Go. Madam Chair, we're ready to start whenever you are. Go. Where does it start whenever you are? Says we're very busy. I have not heard from Miss Palmer, so I'm not sure if she'll be in attendance today. Would you like to proceed?
Yes, I I will do a call to order and then the pledge of allegiance. Hey, this meeting is called to order to the flag of United States of America and to the republic for it stands. One
nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. At this time, Madam Chair, I do have one addition to the agenda, and that is the oath of office for our new committee member, Miss Daniellea Herary, who was sw um who was confirmed at our last
council meeting by the town council. Do we need a motion to proceed with that? No. Okay. Y and then we'll just need a motion to approve the agenda. Okay. And the oath of office will be item number one. Well, it'll be, excuse me,
it'll be after the acceptance of the meeting minutes. So, item number two. Okay. So, do we have a motion to approve the agenda with the included um Oh, wait a minute. I'm just wondering why we have these
other agendas that are attached to this from like 2019. And so, those are the meeting minutes, right? But do we need to why are we approving approving to read them or approving what's uh those are the meeting minutes that's after the approval of the agenda but the
meeting minutes are just for us to file and receive them. Um at for a while we had a backlog of meeting minutes that um were not um done properly for lack of better words and we've since went back and audit them and now we're bringing them back to the committee for review
and receipt and file and you approving them is just a formality. Just approve and file. That's right. Because they weren't filed properly before. They weren't file they hadn't been done before. Okay. Um, and now we they weren't approved before. They weren't approved before because
they weren't created and since we've created them now, we're putting them on the agenda. Okay. But you're asking us to approve something that we're taking your word for that it's um, as long as you've read through them, we're just asking you to approve to for us to receive and file them
for just further. Through this before and I don't think uh, I was in agreement about approving something that we're looking at now that we don't know is word for word what really happened. even if I was in them. Um minutes were not produced timely. Um
obviously in the in the past um I think you will note that uh the clerk staff is doing a much better job of getting uh you copies of the recent minutes. Um so it if you don't
want to vote to formally approve them, you can just indicate that they are acknowledged for receipt and filing. Those will be the minutes that if anybody asks for the minutes of the meetings, those will be the uh the uh
minutes that are produced. Understand why you would be hesitant if you weren't a member of the committee at that. Even if I was seeing your name on there, which my name is in there, I don't remember what happened six years ago. I I I understand that. And so that's
what I'm saying. At this point in time, what we're indicating is that these were placed on an agenda. Um and uh they are received in file. And if somebody wants to see the minutes from that particular meeting, these would the be the minutes
that would be produced from a public record standpoint or from a record standpoint. If someone has takes issue with what was done five or six years ago, um the copies of the
tapes, whether they are video or audio, um are available. That's how these minutes were produced. Um, if you want to uh have more certainty about what had what happened and don't want to just
simply acknowledge their um the minutes for receipt and filing, you can not approve them. We can get you copies of those videos andor audios. you can listen to them and then we can bring it
back at a subsequent meeting once you all have had an opportunity to review them um and give you confidence that the minutes are accurate. It's up to you and all the recordings for the most part are available online as well. And just to clarify, the minutes are
produced by the town administration team office. Okay. The clerk's office. So that's they're producing that based on video. So if you submitted a public records request for a meeting that happened maybe three years ago in June, uh the meetings that the meeting minutes that we have here for that meeting, we would
provide these meeting minutes as we do for all others. And they're also on our MUN code on our website where if you went back to review the meeting minutes, you would these are the meeting minutes you'd see and it's just a formality for us to bring them back to the board for approval um before we upload them. That
gives you guys time to actually review them and then we upload them in the event that there are any corrections that need to be made. Yeah. And I and as as Sam Mr. Brown just indicated uh I think he overstated with its formality. Um the board does approve the
minutes. um uh you know typically and especially the ones that are recent or at. And if you have corrections or want clarification on an item, that is the the purpose. What we're saying is we
acknowledge that um you may not have been there or remember what happened five or six years ago. Um, and it is sufficient for our needs that you um would acknowledge and direct that they
um be received and and filed. So that those would be the uh the minutes. There is the opportunity if you want us to get you the particular meetings and videos, we can set that up and if you're more comfortable with approving them at a
future agenda, that is up to the board. Is there a way that we could approve them with some sort of caveat that says due to the time lapse that you know anyone requesting these should also it would be
you know it would serve them best to listen to the watch the videos and listen to the tapes not just rely on this. I think that I think that would be the um the difference between actually a motion to approve the most recent minutes that you all were in
attendance at and can say, "Yeah, um the clerk's office got this right or wrong or I have a question about this versus a motion to receive and file um previous Yeah. And all of your So you can do it in two motions to to
clarify which ones you're duly approving versus those that are just received and filed. And all of your comments tonight are captured in the record and will be included in the next meeting minutes as well. So that's not necessarily proven. We're just saying, okay, we received it and we can
file it. So you can do that for June of 2019 through January of 2021. And then the board meeting where most of you guys have attended is the May 12th, 2025, which is the most recent meeting that we've had from the committee where you
guys could make a motion to approve those minutes if you're comfortable with that. Put those dates down. So yeah. Okay. Receive and file the 2019
I4E except after C. Was that a motion by Mr. Austin? Well, uh, I'm sorry. Do we need a roll call? Have we done that yet? Committee member Sicano, present. Committee member Karen Plant here.
Committee member Daniela Herity here. Committee member Robert Austin here. Committee member Sarah Palmer. Oh, after roll call. I'm so sorry. I'm sorry. She's not really member until she's sworn in. Okay,
I'll be here. I'll be here again after we submit. Okay, I guess we back up. Okay, sorry, Sammy. So, we've done the roll call with the exception of Miss Harry is not a committee member yet.
So, why don't we make her Okay. All ready. I think that's a good idea. I am in spirit already. At this time, I would perform your oath of office. If you could just repeat after me. I your name I Danielle Herity
do solemnly swear or affirm do solemnly swear or affirm that I will support protect and defend that I will support protect and defend the Constitution and government of the United States the Constitution and government of the United States and the state of Florida and the state of Florida
and the charter of Loxhatche Groves and the charter of Lockache Groves that I am duly qualified to hold office that I'm duly qualified to hold office under the Constitution of the state of Florida under the constit Constitution of the state of Florida and the charter of the town of Lockache Groves
and the charter of the town of Lockache Groves and that I will well and faithfully perform and that I will well and faithfully perform the duties of committee member upon I am about to enter the duties of the committee that I'm about to enter upon which I'm about to enter upon upon which I'm about to enter.
