Search found 2 matches

by rtschl
Thu Sep 29, 2016 3:04 pm
Forum: New to CHL?
Topic: Another signage question
Replies: 15
Views: 11401

Re: Another signage question

My dress code choice is not OC but since 30.07 is not at each entrance it would be a defense to prosecution as it is not compliant with the statute just like size requirements of signs. I wouldn't want to be the test case for it though. I wish 30.06 did have requirement to be posted at every entrance.
by rtschl
Thu Sep 29, 2016 1:59 pm
Forum: New to CHL?
Topic: Another signage question
Replies: 15
Views: 11401

Re: Another signage question

WildBill wrote:
Hello minimalist! I see you are fairly new to the forum, so welcome.

The law requires that the signs be "displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public."
In my opinion, to meet that requirement, both signs should be posted at both entrances.
The theory is that is they are posted in a conspicuous manner you wouldn't have to search the premises for signage.
However, since you have seen both signs you have received notice so you can not carry on the premises. :tiphat:[/quote]

WildBill,

Agreed, except don't forget that 30.07 has to be posted at each entrance, not so for 30.06:
(iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public at each entrance to the property.

So effective notice has been given for CC but "technically" not for OC. Might beat the rap but not the ride though I'm in the camp that they've made their wishes known and I don't want to give them any of my money.

Welcome to the forum minimalist.

Return to “Another signage question”