WORSE. 
          OKAY, SO WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS, JEREMY, CAN YOU ADD THIS SECTION TO OUR LIST OF STUFF WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT? UH, AND, AND MAYBE WE CAN TIGHTEN UP SOME OF THE WORDING BECAUSE FOR EXAMPLE, I THINK WHAT MIKE'S TALKING ABOUT IS, YOU KNOW, IF YOU WANT TO PAINT THE SIGN POLES OR HAVE ONE OF YOUR MAINTENANCE GUYS PAINT A POLE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO SPECIAL EXPERTISE I DON'T THINK REQUIRED FOR THAT. 
          SO WE'LL DO THAT. 
          YEAH. 
          SO WE'LL, WE'LL COME BACK TO THAT. 
          I, YES, JUST GRAB SOMEBODY'S MIC, YOU GOTTA PRESS TO TALK. 
          YES. 
          UH, CHRISTY BARON, SEVEN 13 SIGNS. 
          I JUST HAVE A QUESTION MORE. 
          SO FOR PROBABLY THE CITY, IF SOMEONE PUTS UP A SIGN UP THAT IS NOT A LICENSED CONTRACTOR, WHAT IS THE, WHAT LIKE THEY CAN'T BE SUSPENDED, THEY CAN'T HAVE THEIR LICENSE REVOKED. 
          SO WHAT IS THE PENALTY? YEAH, THE PENALTY, I BELIEVE THE OWNER WOULD HAVE TO TAKE THE SIGN DOWN. 
          IS THAT, THAT IS CORRECT, MR. SHE, BUT WE ALSO HAVE THE MEANS FOR THE MISDEMEANOR AND THERE ARE FINES AND, AND ACTUALLY ONE OF THE AGENDA 
          [00:25:01]
ITEMS THAT WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT TODAY IS DISCUSSION OF THAT, OF, UH, VARIOUS PUNITIVE THINGS THAT WE CAN DO AS WELL. 
          SO IT WOULDN'T HAVE TO BE A REGISTER, A REGISTERED CONTRACTOR THAT WE COULD PENALIZE FOR THAT. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          AND SO IF WE CAN PUT THAT ON THE PARKING LIST, WE'LL GET TO IT. 
          SO LET'S, ITEM NUMBER 12, IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE COMMITTEE THAT HAS AN ISSUE WITH IT? YES. 
          SO CAN I JUST MAKE ONE MORE COMMENT? PETE SITTER LEE, 5 0 0 3 STOUT DRIVE. 
          WHEN IT COMES TO PAINTING THE SIGN, LIKE ANDREW SAID, IT'S NOT AN ISSUE IF YOU'RE PAINTING ON THE WALL, BUT IF THAT'S A NEON, YOU KNOW, HIGH VOLTAGE SIGN THAT YOU'RE PAINTING AROUND ON THE WALL OR ON A PYLON SIGN, YOU'RE PAINTING THE POLE, BUT YOU, YOU KNOW, MIGHT BE NEXT TO SOME HIGH LINES OR HIGH VOLTAGE ON THE SIGN ITSELF. 
          I THINK THAT WAS THE, UH, REASON THAT YOU HAD TO HAVE A LICENSE AND, AND, AND, YOU KNOW, KNEW ALL THE REQUIREMENTS AS FAR AS SETBACKS AND HOW, HOW MUCH, YOU KNOW, FOOTAGE OR HOW MANY FEET YOU HAVE TO BE AWAY FROM A HIGH VOLTAGE LINE OR YOU KNOW, HOW TO OPERATE A CRANE. 
          WE ALL HAVE CRANE, UH, LICENSES THAT WE, YOU KNOW, HAVE TO HAVE TO GET TO BE QUALIFIED TO DO ALL THAT TYPE OF WORK. 
          PERFECT. 
          I JUST, IT JUST SOUNDS A LOT, IT SOUNDS A LOT LIKE RENT SEEKING IS ALL, I'M JUST FROM, FROM A LAYMAN'S PERSPECTIVE, OKAY. 
          AS SOMEBODY THAT HAS TO PAY AND OPERATE OR TO PAY TO, TO HAVE SIGNAGE WORK DONE, YOU KNOW, I, ANYWAY, I DON'T WANNA, WE'RE GONNA CONSIDER THAT AT SOME LATER POINT. 
          ITEM NUMBER, THE NUMBER 12. 
          ANY PROBLEM WITH THE COMMITTEE? OKAY. 
          ITEM 14. 
          UH, REAL QUICK CHAIR. 
          SO I, I WANNA MAKE SURE WE UNDERSTAND THIS AND WE'RE PROCESSING THIS PROPERLY. 
          SO WE, THE, THE JOHN, THAT ITEM WAS SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THIS ITEM. 
          DO WE WANT TO GO AHEAD AND VOTE TO HAVE THIS ONE CLEARED SO WE CAN DO THIS AND THEN ? YEAH, I MEAN WE'LL TAKE A MOTION AT THE END FOR ALL THE ONES LIKE WE DID. 
          OH, THAT'S FINE. 
          YOUR CHOICE. 
          YOU WANT ONE AT THE TIME? WELL, IT'S UP TO THE CHAIR. 
          I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I'M, YEAH. 
          YOU KNOW, SO THERE'S CONSENSUS THAT THAT NUMBER 12 IS OKAY. 
          WE WILL HIT IT AT A MOTION. 
          ONE MOTION. 
          OKAY, PERFECT. 
          ABOUT EACH ONE OF THOSE. 
          OKAY. 
          SO THEN WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR IS, UM, YEAH, WE SHOULDN'T HELP REVIEW AND ITEM, SO I'LL MAKE SURE TO REACH OUT. 
          THANKS. 
          14. 
          I'M SORRY, CHAIR. 
          I HAD A POINT OF CLARIFICATION TO WHAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT. 
          SO WE'RE GONNA VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT AS IT'S BEEN PRESENTED RIGHT HERE ON THE SCREEN WITH THE RED UNDERLINE. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? TODAY IS GONNA BE VOTED ON AND THEN YOU'RE GONNA BRING IT BACK TO DISCUSS THE PAINTING OF THE SIGN. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? HERE? SO, SO WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT THAT SUBSECTION, SEE IF WE WANT TO MAKE ANY CHANGES. 
          IT PROBABLY WILL NOT BE AT THIS MEETING, RIGHT? I JUST WANTED CLARIFY. 
          IT'LL JUST GET ADDED TO THE BOTTOM OF THE LIST AND WE WILL HAVE THAT DISCUSSION OF WHO CAN DO WHAT AND WHAT LICENSE IS REQUIRED, UH, AT A FUTURE MEETING. 
          NO, I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND. 
          I JUST ALSO WANTED TO COMMENT AND ASK STAFF IF THEY COULD BRING INFORMATION ABOUT THE LIFE SAFETY COMPONENT ABOUT SOME OF OUR TIGHT RIGHT OF WAYS AND ACCESSING SIGNS, UM, AND, UH, THE URBAN CORE AND ALSO WHERE SIGNS KIND OF ARE OVER TWO PROPERTY LINES. 
          UH, WHEN YOU BRING THAT ITEM FORWARD, IF SOMEONE COULD SPEAK TO THAT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          SO CHAIR, I JUST WANT TO SUMMARIZE. 
          SO WE ARE, WE'RE GOOD WITH, UH, SECTION 28 26, ADDING THAT, UH, SUBSECTION. 
          YEAH. 
          AND RIGHT NOW STAFF IS GOING TO BE LOOKING AT 28 23 A AND WHAT IS, DOES NOT REQUIRE A LICENSE WITHIN THE CITY, WHICH ULTIMATELY I THINK MEANS WHAT REQUIRES A PERMIT. 
          SO THAT MIGHT BE A ADDITIONAL SECTION WITH THAT, BUT WE'LL KIND OF ROLL THOSE ALL TOGETHER. 
          AND THEN, UH, MS. MALDONADO'S RECOMMENDATION, WE'LL LOOK AT THAT AS WELL AND SEE IF THERE'S ANY OTHER SUBSECTIONS FOR THAT. 
          UH, BUT ADD THAT TO, BUT WHETHER THAT BE ONE OR TWO AGENDA ITEMS, WE'LL LOOK AT THAT AND SEE. 
          AND, AND WE'LL PRESENT THAT LATER. 
          BUT WE'LL ADD THAT TO THE LIST FOR BOTH THOSE TWO ITEMS. THANK YOU. 
          ITEM 14. 
          SO THIS IS ANOTHER INTERNAL, UH, THIS IS JUST ADDING MF 33 TO THE TYPES OF OCCUPANCIES THAT THESE FREESTANDING SCIENCE, AND I'LL PULL UP THE ACTUAL CODE SECTION SO YOU CAN GET FULL REFERENCE. 
          UH, BUT WHEN THIS WAS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN, UH, BACK IN 2017, I DON'T THINK WE HAD MF 33 AS AN OPTION. 
          SO NOW THAT THAT'S A NEW ZONING OPTION, WE WANNA SAY THAT IT IS APPROVED FOR R ONE, OR I'M SORRY, R TWO, R THREE AND MF 33 ZONING LOCATIONS. 
          NO, I KNOW. 
          SO THIS IS PROVISIONS APPLICABLE TO RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS. 
          THE FOLLOWING SIGNS ARE APPROVED IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES. 
          THIS IS FREESTANDING SIGNS ARE ALLOWED IN ACCORDANCE WITH TABLE ONE FOR RESIDENTIAL R TWO, R THREE, AND NOW MF 33 OCCUPANCIES. 
          UH, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF ON THAT. 
          ON THE MF 33, WHICH IS A ZONING CLASSIFICATION, 
          [00:30:01]
THERE'S A WHOLE LOT OF OTHER MF THAT ARE, I BELIEVE ALSO THAT ARE LESS UNITS. 
          SO WHAT I WOULD ASK IS THAT Y'ALL LOOK AT THE ZONING TABLE TO SEE IF THERE ARE, AND IF THERE ARE THAT YOU GET RID OF THE 33 AND JUST PUT MF ZONED OCCUPANCIES. 
          CORRECT? I THINK I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING ABOUT. 
          I THINK THERE'S AN MF 25 AND A FEW OTHERS, RIGHT? SO I CAN HAPPY TO LOOK AT THAT. 
          UM, AND IF ANYTHING MF 33 OR LOWER DENSITY IS ON THE ZONING TABLE, WE COULD ADD THAT OR SUMMARIZE IT IN SUCH A WAY TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE ARE ADDRESSED AS WELL AND MAKE THAT CHANGE. 
          WOULD COMMITTEE WOULD LIKE US TO REPRESENT THAT OR ARE Y'ALL GOOD WITH THIS GENERAL? NO, IF, IF NOBODY HAS ANY OBJECTION, I JUST THINK IT'S, IT'S A WORDSMITHING. 
          SO THE INTENT IS THAT IT APPLIED TO R ONE, R TWO, I MEAN R TWO, R THREE AND MF ZONED OCCUPANCIES. 
          YES. 
          I HAVE A POINT OF CLARIFICATION. 
          CAN YOU PULL UP TABLE ONE? THE HYPERLINK WASN'T WORKING ON THIS, ON YOUR DOC ONLINE. 
          SO WHEN I TRIED TO PULL UP THE SECTION OF THE CODE, I THINK IF WE CAN SEE ALL THE OTHER RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS THAT ARE PERMITTED, THAT'S IN YOUR TABLE. 
          DASH ONE. 
          I HAVE CONCERN WITH R ONE AND R TWO AND R THREE. 
          THOSE ARE REALLY, REALLY SMALL LOTS. 
          THOSE ARE A THOUSAND, 2000, 3000 SQUARE FOOT RESIDENTIAL LOTS. 
          AND I'M SORRY I'M A LITTLE SPOILED. 
          I WAS ON P TTAC AND WE'D GET ALL THESE PRINTED OUT IN THE AGENDA PACKET. 
          SO I WAS A LITTLE CONCERNED WHY WE DID NOT GET ALL THE LANGUAGE THAT INDICATED WHAT SECTION WAS ACTUALLY GONNA BE CHANGED, UM, NOTICED FOR US BECAUSE WHEN I WENT TO THE HYPERLINKS, THEY WEREN'T WORKING. 
          SO IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR SOMEONE I THINK WHO, UNLESS YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH MUNI CODE AND GOING TO LOOK TO BE ABLE TO PULL UP ALL THIS INFORMATION. 
          SO WHERE IS IT YOU WANNA ADD THE MF 33? BECAUSE I DIDN'T SEE IT IN THIS TABLE JUST HERE. 
          UM, FREESTANDING SIGNS ARE ALLOWED IN ACCORDANCE WITH TABLE ONE FOR RESIDENTIAL R TWO AND R THREE CURRENTLY, AND WE'RE LOOKING TO ADD MULTIFAMILY UP TO 33, BUT WE'LL MAKE SURE WE LIST ALL THE OTHER ONES THAT ARE SMALLER THAN, SO THE 33 DENSITY. 
          CAN I, I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. 
          SO YOU'RE, GO BACK TO THE TABLE. 
          IF YOU HAVE A MULTI-FAMILY PROPERTY THAT IS LOCATED ON LOOP FOUR 10 AND THEY'RE ALLOWED UNDER THE SIGN CODE TO HAVE A REALLY BIG SIGN BECAUSE IT'S ON LOOP FOUR 10, THIS, BY ADDING THIS IN, YOU ARE GOING, IS IT CHANGING WHAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO DO NOW OR IN, IN OTHER WORDS, BY ADDING THEM TO THAT SECTION? IS IT CHANGING? IT'S A TABLE ONE ALLOWS ON A LOCAL STREET, A 75 SQUARE FOOT SIGN. 
          SO WHAT I THINK WHAT SHE'S SAYING, YOU KNOW, DON'T LET ME PUT WORDS IN YOUR MOUTH, IS THAT WE'RE WE'RE SAYING THAT IF SOMETHING'S ZONED MF 33, WHICH COULD BE ON A RESIDENTIAL BLOCK, WE'RE ALLOWING A 75 SQUARE FOOT SIGN TO THAT. 
          SO I THINK IF WE'RE GONNA ADD MF 33, MAYBE WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE TABLE. 
          I ACCURATELY, WELL, IF YOU LOOK AT THE TABLE, EXCUSE ME, IT SAYS MAXIMAL ALLOWABLE HEIGHTS AND SIZES FOR FREESTANDING SIGNS IN NON-RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS. 
          AND YOU'RE SEEKING TO ADD R ONE, R TWO, R THREE, WHICH ARE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS IN HERE. 
          BUT YOU'RE ALSO SAYING THAT YOU HAVE TO KNOW THE WIDTH OF THE STREET. 
          I JUST HAVE CONCERN BECAUSE IT DOESN'T STATE EVERYTHING ELSE. 
          YOU'RE ONLY ADDING FOUR FOUR. 
          BUT WHAT'S THE, WHAT'S THE FULL LIST OF EVERYTHING ELSE THAT'S ALREADY EXISTING TO YOUR WHOLE POINT OF, IS MF 18, MF 25, ARE ALL THOSE INCLUDED ALSO? BUT YES, TO YOUR POINT, THAT IS A CONCERN. 
          SO, SO WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS TABLE THIS AND ASK STAFF AT THE NEXT MEETING TO LET THE COMMITTEE KNOW WHAT EXISTS RIGHT NOW FOR THE MF PROPERTIES AND WHAT WOULD BE BY ADDING THEM TO TABLE ONE, WHAT CHANGE WOULD THAT BE? THIS IS, I MEAN, THOMAS, UH, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, UH, WE WILL LOOK AT THAT AND BRING IT BACK. 
          BUT JUST TO CLARIFY, WE ARE NOT ADDING OR RECOMMENDING TO ADD TODAY R ONE, R TWO AND R THREE. 
          IT'S ALREADY IN THE CODE R TWO AND R THREE IS IN THE CODE. 
          IT'S BEEN IN THE CODE FROM 2017, EVEN MAYBE PRIOR, BUT AT LEAST 2017 IT WAS BEFORE. 
          [00:35:01]
SO ALL WHAT WE ARE ADDING IS THE MF 33 BECAUSE IT'S A NEW ZONING AND IT WAS NOT REFERENCED IN THIS CODE. 
          THAT'S THE ONLY THING WE ARE PROPOSING AT THIS POINT. 
          YEAH. 
          SO YEAH, AND I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT POINT, BUT WHAT I AGAIN WOULD ASK IS THAT IF YOU HAD AN MF ZONE PROPERTY BEFORE THIS AND WHAT WOULD BE THE CHANGE AFTER. 
          SO IF WE CAN GET JUST A LITTLE COMPARISON TABLE, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. 
          SO IF NOBODY HAS ANY OBJECTION, WE'RE GONNA TABLE THIS TO GET MORE INFORMATION. 
          PATTY, UM, MR. CHAIR, BACK TO TABLE ONE PLEASE, JEREMY? YES. 
          UH, DOES THE LANGUAGE NEED TO CHANGE ON THAT TABLE TO READ NON-RESIDENTIAL AND RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS? BECAUSE I SEE RIGHT NOW DO THOSE QUAL THE, THOSE HEIGHTS AND SIZES ARE THE SAME AND RESIDENTIAL AS WELL AS NON-RESIDENTIAL? SO I THINK THERE'S ANOTHER TABLE FOR RESIDENTIAL, CORRECT? WELL, I, I I THINK THE INTENT IS THIS IS A TABLE FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL AS A GENERAL. 
          SO ANYTIME YOU'RE IN NON-RESIDENTIAL, YOU GO TO THIS TABLE. 
          WHAT THAT OTHER SUBSECTION IS SAYING IS FOR THESE AREAS, YOU CAN USE THAT TABLE STILL. 
          SO IF THEY WANT US TO CLARIFY THAT, I JUST, IF WE PUT RESIDENTIAL THEN, THEN THAT WOULD ENCOMPASS ALL RESIDENTIAL ZONING INSTEAD OF GOING BACK TO THAT SUBSECTION, WHICH ALLOWS US TO SPECIFY WHAT RESIDENTIAL WOULD BE APPROVED TO USE THAT TABLE. 
          I THINK TO CLARIFY ANDREW PEREZ, I THINK TO CLARIFY WE NEED TO SAY THAT RIGHT, IF MY MEMORY SERVES ME RIGHT, RESIDENTIAL ZONES ARE ALLOWED AND BEING USED AS A RESIDENTIAL USE ARE SIX SQUARE FEET OF SIGNAGE AT SIX FEET HEIGHT. 
          THIS IS FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL USE. 
          SO TO ANSWER THE SHERIFF'S QUESTION WHEN IF ABOUT BEING ON FOUR 10, HE WOULD HAVE TO GO BY THE EXPRESSWAY STANDARDS ON TABLE ONE. 
          YEAH, I, I JUST, IF WE CAN JUST GET SOME CLARIFICATION. 
          SO, UH, WE'RE GONNA TABLE THIS AND MOVE TO THE NEXT ITEM AWAITING SOME, UH, INFORMATION, MORE INFORMATION BY STAFF. 
          ITEM 15. 
          ITEM 15 IS ANOTHER INTERNAL PROPOSED CHANGE. 
          THIS IS IN REFERENCE TO DIGITAL PROJECTION OR DIGITAL SIGNS AND WHAT'S ALLOWED AS FAR AS VIDEO AND ANIMATION. 
          SO I'LL GO TO THAT CODE SECTION. 
          SO THE NON RED UNDERLINED AREAS USE OF DIGITAL PROJECTION AS PROHIBITED ON DISPLAYS GREATER THAN 32 SQUARE FEET IS ORIGINAL LANGUAGE. 
          AND THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION ON A FEW OF THE APPLICATIONS AND PERMITS ABOUT WHAT IS DIGITAL PROJECTION WHEN THE INTENT IS REALLY, WE JUST DON'T WANT VIDEOS, ANIMATIONS, A LOT OF MOVING, UM, PICTURES ON SIGNS THAT EX 32 OR GREATER THAN 32 SQUARE FEET. 
          UH, SO WE'RE LEAVING THE DIGITAL PROJECTION BUT ALSO ADDING VIDEO OR ANIMATION AND GIVING A FEW EXAMPLES. 
          AND I THINK A LOT OF SOME OF THIS WORDING IS FOUND SOMEWHERE ELSE IN THE CODE, CORRECT? YEAH. 
          THE, UH, CAR WRECK AND RUNNING. 
          BUT JUST TO ADD SOME CLARIFICATION OF WHAT WE MEAN BY DIGITAL PROJECTION AND VIDEO FOR THESE STANDARD SIGNS, COMMENTS. 
          ISN'T THIS SUBJECT TO A GREAT DEAL OF INTERPRETATION BY THE INSPECTOR WHO'S DRIVING BY THE SIGN? UH, WHEN WE ORIGINALLY TALKED ABOUT DOING THIS, WE TALKED ABOUT OUTLYING LIVE VIDEO, UM, LIKE AT CHURCHES AND UM, PLACES LIKE THAT. 
          BUT UM, UH, THIS IS SUBJECT TO A GREAT DEAL OF INTERPRETATION AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED. 
          YOU ACTUALLY GET PUT ON THEIR STREAMING VIDEO. 
          IT'S JUST THAT VIDEO IF THAT'S, YOU KNOW, 'CAUSE I REMEMBER THAT LARRY, THAT'S THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT IT WAS, IS THAT IF THERE WAS A CHURCH THAT WAS, HAD A SERVICE GOING ON AND THERE WAS TOO MANY PEOPLE, THEY'D LIVE STREAM IT. 
          AND I THINK, AND THAT DURING THE TIME WHEN WE LOOKED AT THAT DIGITAL MESSAGE CENTER OR IT'S THAT WAS WAS IT WAS PROBABLY PREVALENT, CORRECT. 
          YEAH. 
          AND WE WERE KIND OF LOOKING AT A LOT OF THE WAYS IN LOOKING AT OTHER CITY CODES OF KIND OF HOW TO CODIFY, YOU KNOW, NOT REALLY A MOVING IMAGE, RIGHT? THAT'S KIND OF WHAT WE'RE WORRIED ABOUT IS A MOVING IMAGE THAT CATCHES THE EYE, UH, FOR DRIVERS. 
          AND YEAH, SO I WE'RE HOPING THAT WE LOOKED AT THE, THE TERM STREAMING VIDEO BECAUSE THAT IS THE MAJOR CONCERN AND KIND OF ONE OF THE THINGS THAT BROUGHT THIS UP. 
          AND WE'RE HOPING THAT VIDEO KIND OF CAPTURES THAT AS WELL. 
          BUT ALSO ANY RECORDED VIDEO, YOU KNOW, WE, BUT A LOT OF THIS DOES GO BACK TO INTERPRETATION AND, YOU KNOW, ON SIDE AND, YOU KNOW, IT IS HARD TO CODIFY, YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IT IS WITHOUT GETTING INTO, YOU KNOW, FRAMES PER SECONDS AND STUFF LIKE THAT. 
          UH, BUT RIGHT NOW WHAT WE HAVE IS JUST DIGITAL PROJECTION THEN. 
          SO OUR INSPECTORS, 
          [00:40:01]
WHEN WE TRY TO SAY IT CAN'T BE LIVE ACTION OR MOVING IMAGES AND STUFF LIKE THAT. 
          SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO ADD A LITTLE BIT MORE THERE TO WHEN WE SAY THAT'S NOT ALLOWED, IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE CODIFIED AND A LITTLE MORE BROAD OR, OR SPECIFIC ITEM THAT IS NOT ALLOWED. 
          I'D LIKE TO SEE, UH, A LITTLE MORE LANGUAGE THAT SAYS DIGITAL PROJECTION ALSO INCLUDING MESSAGE CENTER, L E D SIGNS I'VE BEEN ASKED TO REPEAT. 
          I'D LIKE TO SEE A LITTLE MORE CLARIFICATION OR A LITTLE ADDITION TO THIS DEFINITION OR ADDITION OF WHAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING. 
          DIGITAL PROJECTION TO INCLUDE MESSAGE CENTERS, ELECTRONIC MESSAGE CENTERS, OR L E D DIGITAL SCIENCE. 
          I MEAN, I THINK THIS APPLIES TO ALL OF THAT. 
          WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT IS THE CONTENT ON THE SCREEN. 
          IT DOES, BUT IS THERE REALLY IS CLARIFICATION TO BE SPLITTING THE TWO? IT'S HARD TO DEFINE. 
          SO MY QUESTION IS, WOULD IT, IS THERE A DEFINITE, THERE'S A DEFINITION SESSION SECTION IN THIS ORDINANCE, CORRECT? YES SIR. 
          WOULD IT BE EASIER TO DEFINE DIGITAL PROJECTION IN THAT SECTION AND MAKE IT A DEFINED TERM? MM-HMM. 
          . 
          SO THE, THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS THE DIGITAL PROJECTION. 
          SO THERE'S TIMES THAT PEOPLE WANT TO PROJECT SOMETHING UP ONTO A BUILDING OR SOMETHING ELSE AND THAT WOULD FALL UNDER KIND OF THAT DIGITAL PROJECTION. 
          SO WE STILL WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S NOT ALLOWED, BUT ALSO IT MOVES AWAY FROM JUST VIDEO. 
          SO, UM, YOU KNOW, IF, IF THAT'S THE REQUEST INSTEAD OF, YOU KNOW, WE CAN, WE CAN CO UH, ADD MAYBE A DIFFERENT DEFINITION AND A NEW TERM THAT WOULD BE VIDEO OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 
          MAYBE NOT AS GENERIC AS VIDEO. 
          'CAUSE THEN WE RUN INTO TIMES, ANYTIME WE USE VIDEO IT FALLS BACK TO THAT DEFINITION. 
          BUT, UH, IF THAT'S THE APPROACH I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE, WE'RE HAPPY TO LOOK INTO ADDING A NEW DEFINITION THAT KIND OF TALKS ABOUT MOVING IMAGES OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES. 
          BUT WE'LL WANNA LEAVE DIGITAL PROJECTION AS IT IS. 
          'CAUSE THAT'S MORE DISCUSSION OF PROJECTION OF, OF EITHER A VIDEO OR, UM, ANY IMAGES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 
          LARRY, IS YOUR POINT THAT THEY NEED TO BE MORE SPECIFIC IN WHAT THE, WHAT THOSE THINGS MEAN SO THAT IT'S CLEAR TO EVERYBODY WHAT IS OKAY AND WHAT'S NOT SORT OF, OKAY. 
          SO IF, IF SO, WHAT'S THE UH, UH, I MEAN, AGAIN, I, THIS THIS IS SUBJECT TO A LOT OF INTERPRETATION BY THE INSPECTOR. 
          I MEAN, WHAT IF IT'S NOT A CAR WRECK? WHAT IF IT'S A CAR JUST KIND OF TRAVELING BY, OR, WHICH IS NOT GOING TO INTERFERE WITH, UH, MOBILE MARKETS VIEWING? I MEAN, I ORIGINALLY THOUGHT THAT OUTLYING UH, LIVE VIDEO WAS DEFINITELY THE WAY TO GO. 
          AND I JUST, UH, THINK THAT PUTTING THINGS IN THE CODE THAT ARE SUBJECT TO A GREAT DEAL OF INTERPRETATION IS, UM, NOT BENEFICIAL. 
          ANY, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? THERE NEEDS TO BE A BOTTOM LINE WHEN YOU'RE CREATING CODE. 
          IN MY OPINION, EVERYTHING'S SUBJECT TO INTERPRETATION ALMOST. 
          BUT THERE NEEDS TO BE A BOTTOM LINE OF WHERE DO WE START OR STOP. 
          I THINK WHAT YOU, YOU KNOW, ARE HOW MANY INFRACTIONS HAVE YOU HAD WITH VIDEO OR ANIMATION THAT THAT CITIES PROSECUTED ON? YEAH, WE HAVE, WE ONLY HAVE LIKE A HANDFUL, UH, LIDDELL AND WHAT WE DO WHEN WE GO OUT THERE ISSUE A VIOLATION. 
          ALL THIS, MOST OF THE TIMES IT GETS CORRECTED RIGHT AWAY. 
          'CAUSE I'D SEE PROBABLY MORE ON THE BRIGHTNESS THAN ANIMATION. 
          WELL, AN AN ANIMATION COULD BE A CARTOON. 
          THAT'S A STILL PICTURE ON THE THING ALSO. 
          I MEAN IT, SO IS THERE ANY, UH, ON THE PART OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS AN APPETITE TO LEAVE IT, TAKE IT OUT? I THINK WE'VE IDENTIFIED AN OPPORTUNITY TO CLARIFY THE LANGUAGE AND WE SHOULD TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT OPPORTUNITY. 
          YOU KNOW, I, I THINK IT'S PRETTY CLEAR THE INTENT IS THAT WE DON'T WANT, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE IN 
          [00:45:01]
COMMON PARLANCE WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, VIDEOS, WHAT WE'D CALL, LIKE IF YOU LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, WHETHER YOUTUBE OR LIVE STREAM OR WHATEVER IT IS, THAT'S WHAT WE THINK. 
          BUT YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T USE COMMON PARLANCE AND CODE. 
          SO THIS IS A GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO TIGHTEN UP THE LANGUAGE AND, AND I THINK THAT FROM WHAT I HEAR, IT SOUNDS LIKE EVERYBODY'S ON BOARD WITH WITH THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          SO I THINK THE ANSWER IS, IS TO POSSIBLY, UH, DIGITAL PROJECTION AND VIDEO AND THEN MAYBE DEFINE VIDEO IN THE DEFINITIONS TO TIGHTEN EXACTLY WHAT THAT MEANS. 
          IS THAT ? I WOULD ADD THE PHRASE, UH, MOTION PICTURES. 
          WHAT I WOULD ADD THE PHRASE MOTION PICKER MOTION PICTURES, UM, AFTER VIDEO. 
          OKAY. 
          SO BECAUSE THIS SENTENCE, WHEN EVERYTHING IS PUT IN COULD BE LIKE, UH, PAGE LONG. 
          WHAT I THINK IS, UH, WE'LL GIVE THIS ONE BACK TO STAFF. 
          I WOULD PICK A WORD TO GO AFTER DIGITAL PROJECTION AND WHATEVER, AND THEN COME BACK IN THE DEFINITION SECTION AND TIGHTEN WHAT THAT MEANS. 
          BECAUSE IT COULD BE MOTION PICTURES. 
          YOU DON'T WANT TO CARTOON MOVING AROUND. 
          SO I THINK IT'S, IS THAT MR. CHAIR? YES. 