Thank you. Congratulations. Thanks. All right. Now she's really here. Okay. And we still didn't u we need a motion to approve the agenda. Well, and then we'll u go to the approval of
the meeting minutes. Okay. Do I have a motion to approve the agenda? Yes. Motion to approve the agenda. Second. I'll second the motion. All in favor? Which agenda?
Just one from May, right? this agenda or this agenda. Yeah, there's only one agenda in front of you. Yep. Okay. All in favor? I. Okay. Next is approval of the meeting minutes.
Receive and file. No. I think what we're going to do is just go to 0512 this one and then see if we want to approve these minute. There was a consensus to re receive and file June um 2019 through January.
There was I not yet. I want to do 5125 first. Yeah. Right. Actually approved it. Okay. Okay. So, understood. We need a motion and a second. Wait. Right. Well, I'm just I'm I'm
going to take just a second. So, well, 512 2025. There there's no minutes for this one, right? the June 17th. So 512.
So there's no minutes for the 512 2025. I don't see any. Yes, it's on page 22. Yeah. 512 2022 24. I apologize. It's supposed to be 512 2025.
Okay. And we'll be sure to make that correction. Make a correction. Well, does anybody see that? I have May 12th, right? It just has a wrong year on it, but that's supposed to be
I know, but over here it says I don't see minutes. There are no minutes. Yeah, I don't see the minutes on page 23. It says there were no public there were no minutes for approval on unified land develop code at that actual meeting where the com for
the committee meeting prior to that. There were no meeting minutes that you guys had to approve during the May 12th meeting. Okay. So the page before we have that one that says May 12th, 2024. Mhm. So 2024 is supposed to be 2025. Okay.
And that's the start of the minutes of May of 2025. So page 22 is supposed to say 25, not 24. Correct. Right. Yes. And then the minutes go 22 23 24 25 to 26. Correct.
Okay. We have an entrance in animated pen. Okay. Discuss scientists. Okay. All right. So, do we have a motion to approve the
May 12, 2025 minute of the unili unified ULDC meeting? diaper. Yeah. Yeah. I I think so too. I make a motion to approve it May 12th, 2025.
Second. Um, all in favor? I. Great. Yeah, it looks pretty good. Okay. Now I guess we need a motion to
allow for the above that uh 61719 92619 102919 112119 121919 11182011321 meets to be um received received and filed.
Make a motion receive and follow. I'll second that. All in favor? I Okay. Oh, sorry. Opposed. Oh, sorry. I didn't hear you. I thought you said I thought you said like that. I
thought I heard I Motion passes 3 to one. Okay. Okay. Now what? And the next item on the agenda is the discussion regarding commercial signage
and that's on the regular agendas. I guess I'm handing that back to you guys. Yeah. Where do you want to start with that? You want to because so I think um we're we're trying to break it down because it's such a huge topic. So, we had discussed before
um we figured we'll bring forward this time the discussion on master sign plans and so I did a memo kind of explaining and providing some of the language of some other jurisdictions. I'm going to pass out now. I'm trying to be a tree hugger so I didn't make copies for
everybody. So, I'm hoping you'll all share down. These are just examples of some I'm not saying great or good but here's some example of the master sign plans. Are these from the same cities that you cited that No, just not everybody has them online. So, wherever I could grab them, I grabbed them.
Um, you know, they could be very complicated by the one that I show you that has color drawings and all that fun stuff. It could be very simple to a five pager that just describes it. So, it can run the gambit. I'll be honest with you. Um, again, they got the big
master sign plans are generally meant to be adopted in property that has multiple entities because the idea is is that if you have more than one entity, you could have more than one sign. And so we want some uniformity in regards to that sign,
whether it's the same color, the same location, the same lettering. Um, you know, it it really does vary from from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Um, right now we don't have a master sign plan program. The most obvious place that it
would be applicable to would be the grows at town center. That's a prime example. Um, where you have multiple entities. Uh, you know, do you what kind of look do you want to have? Um, it doesn't preclude necessarily. It could be next door on this side we have the
gross medical plaza that happens in multiple tenants. You could also have something like that. So it could be one building, it could be multiple buildings, but usually it references when you have multiple tenants. So bringing it forward for the board to consider is this something first of all
do we want to adopt this approach and if we do what's the applicability? Uh and then from there we can discuss a little bit further what the requirements are. Again, as outlined, as you can tell in the number of provisions that I gave you from the different jurisdictions, it
could be very simple from we're adopting a sign master sign program and it's kind of like we know what we like when we see it or it could be as complicated as some of these are. It tells you exactly what you got to include in the plan. So, I'm going to start off first with what's
everybody's feeling regarding a requirement for a master sign plan. And there's no right or wrong to this. There's no legal right or wrong. It's really what you know this committee would like to recommend. And this is just for commercial properties. This is just for commercial properties. It's all we're talking about right now
is just commercial entities. I I just have a quick question. Did Did is uh is there somewhere we could look at an actual master sign plan that was submitted because this are these are these pictures it because this looks like a building that was already built and then
that's what the sign is and that's the dimensions. Is there one that we could look at like because they This one's a little different. It's for a different municipality that has and I just did like a brief overview of what the signs you know like the
parameters basically per so typically you know again can't provide you one here because we don't have the requirements so I can't show you one here. Uh typically it's done during the approval of when the building is first built. That's typically when it comes in because at that point they're
looking at architectural. So it makes sense to be looking at the signage at this point. So most of our stuff except for the new ones that come in is going to be retroactive. You know, do we want to apply it? If we do want to apply it, is there a time period we want to apply it? So I think the first thing as I said
I I try you know me I try to compartmentalize. The first thing is is it something we want? Because again there are some jurisdictions that don't want the uniformity. their their philosophy is I like the esoteric look. You know, if you go down to, you know, certain places in Miami, you know, they
don't want it to all look alike, but then you go to other places that, you know, again, I always like to tell people like, uh, I used to work in Parkland. You knew you were in Parkland because it was brick on the building, so you knew it as soon as you got there. Um, you know, or there's certain things that people don't like. You know, a lot
of people don't like red signs. And so this way they implement something that says, you know, we don't like red signs and it comes in for the review because it's not a guarantee. If we put it in there, they can't be guaranteed until the plan is reviewed. Now, one of the
things it does save is that if a tenant comes in and they follow the rules of the master sign plan, then they don't need any other approvals, right? They go directly to building permit. So it is more tenet friendly than if you didn't have
one. One of the advantages again it's uh you know but again just wanted to open up the discussion again is it's something and it doesn't you know look I've had I I had when I was in Green Acres there must have been every shopping center had one and they had about eight or nine of them you know and
