What’s Going on between NISD and our City Council?

Yesterday, in the Express-News Northwest Weekly, there was a letter to the editor written by John M. Folks, the Superintendent of the Northside Independent School District (NISD).  In his letter he expressed his disappointment at the Helotes City Council not allowing NISD to install an LED sign at O’Connor High School.

He was also unhappy about some comments made by Helotes City Council member Rich Whitehead (and he quoted him):  ”They (NISD) tend to strong arm their way through and they don’t give anything back.  There seems to be a lot of give on our side and a lot of take on theirs.”

So, what’s going on here?

At the City Council meeting on February 11, 2010, one of the agenda items was a request from NISD for several variances to the sign ordinance for a sign they wanted to put up at O’Connor High School.

NISD wanted to install a sign that is almost 15 feet tall (the ordinance states no more than 8 feet tall), and the surface area of the sign is 130 square feet (the ordinance states surface area shall not exceed 84 square feet).   In addition, the LED Changeable Electronic Variable Message portion of the sign is specifically prohibited in the Outdoor Lighting section of the Helotes sign ordinance.

A Changeable Electronic Variable Message Sign (CEVMS) is defined as a sign which permits light to be turned on or off intermittently or which is operated in a way whereby light is turned on or off intermittently, including any illuminated sign on which such illumination is not kept stationary or constant in intensity and color at all times when such sign is in use, including an LED (light emitting diode) or digital sign, and which varies in intensity or color (or, in other words, a flashing sign).

These variance requests from NISD had already been discussed at the last Planning & Zoning Commission meeting.  By a vote of 6 to 1, that Commission had recommended disapproving all of the variance requests, stating that they “believe it is important to adhere to the City’s design standards, which the proposed sign does not.”  They went on to say that they “felt that the sign’s size, height, and, especially, the fact that it is a CEVMS, contrast sharply with the type of sign appropriate for Helotes.”

Council member Cynthia Massey commented that the requested sign is almost twice the size allowed by the ordinance.  She was also concerned that approving these variances would be like “opening a can of worms,” and would set a dangerous precedence.

Council member Whitehead said that he is not a big fan of our sign ordinance, but he is fundamentally opposed to granting variances.  He then commented that NISD has not been cooperative with the Helotes community.  He reminded everyone that NISD had said they would give Helotes citizens access to the school grounds so we could, for instance, walk on the track, etc.  He said that had happened for a day or so, and then the grounds had been locked up again, denying the promised access.

Council member David Legendre stated that, in his opinion, we allow variances because we can’t cover everything in the ordinances.  He also reminded everyone that the scoreboard at O’Connor has LED lighting.  LED is just a new technology, and we should embrace it.

Whitehead then commented that he thought the point of our sign ordinance was to “not embrace” the new technology.

(To me, the obvious contradiction in comparing the LED lighting on the scoreboard and the LED lighting proposed for the new sign is that the scoreboard is not easily seen from the street and is not on, flashing, 24 hours a day.)

Council member Villanueva agreed with Legendre, commenting that he didn’t “see a problem” with the variance requests from the NISD.

Rick Schroder, the City Administrator, reported that City staff asked NISD if they would turn off the LED part of the sign at night, but they refused, saying they had late events.  (I doubt that their events go past 10 p.m., and they could turn the sign off, or program it to go off, after 10 p.m., but Schroder indicated that they would not agree to that either.)

Whitehead again commented that this type of lighting had been denied before.  He was sure that the Shell station would like to have LED lighting instead of changing the prices manually.  He just feels that as a city this is not what we want, and if we allow them to do it, we have to allow everyone.

Whitehead made a motion to approve the two variances involving the height and size of the sign but not the LED lighting.  This motion was approved with Whitehead, Massey, and Johnson voting for and Legendre and Villanueva voting against.

I understand why the NISD superintendent is upset, but there is more to the story than he is telling.  Even though their proposed sign is much larger than allowed by the Helotes sign ordinance, Council approved it.  Council just didn’t approve the LED lighting, feeling that we, as a community, have told them that we don’t want bright, flashing message board signs in Helotes. 

 O’Connor has existed many years now without this type of sign, and, in my opinion, can go many more and continue to be an excellent school.  Maybe if the NISD had agreed to turn the sign off at night it would have made a difference.  I don’t know.

I do know that I have lived in Texas my whole life, and no matter where I’ve lived in Texas, I have always had access to the track at my local high school.  Lots of my neighbors would go to the school every night after supper and walk or run around the track getting their daily exercise.

Why can’t we do that here in Helotes?

Tags: John M Folks, LED lighting, NISD, Northside Independent School District

This entry was posted on Friday, February 26th, 2010 at 6:11 pm and is filed under City Hall. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.