          UH, I JUST WANT A POINT OF CLARIFICATION. 
          WHEN YOU USE THE TERM FACADE, I WANT TO GIVE TWO EXAMPLES. 
          THAT MISSION FUNERAL HOME DURING THE PANDEMIC PROJECTED FUNERAL SERVICES ON THE FACADE OF THEIR BUILDING FACING SOUTHWEST MILITARY DRIVE BECAUSE OF CAPACITY LIMITED BY COVID IN THEIR CHAPEL. 
          WOULD THAT APPLY BECAUSE IT'S A FACADE. 
          NUMBER TWO, THERE'S A COMPANY IN SOUTH TOWN THAT DOES SLAB CINEMA. 
          THEY PUT 'EM AT THE, UH, ANY LOCATION IN PARKS HEMISPHERE VISIBLE FROM THE STREET AND THEY PROJECT MOVIES. 
          SO IF YOU USE THE TERM MOTION PICTURE, WOULD THIS APPLY IN THAT INSTANCE? BECAUSE IT'S PRETTY BROAD. 
          I CONCUR WITH TIGHTENING UP THE LANGUAGE, BUT I ALSO WOULD THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE AN EXCEPTION FOR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 
          IF, IF AND IN FACT, IT DOES APPLY TO THAT. 
          AND IT COULD BE THE MISSION DRIVE-IN TOO. 
          EXACTLY. 
          THAT'S WHAT IT'S, YEAH, THAT'S, I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT IT'S REFERRING TO. 
          ADVERTISING. 
          IT'S NOT A SIGN. 
          I THINK WE NEED TO ADD INTENDED FOR THE TRAVELING PUBLIC. 
          YEAH. 
          SO IF, IF Y'ALL WILL JUST WORK ON THE DEFINITION OF WHAT, PICK A WORD OR A WAY TO DESCRIBE IT AND UH, ADD A DEFINITION TO THE DEFINITION SECTION AND THEN ALSO LOOK WHAT PATTY WAS TALKING TO MAKE SURE IT DOESN'T PROHIBIT, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THE NEW THING IS THESE BIG BLOWUP UH, SCREENS AND YOU KNOW THAT THEY HAVEN'T, I MEAN, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION'S DONE IT BEFORE AND YOU KNOW, SO I THINK THAT IS NOT WHAT THIS IS INTENDED TO CATCH. 
          BUT ALSO TOO, YOU KNOW, IF THEY'RE ADVERTISING SOMETHING, I THINK THAT'D BE MORE PREVALENT. 
          BUT LIKE, TO PATTY'S POINT, IT'S A FUNERAL. 
          SO THIS IS THE SAME QUAGMIRE THAT WE HAD BACK IN 2010 WHEN WE DID THIS, THE DEFINITION PART. 
          SO I, UNLESS WE JUST PUT ADVERTISING A BUSINESS OR A PRODUCT AND NOT A FUNERAL OR A, YEAH, NO, I, I THINK WHATEVER THE WORD, WHATEVER EVER, WE CAN ACTUALLY, UH, HAVE THEM, UH, DIRECT THEM TO ADD THAT INTO THE, UH, BUT IT, BUT IT'S MORE THAN JUST, I MEAN, IT COULD BE, YOU DON'T WANT A POLITICAL CANDIDATE SITTING UP THERE MOVING. 
          AND SO IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT JUST, I MEAN THAT'S ADVERTISING, BUT YOU KNOW, IT COULD JUST BE A MESSAGE. 
          BUT I, I THINK WE JUST FIGURE OUT TO ADD THE WORD, DEFINE IT, AND THEN IF THERE'S ANOTHER WORD ADDED, WE CAN BRING THAT BACK. 
          OKAY. 
          CHAIR. 
          SO STAFF WILL TABLE THIS ONE. 
          LOOK AT ADDING A NEW DEFINITION TO GO ALONG WITH A DIGITAL PROJECTION AND PRESENT THAT TO THE COMMITTEE AT THE NEXT MEETING. 
          AND THEN WHAT I WOULD ALSO ASK, UH, WHEN YOU FLOAT THE DEFINITION IS YOU SEND IT TO EVERYBODY THAT'S 
          [00:50:01]
IN THE ROOM AND JUST PRIOR TO THE MEETING, AFTER MAYBE A DRAFT IS DONE, ASKING THEM TO WORDSMITH IT SO THAT BY THE TIME IT GETS BACK HERE, HOPEFULLY EVERYBODY IS SATISFIED. 
          YES SIR. 
          YEAH, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND SUBMIT THAT OUT TO EVERYBODY WE HAVE CONTACT INFORMATION WITH FOR AND UH, ASK FOR FEEDBACK PRIOR TO THE NEXT MEETING. 
          OKAY, ITEM FIVE. 
          SO ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS ANOTHER INTERNAL. 
          THIS IS SECTION 28, 30 B, ADDING NON-ELECTRICAL AND NON ILLUMINATED, UH, TO THE DEFINITION OR TO THE, UH, ITEM FOR SIGNS. 
          LEMME PULL THAT SECTION UP. 
          JEREMY. 
          I AM THIS ONE ON MY NUMBER FIVE SAYS EXTERNAL FROM W CLEO. 
          MARK, ARE WE GONNA GO TO, ON THE BACKSIDE OF THE PAGE IS 16 GOING ONLINE? OH, EXCUSE ME. 
          THANK YOU. 
          WE'RE JUST TRYING TO SAVE PAPER HERE. 
          YOU KNOW, SAVE THE TREES. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ITEM 16, EXCUSE ME. 
          THA THAT'S WHY YOU'RE THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BIG BOARD TO KEEP US. 
          YOU'RE DOING GREAT AND YOU KNOW, YOU'RE JUST TRYING TO HELP KEEP THOSE LUMBER COSTS DOWN AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. 
          YOU'RE NOT HELPING, TRUST ME. 
          OKAY, SO THIS IS, UH, PERMIT EXCEPTIONS WHEN, WHEN YOU'RE ALLOWED TO DO SIGNS WITHOUT A PERMIT, UH, THE EXISTING LANGUAGE, UH, FOR SUBSECTION B, SIGNS NOT EXCEEDING 32 SQUARE FEET ARE FACING. 
          UH, AND THEN A LITTLE BIT MORE ADDITIONAL THERE. 
          BUT, UH, WHAT WE WANTED TO DO IS WE'RE RUNNING INTO SOME TIMES WHERE PEOPLE HAD MET THIS, BUT WE'RE STILL KIND OF A, EITHER HAD ITS OWN ILLUMINATION OR HAD ILLUMINATION, UH, ADDING TO ELIMINATION TO IT, HAVING LIGHTED, UH, LIT UP AND STUFF LIKE THAT. 
          SO ANYTIME THEY DO ADD SOME FORM OF WAY OF, OF LIGHTING UP THAT SIGN, WHETHER IT BE PART OF THE SIGN OR LIGHT SHINING ON IT, THAT DOES REQUIRE A PERMIT TO BE REVIEWED AND INSPECTED BY THE CITY. 
          SO WE WANT TO JUST CLARIFY THAT THIS SECTION ONLY IMPLIES TO SIGNS THAT HAVE NO MEANS OF BEING LIT, I GUESS FOR A BETTER WORD, ANY COMMENTS. 
          DOES IT NOT ALSO APPLY TO SIGNS IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT? SO THIS IS THE GENERAL APPROACH. 
          UH, ANYTIME THAT SOMETHING GETS AN ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENT FOR PERMITTING AND STUFF LIKE THAT THROUGH OTHER HISTORICAL DISTRICTS OR ANY OTHER OVERLAY WOULD AUTOMATICALLY, THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER SECTION OF THE, OF THE CHAPTER THAT WOULD IMPOSE THAT. 
          OR MAYBE EVEN UNDER THE U D C. 
          SO THIS DOESN'T EXEMPT THAT REQUIREMENT. 
          THIS IS REALLY JUST IF YOU FALL OUTSIDE OF ANY OTHER REQUIREMENT AND YOU'RE, AND YOU'RE DOING JUST THIS TYPE OF SIGN THAT YOU DON'T REQUIRE PERMIT. 
          ANY OTHER COMMENTS? HOLD ON. 
          JUST STILL READING. 
          SORRY. 
          I MEAN BASICALLY ALL THEY'RE, ALL YOU'RE DOING IS ADDING THE WORD NON-ELECTRIC AND NON ILLUMINATE ILLUMINATED, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. 
          YEAH. 
          JUST, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT'S ON THE ITEM, RIGHT? AND I WANNA BE RESPECTFUL OF THAT, BUT I THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT IS, WHEN DO YOU NOT REQUIRE A LICENSE TO PAINT A SIGN? THIS SEEMS LIKE A RELEVANT TIME OR RELEVANT LOCATION TO, TO DISCUSS THAT. 
          AND IF IT NEEDS TO BE ANOTHER MEETING, IT NEEDS TO BE ANOTHER MEETING, BUT I JUST, I STILL CANNOT, I MEAN, THIS SIGN DOESN'T REQUIRE THESE, THESE ARE SO 28, 29 RIGHT ABOVE A VALIDLY ISSUED LICENSE AND INSURANCE ARE PREREQUISITES TO THE ISSUED ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT FOR WORK IN THIS JU JURISDICTION. 
          NO PERMIT FOR WORK WILL BE ISSUED, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH. 
          I MEAN, IF YOU'D SCROLL UP, YOU'LL READ IT. 
          UM, YEAH, BUT THIS SAYS NO, THIS WOULD BE A PERMIT EXCEPTION. 
          SO THIS WOULD NOT REQUIRE A PERMIT TO PUT THIS UP. 
          NO, I UNDERSTAND THAT. 
          I'M, I'M TALKING ABOUT EXPANDING THE SCOPE OF THINGS THAT DON'T NEED A, A LICENSE TO, TO DO WORK INCLUDES ERECTION, PAINTING, SERVICING, SERVICING, REFACING, MAINTAINING OR DEMOLISHING A SIGN REGULATED BY THIS CHAPTER POINT IS THAT THE PERMIT EXCEPTIONS ARE NEGLIGIBLE AT BEST. 
          SO I THINK THIS KIND OF FALLS BACK TO OUR FIRST ENGINE ITEM THAT YOU BROUGHT UP. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, AND I THINK WE CAN ROLL THAT INTO THAT SECTION. 
          I, I THINK THE ULTIMATE GOAL FROM MICHAEL RUST IS LOOKING ON WHAT SCOPE OF WORK DOES REQUIRE A PERMIT AND THUS REQUIRES REGISTRATION WITH THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. 
          AND WHAT DOES NOT AND LOOKING TO EXPAND THAT SECTION IS, IS THAT 
          [00:55:01]
KIND OF THE OVERALL ADJUST? I WANNA MAKE SURE I'M ON THE SAME PAGE. 
          YES, JEREMY, THAT, THAT, THAT, UH, AND YOU KNOW, YOU'LL RECOGNIZE THESE COMMENTS FROM THE COMMENTS WE HAD YESTERDAY ABOUT THE OTHER, YOU KNOW, THE BUILDING REGISTRATIONS, ET CETERA, CERTIFICATIONS, ET CETERA. 
          IT'S THE SAME CONCEPT. 
          UH, AGREED. 
          YEAH. 
          LIMITING, LIMITING BUREAUCRACY. 
          WE UNDERSTAND AND APPRECIATE THAT. 
          UM, CHAIR, I, I THINK, YOU KNOW, THAT CAN GO DOWN A BIG RABBIT HOLE. 
          I HAVE NO PROBLEM. 
          WE DEFINITELY WANNA GO THROUGH THAT. 
          THAT'S PART OF THIS PROCESS. 
          I DON'T, I DON'T WISH TO DO THAT TODAY IF POSSIBLE. 
           NO. 
          WHAT I, WHAT I WAS WONDERING IS, UM, INSTEAD OF, I CAN SEE THIS BEING BROUGHT IN MANY TIMES, I, I'M TRYING TO THINK OF WHAT THE BEST STRUCTURE TO GO THROUGH THIS, YOU KNOW, SHORT OF JUST SITTING DOWN WITH MIKE AND, AND GOING OVER THAT AND MAKING IT AS INCLUSIVE AS POSSIBLE. 
          UM, KIND OF WONDERING IF WE MAYBE WANT TO HAVE LIKE A WORKSHOP MEETING, UH, THAT'S NOT A COMMITTEE MEETING AND DO THAT. 
          YEAH, I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE WILL DO LEGALLY. 
          SO THEN MY THOUGHT IS MAYBE WE'LL TRY TO SET SOMETHING UP THAT REALLY JUST LOOKS AT WHAT'S REQUIRING A PERMIT AND THUS REGISTRATION AND DO A WORKSHOP OUTSIDE THIS COMMITTEE THAT THEN WE CAN KIND OF, THAT WOULD BE MY PREFERENCE. 
          AND, AND WHAT I WOULD ASK IS A COUPLE OF, TWO OR THREE PEOPLE FROM THE SIGN INDUSTRY AND ANYBODY ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO PARTICIPATE. 
          AND IF YOU'LL JUST GIVE YOUR NAME TO JEREMY, HE'LL GET IT SET UP. 
          FAIR ENOUGH. 
          OKAY. 
          I'LL STOP BONDS IN YOUR MEETING. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          AND SO, UH, JUST, AND I'LL, I'LL, I'LL CONFER WITH LEGAL AND JUST HAVE THE BEST WAY WE CAN DO THAT. 
          SO ONCE AGAIN, THE GOAL I THINK IS TO NOT HAVE IT BE AN OFFICIAL MEETING IF WE NEED TO MAKE IT THAT WAY AND, AND DO IT A MEETING. 
          BUT I'LL, I'LL GO, I'LL GET THROUGH THE LEGALITIES OF THAT AND YEAH, BRING IT TO THIS COMMITTEE AND I'LL, I'LL THEN ONCE AGAIN, KINDA THE SAME THING WE'RE DOING WITH THAT DEFINITION FOR THE PROJECTED SIGN. 
          PERFECT. 
          PUT THAT OUT THERE TO EVERYBODY'S CONTACT THAT WE DO HAVE. 
          PERFECT. 
          SO IS THERE ANY WITHOUT OBJECTION, UH, NUMBER 16 IS OKAY, NUMBER 17. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          NUMBER 17, WHICH IS AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. 
          THIS CON WILL CONCLUDE, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AS AN AGENDA FOR TODAY. 
          THIS IS TEMPORARY SIGNS WITHIN URBAN CORRIDORS, UH, CHANGING THE, THE SQUARE FOOTAGE FROM 15 TO 32. 
          AND I'LL PULL UP THAT SECTION, BUT THIS IS REALLY NOT, WE'RE NOT INCREASING THAT SIGN THAT THAT AVAILABILITY HERE. 
          IT'S REALLY CORRECTION OF AN ERROR IS MY UNDERSTANDING. 
          CORRECT. 
          OKAY. 
          SO, SO WE'RE, IT IS, IT IS CODIFIED SOMEWHERE ELSE IN THE CHAPTER AND WE'RE JUST MAKING SURE THAT THEY ALIGN. 
          BUT CURRENTLY WHAT'S ENFORCED AND APPROVED RIGHT NOW IS THAT 32 SQUARE FEET, UH, BASED ON THAT OTHER SECTION. 
          SO WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE TWO SECTIONS, UH, COEXIST, WHICH IS BASICALLY A FOUR BY EIGHT SIGN, BASICALLY. 
          WHAT IF I DID MY, IF I CAN STILL ADD UP AND COUNT ON MY FINGERS WHAT, ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? SO WHERE ARE THE TWO POINTS THAT DIFFER? THE SECTIONS? YEAH. 
          BA BASICALLY IT'S A FOUR BY EIGHT SIGN. 
          THAT'S A TEMPORARY SIGN. 
          IT COULD BE ADVERTISING FOR SALE OR SOME OTHER, IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY THEN PREVIOUSLY WHEN A CHANGE WAS MADE TO ONE SECTION OF CODE, IT WAS INTENDED TO APPLY TO THE URBAN CORRIDORS, THAT CHANGE DIDN'T GET MADE IN THE URBAN CORRIDORS PORTION. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          CORRECT. 
          FIND CHAIR, THIS IS BIANCA. 
          YES, I HAVE CONCERN ABOUT THAT. 
          IF YOU COULD PULL UP A MAP AND SHOW US WHERE OUR URBAN CORRIDORS DO EXIST, I THINK THAT WOULD BE HUGELY BENEFICIAL BECAUSE IT'S NOT A VERY SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF AREA WITHIN THE CITY. 
          I MEAN, THE INTENT IN AN URBAN CORRIDOR IS SO, SO THAT THERE'S NOT SIGNS THAT ARE DISTRACTING IN THAT CORRIDOR AND THERE'S ALREADY A LIMITATION TO, UM, SIGNAGE IN THOSE AREAS. 
          SO ALLOWING MORE SIGNS IN SQUARE FOOTAGE IN AN URBAN CORRIDOR IS SOMETHING I DON'T THINK IS BEING RESPECTFUL OF THE REASON THAT IT WAS DESIGNATED AT URBAN CORRIDOR TO BEGIN WITH. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          UM, ONE SECOND SO I CAN MAKE SURE I'M GOING THROUGH ALL THE REQUESTS SO FAR. 
          SO THIS IS THE SECTION THAT WAS ORIGINALLY, AND I APOLOGIZE, I'M KIND OF BOUNCING AROUND. 
          SO I WANNA STEP THROUGH THIS. 
          UH, THE FIRST ONE WAS, WHERE'S THE, WHERE DO WE SEE IT TWICE? SO THIS IS WHERE WE HAVE THE 32. 
          [01:00:09]
SO THIS IS WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE. 
          AND I'LL GO TO THE SECTION THAT WE ARE, UH, PROPOSING TO CHANGE. 
          AND I APOLOGIZE ON THE, I THINK MAYBE I HAD PUT 30, BUT THE INTENT WAS 32. 
          SO, UH, BUT THIS IS THE, UH, TEMPORARY SIGNS SECTION. 
          COULD WE POSSIBLY GO BACK TO WHEN THAT CHANGE WAS MADE CITYWIDE AND REVIEW MINUTES AND SUCH? BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S OFTEN VERY IMPORTANT TO SEEING WHAT THE TRUE INTENT WAS AT THE TIME. 
          AND I DID THAT ON ONE OF THE LAST MEETING ITEMS AND, AND IT, IT REVEALS A LOT SOMETIMES. 
          SO I'D PREFER BEFORE WE JUST SAY YEAH, LET'S CHANGE IT TO 32 IN THE URBAN QUARTERS, THAT WE REALLY LOOK AT WHAT WAS SAID DURING THOSE MEETINGS WHEN THAT WAS CONSIDERED. 
          UH, YEAH, WE'RE HAPPY TO LOOK INTO THAT. 
          UM, I'LL HAVE TO DIG INTO WHAT WE HAVE ON RECORD. 
          OKAY, SO WE'RE GONNA TABLE THIS. 
          UH, FOR MORE INFORMATION CHAIR POINT OF ORDER. 
          I WAS ASKED STAFF IF THEY COULD SHOW A MAP THAT HAD THE URBAN CORRIDORS, BECAUSE I THINK WHAT'S IMPORTANT IS THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT AN INCREASE IN A SIGNAGE, WHERE'S THAT TEMPORARY SIGN GONNA GO? AND A LOT OF TIMES IN YOUR URBAN CORRIDORS, WHICH ARE THESE DESIGNATED AREAS, YOU HAVE VERY LIMITED SITE DISTANCE. 
          WHEN YOU'RE TEEN INTO STREETS, WHEN YOU'RE ENTERING AND EXITING BUILDINGS, YOU HAVE BUILDINGS THAT ARE BUILT CLOSER TO THE ROADWAY. 
          YOU DON'T HAVE SIGNIFICANT RIGHT OF WAY SETBACKS LIKE YOU MIGHT HAVE IN OTHER AREAS OF THE CITY. 
          SO ADDITIONAL VISIBLE OBSTRUCTIONS POTENTIALLY THAT COULD BE, YOU KNOW, WHEN THAT COULD COME WITH A LARGER SIGN ARE OF CONCERN FOR ME, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE TRY TO FOCUS ON PEDESTRIAN SAFELY SAFETY AND VISIBILITY IN THESE AREAS. 
          AND SO I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO SHOW WHERE THE URBAN CORRIDOR DISTRICTS ARE. 
          YEAH. 
          SO WHAT STAFF WILL DO IS WHEN THEY BRING THIS BACK TO US WITH ALL THE STUFF, THEY'LL PUT A MAP OF WHERE THE URBAN BRING CORRIDORS ARE. 
          JEREMY, UH, WE'RE GONNA TABLE THAT FOR MORE INFORMATION, INCLUDING, UH, A MAP AT THAT, SOME POINT OF WHERE THE URBAN CORRIDORS ARE AND MOVE ON TO ITEM 18. 
          SO BEFORE YOU GET I, UH, ACTUALLY CHAIR REAL FAST, I APOLOGIZE. 
          THIS ONE SHOULD HAVE BEEN MOVED. 
          SO WHEN I WAS MOVING THINGS AROUND LAST NIGHT. 
          I DIDN'T MOVE THIS ONE DOWN. 
          SO, UH, NUMBER 18 IS NOT ON THE AGENDA, SO WE SHOULD OKAY. 
          SO WE'RE GONNA TABLE THAT TO ANOTHER MEETING, CORRECT? YEAH, THAT'S TECHNICALLY ON THE FINE. 
          THAT'S FINE. 
          AND I, AND I ASSUME WE'RE GONNA BE REACHING OUT TO THE COUNCILMAN'S OFFICE TO FIND OUT EXACTLY EXAMPLES OR SOMETHING, BECAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING IS EVERY BILLBOARD IN THE MILITARY OVERLAY ZONE HAS TO COMPLY WITH THE LIGHTING OF THE, THE ZONE. 
          CORRECT? CORRECT. 
          CHAIRMAN, THAT'D PROBABLY BE IN THE DARK SKY ISSUES. 
          YEAH. 
          THE, IT HAS TO COMPLY WITH THE DARK SKY. 
          YEAH. 
          PERFECT. 
          YEAH. 
          AND WE'LL, WE'LL DISCUSS THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE IN DETAIL UNDER THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT, UM, KIND OF REVIEWING ALL THE PENDING ITEMS. PERFECT. 
          SO ITEM NUMBER FIVE. 
          YEAH, SO THE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER EIGHT IS, UH, SUBMITTAL NUMBER THREE DASH ONE THAT ESSENTIALLY BROUGHT UP DURING PUBLIC COMMENTS. 
          THIS IS THE ADDITION OF GUARD RAILS, UH, TO AREAS THAT ARE NOT ALLOWED FOR SIGNAGE. 
          UH, SECTION 28 75. 
          I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW. 
          OKAY. 
          SO LET, LET'S JUST GET SOME UNDER STATE STATUTE. 
          I KNOW THERE IS SOME STATE STATUTE DEALING WITH PLACEMENT OF POLITICAL SIGNS AND RIGHT OF WAYS. 
          THAT'S CORRECT. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, CHAPTER 3, 9, 3 AND THREE. 
          CHAPTER 
          [01:05:01]
3, 9 2 AND 3 9 3 OF THE TEXAS TRANSPORTATION CODE. 
          OKAY. 
          SO DOES THAT, THAT ALLOWS SIGNS IN THE MEDIANS PRETTY MUCH ANYWHERE IF IT'S PLACED PROPERLY? CORRECT. 
          UH, SIGNAGE CANNOT BE PLACED ON A RIGHT OF WAY OF A TEXAS HIGHWAY. 
          OKAY. 
          WAIT, EXCUSE ME. 
          SO ALL THE SIGNS THAT ARE UP ON THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, AND THAT'S NOT STATE HIGHWAY IS ALLOWED IN SAN ANTONIO? CORRECT. 
          IS THERE A SECTION ON POLITICAL SIGNS SOMEWHERE? IS THIS IT? UH, NO, SIR. 
          NO, NO DEDICATED. 
          IT'S JUST TEMPORARY SIGNS IS THAT WE HAVE, I MEAN, YOU SEE THE, THE POLITICAL SIGNS, WHICH IS I THINK WHAT YOUR ISSUE IS ALL OVER. 
          AND THEY'RE PUT ON, YOU KNOW, IN THE CITY RIGHT AWAY. 
          THEY'RE IN THE MEDIANS ON, YOU KNOW, HENER AND ANY PLACE THAT HAS THE BIG WIDE MEDIANS, IS THAT ALLOWED BY CODE? NO, IT'S, UM, NOT ALLOWED BY CODE. 
          A MEDIAN IS, UH, BASICALLY IF YOU PUT SOMETHING IN THE MEDIAN, IT OBSTRUCTS MOTORIST VIEW OF THE RIGHT OF WAY AND IT CREATES A SAFETY HAZARD. 
          AND NOTHING SHOULD BE ON THE GUARDRAILS THEMSELVES. 
          IS STEPH, AND I KNOW WE'RE TREADING INTO LIKE, DANGER, DANGER. 
          THERE ARE, I WAS GONNA ADD THE WORD. 
          I WANTED TO ADD THE WORD MEDIAN THERE IN THERE, IN ADDITION TO GUARDRAIL. 
          YEAH, BECAUSE MEDIAN'S NOT CALLED OUT. 
          I WOULD CONCUR DRIVE DOWN HENER. 
          I WOULD ADD THE GUARDRAIL IS A, IS A LIFE SAFETY ISSUE BECAUSE A LOT OF THESE GUARDRAILS ARE AROUND DRAINAGE AREAS. 
          AND SO YOU DO NOT WANT TO IMPEDE THE FLOW OF WATER DURING A HEAVY RAIN EVENT. 
          AND WE KNOW ALL TOO OFTEN HOW WATER CAN RISE VERY QUICKLY IN OUR STREETS WHEN WE GET A COUPLE OF INCHES OF RAIN. 
          AND WE WOULD NEVER WANT A POLITICAL SIGN TO BE HOLDING BACK DEBRIS BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT COMES TO IN WATER AND IMPEDES THE FLOW. 
          AND, AND SO I THINK IT'S, IT'S KIND OF A, IT'S A NUISANCE AND WE'D REALLY HOPE THAT THROUGH BETTER EDUCATION THAT THESE INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE PAID TO PUT OUT THOSE SIGNS. 
          'CAUSE A LOT OF TIMES THOSE CANDIDATES DON'T PUT 'EM OUT THEMSELVES. 
          THEY HIRE SOMEBODY TO DO IT, THAT THEY'RE JUST MORE CONSCIENTIOUS OF THE IMPACT THAT THOSE SIGNS COULD HAVE, NOT JUST FROM AN ADVERTISING STANDPOINT, BUT FROM A LIFE SAFETY STANDPOINT. 
          UH, REAL QUICK, THIS IS JEREMY MCDONALD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. 
          SO SUBSECTION A IS STRUCTURES THAT THEY COULD BE PUT OR NOT ALLOWED TO BE PUT ON. 
          WE DO HAVE, UH, SUBSECTIONS B THAT KIND OF TALK ABOUT LOCATIONS, WHICH INCLUDES MEDIAN OPENING. 
          SO IT, IT MAY DEFINITELY IF WE WANT TO UPDATE THIS AS WELL, BUT, UH, WE'LL WANT TO MOVE THAT TO THESE SECTIONS. 
          AND THIS IS JOSEPH ARNEY WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. 
          YOU ALSO HAVE 28 10 THAT KIND OF ADDRESSES THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE PROPERTY. 
          SO JOSEPH, IS IT LEGAL TO PUT POLITICAL SIGNS IN THE RIGHT OF WAY? MEDIAN? SO FIRST OF ALL, YOU, YOU, YOU DON'T DISTINGUISH BETWEEN POLITICAL AND, AND OTHER SIGNS OF TEMPORARY SIGNS BECAUSE OF CONTENT NEUTRAL CONTENT NEUTRALITY. 
          UM, BUT YES, 28 10, YOU BASICALLY NEED, UM, PERMISSION. 
          AND THAT'S A, FOR, FOR PUBLIC PROPERTY, THAT'S A LEGISLATIVE ACTION BASICALLY TO ALLOW, UM, SIGNS IN THE, UH, ON PUBLIC PROPERTY, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE, SO, WHICH MEANS THAT EVERY POLITICAL SIGN NEEDS TO GO DOWN AND PAY THE CITY A LITTLE STICKER FEE TO BE ABLE TO PUT IT ON THE RIGHT OF WAY. 
          UH, IT, IT WOULD BE, IT'S A LEG. 
          IT'S, YEAH, POSSIBLY IT'S JUST, IT'S A MORE IN DEPTH THING. 
          BUT, UH, TO MS. MALDONADO'S, UH, COMMENT. 
          YEAH, A LOT OF THESE SIGNS ARE PUT UP BY CONTRACTORS WHO JUST SIMPLY AREN'T AWARE AND THE CONTRACTORS ARE NOT EVEN LICENSED WITH THE CITY. 
          I MEAN, I WOULDN'T EVEN CALL 'EM CONTRACTORS TO BE HONEST. 
          I MEAN, THEY'RE SEASONAL FOLKS THAT COME IN AND THIS IS THEIR THING. 
          OKAY. 
          SO YOU WOULD LIKE GO BACK UP TO A, SO YOU'RE PROPOSING GUARDRAILS AND MEDIANS, CORRECT? NO, HE SAID MEDIANS IS COVERED ELSEWHERE. 
          FURTHER DOWN IN SECTION WAS THAT B, SO MEDIANS IS ALREADY COVERED, SO I WOULD JUST SAY BE SUPPORTIVE OF THE GUARDRAILS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          B. 
          [01:10:11]
SO THIS IS SECTION 28 75, TEMPORARY SIGNS ON PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY AND CITY PUBLIC PROPERTY. 
          AND THIS IS MOVING TO SIGN LOCATION SUBSECTION FOUR. 
          UH, SECTION A IS DISCUSSING LIKE STRUCTURES OR ITEMS, YOU KNOW, NOT, NOT REALLY LOCATION, BUT JUST PUTTING IT UP ON A STRUCTURE. 
          AND THEN B UH, KIND OF TALKING MORE ABOUT LOCATIONS AROUND INTERSECTIONS AND MEDIANS. 
          SO, UH, ANY COMMENT ON ADDING THE WORD GUARDRAIL? IS IT OKAY WITH THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE? LOOKS GREAT. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S GOOD. 
          CHAIR. 
