City Council — April 7, 2026

Welcome. 5-10, roll call please.

Thank

you very much.

Mayor and Council, City Council met in closed session to discuss the three items on the closed session agenda. Item number one was a matter of workers' compensation existing litigation. Item number two was a matter of labor negotiations with IBW. Item number three was consideration of initiation of litigation in one case. In that item number three, the City Council by unanimous 5-0 vote voted to authorize the city attorney's office to commence litigation. The action, the defendant and the particulars of litigation will become public information and available to anyone who inquires when the lawsuit is filed.

And Lord as we gather together and touch and agree, we ask for Your divine providence, To continue to lead our council. Lord that the wisdom that you give them, that we would have a better community, the wisdom that you provide, the skill set one thank you for our police chief and our chief lord and the wonderful men and women who serve uh our city in this realm communities that they put their lives on the line for us And so when you do see that emergency vehicle going down the road, lights going and sirens coming just give courtesy and let them come through. Let them do their job.

I thank you for the city workers, electricians of streets, waste department. Lord, when I see those vehicles that have Lompoc on the side, that's an immediate prayer. And so as we offer this prayer tonight I pray that you bless everyone that's here, that our needs get met and that wisdom would take place. And so we ask that you would honor us Lord as we honor your presence in your name.

Amen.

Please remain standing until we begin. Ready? Begin.

Thank you. Normally I'm here with my grandnephew, but he's old enough that he's on what's called spring break. I guess he's a pre-K now and they're somewhere in Orange County doing something. My name is Scott Burns. I have a kidney transplant. Almost 11 years ago, the lady who was a nurse at Cottage Hospital died. I ended up getting a kidney. She also donated her other organs—the other kidneys, lungs, liver and her heart.

Why I've got this proclamation and why I thank you for this is the people In Santa Barbara County have probably the highest number of people that have signed up for organ donation with a pink dot under driver's license in the state. And that's one of the reasons is I come by and try to remind people to do this, this proclamation that I thank you for. We'll end up in about three weeks at a run walk in Los Angeles with about 20,000 people seeing it. And then it generally ends up at the DMV afterwards so that people when they go to the DMV they can see that the city of Lompoc appreciates this. I thank you very much. That's my entire presentation.

So let me piggyback on that a little bit too. I learned something here recently with an elderly gentleman, I hope and that is making sure your papers are in order, your DNR papers that do not resuscitate who the person is in charge for your medical and your medication list because I found out certain hospitals don't transfer these things to other hospitals.

You might think your paper's in order but if you don't have them there and if you don't have people who will have them The gentleman I have medical power attorney for, for eight days. I was not allowed to advocate for him because the papers did not transfer from one hospital to another and what medicine they were on? I don't know but it's scary if you don't have your papers in order You are very vulnerable much more so than I ever thought so Maybe we should get a proclamation for that give your papers and order type of day or something All right. What do we got next city manager report?

What do you got? Thank you, Mayor. I want to thank everyone who came out for the annual Easter Egg Hunt. Park and Rec did a stellar job. It was a great day and it's a good event. I want to remind everyone that we have the 21st Annual Parks and Rec Kiwanis Golf Tournament. That'll be next Friday, the 17th. Registration is still open, this is a great event. It helps raise money for scholarships for all the rec programs that people don't have the money so it's a good program and a good way to give back to the community.

It's already spring break if you're looking for some afternoon fun things in Lompoc, The Aquatic Center is hosting special spring swim hours From 1 to 3, we also have presale that you can do from 1230 to 1250. Thank the Aquatic Center for doing that. I'm excited to spotlight the winner of this year's Annual Peeps Diorama Contest. And congratulations to Nolan Anderson for his winning entry. A lot of people put in. It's good to see that all the dioramas came in and people participated.

The spring, the library has participated in L.A.'s County's Libraries One Book One Coast program. This program invites library communities across the west coast to participate and this year's book is called They Called Us Enemy. And you can get free copies of that at the Lompoc library, the village library. You can also use the Libby app if you can download it and it will be available during that period.

Members of the police and fire department participated this year in every 15-minute event at Lompoc High School March 13th. It's a two day event that helps high school juniors and seniors to think about drinking, driving, and making good choices out there. I want to thank the fire and police department for participating in that. Finally, I want to remind everybody that the nominations are still open for this year's Spring Yard beautification contest hosted by Urban Forestry and our Beautification and Appearance Commission.