some of them they didn't limit it look they didn't limit it to just black signs they would say it could be black blue green and yellow and then typically what happens is the landlord approves it before it comes in so the landlord knows what it's going to look like because he's going to be the marketer, chances
are he or she is going to have a better idea of what's going to match and what's what will and what won't. But again, you could limit it to the color on the letter. She could limit it on the color to the background. I mean, so there's any number of uh you know, uh restrictions that we could or would like
to place or not place. Um so, you know, again, we don't have that many shopping centers really, but it is we don't know what's coming in. And again, if you have multiple uses, as an example of the medical, you know, building next door, it is something that, you know, again, we want to continue. Some places have
even done master sign plans for an individual lot that has multiple signage like a bank that has a monument sign, it has a building sign, it has an ingress egress sign, it has the drive-thru sign. So, some even include master plans for
that because they want to make sure all those signs mesh. So again, it goes the gambit and really don't know what the thought was. So just opening it up for discussion for you guys to talk with us about it. Well, you've obviously been doing this a while. Is there any particular city who
you like their sign code that's would be conducive to our area, not necessarily. So could it be cliche and say that this is a unique place? Um so you know again for me most
jurisdictions I find regulate more than we do here. Okay. Uh and so I think again it's more I think there isn't one that I can say you know I try to look that some that are similar you know like I kind of look
at you know people and you know populationwise and kind of what they do and you know again there really isn't a good example Robert I wish I could tell you but there really isn't and a lot of it um started it you know back with just the shopping center owner they didn't
you know they kind of retroed it afterwards and kind of worked it that You know, like at Green Acres, all I had was letters from 1991 saying this is the colors we're doing. They didn't have any plans or anything as we went. And now it's become much more common that you do
have those kind of signage. Particularly, I find uh now with a lot of places, you you don't know, they don't tell you when they change it. So, it's nice to have the picture so you know that this isn't what was originally approved back when. So again you know
you know it's really you know how strict you want to be um you know so the first question ultimately let let you know the first question are we even interested in a master sign plan I think that's the first question you know is that something we feel we want to enforce it will be a cost involved to the to the
owner of the property to do it because they're going to have to hire a sign company or a planner in order to you know create a plan but um I think that's the first question. Well, what if my my think is that if it streamlines the process, meaning it's not something that
they're going to have to go back and forth to P&Z and, you know, ask for a variance on a size of a sign or that, you know, if there's a formula that's in there, it it allows them to get the permit process and and going sooner rather than later instead of having
buildings sitting around waiting for to be finished in my opinion. I mean, like I look at Waw Wa and how they had to redo the signs after it was built. And I think having a a a sign a master plan would have perhaps helped that somewhat. I
don't know. What do you guys think? I would be in favor of doing something proactive as opposed to not having any plan and then someone puts up a giant neon sign that everyone's upset about. Um, so prohibited those, right? I'm just saying that I mean for
example, you know, that that um to have an outline for people to look to as the town grows and new businesses come in, right? Exactly. Because because our code should is clearly going to have to back this up. Also, rural Vista guidelines
are going to have a big play in it. And if that's codified, right, then they're going to be able to find it all, but that's going to be timeconuming for them as well as opposed to, hey, I mean, I again, I feel like if they want to do business here, then then, you know,
that's the onus is on them to fit in. I mean, I like the idea. I I don't I don't necessarily like everybody's sign looking the same. That's not, you know, but all the buildings shouldn't look exactly the same, but they should have some uniformity to them so that they
don't all look like, you know, military trail either. So, I like Danielle's idea about out basic outline, but like you said about being kind of vague, which means it's to interpretation. So, if they submit it, then they can we can say or the
committee can say, "No, that's too gay or we don't like those colors and you see this our basic outline." So, it's kind of a playing a game there between having a basic outline they're going to follow and then leave the wording. They can actually modify it a little bit and submit it right before they actually do
it and then have somebody look at it who says, "Okay, well, this is fits in with the character of our Robert that's a good point. Who looks at it? Not us." Well, it would be us. It would come to us. It would come It would come to you as a recommending body town council for the final vote. Excellent.
I was just thinking because we got that big over there. I don't know how we got the And and again, you know, one of the things is we can outline like like some of them have done said, you know, we we want to see the colors you're proposing. We're not telling you it has to be common. We want to see the colors. We
want to see the lettering. We want to see the location. And that way when it comes before you like you say Robert at that point you'll have the opportunity to say hey I think it should be above the front door so that you know that's the store you know or you know we allow monument signs at each one of the
ingresses or whatever it is or you know um some of them limit you know just to monument signs you know the ones that have a base versus the ones that are the poles. So you do have some flexibility, but you know, you have to get the materials. You have they have to give you the information for you to evaluate
it. And and will we be saying what their site plan has to look like? That's kind of why I was asking for a sample of one because some of these in here in in the that you'd given us ask for three different renderings, you know, uh an elevation and size and because that you
know I'm no architectural engineer and if they say it's that, you know, something that you know we could easily digest. So usually give a site plan because you want to know location, right? Particularly on the monument signs or the ingress egress signs. So that's usually why you get a site plan. Okay.
Then typically you get an elevation example so you know where the sign is going to go. Is it going like I said is it going above the door? Is it going to the right of the door? However they decide you know again roof roof makes a difference you know. So you have to
decide that you know do you want to allow them in boxes you know some have light boxes some have lettering on on you know on the building. So those are also now you can give the discretion you you can say it could be this or this and then you can take a look at it when it comes in and make a decision because
maybe it does vary on the architecture that's given. Well, exactly because some buildings one side might look good and not look good on another one. So you have to actually see it in the full context. So that's generally again I find the hardest thing from a staff perspective is I when I hate it when someone comes
back and goes if I had known I would have done that. Right? So the idea for me in the code is to include what is it we feel we find necessary to include. So that way you can come to the decision with a recommendation to the council and and that's how I really feel about it.