          I JUST HAD ONE ADDITIONAL COMMENT AND IT, IT'S GERMANE TO OUR TOPIC HERE. 
          I FEEL AS THOUGH, EVEN THOUGH IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE A CONTENT NEUTRAL DISCUSSION, UM, AND NOT TALKING ABOUT THE P THE POLITICAL SIGNS, BUT YET THEY'RE TREATED TO A DIFFERENT STANDARD AND THAT THE CITY DOESN'T TAKE 'EM DOWN. 
          AND SO I JUST SAY WE CAN SIT HERE AND SAY WE'RE CONTENT NEUTRAL, BUT THE CITY AND THEIR ENFORCEMENT TAKES A VERY, VERY POLITICAL STANCE IN THAT THEY DON'T TOUCH POLITICAL SIGNS ALTOGETHER. 
          SO THEY DO LOOK AT THE CONTENT. 
          AND SO WITH THAT IN MIND, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ABOUT THAT, THAT I DISAGREE WITH THAT. 
          THAT IF A SIGN IS UP AND IT'S ILLEGAL REGARDLESS OF CONTENT, IT SHOULD BE TAKEN DOWN. 
          AND THE CITY DOESN'T EVEN TAKE 'EM DOWN ON THEIR OWN PROPERTY. 
          PEOPLE GO UP AND PUT THESE ON DRAINAGE CHANNELS THAT ARE PART OF PARKLAND OR IN THE RIGHT OF WAY IN THEIR PROPERTY OF THE CITY OR THE COUNTY, AND NOBODY WANTS TO TAKE 'EM DOWN. 
          AND SO I JUST THINK THAT WHILE WE SAY WE'RE CONTENT NEUTRAL CITY ATTORNEY, WE'RE NOT ALWAYS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CODE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          I CONCUR. 
          AS DO I I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY RIGHT, BUT I THINK IT'S, YOU KNOW, JUST, JUST TO BE A LITTLE CONTRARIAN HERE, I THINK THE CITY GETTING IN THE BUSINESS OF TAKING DOWN POLITICAL SIGNS AS SOON AS THEY TAKE ONE DOWN, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN'T BE ALL PLACES AT ALL TIMES AND THEN THEY'RE NOT GONNA TAKE SOMEBODY ELSE'S DOWN. 
          I THINK ANY READING OF THE HISTORY OF THE COUNTRY, UM, AND I GREW UP IN A, THE CITY OF BALTIMORE, WHICH IS PROBABLY ONE OF THE SINGLE MOST CORRUPT PLACES ON EARTH. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK YOU WANT THE CITY TO, UM, I DON'T THINK YOU WANT THE CITY TO BE INVOLVED IN THAT. 
          YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE'S SOME DOWNHILL OF CONSEQUENCES THAT THAT COULD HAPPEN. 
          SO, AND FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, AND I DON'T KNOW THAT THE, UH, PAID EMPLOYEES OF THE, UH, CITY OF SAN ANTONIO WANT TO, UH, CITE ANY, UH, OF THEIR ELECTED OFFICIAL BOSSES FOR HAVING A LEGAL SIGNS UP EITHER. 
          SO, I MEAN, IT'S JUST, SO I JUST WANNA MAKE A COMMENT BECAUSE SEVEN 13, UH, CHRISTIE WAS SEVEN 13 SIGNS. 
          UM, I DO PLACE THESE SIGNS FOR BUILDERS ON THE WEEKENDS, AND I ABIDE BY THE RULES OF THE DAYS OF THE TIME, THE FRIDAY THROUGH THE MONDAY. 
          AND, UM, AS WELL AS GOING AND GETTING THE PERMITS, THE, THEY'RE ABOUT $6 A PERMIT FOR THOSE SIGNS. 
          MY SIGNS STILL GET TAKEN ALL THE TIME WITH THOSE PERMITS ON THEM. 
          LIKE, BUT YET ALL OF THESE POLITICAL SIGNS CAN STAY UP WITH NO, NO PERMIT, NO TOUCH, NO ANYTHING. 
          THE BUILDERS THEMSELVES AND THE FOR SALE SIGNS, THE OPEN HOUSE SIGNS ARE TARGETED, BUT YET EV THE POLITICAL SIGNS CAN STAY UP. 
          LIKE, NO, NO PROBLEM. 
          IT'S A LOT OF MONEY THAT AT LEAST THE VERY LEAST GO GET THE PERMITS, GO, GO PAY THE MONEY FOR THE PERMITS. 
          'CAUSE ALL OF OURS HAVE TO, I SPEND THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS EACH YEAR FOR THESE PERMITS. 
          NO, IT, YEAH, MR. CHAIR JUST UPSET. 
          YES, PATTY, I'D JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT IN OUR FIRST MEETING IT WAS EITHER YOU OR ONE OF YOU GUYS OVER THERE STATED YOU TOOK OVER ALMOST 5,000 BANDIT SIGNS DOWN A MILLION OR HOWEVER MANY IT WAS. 
          MAYBE THAT WAS THE, BUT IF YOU'RE GOT A BANDIT SIGN AND A POLITICAL SIGN, I THINK THEY SHOULD BOTH COME DOWN. 
          DON'T JUST TAKE ONE AND LEAVE THE OTHER. 
          I CONCUR. 
          THE CITY NEEDS TO NOT CHOOSE OR MAKE A CHOICE, BUT, AND I KNOW THAT'S PROBABLY NOT GERMANE, BUT I'LL BE QUIET NOW. 
          YEAH. 
          SO WE HAVE APPROVED ITEM NUMBER FIVE. 
          UH, I THINK WE CAN BRING UP AT THE, UH, BIG BOARD MEETING, UH, THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE. 
          AND THEN IT'S JUST, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'LL SEE IF THE, UH, OUR POLITICAL LEADERS THAT ARE ELECTED TO CITY COUNCIL, YOU KNOW, ARE GONNA WALK THE WALK OF WHAT THEY TALK AND, YOU KNOW, IF, IF IT'S OKAY FOR ALL THE POLITICAL SIGNS TO BE UP AND NOBODY'S GONNA ENFORCE THE RULES, THEN IT SHOULD BE OKAY. 
          GET RID OF THE STICKERS, PERMITS, EVERYTHING. 
          IT'S A FREE FOR ALL, BUT IT CAN'T BE BOTH WAYS. 
          SO IT HAS TO BE, I AM A BIG BELIEVER OF CALLING BALLS AND STRIKES THE SAME ALL THE TIME. 
          AND SO IF THEY WANNA ALLOW POLITICAL SIGNS UP IN THE CITY RIGHT AWAY, THEY SHOULD, YOU KNOW, WE CAN BE DIRECTED BY, UH, 
          [01:15:01]
THE CITY COUNCIL OR THE COMMITTEE THAT THIS IS GOING TO, THAT THERE'LL BE A, A SECTION FOR POLITICAL SIGNS WHEN THEY CAN BE UP WHERE THEY CAN BE UP. 
          BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THE, THE WAY IT IS NOW IS NON TENABLE. 
          LONG TERM ITEM NUMBER SIX. 
          YES. 
          FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. 
          UM, DO YOU THINK THERE'S A DANGER AFTER AN ELECTION HAS PASSED WITH, UH, THE CITY REMOVING POLITICAL SIGNS? UH, NO. 
          I MEAN, I, THE, THE WAY THE ORDINANCE IS, IS WRITTEN AT THE, YOU KNOW, ABANDONED SIGNS ARE ABANDONED SIGNS, SO IT SHOULD, YOU KNOW, APPLY EVENLY AT ANY TIME. 
          SO WHAT, WHAT THE LEGAL IS, IS THAT THEY'RE ALL THE SAME AND THEY SHOULD BE JUST TAKEN DOWN. 
          BUT I THINK THAT'S ABOVE MY PAY GRADE, MR. CHAIR. 
          UM, THIS IS MIKE SHANNON WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. 
          YOU MODIFY IF I OH, YES, CHIME IN. 
          LEMME IT WAS LIKE GOD SPEAKING CAME IN FROM, YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE, OH, , I WASN'T GONNA DO IT, BUT THREE MINUTES . 
          WOW. 
          WELL, GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. 
          I, UM, SORRY I DIDN'T, UH, START THE MEETING WITH YOU ALL, BUT I DID JUMP IN ON, OF COURSE, POLITICAL SCIENCE CONVERSATION, , UH, WHAT I'LL DO BASED ON THE CONVERSATION YOU GUYS JUST, UH, OFFERED IS, UH, WE'LL WORK WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO TRY TO GIVE SOME MORE INFORMATION ON THIS ISSUE. 
          BUT I, I DO WANNA REMIND EVERYBODY, THERE'S SOME OF YOU THAT WERE HERE BACK IN 2017, ACTUALLY, UH, 2015 TO 2017. 
          UH, WE HAD A, WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME TALKING ABOUT POLITICAL SIGNS AND THE US SUPREME COURT CASE THAT HAPPENED, THE REED CASE AND HOW THAT ALL AFFECTED IT. 
          THE SHORT ANSWER THAT WE STILL STRUGGLE WITH, UH, WITH THE CITY, AND I THINK OTHER CITIES DO, IS WE HAD THIS US SUPREME COURT CASE THAT SAID YOU CAN'T, YOU KNOW, CONTRACT NEUTRAL HAD TO BE, UM, THE RULE OF THE LAND WE STILL HAVE IN TEXAS ON THE BOOKS RULES FOR POLITICAL SCIENCE THAT SAY CITIES CAN'T TOUCH 'EM. 
          I'M, I'M, I'M, I'M, I'M KIND OF SUMMARIZING. 
          UM, SO THE LAST WE HAD TALKED ABOUT AS A CITY WAS OUR CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE SEEKING SOME GUIDANCE FROM THE TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL. 
          AND I DON'T THINK WE'VE RECEIVED ANY GUIDANCE ON THAT. 
          WHAT I'LL DO BASED ON THIS IS, UH, WE'LL WORK WITH OUR CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND THE CITY ATTORNEY HIMSELF TO TRY TO GET SOME MORE CLARIFICATION. 
          NOW REMEMBER, OUR BOOKS, OUR CITY CODE SAYS TEMPORARY SIGNS ARE ALLOWED OR NOT ALLOWED BASED ON PERMITS OR NOT REQUIRED PERMITS. 
          I WOULD RECOMMEND WE FOCUS ON THAT AND THEN WE LET THE, UH, CITY ATTORNEY AND THE STATE TRY TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO COMPLY WITH THE US SUPREME COURT. 
          BUT I'LL BRING BACK SOME MORE INFORMATION. 
          THIS WAS A TOUCHY SUBJECT FOUR OR FIVE YEARS AGO. 
          I'M SURE IT'S STILL A TOUCHY SUBJECT, BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY BRING BACK MORE INFORMATION, UH, TO THIS GROUP, WHETHER IT BE THE COMMITTEE OR THE BIG BOARD, WHENEVER YOU SO CHOOSE. 
          DOES THAT SOUND FAIR? THANK YOU, MIKE. 
          ALRIGHT, ITEM NUMBER SIX. 
          YES. 
          AND I WANNA, UH, OPINE ABOUT, UH, ITEM NUMBER FIVE, UH, BRIEFLY. 
          UM, WE'VE ALREADY APP YOU'VE GOTTEN YOUR IN WHAT YOU WANT. 
          RIGHT? OKAY. 
          BUT I WANTED TO JUST MAKE A LITTLE COMMENT FOR THE RECORD. 
          IT'S, IT'S THE REST, THE, IF, IF YOU WANNA RESERVE YOUR COMMENT FOR THE FINAL PUBLIC COMMENT AND WE'D LIKE TO MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM. 
          SURE, NO PROBLEM. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ITEM NUMBER SIX. 
          THANK YOU, CHAIR. 
          SO THIS IS AGENDA ITEM NUMBER NINE. 
          UM, THIS IS AN EXTERNAL REQUEST, UH, LOOKING AT THE FINES IN VIOLATIONS, WHICH I KNOW WE KIND OF BROUGHT UP A LITTLE BIT EARLIER IN THIS, UH, COMMITTEE MEETING. 
          SO IT'S, IT IS MAKING A BETTER CLARIFICATION AND INCREASING, UH, THE, WHAT THE CITY IS ALLOWED TO DO, UH, TO VIOLATORS. 
          SO THIS IS SECTION 28 DASH NINE VIOLATIONS, PENALTIES, CIVIL REMEDIES, ABANDONED AND NUISANCE SIGNS. 
          AND THIS IS SECTION B PENALTIES. 
          UH, SO CURRENTLY THE LANGUAGE READS, ANY PERSON VIOLATING ANY PROVISION OF THIS CHAPTER SHALL BE GUILTY OF A MISDEMEANOR AND SHALL UPON CONVICTION BE PUNISHED, PUNISHED BY A FINE NOT TO EXCEED $500. 
          UH, THE REQUEST IS TO AMEND THAT TO OF NOT LESS THAN $100 FOR UP TO FIVE VIOLATIONS WITHIN A CALENDAR YEAR AND NOT LESS THAN $500 FOR EACH SUBSEQUENT VIOLATION WITHIN A CALENDAR YEAR, NOT TO EXCEED CUMULATIVE MAXIMUM OF 10,000 PER CALENDAR YEAR. 
          NO REMEDY PERIOD IS PROVIDED FOR VIOLATIONS INVOLVING TEMPORARY SIGNS. 
          AND I WANNA, I MEAN, I, I KNOW THERE'S SOME RULES AND I IGNORANT TO THOSE AS FAR AS H O A AND MISDEMEANORS AND WHAT WE CAN AND CAN'T DO. 
          AND MAYBE JOSEPH, YOU CAN HELP WITH US ON WHETHER THIS LANGUAGE IS ALLOWED CURRENTLY OR, UH, LOOKING AT WHAT'S ALLOWED FOR MISDEMEANORS AND ALSO THE H O A, UH, CITATIONS 
          [01:20:13]
AND APOLOGIZE. 
          I THINK IT WAS A H O A, BUT I THINK IT'S A H O, CORRECT? YEAH. 
          WELL, YEAH, WE'D HAVE TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT AND SEE, UH, YOU KNOW, IF WE CAN EVEN IMPLEMENT THAT CHAIR QUESTION. 
          SO CERTAIN JURISDICTIONAL, WHEN YOU'RE TALKING FINES AND ALL THERE, THERE ARE CERTAIN JURISDICTIONAL RESTRICTIONS. 
          SO YEAH, I'D HAVE TO HAVE TO REVIEW THAT ONE. 
          OKAY. 
          SO WE'RE GONNA TABLE THAT. 
          BUT I, I WOULD JUST CAUTION, UH, EVERYBODY ON THIS INCREASING FINES AND STUFF, UH, APPLYING THE SAME RULES TO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, WHICH THIS CAME FROM, AND WHICH I AM A FORMER NEIGHBORHOOD PRESIDENT WHO PUTS THE TEMPORARY SIGNS IN THE MEDIAN AND ON PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY WITHOUT THE STICKERS AND ANNOUNCES DON'T CUT YOUR TREES BECAUSE OF OAK WILT, OR WE'RE HAVING A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING TOMORROW THAT, THAT ARE IN VIOLATION OF THE CODE SHOULD JUST BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR. 
          BECAUSE AS WE, UH, AS CAME OUT OF THE LAST DISCUSSION FOR, UH, POLITICAL SIGNS, YOU KNOW, THE RULES NEED TO APPLY FAIRLY TO EVERYBODY. 
          AND SO I JUST THINK WE NEED TO LOOK BEFORE WE START RAISING THE FINES UP TO $10,000 FOR PUTTING A, A SIGN AND A, IT WOULD BE A CLASS A MISDEMEANOR OR B OR C MISDEMEANOR. 
          MARK, I THINK THIS IS A GREAT TIME FOR ME TO POINT OUT THAT, UM, BY THE STRUCTURES OF THIS WAY, IT'S WRITTEN, IT'S A MISDEMEANOR TO PAINT A SIGN IF YOU'RE NOT LICENSED. 
          I JUST WANT TO YEAH. 
          POINT THAT OUT. 
          THANK YOU, . 
          MARK, I HAVE A SO YES POINT OF CLARIFICATION. 
          YOU KNOW, WHEN I SERVED ON PTAC AND WE HAD EXTERNAL AMENDMENTS, WE HAD THE APPLICANT PRESENT TO PRESENT ON THEIR AMENDMENT. 
          SO DO WE HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE FROM WHISPERING OAKS, H O A, FROM THE P L P L, I GUESS WHO SUBMITTED THIS AMENDMENT? AND IF NOT, CAN WE ENSURE THAT WHEN WE HAVE EXTERNAL AMENDMENTS BEING PRESENTED, THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE? 'CAUSE I WAS NOT UNDER THE, UNDER IMPRESSION THAT STAFF WOULD BE PRESENTING ON THIS, THAT IT WOULD BE THE APPLICANT AND WE'D GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHY. 
          YEAH. 
          THAT THAT IS NOT HOW WE'VE HANDLED ANY OF THE OTHER THINGS. 
          SO THIS IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN PTECH. 
          THEY'RE WELCOME TO COME IF THEY WANT. 
          IF NOT, THEY SUBMITTED IT, WE'RE GONNA GO OVER IT. 
          AND IF WE DON'T THINK IT'S WORTHY, WE'RE GOING TO VOTE IT DOWN. 
          AND IF IT'S WORTHY OF, YOU KNOW, BEING ADOPTED, THAT'S HOW IT'S BEEN THROUGH OUR WHOLE, AND THEY DIDN'T SUBMIT ANY COMMENTS AT ALL ABOUT THIS WHEN THEY SUBMITTED THIS RECOMMENDATION. 
          I CAN PULL UP THE RECOMMENDATION THAT THEY SUBMITTED. 
          AND WE ALSO DID NOTIFY EVERYBODY THAT'S ON, ON THE AGENDA THAT HAD AN EXTERNAL OKAY. 
          ABOUT THAT THEY'RE ON THE AGENDA AND TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE PRES UH, AWARE OF THE MEETING TIME AND DATE. 
          AND MR. LUN REACHED OUT TO ME BY EMAIL A COUPLE TIMES. 
          SO I'M, WE'RE WE'RE AWARE OF IT NOW. 
          SO, YEAH. 
          MR. CHAIR. 
          YES. 
          UH, A POINT OF CLARIFICATION, LIDDELL, YOU MAY BE ABLE TO ANSWER THIS OR STAFF, UH, IT'S ON BEHALF OF THE WHISPERING OAKS H O A, BUT ARE THEY BEING SPECIFIC TO SIGNS WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD, OR EXCESSIVE TEMPORARY NUISANCE SIGNS POSTED BY SPA? BUSINESS COULD MEAN ANYTHING ON THE STREET OUTSIDE THE GATES. 
          I MEAN, WHISPERING OAKS IS NOT NAKED. 
          THEY'RE TALKING NO, THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT ALL AROUND THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          AND, BUT, BUT YOU KNOW, AS A PERSON WHO LIVES AND DRIVES BY WHISPERING OAKS, PRETTY MUCH FIVE TIMES A DAY, AND I SEE THE NEIGHBORHOOD SIGNS, TEMPORARY SIGNS, YOU KNOW, NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING, WHAT DON'T CUT YOUR OAK TREES, DO THAT. 
          YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT TO THEM IS NOT A TEMPORARY NUISANCE SIGN. 
          IT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY NEED. 
          AND, AND IT'S NOT STICKERED AND IT, YOU KNOW, AND SO I'M JUST A BALLS AND STRIKES GUY AND IF IT'S ILLEGAL, IT SHOULD BE ILLEGAL. 
          AND IF IT'S LEGAL, IT'S LEGAL AND IT REALLY DOESN'T MATTER WHO PUT IT UP. 
          YES. 
          I'D ALSO LIKE TO SAY THAT IF YOU HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION THAT IS ENCLOSED, IF YOU'RE BEHIND THE FENCE AND THE ROADS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION ARE CITY RIGHT OF WAY, THEN YOU PUT A SIGN BEHIND YOUR FENCE. 
          SO SAY IT'S STILL IN VIOLATION OF CITY CODE. 
          NO, BECAUSE THEY, THE, 
          [01:25:01]
THE, IT'S NOT A CITY RIGHT AWAY. 
          IT'S A PRIVATE ROAD IF IT IS CITY RIGHT AWAY, AS I MENTIONED. 
          YEAH. 
          BUT IT CAN'T BE BEHIND A GATE IF IT'S A, A LOT OF HOAS HAVE A PRIVATE FENCE. 
          YEAH, BUT THEIR ROADS AREN'T PRIVATE. 
          YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          BUT IF THEY HAVE, IF THEY'RE, IF THEY'RE A P THEN THEY ARE PRIVATE ROADS. 
          AND SO INSIDE THAT IS CONTROLLED AND MAINTAINED BY THE HOAS. 
          BUT, BUT WHISPER, SPRING OAKS IS NOT A, YOU KNOW, MY NEIGHBORHOOD IS NOT. 
          AND SO, UH, THAT THIS IS WHAT GOT SUBMITTED. 
          WELL, AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT THEIR PRIVATE LAND ALSO IN THEIR REQUEST, UH, AS FAR AS HAVING A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF COST INCURRED BY THEM TO REMOVE SIGNS ON THEIR OWN PRIVATE PROPERTY AND THEN NEARBY PUBLIC PROPERTY. 
          AND, AND IF THIS IS OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING THAT IT'S, IT'S, IT'S NOT A REASONABLE SITUATION TO IMPLEMENT THAT, SOME OF THE SUGGESTIONS THAT THEY'RE RECOMMENDING, I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO PROVIDE THEM RESOURCES ON HOW TO CONTINUE TO REPORT THOSE BANDIT SIGNS TO THE CITY FOR AREAS OUTSIDE OF THEIR PRIVATE LAND. 
          AND IF IT'S ON THEIR PRIVATE PROPERTY, THEY CAN JUST TAKE THEM DOWN, THROW 'EM AWAY. 
          OKAY. 
          SO I, BEFORE, UH, WE GO REFER THIS BACK TO CITY STAFF FOR THESE MASSIVELY INCREASING PENALTIES, IS THERE ANY APPETITE TO INCREASE 'EM TO WHERE YOU CAN GET FINED 10 GRAND? ESPECIALLY FOR THE SIGNS TALKING ABOUT, I MEAN, LIKE, THERE SIGNS, I MEAN THEY'RE JUST, OH, SORRY. 
          THOSE PEOPLE, AND, AND PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF AGAIN. 
          SO EVERYBODY KNOWS IN THE VIEWING WORLD WHO YOU ARE, UH, CHRISTY BARRON, SEVEN 13 SIGNS. 
          I MEAN, IF THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT THE, THESE TEMPORARY BANDIT, LIKE CORRO SIGNS 18 INCHES BY 24 INCHES, THAT'S WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT, I'M ASSUMING. 
          AND I MEAN, $10,000, THAT'S INSANE. 
          I MEAN, WELL, AND IT, IT'S ALSO A CRIMINAL PENALTY, SO YOU'RE GONNA GET SOMETHING ON YOUR RECORD FOR LIFE THAT'S GONNA KEEP YOU FROM GETTING A JOB. 
          EXACTLY. 
          SO, I MEAN, THAT JUST SEEMS EXCESSIVE. 
          ESPECIALLY, I MEAN, THIS, THIS COULD ALSO AGAIN GO BACK TO POLITICAL SIGNS 'CAUSE THEY ARE ALL THE SAME KIND OF SITUATION. 
          SO, SO FROM THE, IF, IF I CAN, IF NOBODY ELSE HAS A COMMENT, WHAT I WOULD ASK THE COMMITTEE IS, DO YOU HAVE AN APPETITE TO MAKE THE CHANGE? I HAVE A COMMENT. 
          OKAY. 
          IF SOMEBODY GETS A VIOLATION, NORMALLY YOU'RE GONNA GET A CITATION TO GO TO MUNICIPAL COURTS. 
          IT'S NOT GONNA GIVE YOU A $10,000 FINE THE FIRST TIME. 
          MATTER OF FACT, I'VE BEEN IN MANY CASES WHERE THAT MINIMUM, WHERE IT SAYS HERE IS A HUNDRED, BUT IF THE PERSON HAS $57 IN THEIR POCKET THAT DAY, THEY'LL TAKE THE $57. 
          IF YOU GET TO THE 10,000 POINT, YOU PROBABLY DESERVE IT. 
          , MR. CHAIR, CAN WE GO, CAN WE GO BACK TO THE LANGUAGE? SO I, I GO BACK AND ASK, UH, THE COMMITTEE, IS THERE AN APPETITE TO ADOPT THIS LANGUAGE? BECAUSE I DON'T WANT THE, TO MAKE THE CITY ATTORNEY DO WORK AND HE BRINGS IT BACK, OR SHE BRINGS IT BACK. 
          AND, UH, THEY, YOU KNOW, WE'VE ALREADY KIND OF DECIDED THAT'S NOT WHERE WE'RE GOING. 
          SO BEFORE WE GET TO THERE IS FROM THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS, IF I CAN JUST, YEAH, I, I DON'T HAVE AN APPETITE FOR IT. 
          AND FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, UM, EACH DAY A VIOLATION EXISTS SHALL CONSTITUTE A SEPARATE VIOLATION AND CONSEQUENTLY A SEPARATE OFFENSE. 
          SO YOU COULD GET TO THAT 10,000 PRETTY, PRETTY QUICK. 
          SO IS THAT THE CONSENSUS OF THE GROUP? OKAY, I CONCUR. 
          MAY I? YES. 
          UM, I AM NOT SURE I AGREE WITH THE 10,000, HOWEVER, IF YOU WANT TO GET RID OF BANDIT SIGNS, YOU HAVE TO HAVE PROGRESSIVE PENALTIES AND WHAT THE BANDIT SIGNS IS COSTING THE CITY AND REMOVAL NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED AS WELL. 
          THE ONLY, THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE IS LIKE, I REMEMBER MIKE, IS IS HE STILL, I REMEMBER, UH, YEARS AGO YOU HAD ALL THOSE SIGNS IN YOUR OFFICE AND WE TRIED, THE CITY TRIED TO DO HIS THING WITH ONE OF THOSE, WE BUY UGLY HOMES AND THEY CAN NEVER GET A HOLD OF GUY. 
          YOU KNOW, THEY ALMOST HAD 'EM. 
          SO I GUESS AT THIS POINT, I DON'T EVEN YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S THE WHOLE THING. 
          SO IF YOU PUT A DOLLAR AMOUNT ON IT, HOW, WHO ARE YOU GONNA FIND THIN AIR? OKAY, SO IF I, IF I COULD GET A MOTION FROM SOMEONE ON THE 
          [01:30:01]
COMMITTEE TO, WELL, I GUESS WE COULD DO, IS THERE A CONSENSUS AMONG THE VOTING MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE TO REJECT THIS ONE? IF I CAN. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF I WANNA REJECT IT. 
          MAYBE JUST, WE DON'T NEED $10,000, SAY, SAY PICK A RIGHT AMOUNT. 
          500 BUCKS. 
          THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS TO BEGIN WITH. 
          OH, A THOUSAND. 
          YEAH, A THOUSAND DOLLARS. 
          MAKE IT REALISTIC. 
          SO CAN WE RAISE THE, THE MAXIMUM PENALTY TO A THOUSAND DOLLARS? THIS IS, THIS IS I EMIN THOMAS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN, IT SAYS BASICALLY TO NOT EXCEED $500, BUT THERE IS NO MAX. 
          SO TECHNICALLY, LIKE, UH, MIKE TALKED ABOUT MIKE CRUST, HE SAID EVERY DAY IT'S IN VIOLATION, WE CAN ISSUE ANOTHER UP TO $500. 
          SO THERE IS NO LIMIT OF 10,000 ON THE CURRENT CODE TODAY. 
          NOW AGAIN, THE KEY HERE IS CAN WE ENFORCE IT? IF WE CAN'T EVEN GET HOLD OF THE PERSON, THEN WE CANNOT ENFORCE THAT CODE. 
          SO REGARDLESS OF THE AMOUNT, BUT AGAIN, TODAY'S CODE, UH, EACH VIOLATION IS UP TO $500 AND THERE IS NO LIMIT ON THE NUMBER OF, UH, VIOLATIONS THAT WE CAN ISSUE. 
          THANK YOU AMIN. 
          AND, AND I CAN CLARIFY HOW THAT WORKS IN THE REAL WORLD FOR ANYBODY. 
          I MEAN, AS AN APARTMENT OPERATOR HAD A BANDIT SIGN THAT SOMEONE TOOK EXCEPTION TO ON OUR OWN PROPERTY, BUT THAT'S A DIFFERENT ISSUE. 
          UM, WENT TO MUNICIPAL COURT AND THAT $500 FINE IS BASICALLY THE STARTING POINT WHERE YOU DEAL WITH THE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, THEY SAY, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN JUST PAY THIS FINE OR WE'LL REDUCE IT DOWN AND, AND IT'LL GO AWAY. 
          AND, UM, OR YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO STAND BEFORE THE, THE JUDGE. 
          UM, AND MY CASE, I WAS ABLE TO GET IT COMPLETELY DISMISSED. 
          BUT, UM, THAT, THAT'S WHERE THAT $500 COMES, THAT MAXIMUM COMES IN. 
          SO YOU'RE GONNA BE, IF YOU CHANGE, MAKE THIS CHANGE, YOU'RE ASKING A JUDGE TO THEN TRY AND HAVE SOME HISTORY OF HOW MANY VIOLATIONS YOU'VE HAD. 
          UH, I MEAN, IT REALLY COMPLICATES THE ACTUAL CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS. 
          AND AMIN TO COM CORRECT ME IF I'M, IF I'M WRONG ON, ON WHAT I'M SAYING HERE, BUT THAT, THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING OF HOW THE PROCESS WORKS AS SOMEBODY THAT'S GONE THROUGH IT AS A, AS A BAD GUY. 
          THIS IS DARREN FROM, UH, BOMA SAN ANTONIO. 
          UM, I THINK YOU GOT A ENFORCEMENT ISSUE ALSO. 
          IF YOU MAKE THIS A CAP OF A THOUSAND BUCKS, WHY DON'T I JUST WRITE YOU A CHECK FOR A THOUSAND BUCKS AND DO AS I PLEASE. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          AGREED. 
          SO GOING BACK TO MY ORIGINAL COMMENT, CAN WE JUST LEAVE IT AT 500 CONSENSUS AMONG THE COMMITTEE? OKAY. 