This is a great time to spotlight landscaping, yards, residentials, HOAs and businesses. There'll be first, second and third place awards will be chosen for the most colorful, best drought tolerant and landscape. Yards will be judged on visual appearance, maintenance, irrigation, water conservation and artistic impact and other criteria's. They'll be announcing those on Tuesday, May 12th.

Oh, I got one more. Finally, I'd like to congratulate our CDBG program for getting an award from HUD. This award emphasizes the city's responsibility using the CDBG program and managing commitments to serve our community. This recognitions that the city remains eligible to continue to apply for CDBG grants. These funds play an important part across our community for strengthening our community, improving our parks and public facilities. And I wanted to thank our Community Development Program Manager for doing that.

Before we kick off and go to the consent calendar I wanted to pull March 13th payroll. Some reason we didn't get all the printout. I think it printed only the odd papers, so what we'll do is we'll pull it and put in your next packet. And that's all I have.

While we're on the note about the consent calendar, I also wanted to state for the record on item number seven. Council member Starbuck owns property within 500 feet of 123 North 8th Street which is the property that's the subject of that agenda item and so council member Starbuck will recuse himself from participating in item number seven because it's on the consent calendar he does not need to leave the room

Let me elaborate on the Easter out there. Mario was there as well, and his crew along with Joanna and Sue and Easter Bunny. I mean it's well over a thousand people out there is very well attended and although it was a little warm the chocolate was melting but the kids had a hoot with that. Good job you guys did. I know you guys were out there early in the morning and it's a lot to get through I did learn something there where that guy had his extension cord, I guess, where he was pirating power. He's got a washing machine out in the riverbed so he's doing laundry out there. So you know, he didn't make it well we saw him sneaking through the bushes but yeah good job for you guys out there Mario. You guys got a lot to be proud of. It was a great event.

Any quick questions for the city manager?

The mayor posted on social media recently about the audit letter that we received from LSL. And so and there's some statements made, but I want to get some clarity from city attorney and maybe staff on a few of these things. As we know, there was a specific addition to our tradition. I think we have a traditional audit on a regular basis either annually. I think it's about every year we get audited.

But then we got an additional Audit for a specific reason, and I think it was in regards to the energy conservation rebate program. So Dean this is under your purview if you don't feel comfortable asking these questions or don't know maybe the city attorney can chime in or staff. So I guess I'll start with maybe a question for finance or for staff or for you.

This additional audit what triggered that?

I'll turn that over to Bob.

The additional audit was triggered when we received notification that charges were filed. We're required to notify our auditors of any subsequent events after the audit period has closed that may become issues on internal controls, so we notified them and they let us know that they wanted Further testing on the rebate program.

So to clarify, wasn't anyone up here that triggered that additional audit? It was your responsibility to inform the auditor that charges had been filed against...

That's my understanding

yes. Understood. Was that an additional cost and who paid for that additional audit?

That was an additional cost it was a little over $9000. It was paid as part of our audit.

Thank you for that. And it's been suggested that this process could have been done in a better way in the past. Obviously, you received several recommendations from the auditor on how to improve the process. Can you tell me, have we adjusted anything? Have we changed anything? Have we updated how we handle this rebate program or anything like that?

Yeah, we had already adjusted and made Made modifications to our process prior to any of this coming forward, prior to the audit starting. And they went back to review the prior fiscal year we had made the changes to our process in September. Which again was tightening up it was looking up additional information submitting additional information with the application confirming some of the information before we process applications.

Thank you for that, and maybe you could chime on in on the next one, but maybe this is better for the city attorney. Is it? And again, this we need to be absolutely crystal clear here. Is it staff's responsibility to give an application back to someone who knowingly or fraudulently filled out an application with false information To have them quote unquote correct that application.

It is not staff's responsibility to do that.

So I'm going to ask you maybe a little bit of a hypothetical. If I were to fill out, and again is there maybe a standard for what fraud is considered if I was to apply for a loan or God forbid use somebody else's social security number and identity to file my taxes? Do I get a do-over or when have I committed fraud?

You've committed fraud when the evidence shows that you have committed fraud. At the time that you make a false statement, I believe that's when the fraud is committed.

So again, I understand if you don't feel comfortable with this, the mayor said he said there's no indication that residents intentionally sought to defraud the city. Do you feel that's accurate?

Sorry, say that again.

It was stated while there is currently no indication that residents intentionally sought to defraud the city. Does that you feel that's an accurate statement? I don't know. Thank you. That's all I've got.