You know some of the other stuff you don't have to get you know into I don't have to tell them what what size it has to be and that kind of thing. Just give me the you know are you using italic lettering? you're using, you know, h, you know, put your font is so that way we can decide kind of where you want to
go with the idea that you always have to keep in mind that trademarked signs are typically exempt. I have some discretion regarding size of it, but I don't have discretion regarding color if it's trademarked. You mean logos? Trademark. Yeah.
I.e. the car wash that's pink and turquoise, whatever it is. We we can't ask that they change those colors. I can't if they're claiming they want it based on a trademark and they show me they have an actual trademark, I cannot preclude them from using the coloring or
the lettering, but I can uh I can determine location and size. Okay, that I have discretion on. Okay. So, I just I just wanted you. So even if they said it was only black signs and Wawa comes in, we've got to authorize Wawa red, but I can determine we, you know, you can make a recommendation as
to the location and the size we're allowed. And Karen, these municipalities that you've included in the list, um, are they just sort of random examples or ones that you have experience with or ones that you particularly like? It
seems to me that in an effort to not over complicate this, uh, it would be great to find another municipal municipality that we like generally what their code how their study code works and then just adapt it a little bit for
for our use. So, I kind of picked all over because, you know, some were simple, some were more complicated. Um generally on you know taking a look at it um Green Acres has a pretty good um you know um uh language regarding their sign code. It's just been updated
recently so it has been reviewed by legal counsel so they have a little bit uh in there. Uh Deerfield wasn't so bad. Um I tried to keep you know in the area because I hate to use like um St. Lucy County because it's a different county. They have a different perspective. Um
that's why I tried to give you Bokeh and Palm Beach Gardens and those kind of things. So, um, again, if you wanted to take a look, I felt, you know, Green Acres was probably pretty pretty common up there. Wellington they use a lot, but, you know, I was like they've got a
lot more going on than we do with 65,000 residents. So, um, you know, I I tried to keep it in a little bit a little bit smaller ones, but Sure. Can I get clarification on them semester plan? Mhm. Okay. So, I don't understand how this different from what we're doing with um
just going through the signs and what we're approved, what we're not. Is the master plan just something that says generalizations? It doesn't give specifics. Correct. So, the way that you So, like in the AR district, you said you're allowing one monument sign. It's
nine square feet. It's in this location. The master sign plan doesn't specify that. You can I mean you could put maximum or minimums if you want but typically the master sign plan is I'm going just like Robert said I'm providing you a plan that I'd like to
implement you tell me whether you're in agreement or not because typically it goes to plan unit developments similar to the gross you know town center and usually you give some discretion there you know because there are different circumstances than it would be in just a single uh you know location but again
I'm looking to you do you want it to apply apply to just planned unit developments like that or do you want it to apply to any structure that has multiple tenants that could have more than one sign? I mean because like that medical center if it's going to get two tenants it's monument sign probably have
two tenants on it. Is that any different than a planned unit development? I would make the argument no right because you the master plan says though they still have to go back to the other sign codes and and apply those to what they do. So when we when they bring in correct when
they bring in their master plan, the master plan has to show they're in compliance with the existing sign regulations. So if we put in a CL low and we say you're only allowed one monument sign, they can only apply for one monument sign unless they're doing a variance,
right? Because they can always come in a variance. Sure. But they have to follow the underlying for no variances. But it does give some discretion like Robert says on you know what does it look like because it has multiple
tenants. So we want you know when you have one tenant they're going to do it the way they want it right but when you have multiple tenants you could get multiple people that's why you want to have one person as Joe says that if you follow that script then you can get your
building permit and your sign code you know signed right away. Mhm. So, it sounds to me that you're in favor of a master sign plan. It sounds like we may still have to work on the underlying
cuz not everything's in a PUB. Nope. Right. I mean, you have John Deere that's by itself. You still need regulations on But isn't there a square footage? Can we can we apply a square footage, you know, in excess of or, you know, if if a
building is like in some of these codes it said 5,000 square feet. I mean, can we can we can can we put something like that? Even if you're a standalone building, if you have any sort, again, as long as you can justify the distinction,
um, you know, then you can go ahead and do it. And a lot of it is size. You know, again, you know, if you're five acres, you can typically have a larger sign than if you're one acre because you don't see a big sign, you know, small sign on a fiveacre parcel, but you might sooner see it on a 1acre parcel. So,
there is a distinction based on typically you can do it on on size of the parcel, square footage of the building. Those are always we can put into place and again, you know, we can go through it. I want again wanted to take the first step which actually the next step after this one will be also a
nice one. is there's amorization we'll have to deal with. But the first one was, you know, master sign plan because what I'll do is I'll bring back language to you and then you can pick the language apart and then we can have that together so I can do part of the work for you and you can mark up however you want it to be. So as we start pulling it
together, we're going to have a whole book on what we've done so far and everything that this should finish the sign codes before we do the master plan. It seems like we're doing it in the wrong order. We just finished for the residentials. Weren't we going to go do commercial?
We are doing commercial. And these are the master sign planning only is applicable to commercial. So it I don't see it being as one before the other. I'm just asking you now if you want to have a master sign plan. So if you have a multiple tenant building, doesn't matter what the underlying regulations
are. The question is do you want them allowed? Are you looking for that master sign plan? And I don't know why we're limiting it to multiple tenant buildings. Number one. Number two, isn't there is there maybe a a formula that could just work on square footage that kind of sort of
wraps it up for everybody? If your building equals, you know, x amount of square feet, this is how big your your sign can be. And it obviously it'll size down or size up. Yeah, you can do that. That could be in the master sign plan.
Yeah, that's what Well, it would be can Well, it could be, but it could also be in your regular regulations, which is what Karen is saying that you can say if you're a five, you know, five acre parcel or or a 1500 square foot building, this is as tall maximum that your sign can be. I
don't like to do minimums because it's really up to the property owner as long as they don't go larger. I think that's really where the concern is more than less, right? Um, trust me, they never go less anyway. They always go to the max they can go. But um you know certainly we can can do that and you know again Karen we'll kind
of do it hand inand the first question was do you even want to consider that let's kind of get that language because really all it is is the language is say we're going to require it we're going to require it at a minimum for PUDS. Now Joe is saying maybe for multi-tenants like we have for the medical building
next door or if you want multi-tenant multi- signage on one site I don't know that's up to you to tell me what you want to do and then we can just clarify what needs to be included in that application with the idea that if you pass that application as a tenant you don't have to go back to the planning
board or to the uldc or to the council because it's already been reviewed and you meet all those criteria and then we will definitely There's no question we're going to get to to the commercial as to, you know, because we have two commercial districts and they could be treated differently because you have different uses in each one.