          SO WE'RE GONNA, WHEN WE VOTE ON THIS, WE'RE GONNA REJECT THIS, UH, AMENDMENT. 
          I, ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, YES, YOU GO TO MUNICIPAL COURTS AFTER THE THIRD TIME, THEY CAN GO UP TO A THOUSAND DOLLARS AT MUNICIPAL COURT TO LEVEL. 
          UH, SO IF WE CAP IT AT FIVE, THAT'S JUST GOING TO CONFUSE THINGS. 
          SO WE SHOULD MAX IT AT WHAT THE REALITY IS WHEN YOU DO GO TO COURT. 
          AND THE REALITY IS REALLY, IF THEY, EVEN IF A THOUSAND DOLLARS MARK DOESN'T WORK, THAT GUY PAYS A THOUSAND DOLLARS AND HE'S STILL IN VIOLATION, WE CAN STILL TAKE HIM TO THE FURTHER COURT, OR THE CITY CAN STILL TAKE HIM TO THE FURTHER COURT AND, AND VI AND HE HAS TO GET A WARRANT. 
          WE CAN GIVE HIM A WARRANT IF HE DOESN'T SHOW UP TO COURT AND ALL THIS OTHER STUFF AND GET ATTORNEYS. 
          SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS TO AMEND THE LANGUAGE AND STRIKE EVERYTHING THAT WAS SUBMITTED AND THEN CHANGED THE LANGUAGE FROM 500 TO A THOUSAND. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? WITH MY EXPERIENCE NOT TO EXCEED A THOUSAND DOLLARS. 
          YEAH. 
          BUT IN REALITY, WHEN YOU GET IN FRONT OF, WHEN THAT SMALL BUSINESS OWNER GETS IN FRONT OF THE MUNICIPAL JUDGE AND THE PROSECUTOR'S THERE, AND THE PROSECUTOR DOESN'T NECESSARILY WANNA SPEND ALL DAY SITTING THERE WAITING FOR THE JUDGE, UH, THEY, THEY, THEY DO SOME NEGOTIATIONS. 
          AND MY GUESS IS, IS THERE'S VERY FEW FINES OF A $500. 
          RIGHT NOW. 
          IT'S, IT'S NOT A PROSECUTOR, IT'S, IT'S USUALLY THE CODE OFFICIAL. 
          YEAH, THAT'S A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE, THIS IS JOSEPH HARNEY. 
          JOSEPH HARNEY WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. 
          AGAIN. 
          UH, SO LIKE I'VE MENTIONED EARLIER, YOU KNOW, WHERE THE CITY MUNICIPAL COURT IS, DOES HAVE JURISDICTIONAL LIMITS FOR A LOT OF THINGS. 
          YOU CANNOT GO OVER $500 IF THE MUNICIPAL COURT DOESN'T HAVE THAT JURISDICTION. 
          THERE ARE CERTAIN EXCEPTIONS. 
          I DON'T KNOW THAT THIS FALLS UNDERNEATH THAT. 
          SO IF THERE IS A DESIRE TO MOVE, YOU KNOW, BEYOND $500, I'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT AND SEE IF IT'S EVEN ALLOWABLE. 
          UH, SO I GO BACK TO MY ORIGINAL QUESTION. 
          IS THERE ANY APPETITE? THANK YOU. 
          IT'S REJECTED. 
          UH, WHEN WE MOVE THAT ON, UH, BY MOTION NUMBER SEVEN, MARK, DO YOU ME TO GO AHEAD 
          [01:35:01]
AND GO? YEAH, PLEASE. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, CHRISTY BARRON WITH SEVEN 13 DINES THAT SUBMITTED THIS MOTION. 
          UM, I ACTUALLY HAVE FOUR MOTIONS SUBMITTED FOR, UM, THEY'RE ALL GONNA BE COMPLYING TO SECTION 28 7 4. 
          UM, AND THEN BACK LITTLE HISTORY ON THIS, THESE WERE ADDED BACK IN 2017 AFTER THE SUPREME COURT CASE, UM, TO HAVE CONTENT NEUTRAL SIGNAGE. 
          UM, PREVIOUS TO THAT, ANDREW, YOU PROBABLY CAN HELP ME OUT WITH THIS A LITTLE MORE. 
          UM, HOME BUILDERS, UM, HAD A SECTION IN THE CODE CORRECT. 
          TO BE ABLE TO ADVERTISE? YES. 
          OKAY. 
          SO WHAT TEXT SECTION 28 7 4 WAS ADDED FOR WAS FOR BASICALLY HOME BUILDERS TO HAVE, THEY WERE NAMED EVENT SIGNS TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THESE SIGNS STILL ALLOWED, BUT BE CONTENT NEUTRAL. 
          SO IF ANYBODY DOESN'T KNOW WHAT THESE SIGNS ARE, I DID RELEASE BRING PICTURES, SO I'M, YOU KNOW WHAT I'M REFERENCING. 
          SO IT WOULD HELP. 
          ERIC, CAN YOU, CAN YOU DO ME A FAVOR? CAN YOU HAND THAT TO JEREMY AND WE CAN SEE 'EM ON THE SCREEN? NO, I HAVE THOSE. 
          I'LL, I'LL PULL THEM UP. 
          THANKS. 
          OKAY. 
          OH, I DON'T THINK YOU HAVE THOSE, THOSE GUYS. 
          I SUBMITTED OTHER ONES FOR A DIFFERENT PART OF THIS, BUT I NOT THOSE, THESE ARE JUST FOR REFERENCE OF WHAT THIS SECTION, THE CODE, THESE TYPE OF SIGNS ARE. 
          SO BASICALLY WHAT THESE ARE, THEY'RE UM, EIGHT FOOT BY EIGHT FOOT MAX SIZE, UH, WOODEN STRUCTURES. 
          WAIT, WAIT, CAN YOU HOLD ON MM-HMM. 
           AND LET HIM GET THE PICTURE UP SO WE CAN, SO JUST TO MAKE SURE. 
          SO THEY'RE DIFFERENT THAN THESE ONES THAT YOU SUBMITTED BEFORE? YES. 
          THOSE ARE, THIS THE, JUST THESE ARE EXAMPLES OF PERMITTED SIGNS. 
          THEY DON'T NEED A STICK, THEY'RE EXEMPT. 
          IT ACTUALLY SAYS FROM THE, NOW IT DOES MAYBE THREE 50, YOU SHOULD PUT, YEAH. 
          YES. 
          SO THESE WOULD BE THE, THE ONES, UH, FOR ANYBODY. 
          THIS IS DIRECTIONAL SIGNS FOR, UH, NEW HOME SUBDIVISIONS AS WELL AS FOR RENT SUBDIVISIONS. 
          YEAH. 
          TYPICALLY THAT'S WHAT THESE SIGNS ARE FOR. 
          THEY'RE NOT LIMITED TO HOME BUILDERS, BUT THIS IS, THIS IS TYPICALLY WHO APPLIES FOR THESE TYPE OF PERMITS. 
          UM, SO I HAVE APPLIED FOR THE MAJORITY OF THESE PERMITS SINCE THIS, UM, NEW CODE WENT INTO PLACE. 
          AND SO WE HAVE COME UP AGAINST, UM, A COUPLE DIFFERENT THINGS AND HENCE THE REASON FOR THE SUGGESTIONS. 
          UM, THE FIRST ONE THAT WE'RE SUGGESTING RIGHT NOW, THE WAY THE CODE IS WRITTEN IS THAT THE, YOU CAN APPLY FOR A PERMIT. 
          YOU GO, DO YOU WANT ME TO SWITCH BACK TO THE CODE LANGUAGE NOW? IS EVERYBODY GOOD WITH WHAT THEY SEE HERE? YES. 
          OKAY. 
          SO REAL QUICK, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION. 
          SO WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, I THINK FOR MOST OF YOUR ITEMS IS UNDER 28 74 TEMPORARY SIGNS ON NON-RESIDENTIAL ZONE PROPERTIES AND NON-RESIDENTIAL USES. 
          YEAH, THAT'S CORRECT. 
          THAT'S START WITH THE, UM, THE PERMITTING ISSUE, THE TEMPORARY, THE, THE PERMIT VALIDITY, UH, PERIOD. 
          WHAT THE WAY THE CODE IS WRITTEN RIGHT NOW IS THAT WE CAN SUBMIT FOR A PERMIT FOR A YEAR, BUT NOT UP TO FIVE YEARS EACH YEAR YOU HAVE TO RENEW THE PERMIT, UM, EACH, YOU CAN RENEW IT FOUR TIMES FOR, SO THE SIGN CAN BASICALLY BE UP FOR FIVE TOTAL YEARS. 
          SO WHAT WE ARE NOW STARTING TO RENEW FOR THESE SIGNS AND, UM, THE REASON WE'RE SUGGESTING IF THE CHANGE IS NUMBER ONE, THE BUILDERS, I'M JUST GONNA REFERENCE BUILDERS. 
          'CAUSE BUILDERS TYPICALLY PUT THESE UP, BUILDERS DO NOT WANT THESE SIGNS UP FOR ANY LONGER THAN WHEN THE SUBDIVISION IS OPEN FOR SALE. 
          SO THEY WILL TAKE THEM DOWN. 
          IT DOES NOT BENEFIT THEM TO KEEP THEIR SIGNS UP PAST LIKE WHEN, WHEN, UNTIL ITS NEIGHBORHOOD'S BASICALLY CLOSED OUT. 
          SO THEY'RE GONNA NATURALLY COME DOWN. 
          TYPICALLY THAT IS NOWHERE NEAR FIVE, FIVE YEARS. 
          UM, SO MY PROPOSAL IS EITHER GOING TO BE TO STRIKE THE WHOLE ENTIRE VALIDITY, LIKE PERMIT PERIOD OR TO MODIFY IT TO BE JUST A ONE TIME AND CAN BE ONLY MET FOR FOUR YEARS, NOT RESUBMITTING FOR RENEWALS OR TO HAVE A ONE RENEWAL PERIOD. 
          THE FIRST PERMIT IS UP FOR TWO YEARS AND THEN IT CAN BE RENEWED ONE MORE TIME FOR TWO MORE YEARS. 
          BECAUSE THE REASON WHY IS BASICALLY BY THE TIME THIS PERMIT IS UP FOR A YEAR, IT, YOU'RE ALMOST ALWAYS GOING TO GO AHEAD AND RENEW THE PERMIT. 
          THE ADDITION IS WE'RE, WE'RE ALSO UP AGAINST IS THAT THERE'S ABOUT FOUR OR FIVE COMPANIES THAT DO WHAT I 
          [01:40:01]
DO WITHIN THE SAN ANTONIO. 
          THERE'S PROBABLY TWO, MAYBE THREE THAT ARE ACTUALLY LICENSED. 
          AND, UH, AND SO WHAT THE BUILDERS CHANGE HANDS, THEY DO, THEY USE DIFFERENT PEOPLE, DIFFERENT COMPANIES JUST BASED OFF OF A MYRIAD OF THINGS. 
          SO IF I SUBMIT FOR A PERMIT FOR A BUILDER, I HOLD THAT PERMIT, NOT THE BUILDER, AND THEN YET THEY DON'T WANNA WORK WITH ME ANYMORE A YEAR DOWN THE ROAD, THEY HAVE TO GO RESUBMIT FOR THE WHOLE ENTIRE PERMIT. 
          THEY CANNOT RENEW THAT PERMIT WITH ANOTHER LICENSE SIGNED CONTRACTOR. 
          THEY HAVE TO SUBMIT, PAY ALL THAT MONEY ALL OVER AGAIN INSTEAD OF, SO IT'S ABOUT $150 FOR A PERMIT FOR ONE, ONE YEAR AND THEN A $25 RENEWAL. 
          SO IF THEY WANT TO GO RENEW WITH SOMEONE ELSE, THEY HAVE TO PAY ANOTHER $150 INSTEAD OF THE 25. 
          SO THESE ARE KIND OF ISSUES WE'RE HAVING. 
          SO OBVIOUSLY I WOULD PREFER IF WE JUST GOT RID OF THE ENTIRE THING TOGETHER, I DON'T THINK THE COMMITTEE'S GONNA GO FOR THAT. 
          SO THAT'S WHY THERE'S OTHER OPTIONS. 
          SO WHAT HAPPENS IN THOSE CASES WHERE IT'S A MEGA SUBDIVISION, THAT BUILDING IS GOING TO BE GOING ON FOR MORE THAN A FOUR YEAR PERIOD? I, I MEAN, I HOPE  NO, BUT DO, DO YOU HAVE LIKE BIG, BIG, BIG, BIG SUBDIVISIONS THAT MAY BE FOUR OR 5,000 LOTS THAT, THAT YOU'RE GONNA BE IN THERE FOR MORE THAN THAT TIMEFRAME. 
          AND IN OTHER WORDS IS IN EVERY CASE, ARE YOU DONE IN FIVE YEARS? AND THAT IS, THAT IS JILL US THAT IS THE GOAL. 
          WE, YOU KNOW, WE TRY TO GET AS SOON AS POSSIBLE OF COURSE, BUT UM, BUT YEAH, IT'S ABOUT FOUR OR FIVE YEARS. 
          IT'S MORE THAN FIVE YEARS. 
          NO, NO, IT'S AROUND FOUR OR FIVE YEARS. 
          YEAH. 
          SO I, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. 
          IF, IF THE LANGUAGE WAS, IS THAT IT'S, THE PERMIT IS GOOD UNTIL SIX MONTHS AFTER THE SUBDIVISION OR THE IT'S CLOSED DOWN OR THEY'RE NO LONGER BUILDING IN THE AREA THAT THEY'RE, IT'S A REALLY A LOCATION SIGN OR DIRECTIONAL SIGN. 
          WOULD Y'ALL STAFF ANY COMMENT ON THAT VERSUS WHAT WE HAD PRIOR TO THE 2017 CHANGES IS THERE WAS SOME LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT TALKED ABOUT A SUBDIVISION ONCE THEY'VE GOTTEN UP TO 95% CELLS AND THEY DON'T HAVE A DROP TRAILER ON THE SITE ANYMORE, IS KIND OF WHAT WAS THE CATALYST FOR REMOVING THOSE SIGNS THAT WAS REMOVED FOR THIS LANGUAGE. 
          SO THERE, YOU KNOW, WE AND I CAN RESEARCH THAT AND TRY TO HAVE IT, IT WAS ACTUALLY SOMETHING WE USED WHEN WE WERE DOING THE CONSTRUCTION NOISE ORDINANCE OF WHEN A, A SUBDIVISION GOING UNDER CONSTRUCTION WOULD NOT HAVE TO MAKE NOTIFICATIONS BECAUSE YOU'RE LIVING IN A SUBDIVISION. 
          AND WE USED THAT LANGUAGE TO SAY, LOOK, IF YOU'RE AT 95 PER 5% BUILD OUT AND YOU STILL HAVE A JOB OR LESS THAN 95% BUILD OUT AND YOU STILL HAVE A JOB TRAILER AT THAT SUBDIVISION, THEN YOU CAN CONTINUE TO HAVE THAT SIGNS UP ONCE YOU GET PAST THAT IS WHEN THE SIGNS WOULD'VE TO COME DOWN. 
          SO THAT WAS THE PRIOR LANGUISH TO THE 2017 CHANGES? MY, YEAH, I MEAN I I MEAN I, FIRST OF ALL, I WANNA, UH, COMMEND YOU VERY, VERY RARELY DO PEOPLE, UH, COME TO A COMMITTEE LIKE THIS AND ACTUALLY, UM, IT'S THE OPPOSITE OF RENT SEEKING I SUPPOSE. 
          YOU KNOW, YOU'RE MAKING IT, YOU'RE LOWERING SWITCHING COSTS FROM YOU TO ANOTHER VENDOR. 
          AND I THINK THAT'S TO BE COMMENDED AND IT MAKES ME, UM, BE COMPELLED BY THE POLICY SUGGESTION EVEN MORE BECAUSE IT'S CLEARLY NOT, YOU KNOW, SELF-INTEREST AT WORK. 
          UM, I DO THINK THAT THIS IS ANOTHER INSTANCE WHERE THE LICENSURE REQUIREMENTS WHERE THE LICENSE IS NOT, THE PERMIT IS NOT HELD BY THE PERSON COMMISSIONING THE WORK BY THE PERSON DOING THE WORK. 
          IT'S WORTH, WORTH CONSIDERING. 
          AND I'LL CONTINUE TO BEAT THIS DEAD HORSE UNTIL HE DRAG ME OUTTA HERE. 
          UM, BUT I I, I MEAN I, I FIND IT COMPELLING TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, JUST EXTEND THE PERIOD SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PAPERWORK AGAINST OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND MAYBE MAKE THE PERMIT MORE EXPENSIVE AND, AND DO IT ONCE, UM, AND THAT, YOU KNOW, MATCHES EVERYBODY'S INTERESTS. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, RATHER THAN EVEN HAVE THE, THE TIME LIMITS. 
          'CAUSE AGAIN, THE MARKET'S GONNA DICTATE YOU'RE NOT GONNA KEEP PAYING FOR A PERMIT FOR A SIGN YOU DON'T WANT ANYMORE. 
          UM, AND, AND SO MY QUESTION IS, IS IF THEY ALLOWED YOU TO DESIGNATE THE PERIOD THAT THE SIGN IS UP, SO IN OTHER WORDS, YOU COULD GET A ONE YEAR, TWO YEAR, THREE YEAR, FOUR YEAR, FIVE UP TO FIVE YEAR PERMIT BY JUST PAYING UP FRONT THE WHOLE THING AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO REDO IT EVERY YEAR. 
          WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD JOE ON THIS TOO? UM, I MEAN, I THINK, SO BASICALLY HAVE AN OPTION OF 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, LIKE, AND PAY A DIFFERENT COST PER, PER WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR. 
          THE MONEY WOULD BE THE SAME. 
          MM-HMM. 
           YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO DO 
          [01:45:01]
IT, YOU KNOW, FOR UP TO THE FIVE YEAR PERIOD, BUT ALL UPFRONT. 
          AND IF YOU CHOOSE A ONE YEAR PERMIT, YOU WOULD DO IT EVERY YEAR. 
          IF YOU CHOSE A TWO YEAR PERMIT, YOU COULD DO A TWO TWO AND A ONE, YOU KNOW, THE PERIOD STAYS FIVE YEARS. 
          BUT YOU CAN CHOOSE TO PAY IT ALL UPFRONT, BUT YOU CAN CHOOSE TO DO IT ONCE BECAUSE I WILL TELL YOU THE COST OF HAVING GONE THROUGH HAVING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO USE THE THE WEBSITE, IF YOU'RE NOT, WELL NO, BUT IF IT, IF YOU'RE NOT EXPERIENCED AT IT AND YOU DON'T DO IT OFTEN AND, AND YOU KNOW IT, IT, OR, OR YOU CHOOSE TO DO IT BY PAPER IF THEY WILL LET YOU DO THAT ANYMORE, YOU KNOW, TABOO. 
          BUT UH, YOU KNOW, THE ADMINISTRATIVE COST OF HAVING TO REDO IT EVERY YEAR COSTS MORE THAN THE FEE THAT, AND IT SAVES EVERYBODY MONEY AT THE END. 
          I PERSONALLY, JOE, YOU, YOU LEMME KNOW ON THIS ONE OF, I'M SPEAKING FOR THE BUILDERS HERE IN CASABA, BUT OKAY, I THINK THE BUILDERS WOULD BE OKAY WITH UPPING THE INITIAL FEES BECAUSE THEIR SIGNS ARE GONNA STAY UP. 
          I THINK MAYBE FROM A CITY ENFORCEMENT STANDPOINT, THE WAY THAT IF, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN GO BACK TO THOSE PICTURES OR NOT THAT I SUBMITTED. 
          THEY HAVE UM, ARTURO, THEY HAVE A PERMIT NUMBER AND THE BEGINNING OF THE NUMBER REPRESENTS THE YEAR THAT WE SUBMITTED FOR THE PERMIT. 
          SO IF ARTURO'S OUT THERE AND THE GUYS ARE OUT THERE, INSPECTORS ARE OUT THERE LOOKING TO SEE IF IT'S A SIGN IS STILL VALID, THE PERMIT IS STILL VALID THAT YEAR WILL HELP THEM BE ABLE TO DISTINGUISH, HEY, LIKE IT'S IT THIS WAS A, THIS WAS ISSUED IN 2021, THEN THEREFORE IN 2022 DID THEY RE-UP IT? IF NOT, SO YOU ADD, IF YOU GIVE US THE OPTION OF ONE THROUGH FOUR FIVE, IT'S NOT GONNA BE AN EASY WAY TO CHECK THE PERMIT. 
          UM, FEEL MAYBE, YEAH, THEY GO ON THEIR LITTLE LAPTOP LIKE THEY DO WHEN THEY RIDE AROUND IN THEIR CAR OR THEY LOOK IT UP, IT SAYS FIVE YEARS. 
          THEY'RE, I I AGREE WITH THAT BUT  IT SHOULD BE EASY ON EVERYBODY. 
          SO WHAT JOE? YEAH, AS FAR AS ENFORCEMENT, I DON'T THINK THERE'S REALLY ANY ISSUE WITH THAT. 
          WE WOULD, YOU KNOW, AS LONG AS WE HAVE THAT PERMIT NUMBER AND IT'S DESIGNATED AT THE BEGINNING OF WHAT IT IS, THEN YES STAFF WOULD UH, LOOK AT THAT AND UH, YOU KNOW, WHEN LOOKING AT IT AND SAY, OH NO, THIS IS STILL VALID. 
          AND IT WOULD BE A SIMPLE, YOU KNOW, NOT EVEN REALLY HAVE TO SEARCH. 
          IT SHOULD BE AN EXPIRED OR NON, YOU KNOW, ACTIVE PERMIT AT THAT POINT. 
          JOE, MY CONCERN IS, UH, THE LAND TIME, YOU KNOW, DO WE HAVE A CHOICE, YOU KNOW, 1, 2, 3 YEARS? YOU KNOW, LET'S SAY, YOU KNOW, WE WANNA GET TWO YEAR AND THEN THE NEXT YEAR WE WANNA GET A ONE. 
          I DON'T WANNA COMMITTED TO, YOU KNOW, WELL I GOTTA PAY ALL FIVE RIGHT NOW. 
          NO, NO NO'S IT'S A CHOICE. 
          WHAT I'M, IT WOULD BE YOUR CHOICE. 
          CHOICE WHAT YOU WANNA DO IF YOU, ALRIGHT, THE OTHER THING IS IF WE HAVE ANOTHER CONTRACTOR, WHICH WE'VE, THAT'S HAPPENED, THERE'S NOT GONNA BE AN ADDITIONAL $50. 
          YEAH, IT'S AS FAR YOU WOULD HAVE THE, UNDER WHAT I AM PITCHING AS THE COMPROMISE. 
          YOU WOULD HAVE THE CHOICE FOR WHATEVER PERMIT PERIOD UP TO FIVE YEARS. 
          SO THAT SIGN CANNOT STAY UP FOR MORE THAN FIVE YEARS. 
          YOU COULD PICK WHAT, WHAT'S THE INITIAL FEE IS HOW MUCH? HUNDRED 50. 
          SO A TOTAL WOULD BE TWO 50 LIKE FOR ALL FIVE YEARS. 
          YEAH, $25 A TIME. 
          SO MOST EVERYBODY WOULD TAKE A FIVE YEAR PERMIT 'CAUSE YOU JUST DON'T WANT TO DO IT. 
          BUT I THINK WE POSSIBLY COULD ADD LANGUAGE IN IT THAT WOULD ALSO SHORTEN THAT PERIOD BY THE CLOSURE OF A SUBDIVISION. 
          AND SO WE CAN BRING THE LANGUAGE BACK, BUT JUST IN CONCEPT, WOULD Y'ALL, DOES ANYBODY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH MAKING IT ONE PERMIT? YOU PICK THE THING THE MAXIMUM LENGTH IT CAN BE RENEWED, UH, ONCE THE SIGN IS UP, YOU KNOW, AND, AND MAYBE WE, IS THERE A WAY TO DO IT LIKE YOU DO A BUILDING PERMIT WHERE THE PERMIT CAN BE ISSUED IN THE NAME OF THE COMPANY THAT IS LIKE WHATEVER, X, Y, Z HOME BUILDER AND, AND IT'S BY SUBMITTED BY A LICENSED SIGNED CONTRACTOR. 
          SO THE PERMIT STAYS IN THE OWNER OF THE SIGN'S NAME VERSUS THE CONTRACTOR. 
          SO IF THEY WANT TO GO RENEW IT ONCE IT'S UP, IT REALLY, YOU'RE JUST PAYING A FEE AT THAT POINT. 
          THAT'S WHERE WE'RE, WE'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH STAFF ABOUT, ABOUT THAT ISSUE THERE. 
          CAN THERE BE AN, AN ADDENDUM TO BE ABLE TO BE SUBMITTED WHEN THEY WANNA RENEW? UM, IN A SENSE, COULD THAT BE AN OPTION FROM ANOTHER LICENSED SIGNED CONTRACTOR AND SUCH? YEAH, MY GUESS IS 
          [01:50:01]
THEY CAN DO IT BECAUSE I KNOW WE PULL BUILDING PERMITS IN OUR NAME, YOU KNOW, AND, AND YOU JUST HAVE TO HAVE A LICENSED CONTRACTOR ATTACHED WITH THE THING. 
          SO CAN WE'RE, WE WILL TABLE THIS ONE, BUT I THINK IS THERE CONSENSUS THAT THAT'S AN OKAY THING, PATTY? UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, SO THE ISSUE IS WHEN, WHEN ANOTHER CONTRACTOR COMES ALONG AND TRIES TO PUT A SIGN UP THAT YOU CHANGE THE, THE DEVELOPER CHANGES HANDS AND THEN THEY WANT SOMEONE ELSE. 
          AND BY THE WAY, IS THAT A PAINTED SIGN? ? UM, IT'S PROBABLY VINYL LETTERS ON. 
          SO PROFESSIONALLY MAINTAINED. 
          SO WOULD THAT THE CONTRACTOR HAVE TO TAKE YOUR SIGN DOWN AND THEN START ALL OVER AGAIN AND PAY THE 150 AND NO, NO, THEY WOULD JUST PAY THE, THE PERMIT AND ALL THE, ALL THE PAPERWORK AGAIN FOR IT. 
          OKAY. 
          SO BECAUSE HERE'S THE THING, IF I, IF I WAS WORKING, SAY WITH JOE WITH DEAR HORTON AND I SUBMITTED LAST YEAR FOR A PERMIT FOR THEM AND THEN THIS YEAR THEY'RE USING ANOTHER SIGNED CONTRACTOR. 
          SO THEY BASICALLY HAVE TO RE THAT TIMING CONTRACTOR HAS TO RESUBMIT ALL THE PAPERWORK ALL OVER AGAIN, GO PUT A NEW PERMIT NUMBER ON THEM AND THEY ARE, THEY'RE HELD ACCOUNTABLE. 
          I'M PERSONALLY NOT GOING TO GO AND RENEW THAT PERMIT AND BE ON THE HOOK FOR THAT MONEY BECAUSE I'M, I MEAN I'M, I'M OUT THAT MONEY, I'M OUT THAT TIME. 
          I'M OUT THE ADMIN ASPECT OF IT. 
          SO I I DON'T WANNA BE, YOU KNOW, HOOK ON THE HOOK FOR THAT. 
          I MEAN THE MONEY MAKE BUSINESS MAKE MONEY NOT LOSE IT. 
          YEAH, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S BASICALLY THE SAME SIGN. 
          YES. 
          YOU KNOW, THE SIGN'S NOT CHANGING. 
          MY GUESS IS THE CITY DOES NOT, WHEN THE PERMIT IS RENEWED, DOESN'T GO OUT AND INSPECT THE SIGN. 
          IT, IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S UP, IT'S TEMPORARY IN NATURE. 
          IT'S DUG INTO A, IT'S FOUR BY FOUR POSTS PUT INTO THE GROUND MOST OF THE TIME. 
          YOU KNOW, I THINK WE JUST SHOULD FIGURE OUT A WAY TO MAKE IT EASY WITH AND BE REVENUE NEUTRAL FOR THE INSPECTION PROCESS THAT HAS TO GOES ON AND FIGURE OUT HOW TO SWITCH THE PERMIT HOLDER TO BE THE OWNER OF THE SIGN BY THIS CONTRACTOR. 
          YOU DO THIS LIKE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, THEN THAT OTHER PART OF KIND OF GOES AWAY ARE Y'ALL TO BE HONEST. 
          COMMENTS FROM, SO THIS IS I EMIN, TOMAS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. 
          UM, I KNOW YOU MENTIONED YOU WANT TO TABLE IT. 
          UH, I LIKE THAT IDEA. 
          SO YOU CAN GIVE US SOME TIME TO STUDY THIS, BUT IN GENERAL I WANNA JUST TALK ABOUT FEW THINGS. 
          SO ANY LICENSED CONTRACTOR WHO HAS A LICENSE FROM THE STATE, LIKE LET'S SAY A PLUMBER, RIGHT? THEY PULL A PERMIT, THE PERMIT NEEDS TO BE UNDER THEIR NAME, SO I CANNOT GIVE THE PERMIT TO THE BUILDER. 
          UH, IT HAS TO BE UNDER THE LICENSED CONTRACTOR BECAUSE IF THEY'RE NOT LICENSED, THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED TO PULL A PERMIT. 
          SAME THING HERE. 
          YOU NEED TO BE LICENSED, UH, SIGNED CONTRACTOR TO BE ABLE TO PULL PERMITS. 
          SO I DON'T THINK WE CAN ISSUE THE PERMIT UNDER THE OWNER'S NAME. 
          NOW WITH THAT SAID, ON OTHER CONTRACTORS LIKE TRADE CONTRACTORS, WE HAVE SOMETHING CALLED COMPLETION PERMIT. 
          SO YOU ARE AN OWNER, UH, OF A BUILDING AND YOU HIRE EX CONTRACTOR AND FOR WHATEVER REASON YOU DON'T WANNA WORK WITH THAT PERSON ANYMORE. 
          OR SOMETHING HAPPENS, YOU CAN HIRE ANOTHER CONTRACTOR WHO IS LICENSED AND THEY PULL SOMETHING CALLED COMPLETION PERMIT. 
          SO AS YOU SAID, LIKE THE WORK IS DONE IS THERE ALL WHAT YOU NEED TO DO IS MOVE IT FROM A TO B COMPANY. 
