GENTRY -- Gentry City Council passed, on first readings, three ordinances -- regulating signs, recreational vehicle parks and accessory buildings -- at its June 6 meeting with all three ordinances scheduled to be brought back in July for their second readings.
As a result of a Supreme Court ruling (Reed v. Town of Gilbert, Arizona), a proposed ordinance amending Gentry code regarding signs and, particularly, yard-sale signs was recommended to the council by the Gentry Planning and Zoning Commission.
In a 2015 ruling, the United States Supreme Court ruled that municipalities could not discriminate in allowing or prohibiting signs based on the content of the signs. In order to comply with the ruling and not expose the city to lawsuits, a proposed amendment was brought to the council which is intended to fix the problem by repealing Gentry Code, Section 7.28.05, regulating yard- and garage-sale signs and amending Code, Section 14.04.09, to say that people who are legally permitted to display commercial or non-commercial signs on their properties may substitute noncommercial messages without discrimination in regard to content.
As an example, a person who could legally display a real estate sign advertising a home for sale on his or her property could substitute any message of his or her choosing on the same-sized sign. Instead of completely rewriting city code, the proposed amendment would repeal the recently-adopted portion of city code allowing yard-sale signs on city-owned property or city right of ways and amend other code to prevent any enforcement of the city's sign ordinance which might discriminate against a sign based on content rather than purely upon size, location and materials.
The proposed change would again make it illegal to post garage-sale signs on any city-owned property or right of ways. The state already prohibits any non-state signs from being displayed in state right of ways, including at intersections, on utility poles or traffic signal posts. Signs may still be posted on private property but only with the property owner's permission.
Jay Williams, city attorney for Gentry, called the proposed amendment a "band-aid solution" to possible issues with current city code subsequent to the Supreme Court Ruling. He said the Planning and Zoning Commission may wish to study the matter and revamp the city's sign ordinances.
Last June, in Clyde Reed v. Town of Gilbert, Arizona, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that sign regulations of a government entity which place different restrictions upon signs based on the message content of the signs are content-based regulations of speech that "cannot survive strict scrutiny" under the First Amendment's protection of free speech (Supreme Court opinion delivered by Justice Thomas).
In the court case, a church pastor by the name of Clyde Reed and his church, Good News Community Church, were cited by the city of Gilbert, Ariz., for violations of its city code regarding the placement and duration of placement of directional signs pointing people to the locations of church services which were held at different locations from Sunday to Sunday. The pastor and church posted the directional signs early on Saturdays and removed them about mid day on Sundays. City code only allowed directional signs to be posted for 12 hours but allowed other signs, such as political signs, to be posted for a longer duration of time. The city's actions were upheld by the District Court and the Ninth Circuit Court, but the Supreme Court overturned those decisions and ruled in favor of Reed
The Supreme Court, in its June 18, 2015, decision, essentially ruled that cities, towns and other government entities may impose rules and regulations concerning sign size, materials used in signs, sign placement locations and duration of sign placement but could not pass restrictions based on a sign's content without violating the right to free speech as protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. In other words, sign restrictions for signs cannot be different because of the sign's content.
For Gentry, this means that if current sign ordinances make different restrictions on signs based on content, enforcement of those ordinances could be found unconstitutional and result in lawsuits and enormous legal fees, Williams explained.
RV Parks
An ordinance which would make provision for the planning and zoning commission to issue a permit to establish a recreational-vehicle park within the city was read in full and passed on its first reading. There were, however, questions regarding the ordinance and how it would affect the RV park connected with Gentry Seventh-day Adventist Church and Ozark Adventist Academy along Flint Creek.
Since the RV park is already in place and was so before the land was annexed into the city of Gentry, the new ordinance would not apply to the RV park area unless spaces were added or major renovations or improvements were made, according to David McNair, the city's building inspector.
The proposed ordinance would make it possible for the planning and zoning commission to issue a permit to build an RV park on lands zoned as Agricultural-1, Residential-4, Commercial-1 or 2, or Industrial. It would allow the use on lots of two acres or more in size if permitted by the planning and zoning commission and spells out the requirements for campsite size, utilities, access, buffers and the like.
The provision is for temporary use of RV and camping spaces, not permanent parking, and provisions reflect the temporary nature of campsite use by prohibiting the removal of wheels or hitches and not permitting utilities to be contracted by utility companies directly to the campers.
Auxiliary Buildings
A third ordinance, passed on its first reading, would change the city's laws regarding auxiliary and temporary buildings. It also would remove limitations on the number of auxiliary or portable buildings and adjust set-backs to make them the same on the back of the lot as they are on the side. The ordinance would permit a tract owner within the city to place accessory buildings on his property as long as no more than 50 percent of the tract area is used by the primary residence and auxiliary structures. If a home and auxiliary structures exceed 30 percent of the land area of a tract, a 6-foot privacy fence would be required to enclose the auxiliary structures.
Reasoning for the change was cited as the regular variance requests from tract owners who wish to put up a garage or shop building which exceeds the current size restriction of up to 40 percent of the area of the primary residence.
Though the council voted unanimously in favor of the ordinance on its first reading, Councilman James Furgason voiced concern that someone might put up a large number of portable buildings on a land tract. He said he could potentially put up more than 20 portable buildings on his tract under the provisions of the proposed ordinance and was concerned that someone might put up numerous buildings and cause an eyesore for his neighbors.
City Signs
Also approved by the council was a plan for a sign in front of the police station. The proposed sign would be monument style, 10-feet, 8-inches wide and 4-feet, 8-inches tall and have the word "POLICE" in large letters with the police department logo beside the large letters. It would be mounted on the existing sign base but be close to ground level. Estimated cost was approximately $3,500, and money for the sign is already in the police department budget.
A sign to be posted at the Flint Creek Nature Area, including park hours, fishing restrictions and prohibited items and activities was also approved for purchase at a cost of approximately $400 for the sign and the post. A design for additional signs for the other city park areas was also presented with no action yet taken. The proposed signs would include a listing of park hours and prohibited items and activities.
General News on 06/15/2016