So maybe some you might want larger than others. I don't know. And we'll have to go through through that as well. So again, I'm going to circle back. So it sounds like master sign plan. Go ahead, Joe. But Karen, do you believe though that with a
master site plan that it directs those applicants to read more thoroughly the code and get it done right the first time or is right like just I I don't want to be redundant. Yeah. But I also don't want for it to slip
through the cracks either. So, what I always put in all my master sign plans, I always put a a line in there that says you must meet all requirements of section 17-325 of the town's uldc. So, they know right in the master sign plan, you have to match it. It doesn't matter any way you
go, you go, you still need to address it. So, that's usually how I deal with that. Okay. Unless they request a variance. Unless they request a variance. That is correct. And that's the same process. comes to you as a recommendation, goes to the council for final decision, and they've got to justify the the the
variance. Remember, variances are exceptions to the rule. So, you got to be able to show why you're entitled to an exception to the rule, why we treat you differently than we treat other people. Sometimes it does make sense. Look, I'm not going to lie to you. Sometimes it doesn't. And you know, I would say in my history, if you want to
tell me the percentages of variances approved, I would say is probably approved 2%. Yeah. It's not like that. So, so I'll go ahead and if you guys are okay, I'll go ahead and draft up something on the master sign plan. Bring the language back to, you know, I'll
send it out in advance. You can take a look at it. We can discuss it next week. So, that way you can tell me if we're going in the right direction or anything else that you want to include in that. Do we have consensus on that? You guys like that? I do. Why don't you like it? this really quickly. It
it feels redundant. If we're already making a sign code, why are we also doing a master plan? I don't understand. Look at it this way. I think that it's that it it provides one more step of oversight because it comes to whoever's
on ULDC at that point in time to look at it. They know the codes and say, "Yeah, this looks like it works." Am I am I or am I wrong? Whoops. Right now, um, ULDC does not review
actual applications. I was going to say we I don't think we've ever seen one. Oh, that was a question I asked. Who reviews it? So, what's the sign process now? That's a um right now it would go through uh plans are de usually go through planning
and zoning board and then the council uh is the authority that actually grants or denies any applications. Okay. So it still gives one more step of oversight in a in a package to PNZ. So doing the master plan makes it go
through the DC doesn't go it'll go through the planning board and to the council. Sorry, I misspoke. I But I thought that's where we said they said it would come for Did you hear that, too? I thought you Okay, sorry. I'm just My bad.
I thought they said that too. Okay. I'm kind of thinking more if it was a variance thing that would come to us to look at because like you said, if it complied with the code, then there wouldn't be anything to look at. But if it wanted something outside of it, that's then people could look at it. Right now, the way the CO code is
structured, the only board that approves anything, be it a waiver, be it a um approval of plan is the town council. Um the planning and
zoning board is a recommending body. Um and there are no powers that are granted elsewhere. Um with the exception of the special magistrate, which is an empty I didn't mean for approval. I meant that we looked at it and said, "Yeah, this looks like it matches what we had in
mind. Send it to whoever the council." The council or PNZ, wherever it goes next. I mean, like I I was not suggesting that we approve it. Yeah. Or not approve it right now. That you would be putting in an extra step right
into the process. Um, and one of the things that we've got to be aware of is, uh, Senate Bill 180. And right now, you can't, um, bring forward
a more restrictive um, ordinance with respect to um, signs or any other part of the um, uh, the approvals. um and you cannot
increase uh the burden on the process. So right now we've got a process that goes uh to PCB um and if you interjected another layer that would be an additional burden on
the applicants and we could not do that at this point in time. Wasn't that until November? Doesn't it end in like a year from the time they 2027 2027 that you can't that's the hurricane damage property. You cannot you cannot propose an
ordinance that would have that effect. So um on new build or hurricane damage anything. Anything. And so, um, anything that is more restrictive
that you all come up with than our current code, that's going to sit and wait, um, for two years basically. Now, um, that's not to say it's not a worthwhile discussion, but I just wanted
to make everybody aware of that it is not unusual. um and I think it's quite common in in larger jurisdictions that um a lot of projects go through
um two boards at least before they go to the um council or they're subject to potential decisions by two other boards. Um, that's the planning and zoning board. And a lot of jurisdictions have
what's called or something close to being called an architectural review board. And it's usually at the architectural review boards that you take a hard look at signs, exteriors, and those kind of things. Planning and zoning boards generally deal with more
the um the boxes and the layouts of the the plan. So, a lot of the things that you all have been working on in other jurisdictions, the board that would review that, potentially approve it or make recommendations to um the council
is something that's generally referred to as an architectural review board. Does it say in our code now that signs have to be included in the architectural renderings? I don't think it does. So
I I if memory serves me correctly, Joe, I think when you're going through the site plan, we ask to kind of get minor information, but it's not generally approved through that process. Okay. Okay. So what does
the master plan actually do? The master plan would require an a property owner of multiple tenant buildings to come to file an application that would be heard by the planning
board as a recommending body and to the town council to approve their master plan which would outline where signs are located, what type of signs, um you know, how many each can have and they don't have to do that now. And they don't have to do that now.
So, right now they would just need to comply with the sign code that the town has. That is correct. Yeah. I kind of like the idea of giving them a an outline to follow, which makes it easier on everybody involved in in my
opinion, you know, because reading through through our code is right. And sorry that because I'm just getting up to to speed here. The code is under review right now. The general sign code is something that is up for discussion, but we could modify the
current sign code to include different things. But at this point, no one would but it still doesn't get submitted for a layer of approval, right? As long as they they if you if you were making the code more lenient or portions of the code more
lenient, that is permissible for us to do. If you are making it more restrictive, you can't. There may be some arguments as to what some things are doing, but if for example um you said you can have right now you
can have four signs and you say no, you're only going to be able to have two signs. Probably not going to be able to move that forward. Okay. And the current sign code is outlined here or where does that exist now?
In ourc. Okay. So we have it online or you can either go to MUN code or you can go to the v the town's website or Danielle I can email you of you know the the sign code section if you want. I'm sure I can find it. Thank you.