Yeah. Anybody else? So I'll just take mayor's privilege here and make a request at this time. I was going to do it at the end of the meeting, but in order to get to the bottom of what's going on here, I make a request that the rebate component that went through, that the city attorney along with other people in the department to analyze what's going on with the rebates, allow people to cure, allow people to withdraw It appears that as many as 40% of the rebates, more than just the 11 that were here have issues with the applications.

And it appears that the review process had significance but again I'm saying appear but I want to just give her the appearance and I'd like the lawyer's office along with staff to determine and if need to bring in a third party to analyze as well But I think in order to get to the bottom of it, we can stop some of the speculation on what's going on and get us a report back together.

I'll say an ASAP type of thing. We don't need to wait six months but let's see what's going on. There are other people who have mistakes on their applications. And I think we need to get to the bottom of it and make that motion if I could get two other people to support that so we can see what the heck is going on.

I just say, um, I don't think we can take that direction right now at this meeting without having an agenda item. So... No no, I'm speaking of... We can bring back the agenda item to clarify and for the council to direct exactly the kind of investigation or report that you're looking

for. That's what I'm

asking for. And we can bring that back ASAP.

Right. Yes, agendized yes. Council Member Starbuck? Council Member Baldage, was that a head nod yes or what?

If you want to bring all that back so we can talk about it I don't have a problem with that. Sure go for it. Okay

thank you.

All right So now open up to public comment on consent calendar. We've got a healthy consent calendar Today, any items that are pulled by Council will be addressed immediately before second oral communications near the end of the meeting. We've got an approval and ratification of expenditures for payroll for February 27th at $2.37 million. And then on March 13th we're pulling off? Correct, City Manager?

Yes, sir. So that was the one we're pulling off. Then we have a voucher register February 23rd through 27th of $3.2 million and another voucher register March 2nd through 6th of 2026 for $1.35 million and a voucher register of March 9th or 2026, March 9th to March 13th at $585,000. And then we have an adoption of resolution number 6802, parentheses 26, amending the city's classification plan to include revised solid waste manager job description Number three is adoption of Resolution 6803, parentheses 26, authorizing the submittal of a petition to the California Energy Commission for determination that 2025 energy code photovoltaic and battery energy storage system requirements are not cost effective in Lompoc and declaring intent to establish an alternative compliance pathway.

Number four is the approval of standing with public risk innovation solutions and management for the optional excess liability insurance program. Number five is adoption of resolution 6804 to establish 30 minutes restricted parking zone at 113 and 119 North A Street. Number six is adoption of resolution number 6805, Prince's disease 26. Approving a declaration of nuisance and abatement order for weeds and debris. Number seven is award of invitation to bid number 2026ITB00T2WDW to JJ Fisher Construction and Corporate Authority amount $341,438 for renovation of a city-owned parking lot That's it. We have seven of them on there, so does anybody on council wish to pull any one of those seven? Or some short I have a quick question on number five.

And my question is, were the neighbors noticed about establishing a 30-minute restricted parking zone? Whose is that one? You got to tell them, Mr. Dearling.

I'm not aware of Public Works staff noticing any neighbors.

OK. For that, I'm going to request that item number five be I have another question on item number 7 in the parking lot.

This was brought to our planning manager, our former planning managers attention and it was discussed at length and we were told we didn't have to bring this to the Planning Commission.

You have a modification of the parking lot I think the interest in introducing landscaping if I remember correctly right?

With within the there were landscape requirements. So we did have to meet that. Yes,

it's not just redoing an asphalt lot. There's a significant change of a downtown parking lot so With that I want to pull that one to the end of the meeting too for other discussion as well as The grant refunding and the monies on that so We'll catch some more questions at the end Anything anybody else? Anybody want to make a motion to approve the rest of it plus the payroll and leaving council members, well that would be in later anyways.

Seven's pulled and so is five.

Council Member Vega? I make a motion that we accept consent calendar except for items number five and number seven.

And removal of the one payroll correct?

Correct.

Councilmember Starbucks seconded. Please go ahead and vote. That passes 5-0. Isn't it nice we all get along so well? I'm going to make Councilmember Paul smile for me. All right, staff presentation announcements. Requests, do we have any? Hello, my name is Janet Blevins. I have lived in Lompoc for 40 years. I'm very nervous right now.

because I have attended every single preliminary hearing regarding Councilmember Bridge. I have been in that courtroom for days and days, and I can tell you he is guilty. There is no such thing as Turner Construction, and that was the company name that he used He does have a son named Scott Turner who does some bits of construction and handyman work, but he's never been Scott Turner Construction because there is no such company.

