Rockwall City Council 15 February

Actions from Executive Session: Acquisition of Parcel 9.

III. Proclamations.

3. Graduates of Rockwall University recognized. They learned about other departments and how those departments work together Then they got a certificate.

2. This week was declared Severe Weather Awareness week after the worse snowstorm in Rockwall's history. The mayor asked if anyone had their own home emergency plan. No one did. Guess we are all doomed.

1. Hazelina Johnson Day. Lady lost 70 pounds and has run a bunch of marathons. Next stop: London. Will be representing Susan G. Komen for the Cure.

IV. Consent Agenda.

27 items!!! And not one councilman felt the need to grandstand or pull any item!

V. Appointments.

1. P&Z Chairman Michael Hunter (who may or may not be planning a run for council this year) noted that the two upcoming public hearing items passed P&Z 7-0.

2. Chief Moeller presented the Racial Profiling Report. There were 3 complaints of racial profiling, and all 3 were dismissed.

The complaints against the police were unfounded. I wonder what a similar report on council or staff would find.

VI. Public Hearings.

1. Fella wants to build a giant shed and requires a zoning change. He gets up to address council and says nothing. The council votes to table any zoning change hearing until full council present (Glen Farris suspiciously absent). Passes 7-0. THEN the petitioner had something to say: he is trying to get a giant shed built before his daughter's wedding in June, and is upset that he now has to wait 2 more weeks before the vote so that he can move along with his plan.

Wait till he finds out in two weeks that will only be the first hearing and vote! Will actually be at least four weeks before he will know what he will be able to do (or not be allowed to do). He may want to get on the phone with the Hilton quick!

2. SUP needed so a guy can build a shed without meeting the city's exterior requirements of imported Italian marble. It will also have shutters, not sure if that is a result of Councilman Russo's influence. Passes 7-0.

1. Sign Ordinance discussion again. Without Mr Farris I would have expected this discussion to move quickly, but 45 minutes later my expectations were killed.

Changes proposed by staff:
-more prohibitions on pole signs.
-more prohibitions on vehicle signs
-prohibitions on signs with non-commercial vulgar or obscene messages
-prohibitions on Holiday signs used for advertising

Pole sign options: No pole signs except on I-30. No pole signs on divided or to be divided roads. No pole signs on undeveloped tracts.

No inflatable type advertising of any kind. So that guy who rents inflatable bounce houses on 276 and uses one to let passers-by aware of that fact will no longer be allowed as that is advertising that the city staff doesn't like. However, if you have a party and rent one and it has the name of the company and phone number on it for adverstising, that will be allowed because that is not advertising according to the city staff. Got that?

City staff also hates cars owned by companies that have advertising signs parked in front of the office of that business where people might drive by and see that vehicle sign being used for advertisement. But if that vehicle is not in front of the business it is advertising, the city does not consider that advertising and will allow that.

For example: Consider you own a construction company and you have an office at a strip mall. If you park in front of your office, you could be in violation. But if you were doing work at the office next door, you could park in front of that office without getting harassed. Make sense?

Margo Nielsen and Mark Russo seemed to be the only voices of reason on this issue. Both agree that vehicles with signs should be able to park on land owned or leased by the company owner without city harassment. Margo

David Sweet asked about church vans.

City Manager Julie couch stated that if you have your vehicle that you paid for and pay taxes on is parked in front of your business that you own and pay taxes on the city will ask you to move it where it cannot be seen even if you cannot move it where it cannot be seen easily buy busy-body city staff.

The city will selectively enforce this as it cannot be reasonably enforced.

Staff also noted that the drafted ordinance was modeled after other cities which are so great the same staff doesn't want to live or work there.

Mussolini would have been so proud.

Motion to CONTINUE. Time spent so far: 1:45.

"The most business friendly council I have ever seen", I was once told.

2. Annexation of four little pockets of freedom not yet devoured by the monster of supreme control. Om nom nom.

3. Require an SUP for any business wanting to sell alcohol within 200 feet of a city park, This was mainly targeted stemming from the proposed 7-11 at Tubbs and Horizon (which would have been AWESOME! *sigh*). Sounded like some cranky lady who was horrified at the thought some precious little snowflake would see alcohol sold near the Park at Fox Chase. I wonder where this cranky old bat buys groceries? Or maybe she was worried people would buy alcohol at the store and then drink it at the park which is already forbidden by the city.

City Attorney Pete Eckert noted that the city cannot create a stricter standard than the State of Texas has created. (300 ft from a school, church, or hospital.)

Mark Russo asked why the city allows consumption of alcohol at the Harbor which is a park.

City Manager Julies Couch's response: "The Harbor is not a park. It's and 'Outdoor Entertainment Area.'"

Ladies and Gentlemen, I think we can award this year's first prize of "Best Usage of Politispeak"