Well and but the whole point of this committee and working on signs at this point in time prior to the passage of SB80 was that our sign code is lackluster and confusing and it needs to be updated. So
yes, while I, you know, while I know that now nothing that we do is going to be able to be enforced until October of 2027, my thought when I spoke to staff was that we had a great group of people here
that was really had a lot of, you know, a lot of momentum and that if we could just continue working on the sign code and even if it sits on a shelf at least, you know, Tuesday after the 27th, you know, in October, whatever. There's something to hand over to council for
them to peruse. Yeah. I just I wanted to clarify the expectations with respect to right when things would move forward. So that's I mean that's kind of where we're at and it's I you know it's entirely up
to you guys if you want to proceed or maybe we can move on to something else as far as I don't know this that would that would take counsel directing us in a new direction
but right now we've been given signs right so I'm in favor of a master plan talking about writing up something based on her experience and the outlines and recommendations and
all right perfect I'll draft something again for you all to take a look at mark it up I don't take it personal you know so you know whatever you feel and again we'll make sure we have everything in a row Joe so that as soon as that magical date comes we'll have the ability to
present whatever the committee has decided at that point. That'd be awesome. And if and actually and if I could see or if you could tell me where to find a site plan that I could look at like, you know, so I can and I just like to
see here's your here's here's my renderings of where signs are going to go because it mentions in a lot of these, you know, landscape, you know, this what all it entails. That'd be great. Okay. Thank you.
Okay. So, that was my major topic. I mean, the next one that I was going to bring up would be the amorization, but you guys decide. Will there be language in the master plan like in some of these that I
was reading through that you handed us that that that um speaks to a time limit or um for the ones that are not in compliance when one needs to be repaired then then they have to come up to the
new code or they'll will they have to submit a site plan for the entire place you know how does that so okay so memorization basically deals with an illegal sign. Whether it's legal, illegal, or whether it was put up
without a permit, doesn't matter. Um, and basically what it says is that for whatever reason, the philosophy, the vision, the desire of the town has changed from when this sign was built to where we are today. And as a result, we
want to get rid of any signage that doesn't match what our desire is. And that could be a monument sign, a building sign, anything along those lines. The only um legal advice I can give you is that basically the courts have said you've got to give the
property owner the um return on what he spent on the sign. Okay. The original memorization to be one year because he spent, you know, $20,000 and you can't recoup that in one year. Do
they want to give some time frame? What that is, Joe? They haven't said a lot of places do five years, some do 10 years, whatever how quickly you want to turn it over, but I certainly wouldn't suggest less than five. I think that would not be looked highly upon by um you know,
the court and people will tend to sue when they feel they spent a lot of money and they're not getting the return on their money. So, that's really what amorization means is that you have a sign, it's no longer in compliance with what we want it to be, and now we're giving you a time frame in which to turn
that sign over. And usually the amorization says at the end of that time, it has to be gone completely. And during the time period in which the amorization is going on, there are certain events that occur that could require them to convert to the new sign.
So, but quickly like what let's say let's say Boon's sign got knocked over in Milton and it's just done but we have a sign code and that says that sign is no longer within it would no longer be in compliance.
How does that work? Then their new sign has to be up to code. That is correct. If it's been demolished in any That is correct. Typically it goes 50%. It's 50% of the value 50 of the value of the sign. So if the fine was $10,000, if
the if the cost to repair it was more than $5,000, that typically kicks it in. Or if 50% of the face of the sign, okay? So if you have, you know, 100 square feet and you have to replace 50, then typically that would then kick it in,
jump you over. That's generally how the language work. doesn't always, but that's generally because I figure at that point cuz height at that point you would have to make major changes in order to be able to do that height. Nope, you saved it. But, you know, things like where
sometimes it doesn't kick in is um sometimes you have the same owner and maybe they change the name of their business. You know, would I require them to replace their whole sign? probably not if they're using the same space area, but they're just changing the name of their business. So, that's an example
of the opposite where we wouldn't necessarily require it. So, that one we could get across the finish line today. It depends. I mean, again, you know, I'm going to I'm trying my best to kind of, like I said, compartmentalize that. And that's another one um on, you know,
whether it's something that we want here. You know, look, you know, I will tell you people, they love their signs. They might want to argue for a long time. It is a common provision. I'm not going to say you're the only one who adopts it. Almost every sign code
typically has something. Believe it or not, we actually have something in our code similar. We just haven't enforced it. I'm not going to lie to you. Okay? So, you know, again, the question is, do we want to continue down that path? Keeping in mind that many of these signs could have been up there for 20
years and we're now telling people it's got to go. Again, doesn't mean they can't have a sign, but it goes back again that, you know, this committee has been very strict on what you've allowed, what you're going to allow. So, you know, they may have a 20 square foot
sign now and when they have to do a new one, it may be nine. And I'm not saying right and wrong. Trust me, that's not what I'm saying. I'm just saying I'm a property owner sitting there and saying I had to sign and everybody could see and now I'm going down to a nine square foot sign. You know, I you know that you know I'm not I'm not going to be happy
about it. You know, again, just uh you know, I I'm always the good and the bad. I'm not taking sides, but um but amorization is is pretty common because you do want, you know, the idea is for you to have whatever your theme, whatever your idea is, you want to implement it at some point. I know the
wise it goes on forever but right and and little things like that I mean I'm sorry not it's not a little thing but that would be you know again we're just advisory right council could say okay yes yes yes this no the you know the the giant signs on Okchobee can
stay right I mean that's you're you're abs you are the recommending body and they have a choice of either they can either agree with you agree with you make changes or disagree with you it's the three choices they have all right the signs have been there for 10, 15 years or they grandfathered in or
we can make them change them under an amorization. You are not grandfathered in. Typically it says after 5 years or 10 years got to go but starting date of the ordinance being adopted. Can you can you make it retroactive or
no? We already have something adopted about that. So they're already in non-compliance if we have that in effect. Correct. We haven't been enforcing. Why don't we start enforcing that now? I think the thought goes back again to kind of what we talked about is that
these people have been in business for so long that's been their sign and I'm just telling you that's just I still don't understand where why we're not enforcing it. I really don't. That's that's the rule. I don't understand if it's in we already have it on the books. Why are we going to rewrite it if it's
already there and we're not enforcing it? Um which which provision are you talking about with respect to Okay. I feel like I'm not aware as to why or why not we're but I kind of feel like Karen if we had
um while we're working on a on a comprehensive sign code that once that gets handed in it would then be okay. We've allowed it but we've we've redone the sign code. It's been passed. It's now ordinance and unfortunately your sign doesn't cut muster and it's time
for it to go. I I mean I feel like that it would be a legitimate way to get If we rewrite it though, doesn't that start the clock again for them? I mean it seems like the clock has already run out for a lot of these signs if it's already on the books for how long? Well, it would it would depend on how you