          UH, THEY DON'T HAVE TO SUBMIT EVERYTHING FROM SCRATCH, THEY DON'T HAVE TO SUBMIT FOR THE PERMIT FEE FROM THE BEGINNING. 
          UH, SO WE CAN LOOK AT THOSE OPTIONS. 
          UM, MY LAST COMMENT ABOUT THIS IS THIS SECTION TALKS ABOUT TEMPORARY SIGNS, NOT JUST THE BUILDER SIGNS THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. 
          SO IF WE GONNA CHANGE IT TO 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 YEARS, ARE WE SAYING ANYBODY WHO WANTS TO PUT TEMPORARY SIGN, THEY'RE GONNA PAY THE TWO 50, ALTHOUGH THEY MIGHT WANT THAT SIGN FOR ONLY SIX MONTHS AND YOU'RE MAKING THEM PAY TWO 50 INSTEAD OF ONE 50? NO, NO, NO. 
          SEE I'M NOT, I'M IT'S UP TO THE PERSON APPLYING FOR THE PERMIT TO PICK THE TERM. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN THERE WOULD BE A FEE FOR EVERY MONTH OR EVERY YEAR OR SO THAT YOU ONLY HAVE TO PROCESS THE PAPERWORK ONCE. 
          MY GUESS IS EVERY BUILDER OUT THERE IS GOING TO PICK THE FIVE YEAR DURATION BECAUSE THE, THE COST DIFFERENTIAL FOR EACH RENEWAL IS MINIMAL. 
          BUT I TH ALSO THINK IN DOING THAT, IF THEY PICK A FIVE 
          [01:55:01]
YEAR TERM, WE SHOULD PROBABLY GIVE THE OPTION TO THE CITY TO TERMINATE EARLY IF THE SUBDIVISION, YOU KNOW, IS BUILT OUT. 
          SO WE'RE GONNA TABLE THAT ITEM. 
          I JUST WANNA SAY THIS, WE CAN'T, WE WON'T BE ABLE TO PUT LANGUAGE SUCH AS THAT IN THERE BECAUSE THEY'RE, IT HAS TO BE CONTENT NEUTRAL AND THAT'S WHY IT WAS, AM I CORRECT ON THAT? THAT, AND THAT'S 'CAUSE THEY DON'T JUST APPLY WHILE THEY'RE MOSTLY USED FOR BUILDER SIGNAGE, UM, THEY'RE NOT, YOU CAN'T SAY THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          SO THEY'LL, THE, THE CITY STAFF AND CITY ATTORNEY WILL, YOU KNOW, LOOK AT ALL THAT AND, AND WE'LL TABLE IT. 
          I DON'T WANT TO GET OUT AHEAD BECAUSE THEY NEED TO. 
          I KIND OF SPRUNG THAT ON THEM. 
          UH, AND SO WE NEED TO JUST SEE IF WE CAN DO IT AND IF WE CAN DO IT. 
          BUT IT SEEMS, YOU KNOW, THE CONSENSUS AMONG THE THE COMMITTEE IS TO MAKE IT EASIER. 
          IF THE CITY IS GONNA GO OUT AND HAVE TO INSPECT EVERY YEAR, THEN YOU KNOW, THAT MAY CHANGE IT. 
          BUT LET'S GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THAT ONE AND CHAIR, THIS IS STAFF. 
          SO WHEN WE LOOK AT THIS, BECAUSE OF THE AMENDMENTS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT MAKING AND FEES ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. 
          SO THIS POTENTIALLY ALSO MIGHT ADJUST ARTICLE FIVE FEE SCHEDULE, UH, TO ACCOMMODATE. 
          SO WE CAN WORD IT IN JUST THE WAY THAT, YOU KNOW, IF WE KINDA HAVE A PROGRESSIVE FEE FOR THAT FROM ONE 50 UP TO TWO 50 OR WHATEVER IT WOULD BE, UH, WE'LL SEE IF WE CAN USE IT WITH THE EXISTING FEE SCHEDULE WE CURRENTLY HAVE. 
          BUT UNDER THIS AGENDA ITEM, WE MIGHT ALSO HAVE THAT SECTION BE AMENDED AS WELL. 
          AND, AND I WANNA MAKE IT CLEAR, I'M NOT, I I KNOW YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO CHANGE THE FEE SCHEDULE IF WE DID THIS, BUT I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE REVENUE NEUTRAL SO THAT IT DOESN'T RUN AFOUL. 
          SO BASICALLY ALL YOU'RE LETTING THE PEOPLE DO IS PREPAY THE FUTURE FEES, YOU KNOW, UPFRONT FOR A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME. 
          THAT'S CORRECT. 
          YEAH, IT WOULD BE MORE OF A CLERICAL ITEM. 
          JUST MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE THAT DESIGNATED FEE TYPE IF NEEDED ON THERE, BUT THE OVERALL FEE SHOULD STAY ABOUT THE SAME. 
          YEAH. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ITEM NUMBER EIGHT. 
          UM, THESE ARE ALL ME. 
          UM, CAN I, CAN I JUST GO TO 19 AND THEN 20 AND THEN COME BACK TO EIGHT? 'CAUSE EIGHT CAN BE A MUCH LONGER DISCUSSION. 
          YEAH. 
          UM, IF YOU GO TO 19, THE ONLY, I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL CAN PULL UP THE PERMIT APPLICATION, BUT WHEN WE SUBMIT THESE, WE HAVE TO SUBMIT FOR A PROPOSED DATE THAT WE'RE GONNA REMOVE THE SIGN. 
          I MEAN, IT'S JUST KIND OF SERVES NO PURPOSE AND WE JUST, WE REALLY DON'T, WE JUST, WE GUESS , I MEAN THERE'S NO REAL REASON TO HAVE IT. 
          AND, UH, AND I, AND JUST POINT OF CLARIFICATION ON THIS ONE. 
          SO THIS IS A, IN AN APPLICATION, NOT REALLY SOMETHING THAT'S CODIFIED. 
          UH, SO DEFINITELY WE WANT TO DISCUSS THAT AND GET SOME AS PART OF THIS. 
          THIS IS AN ADVISORY BOARD. 
          UM, SO THIS ALSO IS AN ADVISORY TO THE, TO THE, UH, D S D AND THE VOTING OFFICIAL. 
          SO ANY CHANGES WE WANT TO DO HERE, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED TO GO THROUGH THE FORMAL PROCESS OF VOTING AND APPROVING. 
          IT IS SOMETHING THAT IF THE COMMITTEE LIKES IT, IT'S MORE OF AN INTERNAL PROCESS, UH, THAT WE CAN LOOK AT AND, AND AMEND. 
          UH, BUT WE DO WANNA GET SOME FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMITTEE ON THAT. 
          THANK YOU JEREMY. 
          SO IF YOU GET A PERMIT FOR ONE YEAR, WHY DO YOU HAVE TO PUT A, AND, AND THIS IS JUST A RHETORICAL QUESTION, WHY DO YOU HAVE TO PUT A DATE THAT YOU'RE GONNA REMOVE THE SIGN? IT SHOULD BE REMOVED ON THE DAY AFTER THE PERMIT EXPIRES. 
          YEAH. 
          ARE THERE OTHER SIGNS THAT THIS WOULD APPLY TO, LIKE FOR AN EVENT SIGN OR THAT'S A TEMPORARY EVENT SIGN WHERE THE EVENT HAPPENS. 
          CAN YOU TAKE A PERMIT OUT FOR ONE MONTH OR TWO MONTHS OR THREE MONTHS? NO, ONLY UP THE FIRST OPTION IS A YEAR. 
          I MEAN, AND YOU CAN RENEW IT FROM THERE. 
          ARE THERE ANY OF THESE SIGNS USED FOR ANY OTHER THINGS OTHER THAN BASICALLY REAL ESTATE SIGNS? UH, YEAH, MOST OF THE WOULD BE EVENTS. 
          SO ANY TYPE OF EVENT IN THE CITY THAT IS TEMPORARY IN NATURE, UH, WOULD FALL UNDER THIS. 
          I I KNOW, I, I KNOW WHAT IT FALLS UNDER MY, MY QUESTION IS, IS THERE, ARE THERE THESE KIND OF SIGNS GOING UP THAT THEY'RE TAKING A PERMIT FOR EVENTS? OR IS IT ALL BASICALLY REAL ESTATE SIGNS? PRETTY MUCH. 
          IT'S BASICALLY A BUILDER'S REAL ESTATE. 
          OKAY. 
          I MEAN, I COULD SEE LIKE FOR AN EVENT SIGN, YOU'D WANT A DATE OF REMOVAL BECAUSE IT'S NOT GONNA STAY UP TILL THE EXPIRATION OF THE PERMIT, CORRECT. 
          OR IS THE PERMIT ONLY GOOD FOR, YOU KNOW, TWO WEEKS OR SAY IF IT'S AN EVENT SIGN, IS THAT, IS THAT IT'S STILL GOOD FOR A YEAR? I THINK THAT'S REALLY REMOVAL. 
          SO WHAT I WOULD, COULD, JEREMY, AND, AND I THINK MAYBE 
          [02:00:01]
A WAY TO HANDLE THIS IS THAT WHEN YOU'RE DOING THE PERMIT, WE CHANGE THE, IF, IF WE MAKE IT MORE GENERIC AS TO IT CAN BE A MAXIMUM OF FIVE YEARS AND THERE'S A DIFFERENT FEE SCHEDULE THAT YOU DO MAYBE START A MONTH OR TWO MONTHS OR THREE MONTHS AND THEN MOVE UP FROM THERE, KEEPING IT SO THAT YOU KNOW WHEN THE PERMIT ENDS. 
          SO A, A A, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY THERE'S A BASE FEE AND THEN SO MUCH FOR EVERY MONTH YOU WANT TO KEEP IT UP AND, AND SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 
          SO WHEN Y'ALL COME BACK, SO WE'RE GONNA TABLE, UH, NOT, WE'RE NOT GONNA TABLE IT, BUT WE'RE, I MEAN IT'S UP TO THE COMMITTEE IF Y'ALL WANT TO, UH, PROVIDE RECOMMENDATION ON HOW TO HANDLE IT. 
          BUT I DO WANT TO, UH, CLARIFY AS WELL. 
          SO THIS IS A PAPER FORM. 
          YOU KNOW, WE'VE NOW MOVED INTO A BUILD ESSAY AND THIS IS KIND OF HARD CODED INTO THE BILL US A APPLICATION FOR THIS TYPE, BUT IT'S NOT A REQUIRED FIELD, SO NOBODY HAS TO FILL IT OUT IN ORDER TO PROGRESS THAT, THAT PERMIT. 
          SO IF IT'S LEFT BLANK, THE PERMIT WOULD MOVE FORWARD AS IS AND NOTHING WOULD CATCH IT. 
          SO CHANGING A, THE PAPER COPY, VERY EASY CHANGING THE BILL, US A WOULD TAKE SOME TIME WORKING WITH I T S D AND OUR, AND OUR PROVIDERS. 
          UH, BUT YOU KNOW, ONCE AGAIN, IF, IF STAFF OR IF THE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE REMOVE IT COMPLETELY, THEN YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO TAKE, JUST WANNA KNOW WHAT THE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION IS, THEN WE'LL GO FROM THERE. 
          SO I, IS THERE CONSENSUS THAT WE JUST TAKE IT OFF COMPLETELY? 'CAUSE IT SHOULD BE FOR THE PERMIT PERIOD. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          20. 
          UM, SO NEXT, SAME STAYING ON THIS APPLICATION AS WELL AS IN THIS, IN WE, WE SUBMIT THESE, A LOT OF THESE SIGNS, THEY'RE ALL GONNA BE OFF-PREMISE SIGNS. 
          SO I HAVE TO GO GET LANDOWNER APPROVAL FROM THESE PRIVATE LANDOWNERS TO BE ABLE TO ALLOW THESE, INSTALL THESE SIGNS ON THEIR, THEIR PROPERTY. 
          MOST OF THE TIME I PAY THEM A FEE, LIKE A MONTHLY RENT FOR, YOU KNOW, TO ALLOW THESE BUILDERS TO, UM, ADVERTISE ON THEIR PROPERTY. 
          THEY LIKE THE MONEY, IT'S GREAT AND EVERYTHING. 
          AND MOST OF THE TIME I HAVE A LEE, A CONTRACT SIGNED WITH THEM. 
          SOME OF THEM JUST SAY, THEY JUST SEND AN EMAIL OVER SAYING, HEY, PUT IT UP. 
          I DON'T CARE. 
          I DON'T WANT ANY MONEY FOR IT. 
          I JUST, IT'S FINE. 
          UH, FOR WHATEVER REASON IT COULD BE A DEVELOPER, IT COULD BE A MYRIAD OF REASONS, BUT RIGHT NOW THE WAY IT SITS IS WE HAVE TO SUBMIT, IF YOU WANNA SCROLL DOWN ON THE APPLICATION, WE HAVE TO SUBMIT EITHER A NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT, A LEASE OR A DEEDED. 
          AND, AND WHEN THERE, IF I HAVE AN EMAIL FROM THE LANDOWNER AND IT MATCHES ALL THE, EVERYTHING ON THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT SHOULD, LIKE, WE'RE ASKING TO BASICALLY ALLOW OTHER OPTIONS THAN THESE. 
          AND I AGREE WITH CHRISTIE ON THIS BECAUSE WE HAVE TO DO THIS WITH ON-PREMISE SIGNING SINCE IT'S PAIN IN THE BUTT AND IT, LIKE THIS WAS IMPLEMENTED, I DON'T KNOW, A COUPLE YEARS AGO WITH MIKE CONSTANTINO AND AS FAR AS GETTING OWNER, OWNER, OWNER SIGNATURE ON, ON PERMITS, LIKE, I'M NOT GONNA PUT A SIGN UP IN SOMEBODY'S BUILDING THAT I DON'T, YOU KNOW, IT'S KIND OF, YEAH. 
          YOU KNOW, SO I AGREE WITH CHRISTIE ON THIS. 
          CAN SOMEONE WITH STAFF GIVE THE OTHER SIDE OF WHY THAT'S REQUIRED VERSUS SOMETHING MORE SIMPLE? SO IF YOU, IF YOU, IF YOU WERE TO PRODUCE A DEED TO THE PROPERTY SHOWING THIS GROUP OWNED IT AND YOU HAVE A, YOU KNOW, EMAIL SAYING IT'S OKAY TO PUT A SIGN UP, IT IS THERE, WHAT, WHAT'S THE DOWNSIDE? BECAUSE IF THEY PUT THE SIGN UP ON SOMEBODY ELSE'S PROPERTY THAT THEY DON'T HAVE PERMISSION TO DO IT ON, THEY HAVE A WHOLE MORE HEAP OF TROUBLE THAN THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. 
          SO, SO I'M NOT SAYING TO GET RID OF THIS WELL THAT WOULD BE WONDERFUL AND DANDY, BUT JUST FOR, JUST FOR AN EXAMPLE, I HAVE SUBMITTED FOR A PERMIT, FOR A SIGN THAT THE LANDOWNER IS THE DEVELOPER OF THE, UH, THE COMMUNITY HE IS, HAS NOT BEEN DEEDED OVER TO THE H O A OR TO THE BUILDERS AND SUCH. 
          SO WE JUST HAVE AN EMAIL FROM HIM SAYING, YES, YOU CAN PUT THE SIGN UP ON MY PROPERTY. 
          LIKE, 'CAUSE HE OWNS IT, BUT THERE'S NO NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT, THERE'S NO LEASE, THERE'S NO DEEDED. 
          AND WELL, BUT THE DEED WOULD SHOW THAT THE OWN, THE PERSON'S NAME IN THE EMAIL IS THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY. 
          SO YOU WOULD SUBMIT THE, JUST A LOT OF EXTRA EFFORT WHEN WE HAVE IT LITERALLY IN HIS SIGNATURE, EVERYTHING SAYING, COMING FROM HIM, IS THIS ADMINISTRATIVE OR IS THIS IN THE CODE? IT'S ADMINISTRATIVE. 
          I PROBABLY WILL DEFER THIS TO THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY, UM, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE, UM, WE GET EVIDENCE THAT THE OWNER OF THAT PROPERTY IS ALLOWING 
          [02:05:01]
THE INSTALLATION OF THAT SIGN. 
          I THINK THAT'S THE REASON FOR IT. 
          NOW, OBVIOUSLY WITH TECHNOLOGY AND CHANGES, I GUESS THROUGHOUT THE YEARS, UH, I DUNNO IF LEGAL WILL ALLOW US TO UTILIZE AN EMAIL THAT STATES THE OWNER'S NAME AND ALL THE INFORMATION ON IT THAT WE CAN UTILIZE THAT INSTEAD OF A NOTARIZED SIGNED COPY. 
          UH, AGAIN, I WOULD, I WOULD LIKE FOR LEGAL TO PROBABLY TALK ABOUT THAT. 
          YOU KNOW, I MEAN, WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT IT. 
          I MEAN, THE ONLY WAY TO, TO ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, PROVE OWNERSHIP IS TITLE SEARCH. 
          UH, EVEN THE BEAR CAD SOMETIMES IS INACCURATE. 
          UM, BUT IF YOU'RE, THERE'S, YOU KNOW, IF YOU WANNA PUT THE BURDEN ON THE APPLICANT OR, AND YOU GET SOME KIND OF, YOU KNOW, NOTARIZED THING FROM THE OWNER, I MEAN, THAT, THAT'S SOMETHING. 
          BUT YEAH, WE HAVE TO LOOK AT, UH, YOU KNOW, ALL THE RAMIFICATIONS I GUESS. 
          SO, SO LET ME JUST SO THE COMMITTEE UNDERSTANDS, SO IF ON THE SIGN APPLICATION THERE'S A SPOT FOR THE OWNER TO SIGN IT, CORRECT? I SIGN IT FOR AN ON-PREMISE SIGN. 
          THERE IS YES. 
          FOR AN ON-PREMISE SIGN. 
          THESE, THERE'S NOT, I JUST HAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF, BUT, BUT THE PROCESS OF WHO OWNS THE BUILDING THAT YOU'RE PUTTING THE SIGN UP TO ME IS, EVEN THOUGH IT'S OFF PREMISE, IT'S THE SAME DEAL. 
          AM I REQUIRED IF I SIGN THE BOTTOM OF THE, THE PERMIT APPLICATION TO PROVIDE PROOF OF OWNERSHIP TO NO, THAT'S CORRECT. 
          NO, YOU WOULD NOT HAVE TO . 
          SO WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE? NO, NO, NO. 
          WHAT, WHAT I'M ASKING WHAT'S, WHY CAN'T, WHY CAN'T THE THERE BE AN OWNER PERMISSION THING WHERE YOU JUST SEND AND, AND YOU KNOW, THERE'S E-SIGNATURE TODAY WHERE YOU MAKE IT EASY AND YOU SEND IT TO THE OWNER AND SAY, HEY, OKAY, WOULD THAT BE ACCEPTABLE? AND, AND WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE? BECAUSE IF, LIKE, DALE PUTS UP A SIGN ON MY PROPERTY, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO THE MASTER LANDLORD TO GET A PERMISSION FOR THE SIGN PERMIT. 
          THE LE THE, THE LESSEE 90% OF THE TIME JUST SIGNS THE FORM. 
          THE CITY AT LEAST, AND I'M NOT A, AN ATTORNEY, BUT I PLAY LIKE ONE SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, THEIR EXPOSURE IS NO DIFFERENT. 
          IF THE SIGN GOES UP ON SOMEBODY ELSE'S PROPERTY, WE AS THE LANDOWNER ARE NOT GONNA THREATEN THE CITY. 
          WE'RE GONNA CALL THE THING AND BASICALLY GO THERE WITH A, YOU KNOW, WE'LL GIVE YOU 30 DAYS TO TAKE IT DOWN OR ONE DAY TO TAKE IT DOWN. 
          AND THEN I'M TAKING A CHAINSAW TO IT. 
          AND BECAUSE THOSE SIGNS ARE EXPENSIVE, NORMALLY IT ALL GETS WORKED OUT BEFORE, YOU KNOW, YOU START DESTROYING THAT, YOU KNOW. 
          AND SO WOULD IT BE ACCEPTABLE JUST TO REQUIRE A SIGNATURE FROM THE, THE RESPONSIBLE PARTY REPRESENTING THE OWNER TO PUT THE SIGN UP? BECAUSE THE OWNER MAY BE, YOU KNOW, MANAGED BY SOME OTHER END? YOU KNOW, THEY'RE A LOT OF TIMES, YOU KNOW, SOME PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY IS MANAGING THE PROPERTY FOR THE OWNER OR SOME ATTORNEY. 
          YOU KNOW, IF A PLUMBER IS GONNA GO, I CAN'T PULL PERMIT FOR WORK TO BE DONE AT MY HOUSE. 
          SO IF I SEND A PLUMBER OUT TO PULL PERMIT TO DO WORK ON MY HOUSE, DOES HE HAVE TO GET FROM ME SAYING THAT HE'S AUTHORIZED TO DO THAT? I'M, YOU KNOW, WHY IS THAT? I JUST, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S, YOU ARE, BUT THAT'S OKAY. 
          MY FRIEND AGAIN, UM, I'M LIKE, MARK, I'M NOT A LAWYER, BUT I WOULD SAY IF, IF I HIRE A PLUMBER TO DO WORK AT MY HOUSE, UM, AND THEY COME APPLY FOR PERMIT AT THE CITY, AND THEY GIVE THEM THE PERMIT, OBVIOUSLY FOR THE PLUMBER TO DO THE WORK, THEY NEED TO HAVE ACCESS TO MY PROPERTY. 
          AND IF I DON'T GIVE THEM ACCESS, THEY CAN'T GET IN. 
          BUT IF A SIGN COMPANY COMES AND PULLS PERMIT AND NEXT DAY I SEE A SIGN IN MY FRONT YARD, WELL, YOU DON'T NEED ACCESS. 
          SO HOW DO YOU KNOW AS AN OWNER, I AUTHORIZE THAT WORK. 
          THAT'S A, THAT'S A GREAT COMEBACK. 
          THANK YOU. 
          REMEMBER, I'M NOT GONNA TELL ME NO, BUT I, I MEAN I THINK THAT'S A VALID POINT, BUT IN THE BIG SCHEME OF THINGS, DOES IT MATTER? OKAY. 
          BECAUSE IF SOMEBODY PUT A SIGN UP IN MY FRONT YARD OF MY HOUSE LIKE THAT, YOU KNOW, MY FIRST CALL WOULD BE YOU, YOU'LL TAKE IT DOWN. 
          I GET IT. 
          . 
          YEAH. 
          WELL EITHER TAKE IT DOWN OR SUE 'EM FOR, FOR DAMAGE TO THE PROPERTY, WHICH MEANS THAT THEY'RE GONNA BE THERE. 
          SO, BUT MY QUESTION IS, IS I WANT TO BE RESPONSIBLE, YOU KNOW, TO PREVENT THAT, BUT 
          [02:10:01]
MAKE IT EASY ON EVERYBODY. 
          SO IF THEY HAVE TO GET A OWNER'S, YOU KNOW, SIGNATURE ON THE PERMIT APPLICATION, WHICH THEY CAN DO, PROVIDE THAT ON A PAPER DOCUMENT WITH, YOU KNOW, AN ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE, WOULD THAT BE OKAY? UH, AGAIN, I'LL, WE'LL TABLE THAT TO COME BACK NEXT MEETING AND THINK ABOUT IT. 
          BUT I, I MEAN, I PUTTING UP A, A, A, A SIGN ON SOMEONE'S VACANT PROPERTY, YOU KNOW, IS, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE DIGGING FOUR HOLES, YOU KNOW? YES. 
          I WAS JUST GONNA CHIME IN. 
          YEAH. 
          NOT A LAWYER EITHER, BUT I THINK IT'S A LIABILITY ISSUE IN THE EVENT THAT SOMETHING WERE TO HAPPEN TO THAT SIGN IF IT WERE TO FALL DOWN OR CAUSE DAMAGE TO SOMEONE. 
          AND YOU DON'T HAVE A RECORD OF WHO HAD PROVIDED PERMISSION PER SE. 
          THAT'S THE ONLY REASON I WOULD THINK, BECAUSE TO YOUR POINT, IT'S A VACANT LAND. 
          THERE'S NOTHING THERE. 
          OR IF THERE IS SOMETHING THERE AND IT DOES CAUSE DAMAGE, WELL, YOU KNOW, IT'S MAYBE PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY. 
          WELL, I DIDN'T KNOW, SO I DIDN'T GIVE PERMISSION. 
          I DON'T KNOW. 
          I'M JUST, I I HOPE LEGAL WILL ADDRESS ALL THOSE CONCERNS. 
          YEAH, THANK YOU. 
          I, I MEAN, I THINK THEY SHOULD, BUT YOU KNOW, FROM A, THE CITY THIS, YOU KNOW, THE CITY HAS NO EXPOSURE. 
          THE, THE EXPOSURE COMES TO THE PERSON WHO PUT THE SIGN UP TO BEGIN WITH, AND THE OWNER OF THE SIGN AND THE PERSON'S NAME ON THE SIGN, UH, BECAUSE THE CITY HAS SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY IN, IN PRETTY MUCH ALL CASES. 
          NO, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING BAD LIKE YOU'RE DESCRIBING HAPPENS. 
          THEY'RE NOT COMING AFTER THE CITY. 
          THEY WANT PEOPLE WITH LIABILITY INSURANCE. 
          BUT WE'LL TABLE THAT AND, UH, CHAIR, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION. 
          YES, YES. 
          UH, BASED OFF THE CONVERSATION, IT SOUNDS LIKE WHAT STAFF IS GOING TO BE LOOKING AT IS THE PROCESS USED FOR ON-PREMISE SIGNS, TRYING TO MIRROR THAT WITH THE OFF-PREMISE SIGNS AS WELL, IF THAT WOULD WORK. 
          THAT'S THE INDUSTRY'S INTENT, AND IT'S JUST KIND OF HAVE THOSE BE THE SAME. 
          SO STAFF WILL LOOK AT THAT AND SEE IF THERE'S ANY LEGAL ISSUES WITH THAT. 
          IF NOT, THEN, UH, WE'LL, WE'LL NEED TO DO ONCE AGAIN, SO NOT REALLY A CODIFIED ITEM. 
          UH, THIS WOULD BE AMENDING THIS PAPER PAR PERMIT, BUT THEN ALSO FINDING A WAY TO AMEND OUR ONLINE PROCESS, WHICH MIGHT TAKE SOME TIME. 
          UH, BUT WE CAN, YEAH, NO, I MEAN, I THINK THEY'RE HAPPY WITH THAT. 
          JEREMY, THE OTHER THING I WOULD TELL YOU IS MAYBE RATHER THAN, YOU KNOW, HAVING A PLACE TO SIGN IS MAYBE COMING UP WITH AN ALTERNATIVE IN LIEU OF AN AFFIDAVIT, WHICH REQUIRES SOMEBODY TO BE THERE IN A NOTARY TO BE THERE, AND ALL THAT STUFF THAT YOU ALLOW PROOF OF OWNERSHIP BY ELECTRONIC MEANS, WHERE THEY CAN SAY, WE ARE THE OWNER OF THIS. 
          THEY SIGN IT, IT HAS AN EMAIL CERTIFICATION, AND THEY UPLOAD IT AS PART OF THE PERMIT PROCESS AND IT'S DONE. 
          SO TO, TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO MAKE IT EASIER ON EVERYBODY THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO GO TRACK DOWN SOMEONE WITH A MOBILE NOTARY THAT MAY BE IN NEW YORK OR SOMEPLACE ELSE. 
          CORRECT. 
          AND I THINK THAT'S THE, HOW IT'S DONE WITH THE ON-PREMISE SIDE. 
          SO THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF THE GOAL, IS TO MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE MAINSTREAM, UH, STREAMLINED. 
          IF IT WORKS FOR ONE, WILL IT WORK FOR THE OTHER? AND IF IT'S, SO, THEN WE'LL MOVE TO THAT PROCESS. 
          OKAY. 
          BACK AND, I'M SORRY, CHAIR, JUST A COMMENT. 
          I GET TEXT FROM, UH, ONE OF MY COWORKERS WHO WAS INVOLVED WITH THIS, AND HE'S SAYING THE REASON FOR THIS, THAT WE CODIFIED IT AT SOME POINT, WE USED TO GET A LOT OF PROPERTY OWNERS CONTACTING US, SAYING THE SIGNED CONTRACTOR HAD NO PERMISSION TO INSTALL THE SIGN, AND IT GOT OUT OF HAND. 
          THAT'S WHY WE CODIFIED IT AND SAID, WE NEED AFFIDAVIT. 
          YEAH. 
          AND, AND I THINK THAT'S A FAIR COMMENT. 
          AND WE WANT TO, WE WANT TO TRY TO PROTECT AGAINST IT THE WAY IT USED TO BE BEFORE THIS ORDINANCE, YOU KNOW, CAME PLACE WHERE BASICALLY, YOU KNOW, EVERY OTHER DAY WE HAD VACANT LAND AND SOMEBODY BUILDER WOULD PUT A SIGN, A BIG SIGN UP WITHOUT ASKING PERMISSION AND, YOU KNOW, HAVING TO, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY DO A TITLE SEARCH AND HAVE AN AFFIDAVIT. 
          SO JUST SOME MIDDLE GROUND. 
          AND I THINK THAT'S A GOOD, WHOEVER DID THAT GETS COMMENDED FOR ADDING SOME, UH, HISTORY TO WHY IT CAME ABOUT MR. CHAIR. 
          YES. 
          WHAT HAPPENS IF THE LAND CHANGES HANDS? IS THAT AUTOMATIC THAT IT'S ACCEPTED? UM, THAT THAT SIGN IS THERE? OKAY, SO, SO AS A REAL ESTATE PERSON, IF, IF THE SIGN COMPANY IS SMART ENOUGH TO GET A LEASE OR A CONS OR A TEMPORARY LIKE EASEMENT TO PUT IT UP, IT, THEY'RE PROTECTED. 
          AND IF THERE'S NONE OF THAT IN PLACE, THEN, YOU KNOW, CHANCES ARE THE SIGNS COMING DOWN. 
          JUST A JUST A REAL LIFE SCENARIO, BASICALLY. 
          THIS DOES HAPPEN ALL OF THE TIME. 
