Oh, crap, at least there aren’t pictures.

Full disclosure-I have edited comments and statements by individuals and the City. However, I have tried to leave the intent of comments intact, and have not added anything that is not in italics.
City Commission Meeting

Assistant City Manager Cheryl Patton reported that the Sign Code Committee recommended Ordinance 2896. Well of course, they spent 3 years on it!
The goals of the proposed Code were: to promote a positive economic and business climate by restricting private property rights through distinctive and effective signage; to improve the community’s image by eliminating sign clutter; Strike one! to encourage signage of a character and scale consistent with the built environment and their desired future vision; to protect health and safety including damages caused by distractions of motorists what part of the code applies to distractions?; to provide a code that is readily understood Strike two!; and to provide binding code implementation and enforcement Strike three!.
Significant changes include: eliminating the clutter caused by uncontrolled temporary signs, encouraging signage to correspond to the scale of the built environment and provided the Design Review Board with the ability to negotiate signage  see below that fits into the premise. Another major change was regarding interpretation of the sign code. The new Code specifically assigned a maximum square foot sign allowance yep, right here! to the premise/property instead of to each business on the property.
Strong enforcement which we have? was recommended by the Committee in order for the community to receive the intended benefit look at the benefits! from this new Code.
Mayor Gray declared the public hearing open. He also thanked all the members of the Sign code committee on behalf of the City Commissioners, for the three years of hard work that was put into the sign code. Blah, blah, blah.

Comment: a member of Sign Code Committee, stated that the committee was interested in changing the visual view that’s not what they were supposed to be doing of the City. The City Commission appointed the Sign Code Review Committee to review the current code, identify problem codes, recommend changes and present them to the City Commission for consideration. He added that early in the process the Committee developed a purpose statement: to evaluate and improve the City of Great Falls sign code so that the code can effectively promote a positive economic business climate; provide guidelines to enhance the community imagine; address design and safety standards; provide ease of understanding for contractors and business lets see if the businesses and members of the sign industry agree that this was one in the community; and provide for effective enforcement er, wait, we gotta enforce this? by the City staff. The Sign Code Committee was told that the sign code should be easy to understand and the playing fields should be level again, see comments. He added that whatever decision the Commission makes should be enforced yep, that word again. He added another area to be addressed was the surrounding areas that have not been annexed into the City. Has this been addressed?

Comment: stated that the Commission should not adopt the complete sign code. He added that the only group to profit from this would be the sign makers and lawyers. He added that a lot of small businesses would be affected by this sign code and end up going out of business dramatic, but… He stated that the City needed to enforce the current sign code not adopt a new one Really? But it will be enforced, they just said so!

Comment: Sign Industry, stated that she did not think the committee was in touch with the real businesses. Asked the Commission not to pass the Ordinance and stated it was an unfair but they just said the playing field was level! sign code.

Comment: Sign Industry, stated that he sees some problems with the language in the new sign code. He also asked how many bench signs would be removed and answered “zero.” He added that part of the problem with the sign code was that it had never been enforced drat, that word again. He stated that roof signs have been banned and stated that was wrong, and ground level signs on windows were not allowed on their own private property. That “rights” thing. They pay their own taxes and wages of employees and should be allowed to advertise their own businesses. He also added that he did not think larger chain stores should be allowed larger signs than local businesses but it said level playing field. He stated that the City needed to enforce the current code.  Eeh, that word! Will it ever go away!

Comment: Sign Industry, stated that he strongly opposed the Ordinance. He added that he commended the Sign Code Committee for all their hard work. He also stated that the new sign code would be hurting a lot of businesses financially and that the only people that would be gaining from this would be the sign companies.

Comment: stated that it was obvious that the Commission needed to deny the new sign code and enforce the existing code. No, no, no, you’re not seeing the big picture. She added that the City needed to get rid of signs of businesses that have already gone out of business Say what?!? some time ago. She also stated that time and investment alone should not be the reason to pass the Ordinance.

Comment: stated that she did not shop downtown because she did not know where anything was located due to poor signage. She added that she stays on 10th Avenue South and that she liked the sign clutter. She added that the City needed to enforce the sign code not again!  they currently have.

Comment: Sign Industry, stated that he opposed the new sign code and was told that the last sign code change in 1970, was going to fix all the problems. He added that it did not work then and that it would not work now. And no one listened…

Comment: stated if the City didn’t enforce the code, it did not do any good to write it. Excellent point. Three years of hard work…

Comment: Sign Industry, stated that he did not see the current sign code being enforced oh, will it never end!. He added that being in the sign business he had seen a lot of things done on nights and weekends with signs and that nothing was done about it. He stated that he was for a sign code but the City needed to enforce its current one. Ahhh…

Another Meeting.
Strong enforcement YES! was recommended by the Committee in order for the community to receive the intended benefit from this new Code.

Comment: Sign Industry, stated that the new sign code didn’t stand on its own and left too much open for interpretation by the City staff. No, it says right up there, easily understood.  He also stated that it infringes on private property rights. Bah, what rights.

Comment: stated he opposed the new sign code because it infringed on property rights.

Comment: stated that advertising was freedom of speech yep according to the 1st Amendment and that forcing businesses to leave out gambling language was asking for a lawsuit against the City. He also added that the new Sign Code Ordinance intruded on individual liberties. But it’s good for the economy!

Comment: Sign Industry, stated that the allowance on signs should be equally applied to each business. But they are, right?
Commissioner Jovick-Kuntz stated she supported the revised Sign Code and that it was a working document. She added that the City hired staff to enforce the new Sign Code. Yeah, she should know.
Commissioner Beecher stated that he agreed with Commissioner Jovick-Kuntz, that the Sign Code took the City to a higher level the City maybe, but what about the rest of us and there was a process to amend it. Yeah, like that’s gonna happen. He added that the City would never get a Sign Code that satisfied everyone and this new code would take the City in the right direction. And we got there fast. Till that u-turn 30 seconds later.

Mayor Gray stated he supported the motion and that the Ordinance had raised a level of awareness lot of bloody good it did for all of us to “participate” in the community. He added that with new staff the City would enforce the code you may hear my head explode soon and that the code can be revised. He also stated that the Ordinance should not be passed just because it had been worked on for long time. It should be passed because it was generally moving in the right direction and accomplishing what the community wanted. And we all agree with that, yeah, that is why we showed up.

Commissioner Hinz asked for legal clarification on the issue of non-conforming signs diminishing the owner’s ability to sell their property. O.K. lawyer question.

City Attorney Dave Gliko stated that he did not have any experience now where is a lawyer that can answer the damn question and why is this one here with the difficulty or opportunity in property transactions sold that included signs. The non-conforming nature of the sign meant that the sign was in jeopardy for continuance (?) should the Ordinance trigger its removal. The question was never answered.

And everyone is so happy, the economic impact has been incredible, and everyone is happy with the Sign Code we all lived happily ever after.  The End.

20 June 2007 | Life | Comments