structured the amortization. Is there a list of signs or companies that are not in compliance at this time? There is not. And so that would it's sort of anecdotal right now or well they're Yes. Yes. I mean because you again some of them got approvals in
the county not from us. Um you know some of them got vested rights that you know they've been there for so long. Um you know again you know you're talking to someone who's been here since April. as I come along. And so how would you assemble a list of
or how would signs um or companies that are not in compliance be identified by the town? Who would do that? So code enforcement would have to go out along with planning and zoning and we would literally have to take a picture of every sign, measure every sign, look
at the files, go back to the county, see what f files we have and have to make that list of determination because we'd have to notify everybody. I mean, if I were a property owner, I wouldn't just take your word for it. I'd want to know, you know, why am I not in compliance? Sure. And we'd have to go through that to see how we and hopefully we get
voluntary compliance. If not, then we have to go to the code enforcement room. And what's the approximate number of businesses or signs that we'd be looking? Do you know that number? Is it, you know, 200,000? You know, there are I would say there's
probably about 200, not more than 200 commercial. I'm not saying home a home occupied based businesses and some of them are along, you know, the road. So, it's not necessarily I think you're going to find the biggest problem are the signs that are in the AR district. I think those
are where you're going to find most of the the FET, the ones that are off of Okchobee are going to be some of those. I think that's really where the areas you're going to find the most non-compliant signs, right? Um, one thing with respect to amortization and with respect to the
code itself, the existing code, this town almost from the beginning and with very few exceptions, um, mostly having to do with life, safety, and health of which signage does
not fall most of the time unless it was a dangerous structure has taken the position when it comes to enforcing any of its codes including the sign code
that um it is all complaintbased and so unless there was a complaint there was no enforcement. That remains the the case today. the
complaints that have been received that I'm aware of over the last few years or you know some of them pre uh preme being a um an employee. The complaints that were received were
not against commercial signage. It had to do with political signage. And with respect to the political signage, um there is a legitimate question as to whether our ordinance is enforcable
with respect to um the constitutionality of it as uh you know under the current case law. So, it's a it's a difficult situation
if you have a provision like that. If and when the council decides to move forward with a revised sign code, the recommendation should be absolutely
that that is something that the staff can enforce without a complaint because you sitting up there, you have an idea of what the sign code says and whether or not a sign is in
compliance. or not. Um, but for you to notice it, go to the effort of making a complaint, knowing that when you make the complaint, your name has to be taken down, and we have to record where the
complaint is coming from. And you go, "Wow, is it really going to be worth it for me?" And I might have to come in and testify. All those kind of things. um sign codes. If you're going to have one,
let your staff enforce it. Otherwise, everything that we talk about is a waste of time. Is it right? That's why I don't understand what we're doing when we already have some of these codes. If we're not going to enforce them, why can't we start enforcing them now?
Because it's complaint driven is why. No, but he's saying we can change that. Why can't that be changed now? That's up to the council. But I think there has to be some homework done first, right? Like to see the impact. But it would be
because it would be probably a lot of shock to everybody if all of a sudden we started going up and rounding up signs and all those kind of things and then there'd be there definitely would be complaints about that act. And let me tell you, anything that we do, including as you
know, most most recently, um, council passes an RV ordinance after lots of time and effort and then we give people a grace period after it has been approved and then we start enforcing it.
And most of the comments that come up to the the council level aren't about, hey, it's great that you guys passed an ordinance and are trying to enforce it. It's like, what is staff doing? Why is code enforcement involved in this?
Yeah. So, folks, if you're going to pass something, pass it with the intent you're going to enforce it. Mhm. And and and and for that to happen, I mean, as far as the ones that are not in compliance, the amateursization needs to
be addressed first. Okay. So, let's bite into that whale, shall we? I mean, how does that again? Just really question. Do we want to keep it in there? And again, we can bring back language that would address
what you want. You tell me. Yeah, I guess we should look at it. I was going to say it's already there. So, let's look at what we have. Let's look at what we have. So, I'll do what we have and maybe some suggested language if it's any different about that. And we probably should come in uh with
some sort of impact analysis for you to understand how many what you would be what would be happening, who would be affected. Not that that makes a difference, but you know, you want to see. Do they need to give me more than a month to do that?
Yes. And then also And that all sign absolutely all sign code is you have the language for that to go be handled directly by staff and not a complaint driven code. That's that's something that's just
that's going to sit until 2027 obviously. Yeah. No, that one doesn't have to. No. Interesting. Okay. Yeah. If the code is there, we're not changing the code. If we just if we want to go and enforce our current code, we can do that. We can do that.
How do you feel about that? Enforce our current code. Code. Okay. Um what once again I think we should do on on that um is
wait for the impact analysis so that you can see what the effect of that recommendation would be and then if that is to be brought to the the council as a recommendation of this body
you know make sure that everybody has thought about what that means and not just oh well the uldc suggests that we do this and you know nobody has figured out what it's going
to take in terms of manpower how much time all those kind of things and here if effective is what's going to be taken away and Ken you think that's going to take you a month or more to put together so should
you don't think it you don't think it's a little more time prudent to go ahead and start on the amortization because the the impact is a byproduct. It's not really shouldn't I don't know how much we should take that into account really. That's going to be I think up to the
town the council. I mean, yeah, we should look at it and be aware that, you know, 5,000 signs are going to come down, but right, should it really drive our how we want the town to look going forward? I don't know.
You guys have any thoughts on that? Well, I think reviewing the current language is sort of the next step for us and then it sounds like it's going to take Karen a little time to put together the rest of the information we need in order to think about tackle this. Right. So,
exactly. So, what I'm saying is we don't do we do we need to wait a month in order to get that all in one package or should we It It's really up to you. I can get you the existing language. I can get you some suggested language, but I will not have available on the impact. I can tell
you some of the, you know, some of it. I mean, I'm going to tell you some of the the churches are probably the worst offenders. Mhm. Yeah. Placement placement wise and size wise. I mean, again, this goes back to what you know, Jeff had said, you know, do do you want to make
do you want a church mad at you exceptions? Do you know the church, you know, what it comes down to? or you have a longer period of time or however you want to do it. We don't know without knowing really what the impact is. So I mean certainly to have to revisit it. I certainly can like I said I can send you the language. I'm just I I you know I'm
not I'm not going to promise something I can't make. I mean I I would guess with respect to the the existing amortization schedule for example some uh the Ye um center you know where
boonies is that that sign is not permitted and there was a 2016 time period it existed before 2016 so that's a prominent sign in a
prominent location. That would be number one to to go. It's the easy citation. And why is that one non-conforming? I think the size is there's height. There's height limitations. There's a height limitation.
