The Town Council voted 4-3 at its May 18 regular session to approve proposed amendments to the sign regulations in the Zoning Ordinance. In spite of some apparent confusion on the part of the public, the council vote does not ban the use of temporary signs within the Town of Fountain Hills.

Based on what he considered a consensus of the council from an earlier meeting, Development Services Director John Wesley wrote the ordinance to prohibit the temporary signs within the town right-of-way (ROW). The right-of-way is a restricted public easement usually extending beyond the street curbs by 12 to 15 feet.

“Temporary signs are still permitted,” Wesley wrote in an email to The Times. “The council ended up not allowing temporary signs in the ROW. Generally, the ROW line is around 10 to 13 feet behind the curb but is sometimes more or less.”

The provisions of the ordinance apply to A-frame business signs, post and board signs, garage sale signs and real estate (open house) signs.

Such signs can be placed on private property (with the owner’s permission).

Mayor Ginny Dickey and council members Peggy McMahon, Alan Magazine and Mike Scharnow supported the sign changes as proposed. Vice Mayor David Spelich and council members Gerry Friedel and Sharron Grzybowski opposed the changes.

“I vehemently oppose limiting businesses’ options,” Spelich said. “It is imperative to think about the future impact.

“I don’t want to put restrictions on business. We need to focus on helping business, not harming them.”

“I don’t think this (proposal) has been properly thought out,” Friedel said. “I don’t think we have had adequate input from businesses. There needs to be some exceptions.”

Councilwoman Peggy McMahon said she believes the emphasis on businesses overshadows the purpose of regulating the signs. She believes it is appropriate to regulate the sign placement for safety.

Councilman Alan Magazine said he believes the attitude of thousands of people in town is that they are sick and tired of seeing the sign “mess.”

“How much new business do these signs generate,” Magazine asked.

There has been anecdotal testimony that the signs do bring customers into a business.

The comment coming in the public hearing was decidedly in support of the business perspective.

Art Tolis, a former council member and business owner, said he uses an A-frame sign and it does bring him business.

“This is so ill-timed coming into summer,” Tolis said. “After a tough year just trying to make a living. We need to work to create an environment for success.”

Tolis suggested tabling action on the ordinance at least through the current calendar year.

Tim Sciutto, owner of DC Bar and Grill, has one of the more interesting challenges of any business. His golf course restaurant sits nearly a half mile off the nearest main intersection at Saguaro Blvd. and Indian Wells Drive. Sciutto has been using an A-frame sign at that intersection, with no real room to get it out of the ROW. He suggested the town consider business signs similar to what ADOT does on the main highways for food and lodging locations. The businesses using those signs pay for the space. Sciutto suggested the town develop a similar program within the town to help identify business locations.

One resident suggested the council was looking at the signs wrong. She said they should not be seen as “clutter,” but as a quaint element that adds character to the town and are user friendly.

Scharnow defended the position of those supporting the ordinance changes. He noted that it seems one reason sign regulations keep changing is that the legal environment changes.

“The timing of this was to address conflicts in the ordinance and a U.S. Supreme Court decision (Reed v Gilbert 2015),” Scharnow said. “I don’t think any of us revel in this. We are pro-business. We need to consider the aesthetics of the signs.

“We are still allowing the A-frames – come to Town Hall, get a permit and talk about the plan you have for the sign.”

McMahon made the motion to prohibit the temporary signs within the right of way.

Scharnow followed up by proposing an amendment to allow for a 10-foot setback behind the curb, which would allow some signs in the ROW. That was seconded by Magazine but failed on a vote of 2-4.

The original motion was approved on the 4-3 vote.

Of related note to these changes, an existing prohibition on temporary signs in the ROW of Shea Blvd. remains. A sunset clause related to the use of A-frame signs has been removed, which eliminates a required periodic review of the ordinance. Political signs are permitted within the ROW due to state law, which preempts local governments from regulating political signs.