Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

[JP171]

its not improper, not illegal and does apply to the parking lot if its posted at the entrance to the lot

[3dfxMM]

It doesn't if it is a public school.

[Keith B]

its not improper, not illegal and does apply to the parking lot if its posted at the entrance to the lot

Actually it IS improper. A public school cannot post a 30.06 sign and enforce it as they are a government entity as they take tax monies. Not illegal, as there is no law that says they can't post it improperly. Doesn't really even apply to the school as they would not be charged with Criminal Trespass, but with carrying in a prohibited place under 46.03.

[JP171]

its not improper, not illegal and does apply to the parking lot if its posted at the entrance to the lot

Actually it IS improper. A public school cannot post a 30.06 sign and enforce it as they are a government entity as they take tax monies. Not illegal, as there is no law that says they can't post it improperly. Doesn't really even apply to the school as they would not be charged with Criminal Trespass, but with carrying in a prohibited place under 46.03.

I remember that here abouts somewhere we had discussed and the consensus was that they could. as far as usnig "they take tax money" that has absolutly nothing to do with being a governent entity, many not for profit organizations recieve tax mony and are not considered government agencies. if I am in error about the parking area posting then I am corrected, as far as the law is concerned a school may be owned by a subdivision of the state but is exempt from the law stating that a governental building cannot be posted, and by logical thought I would still belive that a parking lot/area could be off limits thru 30:06

[3dfxMM]

The argument isn't that they receive tax money. They actually assess and collect taxes independently of the state government.

[JP171]

3d, I understand but thats not what he said LOL, but what actually makes them a governmental agency is actually the elections for the school board are open to anyone within a geographical area not a taxing base because without first being an elected from the citizenry at large in the defined area they can't tax anyone.

Believe me I am the first to complain that a ISD is a governemntal agecy same as MUD's and RFPD's and ESD's

[bones357]

Somehow my post and the following post got confused.... so I'll start over...

There is an improperly posted sign at Texas Bexar County Commissioner office on Bandera Hwy (Hwy 16). Formerly the Sylvia S. Ramos Bexar County Commissioner Office. They have a posted 30.06 sign in the front but they are just a tax collector office. ...

Reference PC 30:06 Section E :

(e) It is an exception to the application of this section that the property
on which the license holder carries a handgun is owned or leased by a
governmental entity and i s not a pr emises or other place on w hich the
license holder is prohibited from carrying the handgun under Section
46.03 or 46.035.

So... how do we go about reporting an improperly posted sign such as mentioned above so that it would be removed to prevent possible confusion.

TIA

-edited to fix Bander to Bandera --

[JP171]

Somehow my post and the following post got confused.... so I'll start over...

There is an improperly posted sign at Texas Bexar County Commissioner office on Bander Hwy (Hwy 16). Formerly the Sylvia S. Ramos Bexar County Commissioner Office. They have a posted 30.06 sign in the front but they are just a tax collector office. ...

Reference PC 30:06 Section E :

(e) It is an exception to the application of this section that the property
on which the license holder carries a handgun is owned or leased by a
governmental entity and i s not a pr emises or other place on w hich the
license holder is prohibited from carrying the handgun under Section
46.03 or 46.035.
So... how do we go about reporting an improperly posted sign such as mentioned above so that it would be removed to prevent possible confusion.

TIA

you probably would have to go to Bexar county commissioners court, no penalty law here so no real way to force the issue

[Keith B]

its not improper, not illegal and does apply to the parking lot if its posted at the entrance to the lot

Actually it IS improper. A public school cannot post a 30.06 sign and enforce it as they are a government entity as they take tax monies. Not illegal, as there is no law that says they can't post it improperly. Doesn't really even apply to the school as they would not be charged with Criminal Trespass, but with carrying in a prohibited place under 46.03.

I remember that here abouts somewhere we had discussed and the consensus was that they could. as far as usnig "they take tax money" that has absolutly nothing to do with being a governent entity, many not for profit organizations recieve tax mony and are not considered government agencies. if I am in error about the parking area posting then I am corrected, as far as the law is concerned a school may be owned by a subdivision of the state but is exempt from the law stating that a governental building cannot be posted, and by logical thought I would still belive that a parking lot/area could be off limits thru 30:06

Public ISD's are government entities per case law and Attorney General Opinion. Here is a case where Arlington ISD is specifically called a governmental entity http://caselaw.findlaw.com/tx-court-of- ... 38398.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The property on which the parking lot is placed belongs to the school, so in turn it belongs to a governmental entity and can't be legally enforced. There is actually a post on here somewhere that one of the members got an email response from Plano ISD stating they know their signs are unenforceable (but they're still up.)

[RottenApple]

Somehow my post and the following post got confused.... so I'll start over...