Well, is it really though? I don't Okay. And what I'm not talking about boonies one necessarily per se, but the sign for the center which is got to be 20 plus feet.
Um and then across the way at the vets that sign there. Yeah. Once again, that was a bank, right? Originally. Yeah. Yeah. But those signs
there was no allowance for them in the existing code. Well, like we'll get we'll get you that they they're preer incorporation. Yeah, I was just going to say going if there was 2016 that's well that's my point about have are we
going to have any grace for grandfathered in or make them change signs they've had for 25 years. Yeah. that well an amortiz if you enforce an amortization that's exactly what you do is you've had that sign for 25 years do not complain right that now it comes down
but they could ask for what you get in replacement is what's our height limitation six feet I don't know my head I don't want to even guess but could be I know it's too tall and and and legacy doesn't apply to
signs it. Oh boy, it can. Oh boy, it can. Let's see. Um, back in 1920. Yeah, you know, because this is where my
greyness and my my age is going to show. Back in 1986 1987 when I was a young attorney in the assistant city attorney in Delray Beach, I created a historical sign ordinance to preserve
those signs that had great historic value in uh Delray Beach because we had eliminated signs um rooftop signs and stuff. So there was a place called Docks um and we saved it sign and the there
was a sailfish, you know, it was sailboat in and they had a sailboat on the top and we let that do and there was about seven or eight signs that we created a historical um uh sign code for. So yeah, you can
you can do that stuff. I can remember how. Okay. Okay. None of those signs are there today. Oh, the sailboat took off.
Yeah. Buildings, developments changed, everything. Fires took it over. Businesses were sold. Boon suddenly becomes an historical. Absolutely. Well, I you know, there is some history
there for sure. Page with my name in it somewhere. Okay, so those were the only two that I was prepared to kind of discuss tonight and figured that, you know, where do we want to go? You know, I've got my marching orders. I know what I need to do in those two. What do we any desire on what
you would like to bring back to the next meeting? Well, when is the next meeting scheduled? Okay, there's that. And third Monday, I think this is the third Monday already. This is the second Monday.
Second Monday. What day is it? Second Monday. Yes, second Monday working right now. So, it would take over month to get that uh information together. Yeah, but she we don't need it for the next meeting. Yeah, that's August 11th. Oh, August 11th is the next meeting,
which is Oh, wow. We're already in July, aren't we? Okay. Just in time for school. So, the question is, do we continue? I mean, I don't know. Is that going to be is that going to is is
the amortization language going to be enough to keep us busy for a couple hours or guard on commercial signs? Yeah. Or should I think you do just like we did with the AR. Pick your zoning district. You got
two commercial zoning districts. So you got the industrial instit um you know public one and wait industrial we have industrial institutional institutional which of those is the amortization going
to affect the most I know you don't have an impact but which probably institutional no no no commercial AR I think well maybe maybe the institutional because the churches uh
But the churches, see the problem is is that churches are not allowed to have monument signs in AR districts, right? Whereas in the institutional, I think they're allowed, but it might be a different size. You have a church that does different uh things every month or every couple weeks. How are you going to let them
advertise what's going on there? I agree. They don't want giant billboard gaudy signs, but they do need something to be able to put out there to let people go and buy know what's going on. So typically you have a temporary sign provision that talks about being allowed
to put up a sign for a certain duration and then has to be taken down after that duration. Well and and that's that's one of the things that when we Yeah. when we want to look at things if we look at the current code and we say this is really not allowed but it hasn't been
enforced but we think it's okay. That's one of the things that if you decide well let's make a provision on this but perhaps limit the size or something like that then arguably that
is a more lenient standard that can go forward under SB 180 right because we're not taking it away altogether exactly okay making it just a little smaller yeah and so you there are some things that we've not sure that we've really
discussed thus far, but there are some things that we could probably discuss. And we're here talking about expanding the ability, you know, or not making it more restrictive. We can come forward with those suggestions. Okay? It
doesn't all have to be um just restrictive that we come that that we look at. You can tell us, hey, we think this should be restricted, but these things we think actually, you know, uh, property owners should have an
expansion of the rights and those would be things that you could go forward with through the council and they could approve that. All right. So, what do between staff and you guys like where do you think we should concentrate on commercial? Is that our biggest That's our That's our
biggest I would do commercial. Right. Commercial. Okay. So, I think if you follow with what Jeff says, I think you take a look. I'll send out the commercial. Again, only two commercial districts, commercial low,
commercial low office. We'll send out the language, the sign code language for each one of those. And then again, let us know if you're okay with the way it is, needs to be more restrictive or less restrictive. Okay. And then we can deal with, you know, ultimately what the
consensus of the committee is. Does that make sense? Yeah. Yes. See and and were there revisions made? Gosh, because uh the ulc the code that I have, the hard copy that I have, I I'm
not sure. I think it's from 16. Is there anything new in there? Yes, sure. Since Okay. The most the most Look, we don't always make the changes right away either. It takes a while to get it in. Okay. It's just like the property appraisers office. You don't find out new
properties except for 3 months later, but um but definitely newer since 2016. I'm sure it's been modified some way. The best is to get the the language off of the MUN code online. That's the most accurate. If you could text me that the the where Yeah, just Well, no, just the
numbers. We'll send the chapters in the section to all of you so that you can have ready access. Brilliant. I would love that. Okay. Well, just that are we that's it for me.
Okay. Do I have a motion to adjurnn? Motion to adjourn. Second. All in favor? We are adjourned. Good job, guys. Good job. Thanks, guys. Ladies and gentlemen, sorry.
Have your big packet. Thanks. I will now. For sure it's gonna be signed out. Yeah, outdone gonna be painted with yellow highlighted.
What is that? It's a good idea taking a little notice. Yeah, even what is it? They must on video like we have you can like
we're so high tech a little