          AND TYPICALLY WHENEVER THE LAND DOES CHANGE HANDS, THEY, THEY'LL, THEY'LL, HEY, THEY HAVE TO LET US KNOW. 
          SO WE STOP MAKING PAYMENTS TO THEM, NUMBER ONE. 
          BUT THEN 
          [02:15:01]
ALSO, UM, THEY'LL JUST TELL US, HEY, WE DON'T WANT THE SIGN UP. 
          WE'RE GONNA BUILD ON THE LAND. 
          WE JUST DON'T WANT IT UP. 
          TAKE IT DOWN. 
          AND THE BUILDERS ARE, THEY KNOW THIS, THEY, IT'S A VERY REGULAR, REGULAR PRACTICE. 
          AND OR THEY'LL SAY, HEY, YEAH, WE WANNA BE PAID FOR THAT SIGN. 
          ONCE PEOPLE START GETTING PAID MONEY MONTHLY, I DON'T KNOW IT, THEY, THEY LIKE IT. 
          YEAH. 
          SO MAILBOX MONEY. 
          SO, SO THEY'LL, IT, IT'S, IT KIND OF WORKS ITSELF OUT ON ITS OWN IN A SENSE. 
          OKAY. 
          NUMBER EIGHT. 
          OKAY, NUMBER EIGHT. 
          THIS IS A BIGGER ONE THAT WE DEFINITELY ARE HAVING A LITTLE ISSUE WITH, UM, UH, REAL FAST. 
          LET ME JUST SO THAT WE'RE, UH, ANYBODY THAT'S WATCHING AT HOME TRYING TO TRACK EVERYTHING OR FOR FUTURE. 
          SO, SO THOSE WERE AGENDA ITEMS, NUMBER 12 AND 13, UH, LOOKING AT THE, UH, APPLICATION AND AMENDING THAT. 
          SO WE'RE MOVING NOW BACK TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 11. 
          THANK YOU. 
          SO ONE OF THE RESTRICTIONS THAT WE HAVE, UM, HAVE TAKEN ISSUE WITH IS THESE SIGNS ARE TEMPORARY SIGNS. 
          AND YEAH, WHEN WE APPLY FOR PERMITS, WE HAVE TO ABIDE BY THE, THAT THEY CANNOT BE PUT IN WITHIN EASEMENTS, UH, THE ELECTRICAL EASEMENTS ON THESE VACANT LANDS. 
          UM, A LOT OF TIMES WHAT WE RUN UP AGAINST IS THAT THERE'S TREE LINES AND WE CAN'T GET OUT OF THAT EASEMENT IN A SENSE, UH, TO BE ABLE TO INSTALL THESE TEMPORARY SIGNS. 
          AND THAT WOULD ALL BE FINE IN DANDY, EXCEPT THAT IN OTHER PARTS OF THE CODE, THEY ARE ALLOWED, THEY ARE ALLOWED WHEN THEY'RE, THE, UM, THE, THE INCIDENTAL, WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT EARLIER, THE PERMIT EXEC EXCLUSIONS AREA, ANYTHING UNDER 32 SQUARE FEET, WHICH ARE TYPICALLY THE SAME. 
          I SUBMITTED PICTURES. 
          THEY'RE TYPICALLY THE EXACT SAME MATERIALS, SAME SIZES, EVERYTHING, BUT THEY'RE ALLOWED DIRECTLY UNDER POWER LINES, UM, WITHIN THOSE ELECTRICAL EASEMENTS AS WELL AS THEY'RE ALSO WITHIN THESE TEMPORARY BANNERS THAT ARE PLACED OVER ROADWAYS. 
          UM, BUT THOSE ARE ALLOWED WITHIN EASEMENTS AS WELL. 
          UM, AND I DON'T KNOW, OBVIOUSLY THE HISTORY ON ALL OF THAT, SO EXCUSE ME ON THAT PART OF IT. 
          BUT WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IS BASICALLY TO HAVE THESE SIGNS BE ALLOWED TO BE WITHIN ELECTRICAL EASEMENTS BECAUSE OF THEIR TEMPORARY NATURE AND AS WELL AS, BECAUSE THEY THE SAME SIZES, SAME MATERIALS AS ALL THESE OTHER TYPES OF SIGNS. 
          SO HOW COME WE HAVE TO PUT THESE OUTSIDE OF ELECTRICAL EASEMENTS, BUT YET THESE OTHER TYPES OF SIGNS DO NOT. 
          SO I MEAN, IN REALITY, ALL, I MEAN, WE HAVE PERMANENT SIGNS WITHIN EASEMENTS AND THEY FIGURE OUT A WAY, OR THE EASEMENT CHANGED THROUGH A REPL AND THE SIGNS UP, OR, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE ALLOWED TO PUT PARKING LOTS OVER EASEMENTS AND YOU KNOW, IF C P S NEEDS TO GET INTO IT, THEY JUST, WITH THEIR CRANE, THEY TAKE IT UP, PULL IT UP, LAY IT DOWN, AND THEN FIX WHATEVER. 
          AND DOES, IS THERE ANY, UH, ANY PROBLEM WITH STAFF WITH CHANGING THIS? THESE ARE JUST THE, JUST FOR EXAMPLE, ALL THESE PICTURES ARE BEING SHOWN RIGHT NOW. 
          THESE ARE WITHIN A MILE OF MY OFFICE AND I CAN, YEAH, I CAN. 
          THEY'RE ALL OVER. 
          THEY'RE ALL OVER THE PLACE. 
          AND NONE OF THESE REQUIRE PERMITS. 
          THEY'RE OVERSIZED. 
          THEY'RE, UM, THEY'RE EVERYWHERE. 
          BUT YET THE BUILDERS ARE HELD TO A DIFFERENT STANDARD. 
          THESE EVENT SIGNS ARE HELD TO A DIFFERENT STANDARD. 
          AND UH, THAT'S A WHOLE OTHER ISSUE, BUT WE'LL JUST STICK TO THIS ONE. 
          I DON'T, ANDREW PEREZ, I DON'T THINK THE CITY HAS THE AUTHORITY TO ALLOW SIGNS TO GO IN CITY ELECTRICAL EASEMENTS MANDATED BY C P S ENERGY. 
          WANNA BET THEY ISSUE PERMITS ALL THE TIME. 
          I, I DIDN'T SAY THEY DIDN'T ISSUE PERMIT, BUT JUST THAT THE CITY DOESN HAVE THE CAN'T TRUMP THEM EASEMENT, EASEMENT AGREEMENT WITH CPS. 
          YEAH, BUT, BUT IF YOU GOT THAT, IT SHOULD BE ALLOWED IN THE EASEMENT. 
          GOOD. 
          IT'S AN EXTREME PROCESS FOR A TEMPORARY SIGN AND A LOT OF MONEY FOR A TEMPORARY SIGN. 
          NORMALLY WHEN, SO WHEN ALL THESE OTHER SIGNS ALLOWED, WHEN YOU APPLY FOR AN ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT THROUGH C P S ENERGY, YOUR EVENT WILL PROBABLY BE OVER BY THE TIME YOU GET THE APPROVAL. 
          EXACTLY. 
          AND THAT'S THE OTHER, I MEAN, IT'S A, IT'S A PROCESS. 
          WE'VE, WE'VE TRIED WORKING THROUGH THAT PROCESS JUST A, IT'S A LOT FOR A TEMPORARY SIGN. 
          I MEAN, THE OWNER, THE OWNER CAN PUT A, WITHOUT GETTING A PERMIT, THE OWNER CAN PUT THE SAME, BASICALLY A 32 SQUARE FOOT SIGN UP RIGHT IN ON THE PROPERTY LINE IN THE EASEMENT. 
          NOBODY HAS, IT'S THE SAME MATERIAL. 
          ALL, ALL THE TEMPORARY SIGNS ARE WOOD POSTS, RIGHT? YES. 
          THEY'RE ALL WOOD. 
          THEY'RE EASY TO BE REMOVED. 
          IT DOESN'T, YOU KNOW, THERE, THERE'S NOTHING THAT SHOULD BE WITHIN THE TWO OR THREE OR FOUR FEET OF NO. 
          [02:20:01]
IF YOU ISSUE THE PERMIT TO PUT IT UP, DO YOU HAVE TO SHOW A, A DRAWING OF WHERE THE SIGN'S GOING? YES, WE DO. 
          AND A PICTURE OF IT. 
          AND I MEAN, AND THERE'S OTHER AREAS IN THE, IN THE CODE THAT STATE, YOU KNOW, THAT THE SIGN ERECTOR SHALL CERTIFY IN WRITING THAT THE SIGN WILL NOT INTERFERE WITH PUBLIC SAFETY. 
          PUT THAT, PUT A, THERE'S LITTLE CHECK MARKS THAT WE HAVE TO CHECK THAT WE ABIDE BY. 
          JUST MAKE US ABIDE BY THOSE THAT WE, WE AGREE WITH THESE. 
          ANY, ANY COMMENTS FROM ANYBODY? I DON'T KNOW. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF CD CAN REGULATE C P S EASEMENTS. 
          WELL, THEY'RE NOT REGULATING. 
          YOU'RE JUST REREGULATING. 
          YOU'RE JUST, YOU KNOW, SO I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO HEAR FROM C P S ON THIS ONE. 
          AND I, I'LL JUST GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE. 
          THEY TRIED TO COME IN WITH A U D C AMENDMENT TO REMOVE TREES UNDERNEATH ALL THEIR POWER DISTRIBUTION LINES, EVERY SINGLE ELECTRICAL LINE. 
          SO I MEAN, THEY ARE CONSCIENTIOUS OF WHAT'S GOING ON UNDERNEATH THEIR POWER LINES. 
          UM, BUT I THINK THERE IS COMMON GROUND TO YOUR WHOLE POINT THAT THEY ARE BEING PLACED ALREADY THERE. 
          UM, SO I THINK IT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO HAVE A STREAMLINE, UM, OF SITUATIONS. 
          I MEAN, THERE ARE SENSITIVE AREAS IN THE CITY WHERE, YOU KNOW, YOU DO HAVE A POWER DISTRIBUTION CENTER. 
          YOU HAVE THOSE HUGE, YOU KNOW, SILVER A ALIGNS GOING THROUGH. 
          BUT WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT MOST OF THEIR LINES ARE ON THE TOP OF THERE, UH, THEY'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, YOUR AT AND T LINES, YOUR OTHER THINGS ARE THE LOWER LINES. 
          UM, AND IT ARE NOT THE ELECTRICAL LINES. 
          SO I'D BE INTERESTED TO HEARING FROM THEM IF WE COULD TABLE THIS. 
          YEAH, I, I THINK WE SHOULD TABLE TO GET CPSS HERE TO COMMENT AND, UH, MAYBE HEAR SOME HYPOCRISY IN MOTION BECAUSE THEY PUT UP STUFF ALL OVER WITHOUT, YOU KNOW, AND I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE DIFFERENCE IS. 
          AND SO I THINK WE BRING THEM IN TO TALK ABOUT IT. 
          UH, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THOSE EASEMENTS, THERE'S NOTHING RUNNING IN THEM AT THAT POINT IN TIME BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S MADE FOR FUTURE EXPANSION AND THINGS LIKE THAT. 
          AND SO IF IT'S REALLY NOT A PROBLEM, YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T, YOU KNOW, DEPENDING ON WHERE IT GOES, THE TREES ARE IN THE WAY AND YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO KEEP THE FIRST 30 OR 40 FEET OF MOST VACANT LAND CLEARED TO KEEP OUT OF THE CO COMPLIANCE CROSSHAIRS, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A NATURAL PLACE TO PUT IT. 
          AND SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, AND THEN MAYBE GIVE US SOME, UH, WHEN WE COME BACK TO REDO THIS, YOU PROVIDE SOME EXAMPLES OF WHERE REAL LIFE EXAMPLES OF, HERE'S WHERE I WANTED TO PUT IT, YOU KNOW, AND, AND MAYBE THEY CAN RESPOND AS TO WHY THAT'S NOT GOOD. 
          BUT, YOU KNOW, WE CAN PAVE OVER THE EASEMENT. 
          I CAN PUT PARKING ON THE EASEMENT, I CAN PUT LIGHT POSTS OVER THE EASEMENT. 
          YOU KNOW, YOU CAN PLANT TREES IN THE EASEMENT. 
          ALL OF THAT STUFF IS MORE DANGEROUS TO ANY UNDERGROUND POWER WATER SEWER, YOU KNOW, AND WE MIGHT ALSO GET SAWS HERE ALSO TO COMMENT ON IT BECAUSE A LOT OF TIMES THEY MAYBE HAVE UNDERGROUND STUFF RUNNING THERE ALSO. 
          IS THAT OKAY WITH THE COMMITTEE? VERY GOOD. 
          ITEM NUMBER 13. 
          OKAY. 
          SO I'D LIKE TO, UH, TAKE, THIS IS A GOOD PAUSING POINT, UH, TO TAKE A, UH, LITTLE FIVE MINUTE BREAK, A BIO BREAK, AND WE'LL BE BACK IN 5, 6, 7 MINUTES. 
          THANK YOU. 
          I'D LIKE TO CALL THE MEETING BACK TO ORDER. 
          OKAY. 
          YOU'RE GONNA GET APPOINTED SUB WORKING GROUPING. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          OKAY. 
          SO I WOULD LIKE TO GET A MOTION TO APPROVE, AND IT'S NOT TO MAKE IT CLEAR FOR THOSE, IT'S NOT THE AGENDA ITEMS, IT'S THE WORK, UH, THE NUMBERS ON OUR SHEET. 
          ITEM NUMBER 12 16 5 TO REJECT ITEM NUMBER SIX AND APPROVE NUMBER 19. 
          OKAY. 
          READY TO APPROVE 12 16 5, 
          [02:25:02]
REJECT NUMBER SIX AND APPROVE NUMBER 19. 
          SO IF I CAN GET A MOTION TO THAT EFFECT, I'LL MAKE A MOTION. 
          MR. CHAIRMAN. 
          THANK YOU. 
          SECOND, JACK. 
          THANK YOU. 
          SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? ALL ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. 
          OPPOSED? ABSTENTIONS. 
          OKAY, Y'ALL? YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          SO IF WE, JEREMY, WE'RE RIGHT NOW, WE'RE JUST GONNA GO INTO A BROAD DISCUSSION ON A WHOLE, SOME THINGS THAT HAD BEEN BROUGHT UP IN THE PREVIOUS MEETING TO GET SOME, UH, CLARIFICATION. 
          SO IF WE CAN GO TO THE PICTURES OF THE WHERE, UH, TO MEASURE FROM PICTURES. 
          UH, GIMME ONE SECOND. 
          I THINK R JUST STEPPED AWAY. 
          I'M NOT SURE IF HE HAS THOSE WITH YOU. 
          HERE. 
          I I HAVE THEM. 
          THAT ONE. 
          OKAY. 
          SO THE ITEM THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING IS WHERE TO MEASURE THE POINT OF, UH, THE ROAD. 
          AND SO THERE'S A DOUBLE, UH, LIMITATION. 
          ONE IS 42 AND A HALF FEET HIGH IS THE TOTAL HEIGHT OF, OF THE SIGN. 
          IF IT'S FLAT, WHICH IS, THIS SHOWS A PICTURE THAT CAN WE GO TO THE NEXT FLIP? OKAY. 
          WHERE IT IS ELEVATED, YOU CAN GO UP TO 42 AND A HALF FEET ABOVE THE POINT OF MARKING, WHICH WOULD BE THE EXPRESSWAY OR A MAXIMUM OF 60 FEET TO THE GROUND. 
          AND THAT'S CURRENTLY WHAT THE RULES ARE. 
          AND WE'RE GONNA COME UP WITH A DEFINITION THAT POINTS EXACTLY TO WHERE THE POINT OF MEASUREMENT IS, WHICH IS WHAT IS BEING ASKED FOR. 
          AND NOW IT IS EVEN MORE COMPLICATED THAN THAT IN THAT, UH, IF YOU THINK ABOUT THE, THE 4 10, 2 81 BY THE AIRPORT WHERE YOU'RE BEGINNING ALL OVER THE CITY TO SEE THESE FLYOVER BRIDGES. 
          AND THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE, UH, WAS CRAFTED WHEN, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS, WAS BASICALLY ONE UPPER DECK IN SAN ANTONIO AND THAT WAS THE PART THAT GOES THROUGH DOWNTOWN. 
          AND YOU KNOW, THE HEIGHT OF THE HIGHWAY IS MAYBE 25 FEET. 
          SO YOU SEE THE BILLBOARDS THAT ARE ON THE UPPER DECK CAN BE SEEN IN EVERYTHING. 
          WHEN YOU GET TO THESE, WHAT I CALL SUPER, SUPER STRUCTURES THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, 50, 60, 70 FEET IN THE AIR THAT MY WIFE, UH, HAS, YOU KNOW, SHE GETS ON THE GROUND OF THE FRONT SEAT AND PUTS HER HEAD DOWN 'CAUSE SHE THINKS SHE'S GONNA FALL OFF THE EDGE OF THE WORLD. 
          YOU KNOW, THOSE BIG OVERPASSES, YOU KNOW, THIS IS REALLY INEFFECTUAL BECAUSE THE HEIGHT OF THE HIGHWAY PUTS THE SIGN IN NO MAN'S LAND BECAUSE IT CAN'T BE SEEN FROM THE UPPER DECK BECAUSE IT HA UH, THE LOWER DECK. 
          'CAUSE IT HAS THE BRIDGE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S GOING OVER AND IT CAN'T BE SEEN FROM THE UPPER DECK AND IT'S, IT'S BAD. 
          SO IN TALKING AND THINKING ABOUT THIS AND, AND YOU KNOW, THE NEED FOR, UH, THE WISH OF A BUNCH OF PEOPLE TO, UH, HAVE BILLBOARDS TAKEN DOWN AND THE DESIRE OF THE BILLBOARD COMPANIES TO HAVE THEIR SIGNS, UH, BEING SEEN IS TO TRY TO SEE IF THERE'S A WAY TO COMPROMISE TO GET WHAT EVERYBODY WANTS. 
          SO THE STATE RULE IS, IS THE SIGN ALONG ANY 
          [02:30:01]
INTERSTATE CANNOT BE HIGHER THAN 85 FEET. 
          SO THAT'S THE STATE REQUIREMENT, CORRECT? CORRECT. 
          85 FEET TALL. 
          SO IN TRYING TO BE A PROBLEM SOLVER AND, AND EITHER MAKE EVERYBODY MAD OR EVERYBODY HAPPY, AND WE'LL SEE HOW THAT DISCUSSION GOES. 
          IF WE WERE TO INCREASE, KEEP THE 42 FOOT HIGH ABOVE THE, UH, POINT OF MEASUREMENT WITH A CAP OF 85 FEET AND IN RETURN FOR GETTING THAT EXCESS, YOU KNOW, COULD BE 25 FEET HIGHER, SO TO GO UP TO THE 85 FEET MAX, THEY WOULD HAVE TO TAKE DOWN ONE BILLBOARD SOMEPLACE ELSE IN THE CITY. 
          IS THAT SOMETHING GOOD, BAD? AND, AND IT WOULD BE LIMITED TO, YOU KNOW, THOSE OVER EXPRESSWAY OVERPASSES ONLY. 
          SO, SO WHERE THERE IS NOT A, YOU KNOW, IT'S STILL, YOU KNOW, 42 AND A HALF FEET FROM THE POINT OF MEASUREMENT UP TO 60 FEET. 
          IF THEY WANTED TO GO TO 85 FEET BECAUSE IT EXCEEDED THAT OVERPASS, YOU KNOW, THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE ABLE TO GET THAT EXTRA 25 FEET. 
          THEY WOULD HAVE TO TAKE DOWN A SIGN. 
          EXCUSE ME. 
          ARE THESE YOUR THOUGHTS? NOW? THIS WASN'T THE ORIGINAL. 
          NO, THIS IS NOT THE WRITTEN PRO. 
          THE, THE WRITTEN PROPOSAL IS ORIGINALLY MEASURE WAS WHERE TO MEASURE FROM AND TO INCREASE IT TO 60 FEET ABOVE THE TOP. 
          AND, AND YOU KNOW, I, UH, COMMUNICATED THAT, YOU KNOW, IT AT LEAST MY POSITION WOULD BE DEAD ON ARRIVAL ON THE SECOND ONE BECAUSE I JUST DON'T THINK WE NEED 60 FEET ABOVE, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD PUT EVERY SIGN OR 42 AND A HALF FEET ABOVE THE HIGHEST POINT NO MATTER HOW HIGH IT GOES UP TO THE 85. 
          AND I THOUGHT THAT WAS, AT LEAST IN MY VIEW, YOU KNOW, NOT GONNA BE GET CONSENSUS AND WAS GONNA STIR THE POT. 
          SO IN THINKING ABOUT WHAT MIGHT BE A WIN-WIN SITUATION FOR EVERYBODY CONCERNED IS, YOU KNOW, THE PEOPLE THAT WANT A MORE SCENIC SAN ANTONIO WOULD GET A, AN ADDITIONAL SIGN TAKEN DOWN. 
          ALL OF THESE SIGNS ARE LOCATED AT WHAT I CALL MAJOR, YOU KNOW, INTERCHANGES BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONLY PLACE THAT IT WOULD REALLY BE APPLICABLE. 
          AND IN RETURN FOR GETTING, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER MAX OF 25 FEET AT THOSE BIG INTERCHANGES, THEY WOULD HAVE TO TAKE DOWN THE SIGN SOMEPLACE. 
          YES. 
          UH, TIM ANDERSON WITH CLEAR CHANNEL, THE CHAIR MENTIONED THIS TO ME JUST AS WE CAME IN TODAY. 
          AND SO I'VE HAD A FEW MINUTES TO THINK ABOUT IT, UH, THE METHODOLOGIES THAT MIGHT BE INVOLVED. 
          AND NUMBER ONE, YES, WE ARE SUPPORTIVE. 
          THIS IDEA, UH, A COUPLE OF THE REALITIES ARE YES, AS THESE FLYOVERS GET BUILT, THAT IT BECOMES MORE DIFFICULT FOR US TO SERVICE OUR CUSTOMERS. 
          THE OTHER REALITIES ARE, IT'S NOT LIKE THOSE SIGNS ARE GONNA COME DOWN, WHETHER THEY'RE BLOCKED OR NOT, THAT THAT JUST DOESN'T HAPPEN. 
          SO I THINK THE CHAIR'S IDEA OF REMOVING A, WHAT I WOULD IMAGINE WOULD BE A SIMILAR SIGN. 
          IN OTHER WORDS, IF I, IF I'M GONNA TAKE A BULLETIN, WHICH ARE ARE BIG ONES AND I WANT TO RAISE THAT THING UP, I GOTTA TAKE DOWN A BULLETIN SOMEWHERE ELSE IN THE CITY. 
          THE SECOND THING I THINK YOU'D HAVE TO SHOW IS, CAUSE I THINK WE'D HAVE TO COME TO THE CITY. 
          'CAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO BE JUST, WE DON'T WANT ANYBODY TO BE ABLE TO TAKE DOWN A, A, A BULLETIN AND RAISE ANY SIGNED 85 FEET. 
          THERE'S GOTTA BE A BLOCKAGE. 
          THERE'S GOTTA BE SOME KIND OF VISUAL PROBLEM WITH THAT SIGN THAT WE CAN AFFIRMATIVELY SHOW THE CITY TO SAY THIS ONE NEEDS TO GO UP. 
          SO THERE WOULD BE A, A PROCESS INVOLVED. 
          AND ALSO, MR. CHAIR, JUST, JUST TO BE REAL CLEAR, THE 85 FEET THAT TXDOT HAS IS TIED TO SOME OTHER ASPECTS. 
          BUT IF THE CERTIFICATION ISSUE THAT WE HAVE PUT FORTH GOES THROUGH, IF THE CITY DOES GET CERTIFIED, THIS ABSOLUTELY HAPPENS. 
          'CAUSE THAT TAKES, TAKES TEXT OUTTA EQUATION AND THE CITY CAN DO WHATEVER IT WANTS TO DO. 
          OKAY. 
          SO I, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO THOUGHTS, I MEAN, WE'RE NOT, THE, THE POINT OF THIS IS NOT COMING TO A DISCI A DECISION, IT'S TO JUDGE THE TEMPERATURE IN THE ROOM AND THEN DIRECT STAFF IF THE TEMPERATURE LIKES IT, TO, YOU KNOW, COME BACK WITH SOME KIND OF, 
          [02:35:01]
YOU KNOW, AT LEAST AT A MINIMUM, SOME BULLET POINT, YOU KNOW, THAT WE CAN GO THROUGH AND GET SOME ACTUAL LANGUAGE. 
          IF THERE IT'S NO APPETITE TO TAKE IT ON, I'D LIKE TO KNOW THAT. 
          AND THEN WE WILL JUST WORK ON THE POINT OF MEASUREMENT. 
          SO THAT, THAT'S JUST REALLY CLEAR HOW PATTY, EXCUSE ME. 
          WELL LET, LET'S JUST GO AROUND. 
          SO, UH, IS THIS PART OF THE MOTION THAT Y'ALL WERE BRINGING FORTH WHERE YOU WERE MOVING THE WELL NO, BACK TO WHAT YOU WERE PRESENTING LAST MEETING WHERE YOU WERE MOVING THE POINT OF MEASUREMENT FROM AN ADJACENT ROADWAY TO A HIGHWAY. 
          IS THIS PART OF THAT? YEAH, IT'S ALL PART OF THE SAME DISCUSSION. 
          OKAY. 
          BE THAT'S WHAT I WANNA KNOW. 
          SO THE SIGN WHICH YOU'RE PROPOSING, AND I THINK, UM, I'VE ALWAYS SAID PRESERVATION'S ABOUT MANAGING CHANGE. 
          THIS IS ABOUT MANAGING CHANGE TOO. 
          WHEN YOU FIRST START OUT MAKING THE BIG SIGNS, YOU DIDN'T HAVE THESE HUGE FLYOVERS THAT TOTALLY OBSCURE A SIGN THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE, YOU JUST SEE THE, THIS MUCH OF IT AT THE TOP. 
          SO 20. 
          SO IT WOULD MAINTAIN THE ORIGINAL POINT OF MEASUREMENT OF YEAH, THE, THE, AND THEN YOU WOULD JUST ADD THE, SO HERE, IF YOU LOOK AT THE FLY OVER HERE, THE POINT OF MEASUREMENT THAT'S FOR THE SIGN WOULD BE THE HIGHEST POINT IN THE HIGHWAY AT THE ELEVATED PORTION. 
          RIGHT NOW THEY, THE CAP IS, SO THAT FLYOVER IS PROBABLY 50 FEET IN THE AIR OR MORE. 
          SO THAT SIGN RIGHT THERE COULD BE AT 40 FEET. 
          AND THAT WOULD BE AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. 
          YOU CAN'T SEE IT FROM THE LOWER DECK. 
          YOU CAN'T SEE IT FROM THE UPPER DECK BECAUSE IT'S A RENTED SIGN. 
          THEY'RE NOT GONNA TAKE IT DOWN, YOU KNOW, IT'S GONNA BE UP THERE FOREVER. 
          SO THE QUESTION IS, IS IF THEY WERE ALLOWED TO RAISE THAT, WOULD IT BE WORTH ALLOWING THEM TO GO UP, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER 20 FEET TO GET THAT SIGN WHERE YOU COULD SEE IT AT A MAX 85? CORRECT. 
          MAX 85, NO, THAT'S THE CITY. 
          THE PHOTOS. 
          THIS IS, SO WHAT IS THE HEIGHT OF THE PERSONALIZED FINANCING SIGN? IS THAT 60 FEET, 62 FEET OR MOST LIKELY, UM, IT, IT, NOT KNOWING HOW OLD IT'S BEEN THERE, BUT THE MOST IT WOULD BE ALLOWED TO BE RIGHT NOW IS 60 FEET. 
          RIGHT. 
          SO MARK, YOUR PROPOSAL WOULD BE TO RAISE THAT SIGN TO, FOR EXAMPLE, TO ALLOW THEM IF 85, IF THEY WANTED 85 UP TO 85 FEET. 
          IF, IF THEY TAKE DOWN A SIGN OF SIMILAR SIZE, THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY WAY I CONSIDER, UH, ACCEPTING ANY TYPE OF RAISING IT WOULD BE TO TAKE DOWN ANOTHER SIGN. 
          WELL, NO, AND THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S WHAT, AND THAT'S A GOOD PROPOSALS. 
          THAT'S THE DEAL. 
          AND SO IF THE, IF, IF THE DEAL IS IS TO ALLOW THEM TO GO UP, YOU GOTTA TAKE ONE DOWN EQUAL SIZE, THEY'RE STILL USING THE ORIGINAL MEASUREMENT. 
          IT WOULD, IT WOULD BE THE, IT WOULD BE WHAT IN THIS PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES IT WOULD BE, THEY COULD GO 42 AND A HALF FEET ABOVE THE TOP MEASUREMENT OF THE EXPRESSWAY WITH A CAP OF 85 FEET. 
          BUT TO GET THE 85 FEET IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE THE HIGHWAYS BLOCKS THE SIGN MEASURE BASE, THE BASE, THE BASE MEASUREMENT IS 85 MAYBE BECAUSE NO ONE WOULD SEE YOUR SIGN IF YOU MEASURED EXPRESS WAY EXCEPT THE PILOTS BY THE AIRPORT. 
          YEAH. 
          AND JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, I WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE. 
          SO THE MEASUREMENT POINT IS STILL THIS EXPRESSWAY HEIGHT RIGHT NOW. 
          THAT'S WHERE WE ARE CURRENTLY. 
          THE, THE PROPOSAL WAS REALLY JUST CLARIFYING EXACTLY ALONG THAT ROAD WHERE WE WOULD MEASURE IT. 
          SO MAYBE ADJUSTING IT BY A FOOT OR TWO, YOU KNOW, AS THE SLOPE OF THE ROAD AND STUFF. 
          BUT WE DON'T LOOK AT THE GROUND LEVEL WHEN WE WERE ALLOWING IT TO GO UP, WE WERE ALWAYS LOOKING AT WHATEVER REALLY THE ROAD CLOSEST TO THAT THEY WERE TRYING TO ADVERTISE TO WHATEVER THAT HEIGHT WAS. 
          SO THAT WON'T CHANGE IN EXCEPT FOR MAYBE JUST A LITTLE BIT OF CLARIFICATION OF WHAT POINT ALONG THAT ROAD. 