During the investigation conducted by the district attorney An investigator was employed, who had several years with a neighboring police force and detective work and so forth. And he called and talked to Steve Bridge and said we were asked to look into Turner Construction. And Steve said, I made a receipt up. I just ginned it up. They needed a piece of paper so I gave them a piece of paper.

We did the work. It's probably my fault. I better own the problem here He did do the work, probably a little shady but we did do the work. That is not acceptable for a council member. And I am absolutely disgusted with the rest of the Council, except for Mr. Ball who are just go along do nothings. Apparently you don't care about the integrity of your council and the integrity of people who represent Lompoc.

You talk about improving our image get Mr. Bridge to stand down until he is on trial. I am positive there will be a trial. Thank you.

Karen Hauenstein, four days on a preliminary hearing. Gosh that's unheard of. Thank you Janet for your liberal perspective and for congratulating the Liberal representative on our...

Keep your comments addressed.

Well she addressed the city attorney can I do

that?

All right I want to talk to the City Council about real corruption Kevin Martin has never supplied the promised report on Liliana Zuniga's death. He represented to real journalists, TV crews that we were going to get a report on the suspicious death of Liliana Zuniga which happened at on the 13th of March 2023 I've been investigating this ever since I followed two separate different police vehicles to Jaime's house, and I was informed about what happened to Liliana by her friends.

That's real corruption when you have a suspicious death of a woman who was held in our jail which is not a real jail it's just the holding cells And they're actually legally supposed to transport the custodies to the main jail after a certain amount of time. But Liliana Zuniga was held in our jail for four days, and then Mr Kevin Martin wants us to believe that she died of a fentanyl overdose after being held inside his Lompoc Police Department station for four days.

I don't believe that at all, not one bit. As a member of the public, not just because I'm investigating this for her mother but I wanna know why she died? Why the coroner's department is saying she died. Also something that's incredibly suspicious is the jailor who was working that day, a woman by the name of Jasmine Hernandez. was not yet a sworn officer. She was just a jailer.

She was the person who was responsible for Liliana's welfare while she was in custody. If you have a death while in custody, that's really kind of a bad thing. It wouldn't result in a promotion necessarily would it? Well, it did Thank you.

Anybody else

feel I'm a victim of a bad mistake here? I own a cabin on Figueroa Mountain and the lake fire came through there and it burned the cabin below me, next to me, and above me. But mine survived but I did lose the outhouse so I was up there at the end of February, the first week of March working on it for a week. When I came back my Toyota Tundra was towed off the street. I first thought it was stolen when I went to the police department They said it was towed because there was a city ordinance that can only be parked on the street for 72 hours.

So I paid the release fee, $215 and on Monday morning I went to the tow yard and paid the storage fee, $856. Now, I asked the tow truck driver why he towed it. He said he didn't know because it had good tires, had good paint, the registration was valid. The officer did run the plates. It was registered right where it was parked. I have no idea why it was towed so I went back to the police department and asked again if there was a complaint and they said no, it's an old ordinance. You have 72 hours on this street and that's it.

So I'm wondering if I can get recompense money back from this because it was just an accident. There's no reason for it to be towed, in my opinion. I have the officer's name and badge number. And I haven't contacted him but maybe he has another reason. It cost me a lot of money to get it back and it shouldn't have happened. So is there any way to get recompensated for this?

I believe the process would be to file a claim with the city clerk tomorrow, and then they'll process through the paralegal through the city attorney's office. And they direct it that direction. Thank you. Which I did notice on the future council list, it looks like our discussion of the Towing Service Agreement Good evening, Mr. Mayor and council members. My name is Tom Gerald and I've lived in Lompoc since 2004

I currently serve as president of the Astronomy Club of Lompoc. I come before you tonight celebrating the proclamation passed by the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors announced today. This proclamation declares the week of April 13th through 20th, 2026 is International Dark Sky Week and encourages all residents of our county to increase their awareness of light pollution and its impacts on the well-being of us all.

In addition to the county, seven of the eight cities in Santa Barbara County have adopted similar proclamations for this week. Backyard astronomers such as ourselves in the club are acutely aware of the compromises caused by light pollution and we encourage all our fellow citizens of Lompoc to think of ways their personal home lighting may impact their neighbors' ability to enjoy the stars at night.