There is an improperly posted sign at Texas Bexar County Commissioner office on Bandera Hwy (Hwy 16). Formerly the Sylvia S. Ramos Bexar County Commissioner Office. They have a posted 30.06 sign in the front but they are just a tax collector office. ...

Reference PC 30:06 Section E :

(e) It is an exception to the application of this section that the property
on which the license holder carries a handgun is owned or leased by a
governmental entity and i s not a pr emises or other place on w hich the
license holder is prohibited from carrying the handgun under Section
46.03 or 46.035.

So... how do we go about reporting an improperly posted sign such as mentioned above so that it would be removed to prevent possible confusion.

TIA

-edited to fix Bander to Bandera --

There is no official way to report improperly posted signs. You can send a letter to the tax office or city, but that's about it. There is a bill (HB508) that has been filed that makes it a class 3 offense for public employees who post 30.06 signs improperly, but it obviously hasn't passed yt.

[JP171]

its not improper, not illegal and does apply to the parking lot if its posted at the entrance to the lot

Actually it IS improper. A public school cannot post a 30.06 sign and enforce it as they are a government entity as they take tax monies. Not illegal, as there is no law that says they can't post it improperly. Doesn't really even apply to the school as they would not be charged with Criminal Trespass, but with carrying in a prohibited place under 46.03.

I remember that here abouts somewhere we had discussed and the consensus was that they could. as far as usnig "they take tax money" that has absolutly nothing to do with being a governent entity, many not for profit organizations recieve tax mony and are not considered government agencies. if I am in error about the parking area posting then I am corrected, as far as the law is concerned a school may be owned by a subdivision of the state but is exempt from the law stating that a governental building cannot be posted, and by logical thought I would still belive that a parking lot/area could be off limits thru 30:06

Public ISD's are government entities per case law and Attorney General Opinion. Here is a case where Arlington ISD is specifically called a governmental entity http://caselaw.findlaw.com/tx-court-of- ... 38398.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The property on which the parking lot is placed belongs to the school, so in turn it belongs to a governmental entity and can't be legally enforced. There is actually a post on here somewhere that one of the members got an email response from Plano ISD stating they know their signs are unenforceable (but they're still up.)

I already know and agree that ISD's are governmental entities, didn't disagree with that at all, there has to date been no case law that removes the 30:06 from being used for a school parking lot, mostly because that schools are catagorically exempted from the governmental clause thats all.

[Keith B]

I already know and agree that ISD's are governmental entities, didn't disagree with that at all, there has to date been no case law that removes the 30:06 from being used for a school parking lot, mostly because that schools are catagorically exempted from the governmental clause thats all.

How so?

[JP171]

it sates in the governmental clause that unless it applies under 46:03 or 46:035 and I quote

PC §46.03. PLACES WEAPONS PROHIBITED. (a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly possesses or goes with a firearm, illegal knife, club, or prohibited weapon listed in Section 46.05(a):
(1) on the physical premises of a school or educational institution, any grounds or building on which an activity sponsored by a school or educational institution is being conducted, or a passenger transportation vehicle of a school or educational institution, whether the school or educational institution is public or private, unless pursuant to written regulations or written authorization of the institution;

therefore in my mind it makes the governmental clause not applicable to a school because the governemntal clause specifies 46:03

Reference PC 30:06 Section E :

(e) It is an exception to the application of this section that the property
on which the license holder carries a handgun is owned or leased by a
governmental entity and i s not a pr emises or other place on w hich the
license holder is prohibited from carrying the handgun under Section
46.03 or 46.035.

[sjfcontrol]

But 46,035 defines Premises as:

(3) "Premises" means a building or a portion of a
building. The term does not include any public or private driveway,
street, sidewalk or walkway, parking lot, parking garage, or other
parking area.

So school parking lots are not part of the "premises" of the school, and are not off limits to CHL.
And additionally they can't enforceably post 30.06 because the property is owned by the Govt. (Public Schools)

[JP171]

But 46,035 defines Premises as:

(3) "Premises" means a building or a portion of a
building. The term does not include any public or private driveway,
street, sidewalk or walkway, parking lot, parking garage, or other
parking area.

So school parking lots are not part of the "premises" of the school, and are not off limits to CHL.
And additionally they can't enforceably post 30.06 because the property is owned by the Govt. (Public Schools)

46:03 also says any grounds which a school sponsored activity is taking place, so if school is in session it is a school sponsored activity. it does not anywhere define what a school sponsored activity is.


mostly I am playing devils advocate here, I prefer to think that the parking area is and should be ok, but if a DA or ADA or city attorney has to take something like this to court, these are the arguments that I think will be used, and they are valid because things are left wide open


now speaking strictly about the Admin Center, that should NOT be off limits in any fashion either for parking or premisis