          YEAH, AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE DRAWING, IF YOU LOOK AT THE, THE PART OF THE ROAD IT GOES UP, IT WOULD BE THE MEASUREMENT POINT WOULD BE THE FAR END ALL THE WAY TO THE RIGHT. 
          BECAUSE THAT'S THE HIGHEST POINT MR. TARA, IF YOU WILL. 
          YES. 
          THE MEASUREMENT POINT CURRENTLY IN THE CODE REFERENCES ADJACENT STREET. 
          SO THERE IS SOME CLARIFICATION THERE YEAH. 
          THAT WE WOULD MOVE TO. 
          BUT IN PRACTICE, WHAT THEY'RE DOING, WHAT I HAVE BEEN TOLD IS THEY'RE MEASURING THE MEASUREMENT WOULD BE FROM THE EXPRESSWAY AND WE'RE GONNA CLARIFY THAT REGARDLESS IN THE LANGUAGE. 
          [02:40:01]
SO THAT THAT, THAT PART OF IT, I THINK THERE'S CONSENSUS THAT THERE'S NO PROBLEM. 
          YEAH, I THINK THAT AND MR. CHAIR, EXCUSE ME, THAT THEY, I THINK THAT'S EXACTLY THE POINT WE WERE BRINGING BEFORE, RIGHT? JUST IF THAT MEASUREMENT POINT IS BETTER DEFINED THAN WE'RE ALL KNOWING, WE ALL KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH WITH THE SIGN. 
          YES. 
          RIGHT. 
          OKAY, BIANCA, UM, AND THEN COLLEEN, SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW WHICH, WHICH SIGNS WILL BE IMPACTED, UM, SPECIFICALLY WHAT IS THE EXISTING INVENTORY RIGHT NOW? AND WHAT CONCERNS ME IS THAT AS YOU TRANSITION INTO, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT URBAN CORRIDORS, 2 81 IS A SCENIC CORRIDOR. 
          THERE'S A REASON THERE'S NO BILLBOARDS BETWEEN THE AIRPORT AND DOWNTOWN. 
          RIGHT. 
          UM, SO I WOULD BE CONCERNED AS THAT TRANSITIONS INTO THAT SCENIC CORRIDOR, THAT AREA, BECAUSE I KNOW WE HAVE CLEAR CHANNEL HERE AT THE TABLE, BUT WE ALSO HAVE OTHER COMPANIES THAT HAVE BILLBOARDS IN THE CITY. 
          AND WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT TAKING DOWN BILLBOARDS, THEY MAY NOT HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE THE SAME SIZE BILLBOARD DOWN. 
          SO YOU MAY SAY YOU'LL TAKE A BULLETIN DOWN. 
          WELL MAYBE THEY DON'T HAVE A BULLETIN WHERE THEY CAN TAKE DOWN, AND IN MY OPINION, IF YOU ARE GONNA PROPOSE A TAKE DOWN, IT SHOULD OCCUR WITHIN A CERTAIN DISTANCE REQUIREMENT OF THE AREA IN WHICH YOU ARE GONNA RAISE A BILLBOARD OR, UM, FOR HEIGHT. 
          I THINK THOSE TWO ELEMENTS HAVE TO GO HAND IN HAND. 
          AND I THINK WE NEED AN INVENTORY OF WHERE THERE ARE HEIGHT ISSUES TODAY, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT IT ABUSED UNFORTUNATELY. 
          YEAH. 
          AND, AND I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE VERY CLEAR. 
          I KNOW THE LAST PROPOSITION THAT WAS MADE, UH, WITH, UH, WE HAD ALL THOSE JUNIOR BILLBOARDS THAT WERE TAKEN DOWN WHEN THEY DOUBLE SIDED THE DIGITALS. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT ONE SIDE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TWO SIDES. 
          THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT PEOPLE ENJOY WITH THESE FLYOVERS BECAUSE YOU DO GET A VIEW SHED OF OUR DOWNTOWN. 
          AND SO WHILE THESE BILLBOARDS ARE, YOU KNOW, IN IN THEIR POSITIONS, YOU CAN MANEUVER AROUND THEM. 
          BUT I WANNA MAKE SURE WE DON'T HAVE AN ADVERSE IMPACT IN CERTAIN AREAS BECAUSE WE ARE TRULY TALKING ABOUT CERTAIN AREAS. 
          I DON'T WANT SOMEBODY TO COME IN AND MAKE THE SAME ARGUMENT FOR THE BILLBOARD OVER BY THE PEARL PER SE, YOU KNOW, AND THAT'S NOT AN ISSUE PER SE, BUT IF WE'RE NOT CLEAR AND DELIBERATE IN ANYTHING THAT WE DISCUSS, THEN IT CAN BE MISCONSTRUED FOR OTHER THINGS. 
          AND SO I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT. 
          I THINK THAT'S VALID. 
          I I THINK YOU'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO DEFINE, WE CAN GIVE EXAMPLES OF WHERE IT EXISTS TODAY, BUT AS, AS TECH STOCK CONTINUES TO MAKE FLYOVERS IT, IT'S, IT WOULD BE APPLICABLE AT ANYWHERE THAT IT WOULD NOT BE PREVENTED BY SOME OTHER ORDINANCE. 
          SO CAN WE GO BACK TO THE PICTURE AND, AND I WANT TO ASK A QUESTION BECAUSE, AND, AND AS CHAIR, I WANNA JUST, SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS, IS IS IF YOU COULD GET A BILLBOARD TAKEN DOWN ON FREDERICKSBURG ROAD THAT'S EQUAL SIZE TO THAT BILLBOARD, THAT'S IN A NE YOU KNOW, THAT HANGS OVER A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WAS PUT IN A LONG TIME AGO, YOU WOULDN'T WANT TO ALLOW THAT TRAIT BECAUSE IT'S, IT WOULD BE OUTSIDE OF A TWO MILE OR THREE MILE, YOU KNOW, SO WE HAD ONE TAKEN DOWN WHEN THEY DOUBLE SETTED THE DIGITAL BILLBOARDS. 
          WE DID HAVE ONE TAKEN DOWN ON NO, BUT I'M SAYING, BUT I'M SAYING BUT YOU'RE SAYING ADDITIONAL ONES. 
          I'M MORE, I I THINK IF YOU CAN GET 'EM TAKEN DOWN, THEY'RE GONNA TAKE DOWN THE LEAST REVENUE GENERATING ONES, WHICH TO ME HERE I HAVE A, I I HAVE A QUESTION HERE. 
          EXCUSE ME. 
          YES, I'M SO SORRY. 
          I WAS ANSWERING. 
          YOU GOTTA PAY ATTENTION TO THE CHAIR . 
          SO, SO MOST LIKELY I AM ASSUMING YOU'RE GONNA TAKE DOWN AS A COMPANY, YOU'RE LEAST PERFORMING BILLBOARDS FOR RAISING THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND MY, MY GUESS IS THOSE ARE GOING TO BE ON MORE LOCAL SMALLER STREETS AND THEN THEY'RE GONNA BE ON WHAT I CALL REAL TIM, TIM ANDERSON FOR CLEAR CHANNEL. 
          WHAT I, WHAT I, HOW I WOULD ANSWER THAT QUESTION IS IF THAT WAS THE PRESUMPTION BEFORE WE HAD TAKEN DOWN ALL THE BILLBOARDS FOR THE DIGITALS, YOU'D BE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. 
          UM, WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF UNDERPERFORMING BILLBOARDS LEFT, SO THESE ARE NOT GONNA BE OBSCURE BILLBOARDS OFF ON SOME STRANGE PLOT OF LAND. 
          THESE ARE GONNA BE VISIBLE BY PEOPLE WHO ARE DRIVING ON, ON THE EXPRESSWAYS ARTERIALS. 
          I'M, I FORGIVE, FORGIVE ME, I DON'T REMEMBER HOW SAN ANTONIO DESIGNATES ALL ROADS, BUT WE DON'T HAVE ANY LEFT. 
          SO WE HAVE TO MAKE SOME, WE HAVE TO PUT A PENCIL TO IT AND MAKE SOME DECISIONS. 
          YEAH. 
          BUT, BUT YOU KNOW, I WOULD LIKE TO LEAVE THAT OPTION OF LETTING THEM AS LONG AS WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF SAN ANTONIO AND IT'S EQUAL SIZE. 
          IN OTHER WORDS, THIS SIGN BASICALLY COULD BE NO BIGGER THAN IT CURRENTLY 
          [02:45:01]
IT UNDER WHAT I AM PITCHING NO BIGGER THAN IT CURRENTLY IS. 
          ALL YOU'RE DOING IS RAISING IT SO IT'S NOT IN NO MAN'S LAND AND IN RETURN FOR RAISING IT, YOU KNOW, AND WE'LL WORK OUT THE LANGUAGE AND YOU KNOW WHAT ROADS IT APPLIES TO. 
          THEY HAVE TO TAKE DOWN A BILLBOARD OF SOME KIND EQUAL IN SIZE WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF SAN ANTONIO. 
          SO FOR CLARIFICATION, SO IF THEY WANT TO ELEVATE THIS PARTICULAR BULLETIN THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, THEY WOULD NOT HAVE TO PAY TAKE DOWN A COMPARABLE SIZE. 
          YOU'RE JUST SAYING IN COMPARABLE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF SIGNAGE WOULD HAVE TO BE REMOVED. 
          IS THAT WHICH WHICH IS, WHICH IS I THINK THE SAME, THEY, THEY'D HAVE TO TAKE A, AN EQUAL SIZE SIGN DOWN. 
          I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE SAME. 
          BECAUSE WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT A LARGE SIGN, I, I'M LOOKING AT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO TAKE ANOTHER LARGE SIGN DOWN. 
          THEY COULDN'T JUNIOR, SOMEBODY COULDN'T TAKE DOWN A ITTY BITTY WELL YEAH, YOU TOOK 'EM ALL DOWN ALREADY 'CAUSE THEY WEREN'T PERFORMING . 
          NO, BUT I MEAN AN EQUAL, AND WHEN I SAID EQUAL AMOUNT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE, I, I DON'T WANT THEM TO BE ABLE TO RAISE THAT TO 85 FEET AND THEN TAKE DOWN A, YOU KNOW, FOUR BY EIGHT SIGN. 
          YOU KNOW, ONE OF THOSE, SOMEBODY MAY HAVE A PERMIT FOR ONE OF THOSE OTHER KIND OF SIGNS SOMEWHERE CHAIR. 
          UM, YES. 
          AND WE WERE KINDA TOS TALKING ABOUT THIS, UM, PREVIOUSLY. 
          AND SO WHAT WE CAN PROBABLY DO IS, IS LOOK AT WHAT'S EXISTING IN THE CODE THAT HAS A POINT OF REFERENCE WHEN LOOKING AT MAKING THIS ADJUSTMENT. 
          AND WHAT WE HAVE IS THE LIMITATION ON RELOCATION PERMITS, WHICH IS KIND OF WHAT WE CALL THE TWO FOR ONE, YOU TAKE DOWN TWO SIGNS, YOU GET A NEW SIGN THAT OF, AND WHAT THEY'RE SAYING IS, YOU KNOW, THOSE TWO SIGNS THAT YOU TAKE DOWN HAVE TO BE DOUBLE THE SIZE OF WHAT YOU'RE PUTTING UP AS A MINIMUM. 
          SO, UH, AND HOW I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD LOOK AT THIS IS WHEN YOU RAISE THAT SIGN, WE LOOK AT THAT AS KIND OF LIKE A NEW SIGN. 
          SO YOU'RE TAKING DOWN THE ONE THAT'S THERE THAT'S TOO SHORT, YOU'RE TAKING DOWN ANOTHER ONE SOMEWHERE ELSE IN THE CITY OF SAME SIZE OR, OR LARGER AND THEN THAT NEW ONE GOES UP. 
          SO IT'S KIND OF THE TWO FOR ONE TRADE OFF IS HOW WE'RE LOOKING AT IT. 
          YEAH. 
          AND IT'S NATURAL CHAIRMAN, CHAIRMAN, WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT IT THAT WAY. 
          A TWO FOR ONE IS A DIFFERENT PROPOSAL THAN A ONE FOR FOR ONE . 
          YEAH. 
          THIS IS, THIS IS ONE AT THIS FOR THE HEIGHT, WE ARE INCENTIVIZING THEM TO CONTINUE TO TAKE SIGNS DOWN. 
          I DON'T, YOU KNOW, IN REALITY ALL THE TWO FOR ONE AND NEW LOCATION DEALS, YOU KNOW, MOST OF THOSE ARE GONE BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT GOING TO, YOU KNOW, TAKE DOWN TWO BIG PERFORMING SIGNS. 
          THIS WOULD BE AN EXTRA INCENTIVE FOR THEM TO GET A, ENCOURAGE THEM TO RAISE THE SIGN IF THEY WANT. 
          AND, BUT YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO TAKE SOMETHING DOWN EQUAL IN SIZE, YOU KNOW, NOT HEIGHT BUT SIGNAGE AT THE SAME TIME. 
          I UNDERSTAND THE INTENT. 
          I THINK THAT BEING MORE DELIBERATE ABOUT IT, LIKE LET'S TALK ABOUT WHAT THOSE SIGNS ARE. 
          I DON'T WANT THIS AS A CARTE BLANC THAT AS TDOT ELEVATES THE ROADWAYS THAT WE'RE JUST GONNA ALLOW ALL OF THESE TO OCCUR. 
          NO, I I THINK WE ALL RECOGNIZE THAT EVEN TDOT RECOGNIZED THAT THEY'RE ROADWAY SIGNAGES ARE, ARE DETRIMENTAL. 
          IT'S NOT A, IT'S A SAFETY ISSUE. 
          THERE'S SIGNAGES ON THE, ON THE HIGHWAYS, YOU KNOW, THE THE ONES THAT THEY FLASH UP TELLING YOU MESSAGES. 
          THEY HAD A STUDY THAT CAME OUT ABOUT THAT. 
          SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO RECOGNIZE THAT IT'S NOT THAT I'M ANTI ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, BUT I'M THINKING PEOPLE LOVE OUR VIEW SHEDS THAT WE HAVE OF DOWNTOWN AND ENJOY OUR ROADWAYS AND WE JUST DON'T WANNA SEE MORE THINGS ELEVATED OUTSIDE OF THAT. 
          I MEAN, I KNOW THAT THERE'S A PURPOSE BEHIND THESE, BUT I THINK IF WE CAN IDENTIFY THERE'S ZONES, WE KNOW THAT THIS DOESN'T EXIST EVERYWHERE IN THE CITY. 
          WE KNOW THAT THERE'S CERTAIN FLYOVERS THAT HAVE COME UP IN THAT TIMEFRAME AND I THINK IT SHOULD BE A ONE TIME THING. 
          I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE CODIFIED FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS UNTIL WE COME BACK. 
          SO I HAVE A DIFFERENT APPROACH ON THIS ONE. 
          SO, SO LET ME SAY WHAT I'D LIKE TO BE. 
          THE ALL WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS CONCEPT. 
          OKAY? ALL THE DETAILS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS STAGE TWO. 
          SO IF, IF THE GROUP AS A WHOLE HAS NO APPETITE TO AT LEAST CONSIDER IT, THERE'S NO POINT IN WASTING EVERYBODY'S TIME AND EFFORT TRYING TO DRAFT LANGUAGE, FIGURE THE THING, GET THE INVENTORY, FIGURE IT OUT IF THERE IS SOME CONSENSUS THAT THIS IS A GOOD THING TO MOVE ON AND, AND WORK ON GETTING THE EXACT LANG CODE LANGUAGE BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT'S GONNA BE IMPORTANT TO BE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, FIGURE OUT IF IT'S ACCEPTABLE OR NOT. 
          BUT IF IT'S D O A, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK ANYBODY WANTS TO SPEND ANY TIME, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO DRAFT 
          [02:50:01]
UP, YOU KNOW, AND NEGOTIATE OUT A BUNCH OF LANGUAGE. 
          COLLEEN, TO ME IT'S NOT D O A. 
          HOWEVER, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO, TO DISCUSS SOME OF OUR CONCERNS SO THAT WE ARE IN A POSITION TO START WORKING IT OUT, YOU KNOW? NO, YEAH, FOR TOO LONG. 
          ONE OF MY CONCERNS, UM, AS YOU KNOW, WE, WE COULD EASILY END UP WITH ALL OF OUR LARGE SIGNS IN ONE AREA OF THE CITY. 
          UM, AND THE OTHER THING IS, UM, I WOULD CONSIDER MOVING, UH, YOU KNOW, THE ONE FOR ONE, I MIGHT CONSIDER IT NOT BEING IN THE SAME AREA, BUT BEING TAKEN OUT OF AREAS WHERE OFF-PREMISE SIGNS ARE CURRENTLY NOT PRO NOT PROHIBIT PERMITTED. 
          OH, THAT, UH, SO IN OTHER WORDS, IN LIKE IN A CORRIDOR, UHHUH. 
          , OKAY. 
          I, I MEAN THAT'S A, I MEAN WE CAN DO THAT AND, AND I THINK I, ONE THING I WANNA MAKE CLEAR IS THIS WOULD NOT APPLY AT LEAST UNDER MY DEAL TO PUTTING UP A NEW SIGN, YOU KNOW, UP IN THE AIR. 
          IT IS ONLY SIGNS THAT ARE THERE NOW, YOU KNOW, THROUGH NO FAULT OF THE, YOU KNOW, THE OPERATOR TXDOT MADE A, YOU KNOW, A VISUAL BLOCK. 
          UM, I AM STILL, I'M SORRY, BUT CONFUSED ON WHERE WE'RE MEASURING THAT MAXIMUM 85 FOOT FROM, IS THAT THE GROUND AT THE BASE OF THE SUN? YES. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE PICTURE, WE WOULD JUST CHANGE 60, THE 60 TO 85, BUT IT WOULD STILL BE CAPPED AT 42 AND A HALF FEET ABOVE THE EXPRESSWAY. 
          THE POINT OF MEASUREMENT, WHICH IS THERE, THERE'S TWO, THERE'S TWO MEASUREMENTS THAT GO ON. 
          THE SIGN CAN BE 42 AND A HALF FEET FROM THE, WHAT I CALL THE ADJACENT ROADWAY, WHICH IN THIS CASE IS WHERE THE WORD EXPRESSWAY IS WRITTEN. 
          OKAY. 
          SO IT CAN BE 42 AND A HALF FEET ABOVE THAT, BUT IT ALSO CANNOT EXCEED 60 FEET FROM THE BASE OF THE SITE. 
          WELL, YEAH. 
          AND I'M SAYING IF THEY TO, TO GIVE THEM IN, IN CASES WHERE THEIR SIGN HAS BEEN VISUALLY BLOCKED, 25 MORE FEET IN RETURN FOR TAKING DOWN A SIGN WHEREVER WE DECIDE THE SIGN NEEDS TO COME DOWN. 
          HOWEVER, IF WE'RE MEASURING IT, SAY, SAY THE EXPRESSWAY IN THIS CASE WAS AT THE SAME GROUND LEVEL AS AT, AS THE BASE OF THE SIGN. 
          I, I DON'T THINK IF YOU'RE CAPPING AT 42 WOULD HAVE, THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE, THEY WOULD AT THAT POINT THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO GO MORE THAN 42 AND A HALF FEET PERIOD. 
          WELL, WOULD YOU SEE THEIR SIGN FROM THAT FLY OVER THERE? YEAH. 
          NO, BUT THE, THE 42 AND A HALF FEET IS MEASURED FROM THE HIGHEST ROADWAY THAT THEY'RE ADJACENT TO. 
          SO GO BACK TO THE OTHER SIGN. 
          BUT, BUT IT'S ALSO, IT'S ALL KEPT AT 85 FEET. 
          OKAY. 
          SO IT'S BOTH MEASUREMENTS. 
          SO IF, IF THE FLYOVER IS AT AT 60 FEET, THE THE MAX THEY COULD STILL GO UP IS 85, WHICH JUST PUTS 'EM 25 FEET ABOVE THE HIGHWAY IF IT'S, SO IT'S, IT'S A DOUBLE MEASUREMENT MEASUREMENT. 
          THE 85 WAS, GO AHEAD. 
          WE WERE TALKING PREVIOUSLY ABOUT THE MAIN TRAVEL ROADWAY BEING SOMETHING DIFFERENT FROM THAT FLY. 
          I'M SORRY, PREVIOUSLY WE WERE TA TALKING ABOUT THE MAIN TRAVEL ROAD BEING SOMETHING OTHER THAN THAT FLYWAY AND THAT FLYWAY MAKES IT EVEN HIGHER IN THE AIR. 
          THAT IS CORRECT. 
          IN MOST HIGHWAYS AROUND TOWN, THIS WOULD, THIS 85 FEET WOULD NOT APPLY BECAUSE YOU KNOW, THE, THE MAX, THE SIGN COULD BE, WOULD, WOULD PROBABLY BE IN MOST CASES, YOU KNOW, UNDER THE 60 FEET BECAUSE THE ROADWAY IS PRETTY FLAT, YOU KNOW, EVEN ON LIKE LOOP FOUR 10, YOU KNOW, IT MAY RAISE FIVE OR 10 FEET SOMEWHERE WHERE IT'S MEASURED OTHER, SO IT WOULD BE 52 AND A HALF FEET. 
          AND MARK, LET ME, I WANNA, YES, GIVE A COUPLE OF THINGS. 
          SO ONCE AGAIN, WE'RE SHOWING THE EXPRESSWAY HERE, BUT A LOT OF TIMES YOU DO HAVE A FRONTAGE ROAD HERE AND AS A HOW DO WE APPROACH IT, WE LET KIND OF THE SIGN INDUSTRY TELL US, YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE YOU AIMING FOR? HEY, WE WANT THIS EXPRESSWAY, THAT'S WHO WE WANT TO GET. 
          SO THAT WILL BE THE MEASUREMENT POINT. 
          SO IF IT'S THE FLYOVER THAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR, THAT WOULD BE THE MEASUREMENT 
          [02:55:01]
POINT. 
          AND THERE ARE TIMES ACTUALLY THE FRONTAGE ROAD, YOU KNOW, DRIVING DOWN 2 81 WHERE THE FRONTAGE ROAD IS HIGHER AND THEN LOWER AND THEY SAY, HEY, WE'RE LOOKING FOR THE FRONTAGE ROAD. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD BE THE MEASUREMENT POINT. 
          UH, BUT IF FOR SOME REASON THEY'RE LOOKING FOR 2 81. 
          SO I MEAN, WE TRY TO WORK WITH THEM AND, AND LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, THEY TELL US THIS IS REALLY WHAT WE'RE AIMING FOR. 
          THIS IS THE SIGNS INTENT IS THIS, THIS ROAD. 
          AND THEN WE USE THAT AS THE ADJACENT ROAD, WHETHER IT BE, YOU KNOW, EVEN THOUGH THE FRONTAGE ROAD MIGHT BE THE TRULY ADJACENT ROAD, WE LOOK AT THE EXPRESSWAY AS THE CURRENT MEASUREMENT. 
          AN IDEA I HAVE IS ANDREW BEDS, BY THE WAY, IS THAT I THINK THAT TAKING A COMPLETE BILLBOARD DOWN IS TOO MUCH. 
          I THINK, 'CAUSE SOME BILLBOARD OPERATORS DON'T HAVE 800 BILLBOARDS, THEY HAVE FIVE. 
          SO ANOTHER WAY TO GET EVERYBODY EQUAL ACROSS THE BOARD IS WHATEVER HEIGHT THE SIGN NEEDS TO GO UP TO MEET THE STANDARDS, NOT EXCEED 85 FEET. 
          THEY NEED TO TAKE THAT HEIGHT THAT THEY'RE GOING UP OFF ANOTHER SIGN THAT'S EXISTING ALREADY UNDER INVENTORY. 
          I MEAN, THAT'S SOMETHING WE COULD CONSIDER IF WE GET, COULD WE HAVE A SIGN INVENTORY AT THE NEXT MEETING? SURE. 
          BY, BY BY SIGN COMPANY TO HER, TO HER WHOLE POINT, UH, YOU KNOW, IN THE PAST WHEN THE BILLBOARDS, THE DIGITAL BILLBOARDS WERE DOUBLE-SIDED, WHAT MADE THAT SUCCESSFUL WAS THAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT CERTAIN LOCATIONS. 
          YOU AND WE ARE PER SE TALKING ABOUT CERTAIN LOCATIONS, BUT WE DON'T HAVE AN INVENTORY. 
          SO TO HER POINT, UNDERSTANDING WHAT IS THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT IN THESE AREAS, UM, AND WE KNOW THEY'RE NOT JUST CLEAR CHANNEL. 
          WE KNOW THERE'S OTHERS THAT ARE OPERATING HERE IN THE CITY, BUT THEY DO HAVE TO LIE AND SHARE WHAT DO YOU HAVE 85, 90% OF THE, OF THEM IN THE MARKETPLACE? SO, UM, I APPRECIATE THE WILLINGNESS TO WANNA REMOVE. 
          UM, BUT I THINK ULTIMATELY, I, I THINK THERE'S A PATH FORWARD. 
          I JUST THINK THAT UNDERSTANDING WHERE YOUR BUILT ENVIRONMENT IS AND ENSURING THAT, UM, WE TALK ABOUT THOSE LOCATIONS ONLY, THAT IT'S NOT SOMETHING UNIVERSAL. 
          AND I THINK THAT THERE'S PATH FORWARD. 
          SO NO, I DON'T, I I THINK WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO CRAFT THE LANGUAGE. 
          SO IT APPLIES TO REALLY IT'S, IT'S MAYBE ONE OR TWO OR THREE OR FOUR PLACES, YOU KNOW, WHERE, WHERE YOU HAVE THESE HUGE FLYOVERS EITHER CURRENTLY CONSTRUCTED OR GONNA BE CONSTRUCTED. 
          AND IT REALLY, YOU KNOW, IT USED TO BE THEY DID 'EM AND THEY WERE 20 FEET HIGH. 
          NOW THEY'VE DECIDED TO MAKE 'EM LIKE, YOU KNOW, SKI SLED, YOU KNOW, RAMPS AND THEY'RE HUGE AND THEY, EACH ONE THEY BUILD, THEY GET A LITTLE HIGHER AND YOU KNOW, BUT TO YOUR WHOLE POINT, I THINK CURRENTLY CONSTRUCTED, I'M NOT WILLING TO HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT SOMETHING THAT MAY BE CONSTRUCTED. 
          WELL ONE, ONCE YOU MAKE THE DEFINITION, IT'S, UNLESS IT'S PROHIBITED, IT WOULD APPLY. 
          YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T, IT MAY BE HARD TO GET TO THAT POINT BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO DEFINE WHERE THE ZONE COULD BE. 
          IT CAN'T, IF THERE'S ANOTHER CITY ORDINANCE THAT PROHIBITS BILLBOARDS FROM BEING MODIFIED CHANGE, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD AND AND THAT IS MY CONCERN. 
          YEAH. 
          SO I'M NOT WILLING TO PUT A U D C AMENDMENT THAT IS GONNA BE UNIVERSAL FOR THE ENTIRE CITY. 
          WELL THIS ISN'T PERIOD. 
          THIS IS IN. 
          SO I THINK THAT THAT'S JUST WHAT I'M SAYING. 
          LIKE IT TO ME IT HAS TO BE VERY SPECIFIC ABOUT THESE PARTICULAR LOCATIONS THAT ARE EXISTING RIGHT NOW. 
          NOT THAT FUTURE CAN BE, CAN BE CONSIDERED. 
          I THINK THAT AS OUR INTERSTATE SYSTEM EXPANDS SPECIFICALLY THE 1604 INTERSECTION, UH, THAT WHOLE EXPANSION THAT'S GOING ON OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS, THAT WE HAVE THAT DISCUSSION AGAIN IN THE FUTURE. 
          YEAH. 
          I THINK RIGHT NOW IT'S, TO ME IT'S ABOUT THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT RIGHT NOW. 
          YEAH, THAT FAIR POINT. 
          IT WOULD BE LIKE A ONETIME THING, LIKE THE SIDING OF THE, THAT'S THE WAY I LOOK AT IT. 
          SO I DON'T REALLY LOOK AT IT AS LIKE A U D C AMENDMENT PER SE, I GUESS. 
          YEAH. 
          IS JUST CLEAR. 
          IS CHAPTER 28 IN THE UDC OR IS IT IN THE BUILDING? THE UUD C IS CHAPTER 35. 
          SO IT'S, IT'S A DIFFERENT ORDINANCE. 
          OKAY. 
          IT'S LIKE A WHOLE AND EVERYTHING WOULD HAVE TO MEET BOTH CHAPTER 28 AND 35. 
          PERFECT. 
          SO WE CAN'T SUPERSEDE U D C U D C HAS. 
          SO IF IT'S A CORRIDOR THAT DOESN'T ALLOW SIGNS NOW OR BILLBOARDS IN IT, THIS WOULDN'T APPLY. 
          ANY OTHER COMMENT? YES. 
          SO THE NEW SIGNS GOING UP WOULD BE DIGITAL? NO, THEY'RE BASICALLY TAKING THE SAME SIGN THEY HAVE AND JUST SCOOCHING IT UP 10, 20 FEET SO YOU CAN SEE IT. 
          YEAH. 
          WE, AND IN, IN RETURN FOR DOING THAT, THEY GOTTA TAKE SOMETHING DOWN EQUAL SIZE WHEREVER, YOU KNOW, WE END UP NEGOTIATING THAT 
          [03:00:01]
IF YOU KNOW IT'S THEN, AND THEN IT'S UP TO THE SIGN COMPANY TO SAY, I, YOU KNOW, YOU MAKE IT SO ONEROUS, YOU KNOW THEY'RE NOT GONNA WANT TO DO IT. 
          WHICH MEANS ALL THE BILLBOARDS STAY UP. 
          AND SO, YOU KNOW, WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS FIND THAT SWEET SPOT WHERE EVERYBODY, YOU KNOW, CAN REACH CONSENSUS AND WE CAN ALL WALK HAND IN HAND AND SAY, THIS IS A GOOD THING FOR SAN ANTONIO. 
          HEY MARK, UH, JACK HERE AGAIN, I, YOU KNOW, I LOOK AT BILLBOARDS A LOT AS UH, A COUPLE DIFFERENT ANGLES, BUT ONE IS YOU EITHER LOOK AT BILLBOARDS OR YOU DON'T. 