Businesses and city governments should take note of the way their parking lot and security lighting impacts the night. Can those lights be equally as effective pointing down, not upward and outward? On a much broader scale, the direct impact to Lompoc's economy is the fact that light pollution measurably reduces crop production in surrounding fields. interfering with pollination when nocturnal insects are confused by the presence of light at night.

The result is altered flowering and growing cycles, and the attraction of pests. We encourage the citizens of Lompoc to look for resources of information about light pollution, learn how they might easily do their part to remedy the problem and celebrate our night skies during the week of International Dark Sky Week April 13th through 20th. Go outside and enjoy the night sky! If you need help, look up The Astronomy Club of Lompoc on the web. We are happy to guide you into the joys of stargazing We have great concerns in this city, but we can take a moment to do something for ourselves and for each other in the quiet of night. Thank you for listening.

Seeing nobody else rise, we'll close oral communication and bring it back to Council. We've got appointments. Item number eight to the Library Commission Youth Commission.

Councillor Boehme? Can I just get clarification? There's several applicants. How many spots do we have to fill or can we nominate everyone in one pass and have them fit in appropriate spots?

Are you talking specifically about the Youth Commission?

Yes.

Well, there's eight vacancies right now and we have three applicants so we have plenty of space for those

applicants. Can we nominate all at once and sign off on that? Sure. Just let me

know what term you want them to sit in.

Got it. So you have to work with me on this just so I don't put my foot in my mouth too much here. So let's start at the top. Marisela

Oh, so that's for library.

Sorry, I missed that. OK, so the next one is the three people for Youth Commission. So Brendan Baker, Victor Cortez and Karen Lopez. Is that yes?

That's accurate.

So I'd like to nominate them. And again, I don't have any preference for what spot they fit in so maybe you can help me.

So currently we have two youth vacancies that end 2028 if you want to use those two for these applicants and then we have an associate term or two associate terms also ending in 2028 if you want to put Victor Cortez for that.

So that'd be my preference for the 28 versus 27. So that be my nomination for Brendan Baker and Karen Lopez for the tooth to youth members ending in twenty twenty eight. And Victor Cortez for the associate member position also ending in 2028. I need to make a motion.

Yes.

Thank you. OK

we've got a motion by Ball seconded by Bridge. The clerk read in with action was taken so the. Applicants can hear.

So Brendan Baker and Karen Lopez are now appointed to the youth commission as youth members with terms ending January 2028. Victor Cortez is now For the library.

Okay, go ahead for that one. So sorry, I missed it on the first time to turn my head sideways. The page is sideways so for the library commission we have two at large vacancies. I'd like to nominate Marisela Trinado for the position on the Library Commission that ends in 2029. That would be my motion.

Motion by Ball seconded by Briggs. Let's go vote. That passes 5-0. All right, moving on down to the public hearing for item number nine. Mr. Stones, you want to amend some science standards and such, right?

Good evening there members of the council. So tonight we have Council to consider the Planning Commission and staff's recommendation for amendments to the sign ordinance title 17 There are two requests one of them is initiated by the developer for River Williams homes for River Terrace project and others a city initiated item So for the developer, Williamson submitted an application for amendments to the temporary sign standards in order to accommodate advertising and sales for the new homes located at River Terrace residential project.

Here's a following summary. To amend the prohibited signs section to add an exemption for feather signs pursuant to allowed temporary sign section. To amend table 17316070A for temporary sign standards for non-residential zones by adding regulations for construction signs and feather signs on project sites equal to or greater than one acre associated with a development review permit or parcel slash track map. And to add table 17 3 1 6 0 7 0 B for temporary sign standards for residential zones for subdivision signs, feather signs and portable signs on project sites also equal to one acre associated with development review permits or parcel track maps.

And then there's another amendment to standards by sign type section to update the mentioned tables that I just mentioned and add a new subsection six to provide additional standards for those subdivision and construction signs. And then the other city-initiated request is to amend the permanent sign section to allow tenants in multi-tenant buildings to have at least one signed building facade for the space occupied by that tenant.

A few examples are, these are existing buildings in this city. This one's on North H Street. This is a building that has four tenants in them. It's a multi-tenant building, separate pad with four tenants. However there are more than four signs or at least six signs. And then here's another example. This is over by the Walmart, this is a separate tenant pad building and it has also four tenants in it however there could be up to eight signs on this one so really this request is an amendment to allow tenants with multiple facades to be able to have at least one sign on each facade Because as currently how the code is, if there was for example a new building or a building that doesn't already have signs on the facade our current code restricts that.

So if there's four tenants in one building you can only have four signs so even though for example Pizza Garden they actually have three signs and one on each side per our current code you wouldn't be able to do that. So this amendment would be able essentially allow that. These particular cases, why they were able to do it from my understanding is because the previous...

They were developed under the sign program which was developed under the previous sign ordinance so back in prior to 2016. So in terms of the environmental review, this falls under Section 15061B3 and Section 15311A and is exempt from CEQA. So the recommendation is to introduce by first reading with further reading waived ordinance number 1745 parenthesis 26 or provide other direction. Thank you.

So I believe what it was, was the ability for the interpretation as it stated there at the building. Was you could have at least one and this gives you much better clarification? I know it's and that's why he was able to get through because it said they could only have one. It said you could have at least one so this gives you much better clarification. I appreciate you clarifying that but.

The discussion on feather flags goes way back, in probably what seven years ago or so. And the discussion back then was in removing the feather flag which was the single pole with the arched banner that's out there that waves in the wind. It was for distractive driving and the argument was We didn't want them up and down the streets because people put them up to distract drivers, obviously. But they were working just like little blow guys they had in their suits that whipped around and went up and down. So the discussion was in being very careful with the signs because there's a protectionism for First Amendment about science but we were determined that they were dangerous and could cause accidents and it still references part of that in the code here Why are we determining that it's not dangerous in a certain environment, yet it's still dangerous in other environments?

Well I mean in this case you could say that if we allow it just as a temporary item there might be some less safety concerns but I know whether it's temporary or permanent thing there you could argue with either way.

Most of these people just put the feather flags up real fast anyways. I know El Pollo Loco got a ticket, was asked to remove them or warned or whatever. Domino's just recently had one up and they were told to take theirs down but now we're saying that they were dangerous for those people but it's not dangerous for somebody else because their property is bigger? Or why are we referencing that it's okay for some and not for others?

Well, yeah. So one thing is because of the size there aren't too many properties in the city that are larger than one acre and not everybody in the city has a development review or track parcel map so that could probably eliminate many of the parcels that exist in the city and that's why it's geared toward those larger parcels because those would most likely be for larger type developments

Okay.

Councillor Boehme. So I mean, I may find partial agreement in some of that to me again. I don't want to necessarily see the city just flooded with feather flags. I think some people are respectful and when they get degraded and take them down and our time sensitive perhaps and others it just they leave them up and it just kind But I do wonder about, are we hamstringing a small business's opportunity to sustain their business or push their wares or bring attention to their business?

They can't do it but somebody that has a large parcel to sell homes can. From my perspective there is such a housing shortage here and such a demand on base, I can't imagine they're going to have trouble selling those homes but that's my personal opinion so I guess from my perspective You know, what I'm all have that are stick to some sort of rules on that.

It does seem weird just if we tell someone you can't have that because it's a hazard to drivers but over there they can do it because maybe we need a hazardous driver so they buy a home seems a little odd to me. And then just a clarifying question, again I guess it's where you decide to be a tenant that matters. But for some places they'll have a front of their business and a side where they have opportunity to put two signs but there are many buildings here in town that have you know for example like the yogurt shop all the way at the end of town they've got two sides but then the business in between them and maybe the pet supply place They only have a front. So again, is there nuance there? Would that business in the middle be able to say hey let me get some signage on that outside wall too?

Is that part of

this? Well your example with the Lemos Pet Supply location I mean they do have a front it's just on the side so in their case their tenant space is towards the end so yeah this preservation could Allow them in the front, obviously. And then on the back side which nobody will really see and then potentially in the back where you could kind of see it going down H Street. So because they're at the end so their corner so they could have at least three but yes because there may not be as practical whereas personally the other end of the New York yogurt store they couldn't potentially have three

Yeah, so I guess it's just my point is that maybe that's just the way it works out. But if you're the person in the middle squeezed in between a couple of folks who might be limited on your signage much more so than somebody that has a corner. Yes. Thank you for clarifying.

Greg, is there anything here that's going to just generally allow feather flags for businesses? I'm sorry say that one more time. The feather flags are they allowed for general businesses in a commercial area?

Well, it would have to be a property larger than one acre and we would have to find if it had a development review or parcel track map associated with that. So many of the properties, well a good amount of them they probably won't even meet that size requirement.

So it's meant for a developer who has a large parcel.

Yes,