          AND A LOT OF IT'S SUBLIMINAL. 
          YOU JUST SEE 'EM OUTTA THE SIDE OF YOUR EYE AND YOU SEE MR FOUR STARING AT YOUR FACE ALL THE TIME. 
          I DIDN'T SAY FOUR, BUT FOUR. 
          UH, YEAH, YOU KNOW, IN YOUR FACE FOUR. 
          SO, BUT LIKE THE ONE THAT YOU'RE SHOWING ON THIS EXAMPLE, FOR EXAMPLE, HOW MANY PEOPLE DRIVE BY THAT AND REALLY TRY TO SEE WHAT THE HECK IS A NEW BILLBOARD THERE? IF YOU'RE A BILLBOARD PERSON THAT LOOKS AT BILLBOARDS, IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT TRYING TO SEE WHAT THAT THING SAYS, AND THESE BILLBOARD COMPANIES HAVE BEEN PENALIZED AS BUSINESS ENTREPRENEURIAL COMPANIES BY ALL OF A SUDDEN THIS STRUCTURE THAT GOT RAISED, I THINK THAT'S REALLY UNFAIR TO THEM BECAUSE WHEN THEY HAD, AND I DON'T, WELL WE HAVE ONE BILLBOARD THAT WAS, HAD THAT PENALTY. 
          SO WE HAVE ONE. 
          SO IF YOU SAID, I WANNA RAISE THAT BOARD, THEN I HAVE TO TAKE IT DOWN TO RAISE IT. 
          'CAUSE I ONLY HAVE ONE. 
          YEAH. 
          BUT IT'S OVER THERE ON I 10. 
          WELL, IT DOESN'T BLOCK ANY, THERE'S NOTHING BEAUTIFUL ABOUT THE HOMES OVER THERE. 
          IT DOESN'T LOOK OVER THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. 
          IT'S NOT ONE OF THE VISUAL CORRIDORS I WOULD THINK. 
          BUT IT WAS PENALIZED WHEN I 10 WAS RAISED AND ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU, IT GOT BLOCKED BY THE TURN TO MEDICAL AND ALL THAT AND YOU COULDN'T, ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU COULDN'T SEE THE BILLBOARD THAT WAS BUILT AT A TIME WHEN IT WAS VERY VISUAL. 
          SO IT WAS PENALIZED BY THAT STRUCTURE. 
          SO IT, IT ALMOST SEEMS LIKE IT'S A CASE BY CASE. 
          BUT YOU KNOW, ONES LIKE THIS THAT ARE HIDDEN, THEN YOU CAN ONLY SEE HALF OF IT. 
          I MEAN, I WOULD DESIGN THAT BETTER THAT YOU COULD JUST REALLY SEE HALF OF IT REALLY WELL AND MAYBE MAKE THE REST BLACK SO YOU DON'T SEE IT. 
          BUT THEY OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO RAISE THEIR SIGN 'CAUSE THEY DIDN'T DO ANYTHING WRONG WHEN THAT, WHEN THEY HAD THAT BUILT AND IT WAS, IT WAS VERY VISUAL AND, YOU KNOW, TO MAKE 'EM TEAR DOWN ANOTHER SIGN TO RAISE THAT ONE SO YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE IT AND NOT SEE HALF OF IT WHERE IT LOOKS LIKE SOMEBODY DID A, A SHODDY DESIGN PROCESS, SOMEBODY COMING INTO THE CITY GO, WHY DID THEY PUT IT SO LOW? THEY DIDN'T, THEY RAISED A STUPID HIGHWAY. 
          SO, I DON'T KNOW. 
          I JUST, YEAH. 
          AND I THINK THAT'S PART OF THE DISCUSSION WE'RE GONNA GO THROUGH TO SAY, IS THERE, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING ELSE THAT THEY COULD DO, YOU KNOW, OTHER THAN TAKE A BILLBOARD DOWN, PLANT TREES, DO SOMETHING ELSE, YOU KNOW, ALL THAT CAN HAPPEN AT THE NEXT PHASE. 
          SO, UH, I THINK WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT, HAVE SOME DIRECTION. 
          JEREMY, CAN WE PUT THE PICTURE UP AND DO THE LAST ITEM, UH, IS GOING TO BE, UH, THE ONE THAT WAS SUBMITTED THAT HAS THAT MAP OF THE HIGHWAY FRONTAGE CHAIR BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM. 
          UM, SO WHAT IS REQUIRED FROM STAFF TO DO BETWEEN NOW AND NEXT MEETING ON THIS ITEM? WHAT'S THE RECOMMENDATION? WHAT DOES THE WE ALL WE NEED COMMITTEE WANT US TO DO? WE NEED A SIGN INVENTORY AND, AND IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF YOU HAVE THAT, UH, G I S PLOTTED. 
          THAT WOULD BE EVEN BETTER BY COMPANY. 
          YEAH. 
          I DON'T KNOW THAT IT THE SIGN LIST BY COMPANY, BUT THE PLOT JUST BY PLOT, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S GONNA BE HARDER TO DO. 
          WELL WE, YEAH, WE NEED IT BY COMPANY JUST TO SEE WHAT THEIR INVENTORY IS. 
          BECAUSE SOME HAVE MORE INVENTORY WHEN YOU GET INTO THE WHOLE TAKE DOWN DISCUSSION. 
          YEAH. 
          AND SO IT MIGHT JUST, JUST ALL THE BILLBOARDS ESSENTIALLY. 
          JUST A ANOTHER IF, IF IT'S POSSIBLE. 
          AND NOT, NOT SAYING WE WANT TO BE LIKE ALL THE OTHER CITIES, BUT, YOU KNOW, ARE WE REINVENTING THE WHEEL OR WHAT IS, WHAT IS AUSTIN, DALLAS, HOUSTON, WHAT, WHAT IS THERE? Y'ALL PROBABLY KNOW THAT INSIDE AND OUT. 
          BUT IT WOULD BE NICE TO, FOR US AS A PART OF THIS DISCUSSION TO KNOW WHAT IS BEING DONE IN OTHER CITIES AROUND BESIDES SAN ANTONIO. 
          WE DON'T KNOW THAT, BUT WE WILL LOOK AT THAT UP AND HAVE THAT READY. 
          YEAH. 
          AND, AND MAYBE, YOU KNOW, THE INDUSTRY GROUPS CAN HELP EASILY, 'CAUSE I'M SURE YOU HAVE IT EVERYWHERE, WHAT THE HIGH REQUIREMENTS ARE AND MAYBE GIVE THAT TO STAFF ON A GRAPH, NOT A GRAPH, BUT A CHART. 
          YOUR CHAIRMAN YES. 
          ON THAT INVENTORY OF SIGNS. 
          CAN YOU PUT IT, PUT PIN DOTS ON A MAP SHOW WHERE THEY'RE AT? YEAH, THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S WHAT I WAS ASKING. 
          THE G I S SIZE OF THE SIGNS SHOWS. 
          [03:05:01]
LET'S JUST TAKE, CAN YOU ALSO HAVE A MAP OF YOUR SCENIC CORRIDORS? THANK YOU. 
          YES, WE, YEAH, WE HAVE THAT. 
          AND WE CAN SHOW IT WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. 
          WE'LL HAVE THAT FOR THE NEXT MEETING. 
          THAT'D BE GREAT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY, SO THIS IS AN ITEM THAT CAME UP LAST TIME THAT I'D LIKE TO TRY TO, WE CAN'T DECIDE ON IT, BUT I WOULD LIKE ACTUALLY MARK, UH, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, WE HAVE NOT BROUGHT THIS ONE UP BEFORE YET. 
          OKAY. 
          SO LET'S, SO THIS IS NEW. 
          THIS IS AN INTERNAL STAFF RECOMMENDATION, MORE OF A CLARIFICATION, BUT WE KNEW IT WAS A LITTLE BIT MORE CONTENTIOUS PROBABLY THAN SOME OF THE OTHER CLARIFICATION ITEMS THAT WE HAD. 
          OKAY. 
          SO THIS WILL BE OUR LAST ITEM FOR THE DAY. 
          AND SO WE'LL END ON A, UH, AND WE'RE, AND THIS IS NOT FOR DECISION BECAUSE IT WASN'T POSTED ON THE AGENDA, BUT I'D JUST LIKE SOME DISCUSSION. 
          ALL YOURS JEREMY? UH, UM, SO WHAT WE HAVE HERE, THIS IS ON-PREMISE SIGNAGE, NOT OFF-PREMISE SIGNAGE. 
          SO SOME OF THE THINGS WE WERE TALKING ABOUT WITH THE ADJACENT GRADE AND, AND BE ABLE TO GO UP, UH, WAS OFF-PREMISE SIGNAGE. 
          THE BOARD SIGNS TYPICALLY, SO THIS IS ON-PREMISE SIGN WHEN YOU ARE NEXT TO AN ADJACENT EXPRESSWAY THAT DOES HAVE AN ELEVATION. 
          AND UM, I'LL HAVE TO PULL UP THAT SECTION HERE IN A SECOND. 
          BUT THIS IS THE VISUAL. 
          SO SAY YOU'RE THIS PROPERTY HERE AND YOU HAVE, OR ANY ALONG THIS FRONTAGE ROAD YOU HAVE, AND I'LL BRING UP THE TABLE THAT ALLOWS YOU TO GO UP 10 FOOT HIGHER THAN WHAT'S ALLOWED ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE CITY WHEN YOU HAVE AN ADJACENT GRADE HIGHER. 
          BUT IF YOU'RE A PROPERTY THAT ISN'T EXACTLY ADJACENT TO THE FRONTAGE ROAD IN EXPRESSWAY, YOU'RE ADJACENT TO ANOTHER PROPERTY, YOU DON'T GET THAT APPROVAL. 
          UH, BUT THE WORDING WITHIN THE CODE RIGHT NOW KINDA MAKES IT SEEM LIKE YOU COULD, AND WE DON'T ENFORCE IT THAT WAY. 
          WE ENFORCE THAT THE MAXIMUM, YOU DON'T ALLOW THAT EXTRA 10 FEET WHEN YOU'RE NOT ADJACENT TO THE FRONTAGE ROAD OR THE SIGN OR THE EXPRESSWAY. 
          SO WE WERE TRYING TO CLARIFY THAT, UH, BY CODIFYING THAT, HOW WE ENFORCED IT. 
          BUT LEMME GO TO THAT CODE SECTION REAL FAST. 
          SO, UM, THIS IS THE TAPE. 
          I THINK IT'S TABLE TWO, CORRECT? TABLE ONE OR TWO. 
          OKAY. 
          SO IT COULD BE ONE R TWO. 
          UH, SO THIS IS, IS, IT'S THIS ITEM RIGHT HERE. 
          SO RIGHT NOW THIS IS THE, IF YOU'RE A ALONG EXPRESSWAY, YOU CAN BE AT 50 FEET, BUT IF YOU'RE ADJACENT TO IT, UH, HEIGHT ABOVE THE ADJACENT STREET GRADE NOT TO EXCEED 60 FEET. 
          SO IT ALLOWS YOU TO GO ABOVE AN EXTRA 10. 
          AND WE WANT, AND THAT'S ONLY FOR THE PROPERTIES THAT ARE RIGHT NEXT TO THE EXPRESSWAY OR THE FRONTAGE ROAD IN THEN EXPRESSWAY AND NOT THE PROPERTIES THAT ARE FURTHER BACK IN, THOSE ARE STILL CAPPED AT 50. 
          UH, BUT IT COULD BE READ TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, 'CAUSE WE REFERENCED THEM BACK TO TABLE ONE AND TWO AND THAT TABLE ONE HAS THIS ASTERISK THAT ALLOWS THE ADJACENT PROPERTY TO GO UP TO 50 OR TO, I'M SORRY, TO 60 AS A MAXIMUM. 
          SO WE'RE JUST WANTING TO ADJUST, ADJUST THE, UH, LANGUAGE. 
          AND I DON'T HAVE THAT WRITTEN UP JUST NOW AND I'LL PRESENT THAT. 
          BUT THE GOAL IS OVERALL TO SAY THAT IF YOU'RE NOT THAT ADJACENT PROPERTY, IF YOU'RE NEXT TO THAT ADJACENT PROPERTY, THEN YOU HAVE TO, YOU'RE MAXED AT 50 AND NOT 60. 
          SO ONCE AGAIN, THAT WOULD BE, THIS PROPERTY WOULD BE MAXED AT 50 WHILE THESE PROPERTIES ALONG HERE ARE MAXED AT 60. 
          SO WHAT, WHAT, CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT THE, WHERE IT SAYS LOCATED WITHIN 500 FEET OF AN EXPRESSWAY. 
          SO ANY, ANY PROPERTY THAT'S WITHIN 500 FEET OF AN EXPRESSWAY FROM THE MEASUREMENT OF, I ASSUME THE CURB TO WHEREVER WOULD BE CLASSIFIED AS AN EXPRESSWAY, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. 
          EXPRESSWAY SITS WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE EXPRESSWAY. 
          THEY'RE ALLOWED EXPRESSWAY STANDARD SIGNS, HOWEVER THEY HAVE TO MEET THE CRITERIA, WHICH IS THE NEXT ONE HAVE TO BE A HUNDRED. 
          THE SIGN HAS TO BE A HUNDRED FEET FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY AND ALSO MAINTAIN 200 FEET FROM THE NEAREST RESIDENTIAL ZONE. 
          AND THE SIGN HAS TO BE ORIENTED TO THE HIGHWAY. 
          SO WHY WOULD WE CARE IF WE GIVE THEM AN EXTRA 10 FEET ON THAT, WHERE THAT MARK INTERSECTS IN THIS EXAMPLE, IF THE PROPERTY SITS AWAY 
          [03:10:01]
FROM THE ADJACENT TO THE HIGHWAY. 
          SO THEY'RE NOT, THE ADJACENT GRADE IS NOT A HIGHWAY, IT IS THE NEXT PROPERTY. 
          SO OUR INTERPRETATION HAS BEEN THAT THEY, THEY DO NOT ALLOW THE ADDITIONAL 10 FEET OF GREAT SEPARATION. 
          I THINK, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION CHAIR, UM, IF WE HAVE A, A PROPERTY THAT IS 499 FEET AWAY FROM THE HIGHWAY, THAT'S WHAT YOU SAID, MEASURE FROM THE CURB AT THE ACCESS ROAD. 
          THAT'S WHY I USED TO MEASUREING FROM, WE DON'T WANT A SIGN STICKING OUT IN THE MIDDLE OF ALL THESE TREES IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE. 
          JUST BIG OLD SIGN KIND OF JUST STICKING OUT. 
          IT DOESN'T GO WITH THE REST OF THE AREA. 
          THE ONES ON THE HIGHWAY, THEY KIND OF DO, 'CAUSE THE SIGNS ARE TYPICALLY TALLER THAN THE ACCESS ROADS, BUT I DON'T THINK I'D, I'D LIKE TO SEE A SIGN 500 FEET AWAY STICKING LIKE A SORE THUMB. 
          OKAY, FAIR ENOUGH. 
          CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE, THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE? SO I HAVEN'T, UH, WRITTEN UP ON THE, UH, ITEM, BUT LET ME PULL UP WHAT WE HAVE HERE. 
          IS THE LANGUAGE THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING, THE ONE ON THE BOTTOM OF THE PICTURE? YEAH. 
          SO IT WOULD BE THE ADDING AND SHALL NOT ALLOW FOR ADJACENT GRADE ALLOWANCE. 
          SO THE SECTION THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS SECTION F, THE EXPRESS STANDARDS. 
          AND TABLES ONE AND TWO SHALL ALSO APPLY TO LOSS ON PORTIONS OF LOSS LOCATED WITHIN 500 FEET, BUT NOT DIRECTLY, BUT IT TAKES 'EM BACK TO THAT TABLE ONE. 
          AND THAT'S WHERE THE CONFUSION COMES IN. 
          THAT TABLE ONE AND TWO HAS THE ASTERISK ALLOWS, UH, ITEM OR PROPERTIES ADJACENT TO THE EXPRESSWAY TO GO FROM 50 TO 60. 
          AND THERE'S BEEN CONFUSION BY APPLICANTS THAT THINK THEY CAN GO TO 60 BASED ON THE KIND OF THE CIRCULAR APPROACH TO THIS CODE LANGUAGE OF IF I FALL UNDER SECTION SUBSECTION F GO BACK TO TABLE ONE, I FALL UNDER THAT EXPRESSWAY BECAUSE I'M WITHIN 500 FEET. 
          BUT REALLY THAT'S NOT THE INTENT. 
          YOU HAVE TO BE EXPRESSLY ADJACENT TO THE FRONT ROAD AND EXPRESSWAY TO GET THAT EXTRA 10 FEET. 
          SO WHEN YOU BRING THIS BACK, I WOULD MAKE THE FOLLOWING SUGGESTIONS, I'D LEAVE F THE WAY IT IS. 
          AND CAN YOU GO BACK TO TABLE ONE AND TWO? I WOULD, UH, PUT A, LIKE A, INSTEAD OF ASTERISK, I'D PUT A ONE AND A TWO A NOTE AND, AND REALLY EXPLAIN IN THE TABLE THAT THE, YOU CAN ADD ANOTHER 10 FEET IF YOU ARE DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE HIGHWAY. 
          SO IT'S CLEAR IN THE TABLE BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY WHERE THE MOST OF THEM ARE LOOKING. 
          I MEAN, WHEN YOU GO TO FIND OUT, YOU, YOU GO INTO THE TABLE AND YOU SEE THE NOTE DOWN THERE, YOU'RE NOT LOOKING BACK AT THE CODE LANGUAGE. 
          AND I THINK IT WOULD JUST BE EASIER TO CLARIFY IT IN THE CO IN THE TABLES AS THE NOTES TO THE TABLE THAN IT IS TO CLARIFY IT. 
          AND IF THAT'S ALWAYS BEEN THE ARGUMENT THAT ADJACENT, THAT'S WHAT I ALWAYS USE. 
          AND THAT TYPICALLY WORKED FOR ME, BUT I WOULD JUST PUT DIRECTLY ADJACENT. 
          SO IT IT'S THE PROPERTY OR PROPERTY THAT ABUTS TO THE HIGHWAY IS PROBABLY A BETTER WAY TO DEFINE HOW YOU GET THE 10 FEET. 
          AGREED. 
          SO YOUR PROPERTY HAS TO BE DIRECTLY UP AGAINST THE HIGHWAY, CORRECT? THAT IS THE INTENT, YES SIR. 
          YEAH. 
          SO MAYBE WE USE THE, CHANGE THE WORD IN THE TABLES TO, YOU KNOW, PROPERTIES DIRECTLY ABUTTING THE, THE EXPRESSWAY MAY, YOU KNOW, GET 10 EXTRA FEET OR WHATEVER LANGUAGE YOU WANT TO USE THAT'S LEGALLY CORRECT. 
          PROPERTIES WITH HIGHWAY FRONTAGE 500 FEET, YOU DON'T HAVE HIGHWAY FRONTAGE AND WE'LL, WE'LL CHECK THE CODE AND SEE WHERE ELSE WE MIGHT HAVE USED THAT REFERENCE. 
          BUT YEAH, I THINK WE STAFF UNDERSTANDS THE INTENT AND WE'LL MAKE THOSE ADJUSTMENTS WHEN WE PRESENT THIS TO THE COMMITTEE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          JUST SIMPLY ELIMINATE THE 500 FOOT NO, BECAUSE THAT, BECAUSE IT'S WITHIN THE 500, IF YOU'RE WITHIN 500 FEET OF A FREEWAY, YOU GET TO GO UP 50 FEET, ELIMINATE THE 500, JUST CALL IT ADJACENT, BUT IT ALLOWS MORE PROPERTY TO HAVE HIGHER SIGNS CLOSE TO HIGHWAYS. 
          SO IF, IF YOU ELIMINATE THE 500, THEN YOU'RE BASICALLY GOING TO BE LIMITED BY THE TYPE OF STREET MAYBE TO A 32 FOOT SIGN. 
          BUT BECAUSE YOU'RE WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE HIGHWAY, YOU CAN GO UP 50 FEET. 
          I THINK WHAT I'M LOOKING AT IS IF YOU'RE ON THE FRONTAGE ROAD, YOU'RE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE FRONTAGE ROAD PROPERTY, YOU GOT FRONTAGE ROAD ACCESS, RIGHT? NO. 
          AND THAT, THAT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ON THIS PROPERTY, IT DOES NOT HAVE THE FRONTAGE ROAD PROP, 
          [03:15:01]
UH, ACCESS THERE ON A ARTERIAL STREET OR MAYBE EVEN A LOCAL STREET OFF OF THAT FRONTAGE ROAD. 
          THEY'RE JUST WITHIN 500 FEET. 
          SO WE'RE GIVING THEM A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN WHAT THEY'RE TECHNICALLY ALLOWED BY THESE TABLES. 
          WE'RE JUST NOT GIVING 'EM THAT EXTRA 10 IF THEY'RE ACTUALLY ADJACENT TO THE FRONTAGE ROAD. 
          I GOTCHA. 
          OKAY, MR. CHAIRMAN. 
          YES. 
          UM, IN WHAT WE'VE LOOKED AT AS EXAMPLES, WE ONLY TALKED ABOUT THE ARTERIAL TYPE A. 
          ARE WE GOING TO CARRY THAT THROUGH, UM, TO THE OTHER TYPES OF STREETS? FOR EXAMPLE, IF THAT CROSS STREET IS A LOCAL STREET, ARE WE GOING TO RAISE IT TO 30? NO, IT, IT ONLY APPLIES TO EXPRESSWAYS AND ONLY PROPERTY THAT IS DIRECTLY ADJACENT OR DIRECTLY ABUTS THE HIGHWAY GETS EXTRA 10 FEET. 
          YEAH. 
          SO WHAT IT IS, IS THAT SUBSECTION ALLOWS ANYBODY THAT'S WITHIN 500 FEET OF HERE, INSTEAD OF BEING LIMITED TO WHAT THIS STREET IS, CALL AN ARTERIAL AT 32 FEET. 
          IF THEY'RE WITHIN 500 FEET AND MEET THE OTHER REQUIREMENTS ALONG FROM RIGHT OF WAY AND RESIDENTIAL, THEY COULD GO UP TO THE EXPRESSWAY OF 50 FOR ONE AND 60 FOR THE OTHER, FOR TABLE ONE AND TWO. 
          NOW THESE ARE ALLOWED TO GO UP TO 60 AND 70, BUT WE'RE TELLING THEM THEY CAN'T GO TO 60 AND 70. 
          THEY GOTTA STAY AT 50 OR 60 OF THE EXPRESSWAY. 
          BUT THEY'RE STILL BEING BETTER THAN WHAT THEY WOULD GET IF THEY HAD TO GO OFF THE ACTUAL STREET THAT THEY'RE NEXT TO, WHICH IS EITHER AN ARTERIAL OR, OR, UM, OTHER FORM OF STREET. 
          AND, AND WE'RE NOT TO MAKE IT CLEAR TO EVERYBODY, WE ARE NOT MAKING ANY CHANGE AT ALL. 
          WE'RE JUST CLARIFYING THE LANGUAGE SO EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS WHAT IT MEANS. 
          YEAH, I THAT'S WHY I WANTED SURE. 
          YOU KNOW, HOW LONG YEAH, IT'S NOT CHANGING. 
          IT'S JUST A QUESTION. 
          YEAH, NO, NO, I THINK YOUR QUESTION WAS A GREAT QUESTION. 
          'CAUSE I THINK, YOU KNOW, WHEN I FIRST HEARD IT, I DIDN'T EXACTLY UNDERSTAND IT AND I, IT'S STILL HARD CONCEPT. 
          BUT BASICALLY I THINK ALL THE QUESTIONS, YOU KNOW, THAT WE'VE GOT ASKED BY EVERYBODY TODAY WERE GREAT QUESTIONS. 
          'CAUSE IT JUST FURTHERS A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT'S IN THE CODE. 
          BECAUSE THE PROBLEM IS, AND AND AM AND I HAVE HAD THIS CONVERSATION A LOT, IS THE PEOPLE WHO DRAFT THE CODE AND UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY MEANT TO SAY. 
          OKAY. 
          AND, AND YOU KNOW, AS A PERSON WHO HAS DRAFTED A LOT OF CODE LANGUAGE AS A VOLUNTEER AND SUBMITTED AMENDMENTS, WHEN I DRAFTED IT AND I SUBMITTED IT FIVE YEARS AGO, I UNDERSTOOD EXACTLY WHAT I WANTED TO SAY. 
          AND THEN FIVE YEARS AS WE'RE GOING THROUGH REVIEWING IT AGAIN AND I READ IT, I DON'T EXACTLY UNDERSTAND WHAT I MEANT TO SAY THEN. 
          SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, HAVING QUESTIONS ASKED IS GREAT BECAUSE IF YOU'RE NOT A CODE WONK AND YOU DIDN'T WRITE IT, IT'S REALLY THE PROBLEMS THEY'RE CLARIFYING RIGHT NOW IS STUFF THAT PEOPLE HAVE READ IT AND MISINTERPRETED WHAT THE INTENT. 
          AND WE JUST WANT TO CLEAN UP WHAT THE INTENT WAS TO BEGIN WITH. 
          OKAY. 
          IF THERE'S NO OTHER BUSINESS, UH, MEETING IS ADJOURNED. 
          OH, JEREMY, DO YOU HAVE MORE SLIDES THAT YOU HAVE TO SHOW BEFORE WE ADJOURN? UH, NO, I JUST BRING THIS BACK UP. 
          THIS IS WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER. 
          SO, UM, WEBSITE AND WHERE THINGS ARE AT, UM, AND HOW TO REACH US THROUGH COMMENTS THROUGH THIS EMAIL ADDRESS AND WHERE TO WATCH THE VIDEOS. 
          SAME, SAME AS BEFORE. 
          AND I THAT EVERYTHING FROM STAFF. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND BEFORE WE END, I, I'D REALLY LIKE TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR THEIR PARTICIPATION TODAY. 
          UH, I WOULD SUGGEST AND, AND I REACHED OUT BY EMAIL TO EVERYBODY WHO APPLIED TO BE ON THE COMMITTEE TO IMPLORE THEM TO COME BECAUSE MY HOPE IS I ONLY WANT TO DO THIS ONCE AND I DON'T WANT IT TO GET TO A COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND THEN WE HAVE TO START BACK. 
          SO WE'RE RUNNING A VERY OPEN MEETING, EVEN THOUGH I TRY TO MOVE THE MEETING ALONG SOMETIMES TO GET US THROUGH IT. 
          BUT EVERYBODY'S COMMENTS ARE APPRECIATED. 
          AND ANYBODY WHO'S OUT THERE IN THE GENERAL PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO ATTEND, IT'S POSTED ON THE D S D WEBSITE. 
          I BELIEVE IT'S IN TWO WEEKS, YOU KNOW, WE'LL HIT SOME MORE ITEMS. WE MAY NOT, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THESE MAY TAKE A FEW MORE MEETINGS. 
          UH, MIKE, UH, RUSS, BECAUSE HE WALKED OUT OF THE MEETING IS BEING VOLUNTEERED TO, UH, CHAIR THE COMMITTEE OR THE WORKING GROUP TO GO OVER THE, UH, THE LICENSING AND WHAT'S REQUIRED AND WHAT YOU CAN AND CAN'T DO, UH, TO, UH, AND I'D LIKE A COUPLE OF ASSIGNED PEOPLE TO SERVE ON IT BECAUSE YOU'RE THE LICENSED ONES AND THAT'S, YOU KNOW, WHO THANKS. 
          AND, AND SO IT COULD BE ANYBODY, WHETHER THEY'RE ON THE HERE TODAY OR NOT ON THE COMMITTEE, I DON'T CARE. 
          SO IF YOU'LL GET YOUR NAMES TO JEREMY, UH, WITH THE CITY, WE'D APPRECIATE IT. 
          THE 
          [03:20:01]
OTHER THING I WOULD ASK IS THERE'S A COUPLE OF SECTIONS, UH, AT LEAST THE, THE, I THINK SOME OF THEM, THE POINT OF MEASUREMENT IS EASY, BUT IF WE CAN GET SOME EXACT CODE LANGUAGE ON THAT AND WHAT THE MAINTENANCE, YOU KNOW, SO THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY LOOK AT WORDING OF WHAT THAT MEANS. 
          UH, IF WE CAN GET THAT, LET'S SAY BY NEXT TUESDAY OR WEDNESDAY TO JEREMY SO THAT THE STAFF HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK OVER AND WE MAY SET A STAKEHOLDER MEETING BETWEEN Y'ALL AND THE SIGN INDUSTRY AND THE STAFF TO SEE, YOU KNOW, WHERE TO GET THE LANGUAGE CLEAR SO WHEN IT GETS PRESENTED TO THE COMMITTEE, WE'RE GOOD. 
          WE SAID THAT YESTERDAY. 
          OKAY. 
          PERFECT. 
          WHEN'S THE NEXT MEETING? TWO WEEKS. 
          SO WE CURRENTLY HAVE THE 17TH AT WHAT TIME? ONE SECOND. 
          SO CHAIR, YOU DID, DID YOU SAY THAT UH, MIKE AND AND PETE ARE GONNA BE HANDLING THIS WORKSHOP TO GO THROUGH THOSE RELATIONS? YEAH. 
          AND AND THEY'LL RECRUIT ANYBODY ELSE THAT WANTS TO SERVE TO, TO JUST, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE JEREMY HEARD THAT SO THAT WE CAN YES. 
          DO THAT. 
          AND IT DOESN'T GET TAKEN TO THE BIG BOARD. 
          WE JUST GET IT DONE. 
          YEAH. 
          AT THIS LEVEL, CORRECT. 
          YEAH. 
          SO WE HAVE JUNE 17TH AT 1:00 PM 1:00 PM AND, AND STAFF WILL SEND OUT, UH, IF WE CAN JEREMY A CALENDAR INVITE TO ALL THAT BIG GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT APPLIED. 
          SO IT'S ON THEIR CALENDAR TOO BECAUSE I, I REALLY WANT PARTICIPATION. 
          THANK YOU FOR TALKING. 
          US TOO. 
          THANK THE STAFF. 
          BUT I WILL WARN YOU, WHEN YOU MEET AT ONE O'CLOCK, YOU DON'T GET FED. 
          SO, SO EAT LUNCH BEFORE YOU COME. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          MEETING ADJOURN.
* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.